1
00:00:08,520 --> 00:00:11,920
Speaker 1: Hey, Daniel, if you could throw anything into a black hole,

2
00:00:12,560 --> 00:00:13,280
Speaker 1: what would it be?

3
00:00:15,080 --> 00:00:17,279
Speaker 2: I guess it'd be something I don't ever want to

4
00:00:17,320 --> 00:00:19,439
Speaker 2: see again, Like a bunch of white chocolate.

5
00:00:21,120 --> 00:00:23,040
Speaker 1: You know that doesn't get rid of the concept of

6
00:00:23,079 --> 00:00:25,239
Speaker 1: white chocolate. People can still make more.

7
00:00:25,880 --> 00:00:27,840
Speaker 2: And I'll keep throwing it in the black hole until

8
00:00:27,880 --> 00:00:28,319
Speaker 2: they learn.

9
00:00:28,560 --> 00:00:30,960
Speaker 1: But if you throw a white chocolate into a black hole,

10
00:00:31,200 --> 00:00:32,400
Speaker 1: does it make it a white hole?

11
00:00:33,880 --> 00:00:36,080
Speaker 2: If it eats matter, it's a black hole. A white

12
00:00:36,120 --> 00:00:37,600
Speaker 2: hole would be making matter.

13
00:00:37,800 --> 00:00:39,199
Speaker 1: So if you ever see a white hole out there

14
00:00:39,200 --> 00:00:42,599
Speaker 1: in space, it's it's basically a white chocolate fountain.

15
00:00:42,960 --> 00:00:45,400
Speaker 2: If there's somebody on the other side throwing all their

16
00:00:45,400 --> 00:00:47,919
Speaker 2: white chocolate into a black hole, then yeah.

17
00:00:48,040 --> 00:00:50,320
Speaker 1: Or does a dark chocolate get turned into white chocolate

18
00:00:50,360 --> 00:00:51,200
Speaker 1: on the other side?

19
00:00:52,600 --> 00:00:54,480
Speaker 2: What a cosmic tragedy that would be.

20
00:00:54,640 --> 00:00:56,280
Speaker 1: What if you're in like the five percent of the

21
00:00:56,360 --> 00:00:59,360
Speaker 1: universe that doesn't like white chocolate, What if it's cosmically

22
00:00:59,400 --> 00:01:03,920
Speaker 1: loved except for a certain household in Irvine, California.

23
00:01:04,080 --> 00:01:05,440
Speaker 2: I don't want to meet those aliens.

24
00:01:20,920 --> 00:01:22,760
Speaker 1: Hi, I am morehy Man cartoonas and the author of

25
00:01:22,800 --> 00:01:24,360
Speaker 1: Oliver's Great Big Universe.

26
00:01:24,520 --> 00:01:27,240
Speaker 2: Hi, I'm Daniel, I'm a particle physicist and a professor

27
00:01:27,280 --> 00:01:30,840
Speaker 2: at UC Irvine, And yes, I'll meet the white chocolate aliens.

28
00:01:31,040 --> 00:01:33,240
Speaker 1: Aliens are made out of white chocolate, or they like

29
00:01:33,400 --> 00:01:34,080
Speaker 1: white chocolate.

30
00:01:34,520 --> 00:01:36,319
Speaker 2: If they're made out of white chocolate, I'll feel so

31
00:01:36,360 --> 00:01:38,479
Speaker 2: sorry for them that I'll definitely meet them just out

32
00:01:38,480 --> 00:01:38,840
Speaker 2: of pain.

33
00:01:40,880 --> 00:01:43,240
Speaker 1: Well, they probably feel really safe around you because they

34
00:01:43,280 --> 00:01:44,120
Speaker 1: know you won't eat them.

35
00:01:44,440 --> 00:01:47,360
Speaker 2: That's true exactly, But they might melt in the sun.

36
00:01:47,440 --> 00:01:50,000
Speaker 2: You know, that stuff is just not really very substantial.

37
00:01:51,600 --> 00:01:54,400
Speaker 1: They need like sunshields or something. But anyways, welcome to

38
00:01:54,440 --> 00:01:57,280
Speaker 1: our podcast, Daniel and Jorge Explain the Universe, a production

39
00:01:57,400 --> 00:01:58,960
Speaker 1: of iHeartRadio.

40
00:01:58,440 --> 00:02:00,520
Speaker 2: In which we take a deep look at both sides

41
00:02:00,560 --> 00:02:03,320
Speaker 2: of the universe, the light matter, the dark matter, the

42
00:02:03,320 --> 00:02:06,280
Speaker 2: white chocolate, the dark chocolate, the stuff that we're curious

43
00:02:06,280 --> 00:02:09,240
Speaker 2: about and the stuff that you are curious about. We

44
00:02:09,320 --> 00:02:11,280
Speaker 2: think that everything out there in the universe is a

45
00:02:11,320 --> 00:02:14,040
Speaker 2: delicious mystery, and it deserves to have a bite taken

46
00:02:14,120 --> 00:02:14,600
Speaker 2: out of it.

47
00:02:14,720 --> 00:02:16,960
Speaker 1: That's right. We try to delve into the deep, dark

48
00:02:17,040 --> 00:02:20,640
Speaker 1: mysteries of the universe as well as its shiny bright facts,

49
00:02:21,160 --> 00:02:23,520
Speaker 1: the things that scientists and work hard over many years

50
00:02:23,560 --> 00:02:26,320
Speaker 1: to discover and figure out how it all works.

51
00:02:26,200 --> 00:02:28,280
Speaker 2: And one of the goals of the podcast is to

52
00:02:28,320 --> 00:02:31,520
Speaker 2: take you along on that journey. Puzzling out the nature

53
00:02:31,520 --> 00:02:34,720
Speaker 2: of the universe is not just something professional scientists should do.

54
00:02:34,800 --> 00:02:37,360
Speaker 2: It's something everybody should be thinking about. We should all

55
00:02:37,400 --> 00:02:39,600
Speaker 2: be thinking like a physicist, even if we're not thinking

56
00:02:39,680 --> 00:02:43,359
Speaker 2: about physics problems. But those physics problems are fascinating and

57
00:02:43,480 --> 00:02:46,760
Speaker 2: are deep and are consequential. Where do the universe come from?

58
00:02:46,840 --> 00:02:48,720
Speaker 2: How does it all work? How will it all end?

59
00:02:48,760 --> 00:02:51,360
Speaker 2: Where is our place in it? All? These things are

60
00:02:51,440 --> 00:02:54,799
Speaker 2: questions that everybody has, and we hope to work together

61
00:02:54,919 --> 00:02:57,560
Speaker 2: to find the answer. And that means you should also

62
00:02:57,720 --> 00:02:58,880
Speaker 2: be asking questions.

63
00:02:59,160 --> 00:03:02,360
Speaker 1: Yeah, because about the universe are all around us. They

64
00:03:02,360 --> 00:03:05,920
Speaker 1: affect us on an everyday basis, and they make us

65
00:03:05,919 --> 00:03:09,200
Speaker 1: all curious about what our place in it is? And

66
00:03:09,400 --> 00:03:10,519
Speaker 1: where does this all heading?

