What is the ORIGIN of all MASS in the Universe? Physics of symmetry breaking

[@Rationalific]

I love it that you explain things in a clear way without hours of math formulae, but at the same time, treat us like we can handle these high-level concepts. Your unique style leads to us being able to gain a general overview of concepts that are at the cutting-edge of human knowledge. You go further than about any other person in explaining these in the most comprehensible ways possible.

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks for that. I appreciate it. And I'm glad you find my videos helpful.

[@Rationalific]

@@ArvinAsh Thank you! 👍

[@freefall9832]

I don't see why the issue needs to be confused with this long winded symmetry, energy is binding the quarks and energy is mass

[@stolearovigor281]

Are you paid to make positive comments? Or you just little bit ignorant and believe all cartoons?

[@vinodkadlaskar2028]

@@freefall9832 Cos when the universe was created there was equal amount of matter and anti matter ie the symmetry

[@n-da-bunka2650]

i would LOVE to get involve with this particular study of science. I was the grade school geek who read about quarks in one of those early science magazines and argued with science teachers when they graded me WRONG for answering that protons, neutrons weren't the "smallest parts of an atom". I literally had to SHOW her the article before she would change my grade. Her answer was that "i wasn't supposed to know that" but the reality was that SHE did not (yet) know that so she was teaching what everyone taught back in the early 70's. Now that I am nearing retirement I can return to this original thirst for knowledge and constantly watch yours and other science and math videos. While I took calculus, discrete structures, statistics and all those other higher maths, I am not as good at them as I am with physics, QED and such so these fit well with my objectives. I'd much rather watch these videos so THANK YOU for continuing to bring us AWESOME content like this! Could you do a video on "penta" quarks?

[@ExistenceUniversity]

Classical teacher, punishing students for "knowing more than they should". Sadly school is not for learning to think but for learning how to follow.

[@Primitarian]

I'm glad she changed your grade, but at least she did do so once shown. Also, quarks were something of a novelty in the 70s, viewed then widely as mathematical conjecture, not necessarily physical reality. Indeed, even today no one has actually pulled out a quark as a separate part.

[@gaopinghu7332]

@@Primitarian yeah, quarks when pulled apart just create another quark to bond with.

[@ExistenceUniversity]

@@Parmenides7 What? Do you mean it is sad that school tells you how to feel/think, or did you think that I was saying you need school in order to think? 😆

[@jamesbarlow6423]

Go for it

[@stevemonkey6666]

I'm really happy that you are going deeper into this subject than other channels. I'm just an ordinary guy and I want to understand this stuff better, and you're making it possible 😁👍

[@yziib3578]

Deeper than PBS Space Time?

[@eddieroa291]

@@yziib3578 I was about to say lol

[@aryanbansode1897]

Pbs?

[@garffieldiscool1163]

@@aryanbansode1897 What about, into the impossible or Sabine?

[@bydlokun]

You may want to check Physics Explained channel if you wish go deeper into equations

[@tayzonday]

This is the best explanation of mass.

[@seanengler6423]

wtf hey

[@atticuswalker8970]

If this is what causes mass. And it takes time for it to happen. Then wouldn't more mass take more time. . Wouldn't spacetime stretch to accommodate the interactions required for more mass. Wouldn't objects acelerating through spacetime have more interactions and gain mass. Would the mass at the center of a black hole have a constant connection to the Higgs field and require infinite time. Would that explain gravity.

[@Bill-ou7zp]

Bro don’t pretend like you understand it lmao

[@sebastianclarke2441]

I'm once again truly humbled by your unparalleled ability to convey these mind blowing theories while continuously taking us closer to the core fundamentals. Thank you so much for these beautiful insights Arvin. What a video, keep up the good fight, kind sir!

[@ibrarkhan9878]

I am watching your channel since 2019. Your channel and Pbs spacetime are outstanding.

[@domenicobarillari2046]

Hi Arvin Just a trolling physicist who landed here again by accident and glad I did. As usual, a fabulous job done by you and your expert physics team. I have no reservations recommending you (and PBS Spacetime, etc.) to any of my students for the correct explanations, backed up by good "production values" (as they say), to go further than dry equations.