67
00:03:10,680 --> 00:03:12,960
Speaker 2: Some sort of white chocolate apocalypse that's where we're heading.

68
00:03:15,040 --> 00:03:17,200
Speaker 1: Wait, is that a dark vision of the future or

69
00:03:17,240 --> 00:03:19,040
Speaker 1: a bright vision of the future.

70
00:03:20,040 --> 00:03:21,880
Speaker 2: I think people's reactions that will tell us a lot

71
00:03:21,880 --> 00:03:23,160
Speaker 2: about who they are deep down.

72
00:03:23,240 --> 00:03:26,520
Speaker 1: Yeah, So if they like white chocolate, they're optimists and

73
00:03:26,600 --> 00:03:27,280
Speaker 1: happy people.

74
00:03:28,720 --> 00:03:32,239
Speaker 2: Some of us will run screaming from that kind of person.

75
00:03:32,560 --> 00:03:34,400
Speaker 2: But I'm not the kind of person who runs screaming

76
00:03:34,400 --> 00:03:37,440
Speaker 2: when I get emails from listeners. I love those emails.

77
00:03:37,520 --> 00:03:40,320
Speaker 2: I love hearing your questions about the universe. I love

78
00:03:40,360 --> 00:03:42,520
Speaker 2: thinking with you about the edge of your knowledge or

79
00:03:42,520 --> 00:03:46,320
Speaker 2: the edge of human knowledge, which listeners often creep right

80
00:03:46,400 --> 00:03:49,280
Speaker 2: up into. So please don't be shy send me your

81
00:03:49,320 --> 00:03:53,119
Speaker 2: questions to questions at Danielandjorge dot com. We write back

82
00:03:53,160 --> 00:03:53,880
Speaker 2: to everybody.

83
00:03:54,080 --> 00:03:56,280
Speaker 1: Yeah, and sometimes we take those questions and we try

84
00:03:56,320 --> 00:03:58,880
Speaker 1: to answer them here on the podcast, or at least

85
00:03:58,880 --> 00:04:01,880
Speaker 1: we talk about them, which sometimes involves an answer.

86
00:04:03,400 --> 00:04:05,840
Speaker 2: That's right. Some of the questions I get over email.

87
00:04:06,080 --> 00:04:08,560
Speaker 2: I think lots of people might have this question, and

88
00:04:08,600 --> 00:04:11,240
Speaker 2: so I'd like to share the question and the answer

89
00:04:11,280 --> 00:04:14,000
Speaker 2: with the whole podcast community. Other questions I have no

90
00:04:14,080 --> 00:04:15,960
Speaker 2: answer to, and so I just hope that we can

91
00:04:16,000 --> 00:04:18,880
Speaker 2: fill some time with jokes and speculation in lieu of

92
00:04:18,920 --> 00:04:19,400
Speaker 2: an answer.

93
00:04:19,480 --> 00:04:29,320
Speaker 1: So TODA podcast we'll be tackling listener questions number sixty three,

94
00:04:29,400 --> 00:04:32,240
Speaker 1: and today we have three pretty awesome questions. One of

95
00:04:32,279 --> 00:04:35,320
Speaker 1: them is about hawking radiation. The only one is about

96
00:04:35,360 --> 00:04:38,440
Speaker 1: making new matter in the universe. And then we have

97
00:04:38,480 --> 00:04:41,400
Speaker 1: a question about the ultimate.

98
00:04:41,120 --> 00:04:43,480
Speaker 2: Particle and the ultimate anti particle.

99
00:04:43,720 --> 00:04:47,200
Speaker 1: Oh wait, is the ultimate antiparticle just the first particle?

100
00:04:48,360 --> 00:04:49,840
Speaker 2: That's basically Brett's question.

101
00:04:49,960 --> 00:04:52,159
Speaker 1: You all right, let's dig into it. Our first question

102
00:04:52,320 --> 00:04:53,640
Speaker 1: comes from Andrew.

103
00:04:53,720 --> 00:04:56,120
Speaker 3: Hi, Daniel, and Jorge. This is Andrea, and I have

104
00:04:56,160 --> 00:04:59,520
Speaker 3: a question about Hawking radiation. I was interested in something

105
00:04:59,560 --> 00:05:02,640
Speaker 3: you said another episode about it being impossible to detect,

106
00:05:03,320 --> 00:05:05,200
Speaker 3: and I was wondering if you could talk a bit

107
00:05:05,240 --> 00:05:11,080
Speaker 3: more about that, and especially in terms of analysis and

108
00:05:11,120 --> 00:05:17,160
Speaker 3: detection and instruments and experiments. For example, have any lab

109
00:05:17,240 --> 00:05:22,919
Speaker 3: experiments or simulations already been done to look for Hawking radiation?

110
00:05:24,000 --> 00:05:27,120
Speaker 3: If we could develop an instrument, because I imagine this

111
00:05:27,200 --> 00:05:29,680
Speaker 3: is just very theoretical at this point, but if we

112
00:05:29,720 --> 00:05:32,560
Speaker 3: could develop an instrument to use on a real black

113
00:05:32,600 --> 00:05:36,320
Speaker 3: hole in space to analyze the Hawking radiation, what would

114
00:05:36,360 --> 00:05:40,520
Speaker 3: that require and what would that look like? Also, would

115
00:05:40,600 --> 00:05:43,520
Speaker 3: only some kinds of black holes be feasible for this

116
00:05:43,600 --> 00:05:46,360
Speaker 3: kind of analysis, like maybe the one at the center

117
00:05:46,400 --> 00:05:51,040
Speaker 3: of our galaxy is too massive? So thank you very

118
00:05:51,120 --> 00:05:53,760
Speaker 3: much for taking my question. I love the show.

119
00:05:54,640 --> 00:05:59,440
Speaker 1: Awesome question. It's all about Hawking radiation. You know, can

120
00:05:59,480 --> 00:06:01,920
Speaker 1: you have we detected it? Is it just an idea

121
00:06:01,960 --> 00:06:04,920
Speaker 1: that we have or is it a proven concept? And

122
00:06:05,520 --> 00:06:07,840
Speaker 1: if we haven't detected it, how would you measure it?

123
00:06:07,880 --> 00:06:10,800
Speaker 1: And what's at the source of Stephen Hawkins is superpowers?

124
00:06:13,160 --> 00:06:15,000
Speaker 2: I think that was just his sheer sex appeal.

125
00:06:15,200 --> 00:06:18,119
Speaker 1: He admitted rhiz waves.

126
00:06:18,640 --> 00:06:22,160
Speaker 2: That's right, rhiz particles. Actually it's quantum. Yeah, this is

127
00:06:22,160 --> 00:06:24,760
Speaker 2: a great question because I love the sort of forward thinking,

128
00:06:25,279 --> 00:06:27,840
Speaker 2: like how can we actually figure this out? What technology

129
00:06:27,880 --> 00:06:30,919
Speaker 2: would we need? How can we make this practical? Like

130
00:06:31,040 --> 00:06:33,680
Speaker 2: me Andrea really really wants to see a black hole

131
00:06:33,720 --> 00:06:35,359
Speaker 2: and study it, and this is like one of the

132
00:06:35,400 --> 00:06:36,680
Speaker 2: only ways we can really do that.

133
00:06:37,040 --> 00:06:39,279
Speaker 1: Well, maybe you start with the basics, like what is

134
00:06:39,600 --> 00:06:42,520
Speaker 1: exactly Hawking radiation and have we seen it?

135
00:06:42,560 --> 00:06:45,840
Speaker 2: Hawking radiation is a super fascinating concept because it's like

136
00:06:45,880 --> 00:06:48,760
Speaker 2: a first step between our current understanding of black holes,

137
00:06:48,960 --> 00:06:52,279
Speaker 2: which is basically just what general relativity says that matter

138
00:06:52,360 --> 00:06:55,880
Speaker 2: falls in it creates an event horizon inside is a singularity,

139
00:06:56,320 --> 00:06:59,560
Speaker 2: nothing can escape. Black holes are truly black according to

140
00:06:59,640 --> 00:07:02,800
Speaker 2: general relativity. But we know that general relativity can't be

141
00:07:02,839 --> 00:07:06,599
Speaker 2: an ultimate description of the universe because it's ignoring quantum effects.

142
00:07:06,600 --> 00:07:08,799
Speaker 2: And we know that quantum effects have to be important

143
00:07:09,000 --> 00:07:11,520
Speaker 2: when you get really really dense and really really small

144
00:07:11,520 --> 00:07:14,840
Speaker 2: things like a singularity. But we don't have a theory

145
00:07:15,000 --> 00:07:19,680
Speaker 2: of quantum gravity something that unifies general relativity and quantum mechanics.

146
00:07:19,680 --> 00:07:22,160
Speaker 2: It gives us like a description of a quantum black hole.

147
00:07:22,280 --> 00:07:25,000
Speaker 2: But Stephen Hawking did something like take a first step

148
00:07:25,040 --> 00:07:27,920
Speaker 2: in that direction, and he figured out that if you

149
00:07:27,960 --> 00:07:30,400
Speaker 2: have a black hole in our universe, it follows the

150
00:07:30,440 --> 00:07:32,680
Speaker 2: rules of general relativity, but also has to follow the

151
00:07:32,720 --> 00:07:34,920
Speaker 2: rules of quantum mechanics. And he was able to bring

152
00:07:34,960 --> 00:07:37,000
Speaker 2: the math together to make it play nicely. And it

153
00:07:37,040 --> 00:07:40,160
Speaker 2: predicts that these quantum black holes are not truly black.

154
00:07:40,200 --> 00:07:45,280
Speaker 2: They actually faintly glow with radiation, and that's the Hawking radiation.

155
00:07:45,080 --> 00:07:49,520
Speaker 1: M Wait, so he was actually able to make quantum

156
00:07:49,600 --> 00:07:53,360
Speaker 1: mechanics play nicely with special or general relativity. I thought

157
00:07:53,400 --> 00:07:54,680
Speaker 1: that was sort of impossible.

158
00:07:54,760 --> 00:07:58,680
Speaker 2: It's hopefully not impossible, because that would mean the universe

159
00:07:58,960 --> 00:08:02,040
Speaker 2: can to be understood. It's so far not been achieved

160
00:08:02,080 --> 00:08:05,160
Speaker 2: in a comprehensive and coherent way, but there are places

161
00:08:05,160 --> 00:08:07,080
Speaker 2: where people have made a few inroads. And so we

162
00:08:07,120 --> 00:08:10,120
Speaker 2: call this semi classical because he didn't make a complete

163
00:08:10,160 --> 00:08:13,080
Speaker 2: theory of quantum gravity. He just pulls some really clever

164
00:08:13,120 --> 00:08:16,239
Speaker 2: tricks in order to do this one calculation without actually

165
00:08:16,280 --> 00:08:18,600
Speaker 2: knowing the theory of quantum gravity. So it's a really

166
00:08:18,640 --> 00:08:20,840
Speaker 2: slick sort of mathematical maneuver that he did.

167
00:08:21,000 --> 00:08:22,240
Speaker 1: Well, what is it exactly?

168
00:08:22,320 --> 00:08:24,320
Speaker 2: So what he did is he thought about what happens

169
00:08:24,320 --> 00:08:27,559
Speaker 2: to quantum fields near a black hole. Now you often

170
00:08:27,600 --> 00:08:30,880
Speaker 2: hear in popular science this sort of handwavy description of

171
00:08:30,920 --> 00:08:34,640
Speaker 2: Hawking radiation, and the description goes something like a particle

172
00:08:34,679 --> 00:08:37,240
Speaker 2: and an anti particle and made near the event horizon.

173
00:08:37,360 --> 00:08:39,800
Speaker 2: One falls in the other one is Hawking radiation. That's

174
00:08:39,840 --> 00:08:41,920
Speaker 2: not what's going on as far as we know. In fact,

175
00:08:41,960 --> 00:08:45,000
Speaker 2: we don't have any understanding of the particle picture of

176
00:08:45,000 --> 00:08:47,320
Speaker 2: how this works, because again we don't have that theory

177
00:08:47,360 --> 00:08:50,360
Speaker 2: of quantum gravity. We don't know how gravity affects these

178
00:08:50,400 --> 00:08:53,439
Speaker 2: tiny particles. What Hawking did instead was think about fields

179
00:08:53,520 --> 00:08:56,200
Speaker 2: near the event horizon. A lot of fields have this

180
00:08:56,280 --> 00:08:58,240
Speaker 2: property that they can do two things. They can make

181
00:08:58,280 --> 00:09:01,640
Speaker 2: particles and they can make anti particles. Or for example,

182
00:09:01,960 --> 00:09:05,600
Speaker 2: electroagnetic fields can make fields of all sorts of different frequencies.

183
00:09:06,160 --> 00:09:08,080
Speaker 2: And what he did was he said, well, how do

184
00:09:08,160 --> 00:09:11,040
Speaker 2: we think about those fields near and event horizon? Because

185
00:09:11,080 --> 00:09:13,600
Speaker 2: when you solve field equations, you're thinking about how waves

186
00:09:13,960 --> 00:09:17,440
Speaker 2: move through those fields. And the math that he did

187
00:09:17,480 --> 00:09:20,600
Speaker 2: showed us that near an event horizon, there's something weird

188
00:09:20,640 --> 00:09:23,400
Speaker 2: that happens to those fields. And basically there always has

189
00:09:23,440 --> 00:09:25,760
Speaker 2: to be an outgoing wave in order to make the

190
00:09:25,800 --> 00:09:26,800
Speaker 2: mathematics work.

191
00:09:27,000 --> 00:09:28,679
Speaker 1: Well, what do you mean like an outgoing wave? What

192
00:09:28,720 --> 00:09:31,319
Speaker 1: does that mean? Outgoing in which directing like away from

193
00:09:31,360 --> 00:09:32,239
Speaker 1: the black hole.

194
00:09:32,280 --> 00:09:34,840
Speaker 2: Like awave from the black hole exactly. And so that's

195
00:09:34,880 --> 00:09:40,160
Speaker 2: what's interpreted as outgoing Hawking radiation, the generation of particles

196
00:09:40,200 --> 00:09:42,960
Speaker 2: from the energy of the black hole. That's what this

197
00:09:43,120 --> 00:09:44,240
Speaker 2: radiation comes from.