[@sngash]

Thank you Arvin. This topic was always mysterious to me but the veil has been somewhat lifted by your explanation. I look forward to more breakthroughs that will further demystify the universe.

[@dawnwatching6382]

Your visualizations are second to none, Arvin! Keep it up!

[@sravanmulugu4702]

❤

[@nathanwalker1424]

Every single one of Arvin’s videos is incredible.

[@jaybingham3711]

Home run episode right there! Kudos. Side note: The bi-lateral symmetry of the human face can be nearly perfect. Yet, by far, those faces with noticeable minor asymmetries (like in this photo 2:16) consistently score the highest beauty-wise in aggregated results. Though totally subjective, might it be that it's our (lower conscious) way of paying homage to the universe's solid move of breaking symmetry? Pretty sure that needs to be a new Netflix series.

[@aaronramsden1657]

What an amazing visual representation to help us learn

[@williejohnson487]

That was clear vision and gave me understanding of the Higgs field.

[@bdub8442]

You can place the ball anywhere on graph as long as u change ur perspective postition to make the ball appear symmetrical

[@suvalaki]

So much respect for the attitude to “why” questions. This is a needed disclaimer for people

[@MrPeterPanos]

I really enjoy your videos Arvin, I feel ever more enlightened with each one I watch. Thank you for making and sharing them🌌

[@ArvinAsh]

My pleasure! Thank you for watching.

[@akostarkanyi825]

This video cannot be commended enough. It is best of the best.

[@camellkachour4112]

Arvin, you are an incredible teacher ! Myself I am mathematician very frustrated to not had good theoretical physics understanding, probably due to bad teaching of physics when I was student in Paris, 25 years ago. My dream would be to meet people like you who can explain me physics simply !

[@euginrobinson]

Wow, amazing, though some of it went above my head, it is presented in an as simple as it can get manner. But what a lot to know about the universe, and you are doing a wonderful job communicating these extremely hard concepts in simple terms. I've signed up to you channel already.

[@ArvinAsh]

Welcome aboard!

[@qtcollect4608]

I just subbed to Wondrium and I'm loving it so far with Understanding Electronics course.

[@ArvinAsh]

Wonderful. I love the app myself.

[@DaellusKnights]

The Higgs Field is probably one of the most fascinating aspects of physics to me. Especially when discussing Vacuum Decay. Which I couldn't help thinking about watching the animations illustrating the non-zero energy expectations. Any chance you could do a deep-dive on the whole Higgs/mass/vacuum decay topic?

[@ArvinAsh]

I did make a video on that here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/sIqZen5mhMd3j7c

[@Thedanishundertaker]

Love the channel, the mass comes from the strongforce, and interaction between the gluons and the Quarks :)

[@manicmadpanickedman2249]

Check the link for example kzbin.infoFxE-V3JN-EE?feature=share

[@kipponi]

Yes...

[@kenwhitfield219]

And the gravitational force gives mass weight.

[@freefall9832]

The Mass comes from the energy binding the quarks together

[@TD-iy8us]

That's only for composite particles, fundamental particles( except neutrinos) get their mass from the higgs field

[@frankgaertner9021]

Your work is so wonderful. You are a top reference in the first and now the second Volume of my “Our Self Assembling Universe” AWTbook(tm) Series. The second one is in final stages of writing. It’s subtitled “Who is Us? The nanoscale answer to that question is so incredible and you nail so much of it with your beautifully clear answers. Whether my efforts make any difference remains to be seen. But I do think I am onto something with my new, may I say it, literary art form in which you were first featured in OSAU-2, C&I&L&E=mc2.

[@A.r.j.u.n33]

Whoaaaat a legend. Explained one of the most complex part in particle physics in just 15 minutes. Science teacher in my school would take 500 years to explain this. 😂😂

[@fingtechnology1094]

I appreciate the way you explain and make complex ideas accessible. Thank you. Subscribed.

[@tcarr349]

Great job! Great video! Great graphics! You might be the best science communicator in the world?! 👍

[@ArvinAsh]

Wow, thanks!

[@ashwanipandey7668]

I love the fact that you bring some very fundamental question ,like this video,never thaught about this thing... But amazing video love your videos.