198
00:09:44,400 --> 00:09:46,440
Speaker 1: Now, where does this idea that there has to be

199
00:09:46,480 --> 00:09:50,400
Speaker 1: a radiation come from? Is there no explanation to it?

200
00:09:50,559 --> 00:09:52,600
Speaker 2: You can try to make some intuitive sense of it,

201
00:09:52,640 --> 00:09:55,600
Speaker 2: but we don't have any microphysics explanation of it. Like

202
00:09:55,679 --> 00:09:57,400
Speaker 2: we want one. I can hear that you want it.

203
00:09:57,440 --> 00:09:59,840
Speaker 2: I'm sure listeners want it. I desperately want it, Like

204
00:10:00,120 --> 00:10:03,160
Speaker 2: what's actually happening? We don't have that understanding because we

205
00:10:03,160 --> 00:10:06,000
Speaker 2: don't understand particles and gravity. There's another way to gain

206
00:10:06,040 --> 00:10:09,439
Speaker 2: some intuition about it, which is thermodynamically. Think about black

207
00:10:09,480 --> 00:10:13,040
Speaker 2: holes as having a temperature. Right, everything in the universe

208
00:10:13,080 --> 00:10:16,600
Speaker 2: that has a temperature glows, so black holes also have

209
00:10:16,679 --> 00:10:20,120
Speaker 2: a temperature. Then they must also glow. And black holes

210
00:10:20,120 --> 00:10:22,640
Speaker 2: because the information that falls in them have to have

211
00:10:22,679 --> 00:10:24,880
Speaker 2: an entropy and therefore to have a temperature. And so

212
00:10:24,920 --> 00:10:27,560
Speaker 2: that's another way to think about what hawking radiation is.

213
00:10:27,880 --> 00:10:31,199
Speaker 2: It's like the black body radiation of a black hole.

214
00:10:31,400 --> 00:10:33,800
Speaker 1: But wait, it sounds like you have to treat the

215
00:10:33,840 --> 00:10:37,680
Speaker 1: black hole as a whole if you're talking about entropy

216
00:10:37,679 --> 00:10:39,559
Speaker 1: and things like that, So then how is it quantum

217
00:10:39,559 --> 00:10:39,880
Speaker 1: as well?

218
00:10:39,960 --> 00:10:42,520
Speaker 2: Yeah, the quantum aspect has to do with these waves,

219
00:10:42,559 --> 00:10:46,440
Speaker 2: these quantized fields that surround the black hole, and Hawking

220
00:10:46,520 --> 00:10:49,720
Speaker 2: radiation comes from when you have quantum fields and an

221
00:10:49,800 --> 00:10:53,920
Speaker 2: event horizon together, you get this generation of waves that

222
00:10:54,000 --> 00:10:57,040
Speaker 2: come away from the event horizon. That's what hawking radiation is.

223
00:10:57,480 --> 00:11:00,520
Speaker 1: So it's just I mean black body radiation that happens

224
00:11:00,520 --> 00:11:03,120
Speaker 1: when like something you have a hot rock in space.

225
00:11:03,240 --> 00:11:06,640
Speaker 1: It's just the molecules and atoms in it are very

226
00:11:06,640 --> 00:11:10,600
Speaker 1: excited and so they generate photons that you know shoot out.

227
00:11:10,640 --> 00:11:12,679
Speaker 1: Is that kind of what's happening, Like the black hole

228
00:11:12,720 --> 00:11:14,240
Speaker 1: is just randomly shooting photons.

229
00:11:14,559 --> 00:11:17,920
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's our microphysics understanding of normal black body radiation.

230
00:11:18,080 --> 00:11:21,640
Speaker 2: You're totally right. There's like motion within a rock, for example,

231
00:11:21,640 --> 00:11:25,040
Speaker 2: it has some temperature to it, and so photons will escape,

232
00:11:25,240 --> 00:11:27,920
Speaker 2: and that's well described by black body radiation. In terms

233
00:11:27,960 --> 00:11:29,760
Speaker 2: of a black hole, we don't know what's going on

234
00:11:29,840 --> 00:11:32,760
Speaker 2: from the microphysics point of view. We don't understand the

235
00:11:32,760 --> 00:11:35,760
Speaker 2: event horizon and can't think about that in terms of particles,

236
00:11:35,920 --> 00:11:38,600
Speaker 2: so we have no picture to provide for like what's

237
00:11:38,679 --> 00:11:42,760
Speaker 2: generating this radiation other than these mathematical solutions to the

238
00:11:42,800 --> 00:11:45,320
Speaker 2: wave equation near an event horizon. You can think about

239
00:11:45,360 --> 00:11:48,920
Speaker 2: it thermodynamically also to interpret the black holes having a temperature,

240
00:11:49,040 --> 00:11:50,840
Speaker 2: but you don't really know what that temperature means. It

241
00:11:50,880 --> 00:11:54,760
Speaker 2: doesn't reflect necessarily the kinetic energy of particles within the

242
00:11:54,760 --> 00:11:57,480
Speaker 2: black hole. We don't know how to interpret that because

243
00:11:57,480 --> 00:11:59,719
Speaker 2: again we don't have that theory, So we're kind of

244
00:11:59,720 --> 00:12:01,480
Speaker 2: black theoretically there.

245
00:12:01,800 --> 00:12:04,200
Speaker 1: Well, what about this idea that you do see in

246
00:12:04,280 --> 00:12:07,080
Speaker 1: popular culture and popular science a lot that you know,

247
00:12:07,120 --> 00:12:09,679
Speaker 1: at the edge of a black hole, there's two particles

248
00:12:09,720 --> 00:12:11,760
Speaker 1: being created. One of them falls in, the other one

249
00:12:11,880 --> 00:12:14,720
Speaker 1: spews out, and that's kind of what is hawking radiation?

250
00:12:14,880 --> 00:12:17,319
Speaker 1: Does that not happen or we don't know if it happens.

251
00:12:17,559 --> 00:12:20,080
Speaker 2: That could be what happens, but we don't know how

252
00:12:20,160 --> 00:12:23,079
Speaker 2: particles operate near an event horizon. We don't know if

253
00:12:23,080 --> 00:12:26,720
Speaker 2: gravity is a classical force which would require these particles

254
00:12:26,760 --> 00:12:30,160
Speaker 2: to collapse their probabilities, or if gravity is quantum, which

255
00:12:30,200 --> 00:12:33,760
Speaker 2: means that it can interact with the various possibilities of

256
00:12:33,800 --> 00:12:35,600
Speaker 2: the particles. And so we don't know how to do

257
00:12:35,679 --> 00:12:38,360
Speaker 2: those calculations. So we don't know what happens to particle

258
00:12:38,440 --> 00:12:40,959
Speaker 2: anti particle pairs near to vent horizon. So yeah, the

259
00:12:40,960 --> 00:12:41,800
Speaker 2: answer is we don't know.

260
00:12:41,840 --> 00:12:44,480
Speaker 1: That could be correct, so they could maybe explain what

261
00:12:44,679 --> 00:12:45,680
Speaker 1: is hawking radiation.

262
00:12:45,920 --> 00:12:48,880
Speaker 2: There is definitely an explanation for hawking radiation if it

263
00:12:48,920 --> 00:12:50,600
Speaker 2: is a real thing in the universe. We just don't

264
00:12:50,600 --> 00:12:53,320
Speaker 2: have it. And yes, it could be that one, but

265
00:12:53,400 --> 00:12:57,240
Speaker 2: there's no theory behind that. That's just like a handwavy cartoon.

266
00:12:57,200 --> 00:13:02,560
Speaker 1: And what's throwing with handwavy cartoons? Daniel, you can't my

267
00:13:02,679 --> 00:13:04,200
Speaker 1: career you're talking about.

268
00:13:05,160 --> 00:13:07,880
Speaker 2: Yeah, they're wonderful, but they're not necessarily accurate and you

269
00:13:07,920 --> 00:13:10,800
Speaker 2: can't use them to do calculations or anything. That's all

270
00:13:10,840 --> 00:13:12,600
Speaker 2: they are is just a handwavy cartoon.

271
00:13:12,800 --> 00:13:16,120
Speaker 1: Are there other possible handwavy cartoony explanations or is that

272
00:13:16,160 --> 00:13:17,160
Speaker 1: the only one that we have?

273
00:13:17,559 --> 00:13:19,199
Speaker 2: I mean, in popular science you'll see all sorts of

274
00:13:19,240 --> 00:13:22,920
Speaker 2: descriptions of Hawking radiation, most of which are wrong. The

275
00:13:22,960 --> 00:13:25,760
Speaker 2: ones that are most accurate either rely on this thermodynamic

276
00:13:25,800 --> 00:13:30,800
Speaker 2: description or Hawking's actual calculation using boundary conditions for waves

277
00:13:31,120 --> 00:13:32,199
Speaker 2: near an event horizon.

278
00:13:32,760 --> 00:13:34,640
Speaker 1: But you're saying they're not wrong. We just don't know

279
00:13:34,679 --> 00:13:35,840
Speaker 1: what the real answer is.

280
00:13:36,080 --> 00:13:38,280
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right. It's like the universe has a number

281
00:13:38,280 --> 00:13:40,200
Speaker 2: in its head between one and a million, and you

282
00:13:40,280 --> 00:13:42,600
Speaker 2: might say, well, Daniel, is it seventy four? And we're like, well,

283
00:13:42,640 --> 00:13:44,959
Speaker 2: I could be seventy four, but yeah, I mean, who knows.

284
00:13:45,320 --> 00:13:48,720
Speaker 1: But so far, Hawking radiation is a concept, right, Like,

285
00:13:48,840 --> 00:13:52,120
Speaker 1: do have we actually ever measured this at all or

286
00:13:52,280 --> 00:13:54,360
Speaker 1: seen it? Or is it just sort of an idea

287
00:13:54,400 --> 00:13:57,200
Speaker 1: that physicists think is happening at black holes?

288
00:13:57,360 --> 00:14:00,920
Speaker 2: It's currently still just an idea. We've never seen hawking

289
00:14:01,000 --> 00:14:04,480
Speaker 2: radiation and it would be really challenging to ever see

290
00:14:04,520 --> 00:14:09,320
Speaker 2: it because hawking radiation is extraordinarily faint for large black holes.

291
00:14:09,400 --> 00:14:12,080
Speaker 1: Are you saying that we haven't seen it, so we

292
00:14:12,120 --> 00:14:15,319
Speaker 1: don't know what it is, So it's basically a handwavy cartoon.

293
00:14:17,400 --> 00:14:19,640
Speaker 2: We have lots of theories we have not proven, like

294
00:14:19,640 --> 00:14:21,920
Speaker 2: string theory, which is much more than a handwavy cartoon.

295
00:14:21,960 --> 00:14:25,120
Speaker 2: Because our physical principles and calculations, you can make predictions,

296
00:14:25,160 --> 00:14:27,400
Speaker 2: et cetera, et cetera. So not everything that hasn't been

297
00:14:27,440 --> 00:14:31,080
Speaker 2: observed is a handwavy cartoon. But yet we have never

298
00:14:31,080 --> 00:14:34,160
Speaker 2: seen hawking radiation, and the challenge is that it's super

299
00:14:34,240 --> 00:14:39,040
Speaker 2: duper faint. Like larger black holes are colder, which means

300
00:14:39,080 --> 00:14:42,480
Speaker 2: they glow more faintly. So the smaller black hole is

301
00:14:42,520 --> 00:14:45,800
Speaker 2: the hotter it is, the brighter it glows. So, for example,

302
00:14:45,840 --> 00:14:47,640
Speaker 2: a black hole that has the mass of our sun,

303
00:14:47,720 --> 00:14:50,000
Speaker 2: which is already a pretty small black hole, but have

304
00:14:50,000 --> 00:14:53,680
Speaker 2: a temperature of sixty nanokelvins, which makes it very dark

305
00:14:53,760 --> 00:14:56,320
Speaker 2: and very cold, and any glow it has would be

306
00:14:56,400 --> 00:14:57,160
Speaker 2: very very faint.

307
00:14:57,400 --> 00:14:59,280
Speaker 1: Wait wait, wait, what does it even mean to for

308
00:14:59,320 --> 00:15:01,840
Speaker 1: a black hole to temperature. Like if a rock is

309
00:15:01,880 --> 00:15:04,960
Speaker 1: a temperature, that means it captures you know, the movement

310
00:15:05,000 --> 00:15:07,520
Speaker 1: of the molecules inside the rock somehow, right, Like a

311
00:15:07,600 --> 00:15:10,000
Speaker 1: hot something hot means that all of its molecules are

312
00:15:10,040 --> 00:15:11,920
Speaker 1: moving a lot. They have a lot of kinetic energy.

313
00:15:11,960 --> 00:15:13,240
Speaker 1: What would it mean for a black hole?

314
00:15:13,440 --> 00:15:15,840
Speaker 2: Yeah, we don't know. I mean, Thummer dynamics is often

315
00:15:16,240 --> 00:15:19,920
Speaker 2: not about the microscopic picture. You don't have to understand

316
00:15:19,920 --> 00:15:23,520
Speaker 2: what's going on inside to have these macroscopic descriptions of

317
00:15:23,640 --> 00:15:26,440
Speaker 2: entropy and temperature, etc. Really justus sort of like high

318
00:15:26,520 --> 00:15:29,960
Speaker 2: level summaries for what's going on inside. Sometimes you can

319
00:15:30,000 --> 00:15:33,040
Speaker 2: make these connections, like for the ideal gas law between

320
00:15:33,040 --> 00:15:36,320
Speaker 2: the microphysics and the macrophysics. But no, we don't know

321
00:15:36,360 --> 00:15:38,640
Speaker 2: what temperature really means for a black hole. There are

322
00:15:38,680 --> 00:15:43,440
Speaker 2: some arguments about information and entropy and connecting it to temperature,

323
00:15:43,600 --> 00:15:46,000
Speaker 2: but that's a whole rabbit hole that Andrea didn't ask

324
00:15:46,120 --> 00:15:48,080
Speaker 2: us about. In this case, you should just think about

325
00:15:48,080 --> 00:15:50,840
Speaker 2: the temperature as determining the glow of the black hole.