[@jamesnasmith984]

This high quality narrative and graphics bring me tantalizingly close to grasping these notions but the maths I encountered in my biochem and medical career weren’t enough for a proper understanding. I wonder if a math course catch-up is a feasible goal in retirement.

[@jimmorris5328]

This explanation of symmetry breaking has cleared up my understanding of dark matter theories for WIMPs being a likely candidate as the spontaneous field fluctuations cause particles to pop into and out of existence. Thanks for another great video

[@ArvinAsh]

Great to hear that the video was helpful. Thank you for watching.

[@vishalmishra3046]

Exceptionally awesome visualizations in your Video @Arvin 🙂

[@lookmath4582]

The fastest growing physics channel and so informative ❤ .

[@luudest]

The chiral symmetry breaking in the proton is very interesting. I wonder how expirements have to be set up in order prove these theories?

[@philippefossier7178]

Excellent content and presentations. Such high quality. I am a big fan.

[@AnilKumar-xl2te]

I appreciate the efforts of all scientists over the thousands of years We need more scientists to understand this vast universe We need more scientists like Einstein

[@judgeomega]

the way i see it; the 'symmetry' breaking and conversion are because we assembled the model in this way so its not really answering a 'why'. its like trying to explain the why by saying because there is addition done... symmetry is just a more complex addition. if we had a full and complete model of the universe we would have no breaking of symmetry given a similar model to what we have now because everything would be accounted for in the equations.

[@saintott]

Really appreciate the description.❤

[@mattiasaxner9841]

A great explaination that increased my understanding of this.

[@ProactiveForce]

One of you most important videos. To me it would seem there are keys or paths in this video as to how gravity works that we currently are missing. The big bang potential working time clock machine first law of thermodynamics resulting in the recorded second law of thermodynamics including all resulting paths and consistent symmetries within time space and mass gravity causality pathways or E=mc2. Sort of a algebra puzzle with lot's of pieces.

[@kevindooley5934]

Thanks for doing this. The Goldstone mechanism is a tricky concept.

[@samuelbendayan2235]

Inside the Meson, since quark and anti-quark have opposite charge, why do you need gluons to bind them together? Don't they naturally attract?

[@aprylvanryn5898]

You answered so many questions without answering any questions lol. I'm gonna have to watch this again to fully get what u mean

[@محسنمسعود-ف1و]

هل كسر التناظر بما يسمى الميزون يقابله تجربة اكتشاف شحنة الالكترون اعني تجربة قطرات الزيت؟

[@amanvijayjindal5742]

This is bestest explanation of MASS in KZbin universe, many alternate universes exist in minds of those 1 percent Scientists.. who actually actually reached these MIND BENDING conclusions.. ie mass comes from energy, the gluon clouds.. whoa.. a BIG WHOA

[@001firebrand]

Mind-blowing. Just outstanding! 💖

[@ArvinAsh]

Thank you! Cheers!

[@gualbertovega3218]

Your videos should be part of home schooling.👏 I think it would be a great idea to create a home schooling series, for you have an excellent way of explaining advanced concepts in a way that are easy to understand. Thanks

[@pogtuber5146]

Thanks Arvin. I'm gonna go ahead and keep this tab open so I can watch it 5 more times.

[@m.alisiddiqui5802]

Thanks, you are doing great job, making things easier is not easier

[@thenameisshubhamsingh.]

Loved your videos as always!!

[@doctorflint2224]

After having seen several of your videos on strong nuclear force, I finally understood how a Meson can exists....I always thought " how can a quark and anti quark particle be stable and not annihilate?". Please Arvin, if you have more videos on Meson formation let me know (if not, it should be nice to have a new one!). Thanks again for all you videos!

[@AlbartBilal]

no words for appreciation....God blessing you sir for all times.......

[@JKDVIPER]

Hi ARVIN. If you think about it right. A black hole is a good or perfect example of what an atom probably looks like in realty. On an atom, the electron would be compared to the event horizon on a black hole. A certain section or volume is filled with a fluid or gas or an electrical field, on or near the nucleus. So the pulp or the core would be a supermassive black hole made of heavier elements in subatomic particles. SUBCOOLED and LIQUID STATE these volumes break the atom and resemble our smallest interactions. Whilst the MACRO SENSE looks very similar.