326
00:15:50,920 --> 00:15:53,080
Speaker 2: Higher temperature glows in higher frequencies.

327
00:15:53,240 --> 00:15:57,080
Speaker 1: It glows via the hawking radiation, yeah, exactly, which we

328
00:15:57,120 --> 00:15:58,400
Speaker 1: don't know is real or not.

329
00:15:58,560 --> 00:16:00,320
Speaker 2: We don't know if it's real or not, but it

330
00:16:00,320 --> 00:16:02,200
Speaker 2: makes predictions. You have this temperature, you can use the

331
00:16:02,200 --> 00:16:05,440
Speaker 2: black body radiation curve. You can say, okay, a sixty

332
00:16:05,600 --> 00:16:09,520
Speaker 2: nanokelvin black hole would emit this number of photons at

333
00:16:09,520 --> 00:16:11,920
Speaker 2: this frequency, and you can look for that. But the

334
00:16:11,960 --> 00:16:14,880
Speaker 2: thing is it's very very faint, and so it's very

335
00:16:14,920 --> 00:16:17,800
Speaker 2: hard to see. For a couple of reasons. One, black

336
00:16:17,840 --> 00:16:20,720
Speaker 2: holes are really far away. That's a good thing if

337
00:16:20,760 --> 00:16:22,520
Speaker 2: you want to survive, but a bad thing if you

338
00:16:22,560 --> 00:16:25,440
Speaker 2: want to study them. And number two is black holes

339
00:16:25,440 --> 00:16:28,880
Speaker 2: are usually surrounded by other really hot stuff that's glowing

340
00:16:29,000 --> 00:16:32,000
Speaker 2: very very brightly. So you're looking for a very faint

341
00:16:32,120 --> 00:16:35,800
Speaker 2: glow from something otherwise very bright and very far away.

342
00:16:37,000 --> 00:16:39,680
Speaker 1: How faint are we talking about, like basically the equivalent

343
00:16:39,760 --> 00:16:43,720
Speaker 1: of how much a rock that is sixteen nanokelving how

344
00:16:43,800 --> 00:16:46,520
Speaker 1: much it would glow in the infrared, which is probably

345
00:16:46,560 --> 00:16:48,560
Speaker 1: like almost nothing at all, Almost.

346
00:16:48,240 --> 00:16:50,920
Speaker 2: Nothing at all, Yeah, exactly. Now, Andrew asks like, how

347
00:16:50,920 --> 00:16:53,160
Speaker 2: could you possibly ever see it? Well, you know, you'd

348
00:16:53,200 --> 00:16:57,960
Speaker 2: need super duper sensitive deep infrared sensors and you need

349
00:16:58,040 --> 00:17:00,200
Speaker 2: to be near enough the black hole you could which

350
00:17:00,200 --> 00:17:03,080
Speaker 2: are some of these rare photons, then you might be

351
00:17:03,080 --> 00:17:05,080
Speaker 2: able to pick it out because it would have a

352
00:17:05,080 --> 00:17:07,560
Speaker 2: different spectrum than the rest of the stuff, like the

353
00:17:07,600 --> 00:17:10,520
Speaker 2: stuff around the black hole, the accretion disk of hot gas.

354
00:17:10,640 --> 00:17:12,480
Speaker 2: It's going to glow mostly like in the X ray

355
00:17:12,520 --> 00:17:14,359
Speaker 2: because it's very hot, and so if you look at

356
00:17:14,359 --> 00:17:16,480
Speaker 2: the very red end of the spectrum and you have

357
00:17:16,600 --> 00:17:19,800
Speaker 2: very sensitive devices, then you might be able to pick

358
00:17:19,840 --> 00:17:20,200
Speaker 2: this out.

359
00:17:21,400 --> 00:17:24,280
Speaker 1: I wonder if it would get washed in the cosmic

360
00:17:25,119 --> 00:17:28,840
Speaker 1: background the noise of light, right, like, aren't we bathed

361
00:17:28,920 --> 00:17:32,600
Speaker 1: in infrared light just from the universe sort of glowing?

362
00:17:32,800 --> 00:17:35,600
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly, we are. That's a great point. The temperature

363
00:17:35,680 --> 00:17:38,960
Speaker 2: of that light is around two point seven degreas calvin,

364
00:17:39,280 --> 00:17:42,080
Speaker 2: so that's very hot compared to black holes, which tells

365
00:17:42,119 --> 00:17:44,440
Speaker 2: you that this would be much fainter and much much

366
00:17:44,800 --> 00:17:47,560
Speaker 2: much redder. Now black holes get small, then they do

367
00:17:47,640 --> 00:17:50,720
Speaker 2: get brighter. The temperature goes like inverse mass, and so

368
00:17:51,160 --> 00:17:53,639
Speaker 2: if a black hole was left on its own, it

369
00:17:53,680 --> 00:17:56,320
Speaker 2: would very faintly glow. It would lose mass and then

370
00:17:56,400 --> 00:17:59,760
Speaker 2: get brighter. And because it's getting brighter, it's losing mass faster,

371
00:18:00,080 --> 00:18:02,760
Speaker 2: so you have this runaway effect where eventually a black

372
00:18:02,760 --> 00:18:05,840
Speaker 2: hole evaporates, and near the very end, when it's very

373
00:18:05,920 --> 00:18:08,879
Speaker 2: very small, it gets quite hot, and then the hawking

374
00:18:08,960 --> 00:18:11,800
Speaker 2: radiation would be visible. So seeing a big black hole

375
00:18:11,840 --> 00:18:15,040
Speaker 2: would be difficult. Seeing a disappearing black hole would be

376
00:18:15,119 --> 00:18:16,080
Speaker 2: much more possible.

377
00:18:16,400 --> 00:18:19,959
Speaker 1: Well, as it gets smaller, it becomes hotter. So you're

378
00:18:20,000 --> 00:18:22,720
Speaker 1: saying it would be admit more photons, but would it

379
00:18:22,800 --> 00:18:25,760
Speaker 1: actually be brighter because it's also smaller. I wonder if

380
00:18:25,840 --> 00:18:28,160
Speaker 1: if maybe those things would balance out and it would

381
00:18:28,200 --> 00:18:30,239
Speaker 1: just be as faint like a tiny black hole a

382
00:18:30,240 --> 00:18:33,639
Speaker 1: million kilometers aways. It's about as fant as a giant

383
00:18:33,640 --> 00:18:35,479
Speaker 1: black hole that's colder, isn't it.

384
00:18:35,520 --> 00:18:39,119
Speaker 2: The event horizon does shrink, which reduces the intensity, but

385
00:18:39,160 --> 00:18:42,879
Speaker 2: the temperature increasing overwhelms that, and so we expect a

386
00:18:42,920 --> 00:18:46,000
Speaker 2: smaller black hole to actually be brighter. It's not just

387
00:18:46,040 --> 00:18:48,040
Speaker 2: that the frequency of the radiation goes up, but the

388
00:18:48,080 --> 00:18:50,720
Speaker 2: intensity of it also will even though the event horizon

389
00:18:50,800 --> 00:18:54,679
Speaker 2: is getting smaller, So smaller black holes might evaporate in

390
00:18:54,720 --> 00:18:56,800
Speaker 2: a way we could actually see, And people have looked

391
00:18:56,800 --> 00:18:59,240
Speaker 2: for this in the night sky because if there were

392
00:18:59,320 --> 00:19:02,680
Speaker 2: small black hole holes made during the Big Bang, their

393
00:19:02,720 --> 00:19:06,400
Speaker 2: lifetime might be a few billion years. And if they're

394
00:19:06,400 --> 00:19:09,000
Speaker 2: just sort of like scattered out in space, not near

395
00:19:09,119 --> 00:19:12,119
Speaker 2: some huge source of mass, they could be isolated and

396
00:19:12,160 --> 00:19:14,680
Speaker 2: they could be evaporating, and they could glow with these

397
00:19:14,880 --> 00:19:18,000
Speaker 2: brilliant pinpricks of light. People have looked for them, nobody's

398
00:19:18,040 --> 00:19:19,760
Speaker 2: ever seen one. But that doesn't mean that we won't.

399
00:19:20,000 --> 00:19:22,440
Speaker 1: Like what size are we talking about, Like I imagine

400
00:19:22,480 --> 00:19:24,560
Speaker 1: maybe there's like an optimal size for us to see them,

401
00:19:24,560 --> 00:19:27,000
Speaker 1: because if they're too small, they're too small to see.

402
00:19:27,359 --> 00:19:29,120
Speaker 1: But if they're too big, they're too cold to see.

403
00:19:29,640 --> 00:19:32,399
Speaker 1: Is there are wonder if there's an optimal Hawking black

404
00:19:32,400 --> 00:19:33,320
Speaker 1: hole size to see.

405
00:19:33,440 --> 00:19:35,480
Speaker 2: The lifetime of a black hole is very very long,

406
00:19:35,560 --> 00:19:38,160
Speaker 2: if it's any size at all. Like if you took

407
00:19:38,200 --> 00:19:40,280
Speaker 2: a black hole that had the mass of our Sun

408
00:19:40,320 --> 00:19:42,560
Speaker 2: and you put it in empty space, it would take

409
00:19:42,720 --> 00:19:46,800
Speaker 2: ten to the sixty three years to evaporate. Most of

410
00:19:46,840 --> 00:19:49,200
Speaker 2: that time it would be glowing so faintly its mass

411
00:19:49,200 --> 00:19:51,280
Speaker 2: would hardly be dropping. A lot of the progress is

412
00:19:51,280 --> 00:19:53,800
Speaker 2: made near the end because of the runaway effect. A

413
00:19:53,840 --> 00:19:55,879
Speaker 2: much much smaller black hole, of course, could only take

414
00:19:55,920 --> 00:19:58,800
Speaker 2: a few billion years so smaller black holes are better

415
00:19:58,840 --> 00:20:01,639
Speaker 2: for observing hawking res and that's why people are thinking

416
00:20:01,640 --> 00:20:06,240
Speaker 2: about primordial black holes, because stellar collapse or galactic centers,

417
00:20:06,320 --> 00:20:09,200
Speaker 2: these produce huge black holes. If you want to see

418
00:20:09,240 --> 00:20:11,760
Speaker 2: hawking radiation, you need little ones. That's why people are

419
00:20:11,800 --> 00:20:14,159
Speaker 2: looking for black holes that come from the Big Bang,

420
00:20:14,240 --> 00:20:16,679
Speaker 2: where it might have made a whole spectrum of black holes,

421
00:20:16,720 --> 00:20:19,560
Speaker 2: from super massive ones to super duper tiny ones.

422
00:20:19,720 --> 00:20:21,439
Speaker 1: But don't they also say that at the Large had

423
00:20:21,480 --> 00:20:23,840
Speaker 1: drink collider years you're sort of making black holes.

424
00:20:24,160 --> 00:20:25,959
Speaker 2: We are looking for black holes at the Large had

425
00:20:26,000 --> 00:20:29,480
Speaker 2: drunk Collider. One idea might be that gravity doesn't behave

426
00:20:29,560 --> 00:20:31,960
Speaker 2: the way we expect. If you get things really really

427
00:20:32,000 --> 00:20:35,480
Speaker 2: close together, gravity actually gets very very strong. We've never

428
00:20:35,520 --> 00:20:39,680
Speaker 2: really tested gravity over extraordinarily short distance scales, so it

429
00:20:39,760 --> 00:20:42,160
Speaker 2: might be that if you smash two protons together, when

430
00:20:42,200 --> 00:20:44,840
Speaker 2: they get really close together, gravity gets really strong and

431
00:20:44,880 --> 00:20:47,840
Speaker 2: it forms a tiny black hole, which would then almost

432
00:20:47,880 --> 00:20:51,840
Speaker 2: instantly evaporate but leave a spectrum of hawking radiation which

433
00:20:51,880 --> 00:20:54,399
Speaker 2: we could see in our detectors. So we looked for

434
00:20:54,440 --> 00:20:57,240
Speaker 2: hawking radiation at the Large hair Drunk Colider but never

435
00:20:57,320 --> 00:20:59,720
Speaker 2: seen it. So there's lots of ways you might see

436
00:20:59,760 --> 00:21:02,119
Speaker 2: hawks radiation, but yeah, and so far nothing.

437
00:21:02,320 --> 00:21:04,280
Speaker 1: But do you expect there to be black holes? And

438
00:21:04,640 --> 00:21:07,760
Speaker 1: in these collisions you're creating? Or I mean, is it

439
00:21:07,800 --> 00:21:10,400
Speaker 1: surprising you haven't seen a hawking radiation at the large

440
00:21:10,440 --> 00:21:11,119
Speaker 1: Hadron collide?

441
00:21:11,240 --> 00:21:13,359
Speaker 2: Whether you expect to see them depends on a bunch

442
00:21:13,400 --> 00:21:16,520
Speaker 2: of theoretical questions we don't have answers too, like are

443
00:21:16,560 --> 00:21:20,919
Speaker 2: there additional spatial dimensions? What are the parameters of those dimensions?

444
00:21:21,119 --> 00:21:24,040
Speaker 2: You need those spatial dimensions to explain why gravity gets

445
00:21:24,080 --> 00:21:27,240
Speaker 2: stronger as things gets closer. And so if for some

446
00:21:27,280 --> 00:21:30,520
Speaker 2: scenarios we would have expected to see the black holes already,

447
00:21:30,640 --> 00:21:33,040
Speaker 2: in other scenarios we wouldn't have expected to see them,

448
00:21:33,520 --> 00:21:36,040
Speaker 2: and so the answer is a bit muddy. Also, those

449
00:21:36,080 --> 00:21:40,320
Speaker 2: calculations are even more handwaving than the Hawking radiation calculations themselves,

450
00:21:40,320 --> 00:21:42,160
Speaker 2: Like some listeners might think, hold on, you just told

451
00:21:42,240 --> 00:21:44,640
Speaker 2: us we don't understand gravity for particles, So how can

452
00:21:44,680 --> 00:21:47,840
Speaker 2: you talk about the gravitational force between two protons when

453
00:21:47,880 --> 00:21:49,520
Speaker 2: they're really close to each other? And the answer is

454
00:21:49,560 --> 00:21:51,440
Speaker 2: we can't. People have done a bunch of back of

455
00:21:51,480 --> 00:21:55,399
Speaker 2: the envelopes, sketchy hand wavy cartoon calculations. We don't really

456
00:21:55,480 --> 00:21:58,000
Speaker 2: know whether those are right. So it's just sort of

457
00:21:58,040 --> 00:21:59,600
Speaker 2: like a, oh, we should look for this in case

458
00:21:59,600 --> 00:22:01,879
Speaker 2: it's there. It's not so much that if we didn't

459
00:22:01,880 --> 00:22:04,159
Speaker 2: see it, we're sure it's not there. There's lots of

460
00:22:04,160 --> 00:22:06,240
Speaker 2: reasons why it might not happen, all right.