[@joegeorge3889]

He is definitely very interesting in his talks about the universe

[@nisheethrastogi]

Most accurate but, simplified easy to understand physics!

[@muahmuah4135]

Im glad to say that I've learned about a few of the things mentioned in this video during my physics classes and its really² hard involving a lot of equations that are really² long😅😅

[@jamesallison9725]

Thanks, now I know what the big deal about the Higgs field and the Higgs boson was all about. Nice explanation!!

[@b.s.7693]

Nick picking question: 12:57 the y-axis represents the energy level, but what is the meaning of the x-axis?

[@ArvinAsh]

Y axis is potential energy. X axis is the expectation value of the field. I talked about what expectation value is in the video. It has to do with the overall energy of particle/anti-particle creation and annihilation in the field.

[@Regularsshorts]

Dimensions increases with characteristics. 0D has no characteristics 1D gains length 2D gains width and 3D gains height. But what comes next? What does the 4th dimension gains? Time. The Universe expands and the space expands with it, space expands in the 4th dimension and since the 4th dimension is time it flows forward as the expansion. Gravity affects the flow of time. Why? Because mass slows down the rate of expansion of the 4th dimension. Since we are 3D beings it is hard for us to think about time as a spacial dimension. Think of a hypercube, it is made of two cubes with its corners joined by lines. Those lines represents time and the expansion of that line represents the forward flow of time

[@florianschneider3982]

A hypercube is made of 8 cubes

[@c.s.4273]

How much LSD does it need to think that way? 😉 PS: I do not want to imply you are wrong.

[@Vitamin.Z]

What is the universe expanding into?

[@florianschneider3982]

@@Vitamin.Z Nothing

[@c.s.4273]

@@Vitamin.Z There is no "into" as into implies an already given space. The space expansion happens in the fourth dimension, in time. If you would stop time you would also stop space expansion and if you would turn back the "clock" the existing space would shrink until there is no more time and space. There is an entity called "spacetime" that is hard to grasp. The separation of space and time is our illusion. It is like separating the second dimension from the third dimension or the separation of the first dimension from the second dimension. They are an essential part of each other. Try to see it this way, imagine us living in a universe with only one dimension. If you want to meet me there you need just 1 information like the distance on a ruler, for example the house number if the world would be a street. Now imagine living in a two dimensional world, you would need 2 informations to meet me on a surface (the x- and the y-axes), it would be like living in a town, you also need the street name and house number. Now imagine living in a three dimensional world, like for example a big city with skyscrapers, you would need 3 informations, the street, the house number and the floor number. Is this enough to meet me? No, because we live in a four dimensional world, therefore in order to meet me you need also the time or you would miss me. Therefore to locate me you need 4 informations, time including. This should be proof enough that we live in a four dimensional world.

[@txlish]

Appreciate Arvin, for peeling 1 layer at a time for a person interested in topic But minimal acedemic knowledge of high school physics of 70s -:)

[@powerzx]

According to current knowledge 99% of the mass is from strong force and 1% of the mass is from Higgs field.

[@manicmadpanickedman2249]

Heads up check the link for example kzbin.infoFxE-V3JN-EE?feature=share

[@freefall9832]

Yes, why he went on about Higgs and symmetry is just over complicating the topic

[@robotaholic]

actually it is from the color force

[@ExistenceUniversity]

@@robotaholic The color force is the strong force

[@TD-iy8us]

This is only for composite particles. Elementary particles(except neutrinos) get all their mass from the higgs field

[@hiiamjustacoolrandomuser168]

Very interesting and well explains vidoe. Arvin Ash being one of the best to explain complicated things much simplified.

[@kmash8716]

Great info, Thank you

[@mpsibi]

Well explained, thanks

[@manicmadpanickedman2249]

You should check this out kzbin.infoFxE-V3JN-EE?feature=share

[@NikkiTrudelle]

Thanks for doing what you do

[@danielduarte5073]

Amazing information !

[@Erik_Swiger]

Lately, I've really been spending some time trying to wrap my head around this stuff. Like, a photon is neutral, yet it contains (apparently) a negative and a positive charge, and magnetic north and south poles which alternate? And at 90 degrees - what's that about? I'm sure someone could refer me to a textbook of fundamentals, but I can already see that bottomless rabbit hole. I know life isn't "simple" but it seems as if there's a basic truth I'm not understanding. And photons can become electron/positron pairs...and I haven't even got to hadrons. It makes my head hurt, in a sort of good way.

[@cademosley4886]

As I understand it, a charged particle is a field source and a non-charged particle is a field carrier, but not itself a source. So a photon is an EM field carrier, but not an EM field source. That's why it's not charged. If you want the most basic of analogies or images to imagine, imagine a charged particle like an electron is like a little propeller that induces a vortex motion in the water around it that creates this rotating system, sort of like the electric field in 2D. That's like how a field source works. The photon would be a component of that moving system itself. In the whirlpool image, they are arbitrary points of the rotating water. (The vortex motion is more complex, but this gets the idea across.) A photon is "carrying" the rotating motion of the EM field (it is the motion), but it itself is not a little propeller creating its own vortex with it at the center. So it is not a charged particle. It's a field carrier but not a field source. When two vortex systems like whirlpools approach, which gives a rough analogy for the electric field in 2D, if they're spinning the opposite direction, opposite charge, they'll drag each other into each other where they intersect, if there's enough energy at that place. If they're spinning the same direction, same charge, they'll push each other back where they intersect. We can model where those two field components intersect and push at each other as a "photon exchange", as two photons mediating the electric "force". They're "field carriers" and "force carriers", but again they're not little propellers spinning up the field themselves. They're just carrying that field motion that the charged particle, the electron, created as the field source. Contrast all of this to gluons, which are both field carriers and field sources. A color charged quark is a little propeller inducing a vortex motion in the color field as a source, the carrying components of which we call the gluon field, so it's making gluons. But the difference is each component of that field motion, the gluons, are also little propellers themselves that create their own vortexes with themselves at the center, and the whole thing quickly cascades into these runaway propellers making propellers quickly sucking in the whole system back into the low energy state. I think that's right as a really crude but useful analogy, but anybody can feel free to correct it or make it better as a crude but useful analogy.

[@XEinstein]

@@cademosley4886 wow... that was the most amazing analogy I have ever read

[@valkyrie_592]

I am glad that some people that are not dancing on tiktok, do something actually highly productive to propel our existence into the future

[@timjohnson979]

This must be mass week. Anton Petrov also had a video on his KZbin channel this week called "But What Exactly Is Mass And How Is It Formed?"

[@manicmadpanickedman2249]

Hey check this example out kzbin.infoFxE-V3JN-EE?feature=share

[@nixdorfbrazil]

PBS Space Time released one also commeting on QCED and gluon energy to be causing the rest of the mass.

[@JamesWilson-ve9zi]

The Universe is not just expanding the whole Universe is also rotating which started with the big bang.

[@andystoolbox]

One of the better explanations for beggeners I have heard. Thanks.

[@dipling.pitzler7650]

That explains in my opinion where the energy comes from when the bond is broken by fission !The Gluon binding force AKA Mass of approx 1000 MeV / proton is released via radiation as it is no longer needed reducing the measured mass each time this happens. Does any body agree or is this TBS ?

[@rajeevyelkur7568]

both the weak force and strong force are invovled in nuclear fission. if the nm,ber of nuetrons and protons is not the same then weak force is also involved. otherwise you could say its just the strong force (ie gluons)

[@Natgrid02]

mind blown in 15 mins.......

[@faikerdogan2802]

I think it was pretty beautiful

[@thedouglasw.lippchannel5546]

A fabulous video - great job again! Could you do a video on CIG Theory?

[@KaliFissure]

Mass units such as a neutron or proton have, are photons of wavelength 2pi Planck length trapped over their own gravity with the help of a neutrino m=E/c² mass is energy in orbit over a sphere, trapped by its own gravity creating classical inertia c² (v²) creating inertia.

[@migs192]

Huh things are clearer now. Thank you for the best explanation I have yet to see.

[@gwentchamp8720]

You mentioned that the "Net energy of virtual particle creation/annihilation adds up to zero" Is that the same things as saying the net energy of the Universe is zero?

[@ArvinAsh]

No, my statement was regarding expectation value. The expectation value of all the fields (except the Higgs field) is zero. This means that the lowest energy state of the fields is zero, meaning that virtual particles that are coming in and out of existence in these fields in totality add up to zero. This video I made might make this virtual particle issue clearer: kzbin.info/www/bejne/i6CvmJ-mptKCqJI

[@The.Golden.Door.]

Ignoring the minor asymmetry is the Biggest problem with physics .We do have a satisfying solution as to why Symmetry is broken, however, modern day physics doesn't teach this form of math.

[@kafalonitis]

The meaning of mass has been deciphered in the "Novel quantitative push gravity/electricity theory poised for verification". It provides an alternative platform to map out existing experimental data. Hopefully, there may be a correspondence between the outlined ideas in the above video and the ideas on mass, force fields, black holes and much more derived by the proposed novel theory. It is much easier to conceptualize with palpable explanations. The examination of alternatives is always a fruitful exercise. Please give it a try.

[@iam6424]

What is the Mass of Space ??

[@yeshagarwal431]

I have a little off topic question but we know due to entropy time travel is not possible because entropy always increases or remains same but that is for the closed system what if we create a system in which one sides entropy is getting transferred to the other side something like a huge refrigerater, can then time travel (in backwards direction) be possible?

[@ministerofjoy]

Thank you

[@alphalunamare]

I have a problem with Symmetries being causal agents. I believe it to be an incorrect description. Quite simply these symmetries are exhibited by the systems under inspection. Likewise with symmetry breaking. It is useful to have metaphors that can be expressed as symmetries but that does not demand that causal agencies should exist, they are merely descriptions in human understandable text. On a minor point, if Chirality is so important why is it so little talked about?

[@dannydandaniel8040]

I think Emmy Noether might disagree.. causality is an expression of symmetry

[@alphalunamare]

@@dannydandaniel8040 I doubt that very much, She knew what She was talking about. Correspondence does not mean in 'English' that there exists a causality and it certainly does not imply 'direction'. It merely means that there is a relationship of sorts.

[@enzocussuol]

great as always 👏🏻🇧🇷

[@boilingpointstudios6471]

Another Great AA vid

[@stephanieparker1250]

I learned a lot from this video, thanks! The graphics were very helpful 🙌

[@stevendashley6209]

I love your videos!!

[@gosnooky]

So the Higgs seems to exist to supply enough particles with starter "mass" so they can bond and create the actual mass via gluon interactions. Fascinating.

[@gscottfuller]

Arvin - since the making of this video, does the explanation of mass coming from pion condensate drag on the quarks change anything in your video? Thanks!

[@ArvinAsh]

It would add an added source of to the mass of atoms. I'm not sure how much of a contribution this has to the total mass of the atom. My guess is very little compared to the other sources.

[@joedizzelfoerizle]

Great stuff man, thanks! Keep it up 💪😎🇺🇸

[@spiralsun1]

Awesome!! Thanks-been thinking about chirality and symmetries for years and this really helped.

[@freefall9832]

Symmetry seemed like something thrown in to complicate the subject

[@TD-iy8us]

​@@freefall9832 it's not

[@freefall9832]

@TD haha comment from the past, I looked into it, and I'm not buying symmetry. Physicists found their rabbit hole and they might be lost to us forever hahaha

[@TD-iy8us]

@@freefall9832 why aren't you buying symmetry?

[@freefall9832]

@TD I see modern physics built on shaky foundations. The misuse of math to predict future or past events has led to the current state where things aren't adding up. Symmetry, entanglement, red shift are all in doubt and on the chopping block

[@alfadog67]

Hi Dr. Ash. Thank you for another post that is just smarter than me. I have a fatal flaw, in that I have almost no certified training in physics. But I've come across another flaw that I just can't see past. Since the speed of light is c, does that mean that time moves at a similar speed? If the speed of light were infinite, wouldn't everything "happen at once" as they say?

[@ArvinAsh]

There would be many issues with an infinite speed. Matter, for one couldn't exist because it would require infinite energy. I explain why in this video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/aWqVf2B_jreYpsU

[@PATISLAV]

Well, from the perspective of the photon the things get interesting. If I understood it correctly, it "experiences" the travel as instant. I wonder if that could mean a single photon is in fact able to travel like that infinitly far.

[@onemediuminmotion]

1. First "kinetic energy", as the linear momentum of a particulate mass-object that is in motion relative to another (e.g. 'observer') mass-object, as imparted to it by an initial 'pulse' of accelerating force; and the "potential energy" we say a mass-object has that is being held aloft in a (say) gravitational field, are in fact the same thing - the "held aloft" object being, in fact, subjected to a sustained (or you might say, not yet completed pulse of) accelerating force point-radially with respect to the center of mass of the system under consideration. 2. Second, all "motion" is - ultimately - point-radial, originating from "The Big Bang", and still proceeding from it we must assume - no matter which 'direction' a given particulate mass-object is "pushed" by one of its fellows. What distinguishes a bounded region (such as a "proton") of confined motion (such as that of its "quarks") from the "empty space" (defined by the propagation of EMR photons through it at "the speed of light") surrounding such a region, is precisely that property it exhibits that we call "mass", and which is more accurately described (I propose) as the point-radial (and 'still spinning') fluid vortexual acceleration-flow (complete with 'length contraction' and 'time dilation') imparted to the spacetime contained in that region by some initial point-radially 'explosive' event like "The Big Bang" or a stellar supernova "event". 3. "Spacetime", the 'stuff' we perceive as being "curved" by the presence of a gravitating mass, is an otherwise scale-uniform superfluid medium (SUM) whose self-relative motion -- a.k.a. "acceleration" -- is what endows it with structure (geometric and otherwise).

[@zahidaminbhat5934]

great job👍👍👍👍👍👍

[@L2p2]

great video Arvin ! I think we will still have to wait (insert best guess) years before a full understanding of what is mass ! Is amazing how after 100 years of einstein some of the answers he gave special and general theory of relativity are still not fully reconciled with quantum physics.

[@LyubomirIko]

Mass is property of Energy. Mass is the name we give to the tendency of highly concentrated energy to resist acceleration when acted upon by an external force. The question is what is Energy.

[@rajeevyelkur7568]

@@LyubomirIko Thanks you. Newtown explain gravity and its relationship with mass with this famous equation F = GmM / r^2 . Einsten elaborated and replaced with his theory of general relativity. So that much is clear. What we are yet to understand I think is how is is that this property of emerges (mass) emerges. The explanation of higgs mechanism and how the energy of gluons gives rise to mass is wonderful , Arvin did a great job of explaining all that. But it is not very satisfying. Why gluons have the energy they do or why the higgs potential has the value is does. None of the theories mentioned spo far have explaines where these values come from. That is the great mystery. As you say if we truly understand energy then we may understand how this property of energy as you put it emerges.

[@LyubomirIko]

​@@rajeevyelkur7568 "Why gluons have the energy they do" - as we know - The law of conservation of energy states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed - only converted from one form of energy to another... Yet - gluons breaks this laws every moment - in a constant stream - zipping in and out of existence on top of that -in order to create the whole Universe. It is enormous paradox - both for science, but for philosophy too.

[@rajeevyelkur7568]

@@LyubomirIko I am not a physicist to give a perfect answer here. But yes the zero point energy paradox as it is called is known as the "worst prediction in physics" order of 10^120 wrong from observation. However I think there is a partial resolution at least 1. particles have positive energy and anti particles negative energy. that should cancel. But gluons are the binding energy . However gluons binding virtual particles and antiparticle pairs according to me at least do not represent energy unless they particles themselves become real . What really makes them "real" is the next question. Yes this part is an unresolved mystery. I have some ideas in this area but its too much to put here as a comment. I believe it has to do with dark energy and how particles become real or come into being. However at this time i do not know of any theory that accounts for dark energy at sub atomic particle levels. I have been trying to gather some ideas about this for some time now.

[@LyubomirIko]

@@rajeevyelkur7568 It's rather the opposite - the particles are special manifestation of the so called virtual particles. By virtual particles science mean field of particles. And all particles are virtual particles - there is no other type. - Read a better description from someone with master degree in science: In quantum field theory we are taught that virtual particles are just mathematical fictions, only existing inside Feynman diagrams. The only measurable things are "real" particles that exist in the "in" and the "out" external states, the lines entering or leaving a Feynman diagram. However...... ..the truth is the reverse. It is the real particles, the external legs on the Feynman diagrams, that are the mathematical fictions, because they are presumed to be free or non-interacting, which is just a mathematical convenience - a fiction - to simplify the calculations. It is the virtual particles that really exist and that the rest of the world interacts with. The universe is just a set of particle interactions or Feynman diagrams, without artificial boundaries; we are "inside" the diagrams.

[@barryzeeberg3672]

At 6:03 The video states: "Modern quantum theory shows that all particles are excitations in fields that permeate the entire universe." My question (that I have asked many times but never has been answered) is: Consider the (x,y,z,t) location of a particle in the "real" everyday world that we experience. How is that location determined by (or related to) the excitation in the quantum field? For instance, I am familiar with Fourier Transforms and Inverse Fourier Transforms. In this case, there is a very clear way to compute the real-world coordinates of an object from the Fourier Transform. I guess I am asking how this inversion is done for the case of an excitation in a quantum field. Also, how can we in the every-day world move a particle? That is, when we "think" we are moving an ordinary object, it must be that we are "really" changing the excitations in the quantum field. Please help me to understand this. I feel that if the theory is not easily seen to function in the ordinary world, it is not a very "useful" or "realistic" theory. Or is the underlying reality the quantum field, and we just are under the illusion that we live in what we call the "ordinary" world? Is our "reality" entirely an illusion, just our brain tricking us?

[@ArvinAsh]

Our brains are not tricking us. At their root, everything is fields. However for macro objects the waves and uncertainties are so small that we don't notice them. If it were possible to shrink to the size of atoms, you would perceive the quantum reality of all things.

[@regentword]

the actions in the fields are ultimately the result of our actions ... not the other way round ..... therfire we are creating what we call reality

[@barryzeeberg3672]

@@ArvinAsh Thank you so much for your response. But I still do not have an intuitive understanding. Perhaps my conceptual problem is that I am assuming that the excitation in the quantum field is a rather "delocalized" wave that permeates through the entire field (much like the Fourier transform of a real object). But maybe my conception is incorrect, and the excitation is really just at one point in the quantum field, right where the real object is? If I use my hand to move a real object, then presumably this would "cause" the position of the excitation in the quantum field to move? Does this movement happen instantaneously, or is there some delay, perhaps related to the finite speed of light?

[@mskEduTech]

Excellent

[@babyoda1973]

I like to think energy in place of mass to keep it a straight

[@JackSanders7777]

4D & 3D particle ages as Universe contains the 2nd dimension or Higgs Field stores information in 2 dimensions and allows faster than light, left handed neutrinos by mirroring these particles in the 3rd dimension which annihilate giving mass to the particles that pass through ths 2D layer of Universe.

[@blonkasnootch7850]

Theory: 1. We did never produce anti matter in the labs. It was something else but no anti matter! 2. We and all galaxys visible to us are in "local" spots of regular matter which we can see and where gravity works attracting. 3. Between this galaxies is anti matter which we can not interact with and which negated gravity forces are pushing the galaxies apart. 4. this was not like this in the early universe, it is a result of the attracting and pushing forces of matter and anti matter it self.

[@Corvaire]

The adhesion and repulsion of 4 dimensional spin is what causes mass and anti-mass 'attributes' in all forces. The current equations don't take 4 dimensional space in to consideration, there for mass is fundamentally misunderstood. If 4d spin entered into the equations we would already have the fundamental answers to many of our paradoxes (ie, gravity, electromagnetism, information containment, cyclical entropy, supersymmetry, etc., etc..)

[@anywallsocket]

lmk when you publish that paper my guy

[@kingz_danklv3683]

Yea please publish that paper