461
00:22:06,119 --> 00:22:08,840
Speaker 1: So then the answer for Andra is a tall a

462
00:22:08,840 --> 00:22:13,159
Speaker 1: handwavy cartoon Andre. It's like asking for an explanation of

463
00:22:13,200 --> 00:22:16,960
Speaker 1: something that we're not sure exists or know how it works.

464
00:22:17,040 --> 00:22:18,800
Speaker 2: Kind of, but we hope one day to see this.

465
00:22:19,000 --> 00:22:22,240
Speaker 2: If we do see hawking radiation, that confirms something important.

466
00:22:22,560 --> 00:22:25,399
Speaker 2: It tells us that black holes are quantum objects, that

467
00:22:25,440 --> 00:22:28,880
Speaker 2: they are following the quantum rules of the universe. They

468
00:22:28,880 --> 00:22:32,200
Speaker 2: are not pure general relativistic black holes, that black holes

469
00:22:32,240 --> 00:22:35,600
Speaker 2: are not completely black. That would be a huge breakthrough.

470
00:22:35,800 --> 00:22:39,080
Speaker 1: How bright with these black holes getting snuffed out in

471
00:22:39,119 --> 00:22:41,679
Speaker 1: the cosmos beat? Would they be visible to the naked

472
00:22:41,720 --> 00:22:45,960
Speaker 1: eye or only if you're wearing special glasses or do

473
00:22:46,000 --> 00:22:47,280
Speaker 1: you need like special telescopes.

474
00:22:48,240 --> 00:22:50,119
Speaker 2: Yeah, this is the kind of thing we use telescopes

475
00:22:50,160 --> 00:22:52,480
Speaker 2: to look for, because you need to see these photons

476
00:22:52,520 --> 00:22:55,600
Speaker 2: a very specific frequency range which is usually not in

477
00:22:55,640 --> 00:22:58,040
Speaker 2: a visible range. Usually they're in the infrared.

478
00:22:58,359 --> 00:23:00,680
Speaker 1: All right, well, I guess we need to keep looking

479
00:23:00,680 --> 00:23:03,000
Speaker 1: at the sky right then, to see if we ever

480
00:23:03,080 --> 00:23:03,920
Speaker 1: see these flashes.

481
00:23:04,560 --> 00:23:08,760
Speaker 2: That's right, more particle colliders, more telescopes, more technological eyeballs

482
00:23:08,800 --> 00:23:09,920
Speaker 2: to understand the universe.

483
00:23:10,160 --> 00:23:13,840
Speaker 1: Wait, did you just try to hawk more particle colliders?

484
00:23:16,240 --> 00:23:18,119
Speaker 2: Hey, you're hawking your book on every episode, so I

485
00:23:18,119 --> 00:23:19,399
Speaker 2: can talk particle colliders.

486
00:23:19,720 --> 00:23:21,760
Speaker 1: All right, Well, thank you Andrew for that great question.

487
00:23:22,000 --> 00:23:24,159
Speaker 1: Now let's get to our next question, and it's about

488
00:23:24,720 --> 00:23:28,800
Speaker 1: making new matter in the universe, So let's get to that.

489
00:23:28,840 --> 00:23:30,560
Speaker 1: But first let's take a quick break.

490
00:23:43,440 --> 00:23:43,560
Speaker 3: Right.

491
00:23:43,560 --> 00:23:46,600
Speaker 1: We're answering listener questions here today, and our next question

492
00:23:46,880 --> 00:23:48,640
Speaker 1: comes from Asif.

493
00:23:48,720 --> 00:23:52,040
Speaker 4: Hi, Daniel, and Jorge. This is answer from Tom Finland.

494
00:23:52,640 --> 00:23:54,560
Speaker 4: I'm a big fan of the pod and I've been

495
00:23:54,560 --> 00:23:58,000
Speaker 4: wondering how difficult is it to generate new matter from energy.

496
00:23:58,840 --> 00:24:01,800
Speaker 4: You have previously talked about out how unstabled particles are

497
00:24:01,800 --> 00:24:04,320
Speaker 4: able to summon or pull their counterparts out of thin

498
00:24:04,400 --> 00:24:07,440
Speaker 4: air to reach a stable configuration again after a collision

499
00:24:07,440 --> 00:24:10,480
Speaker 4: in the Large Hadron collider. Doesn't this mean that new

500
00:24:10,520 --> 00:24:13,560
Speaker 4: matter is generated from the collision energy. Would it be

501
00:24:13,600 --> 00:24:16,159
Speaker 4: possible to scale up this process to keep multiplying the

502
00:24:16,240 --> 00:24:19,879
Speaker 4: number of stable particles to produce macroscopic amounts of new matter.

503
00:24:20,960 --> 00:24:23,120
Speaker 4: Can we only go in the direction of lower mass

504
00:24:23,160 --> 00:24:25,840
Speaker 4: particles this way, or would we be able to somehow

505
00:24:25,960 --> 00:24:30,320
Speaker 4: generate all different elements of the periodic table. I'm imagining

506
00:24:30,320 --> 00:24:33,480
Speaker 4: a space station orbiting the Sun, generating building materials and

507
00:24:33,520 --> 00:24:36,920
Speaker 4: resources to become self sustained, and starting expanding just by

508
00:24:37,000 --> 00:24:40,480
Speaker 4: using the available unlimited free energy. I think it's about

509
00:24:40,520 --> 00:24:42,960
Speaker 4: time to get this project started, don't you agree.

510
00:24:43,240 --> 00:24:46,639
Speaker 1: Thanks guys, I'm blessing a theme here, Daniel. These are

511
00:24:46,680 --> 00:24:48,040
Speaker 1: all particle questions.

512
00:24:50,280 --> 00:24:52,600
Speaker 2: I'm not organizing them anymore. I'm just answering them in

513
00:24:52,640 --> 00:24:55,160
Speaker 2: the order they come in. This is just a particle

514
00:24:55,160 --> 00:24:56,440
Speaker 2: week over here the podcast.

515
00:24:56,640 --> 00:24:59,119
Speaker 1: But this is an interesting question. I guess the question is, like,

516
00:24:59,160 --> 00:25:02,639
Speaker 1: what's actually happening when you collide particles? Because I know

517
00:25:02,680 --> 00:25:04,920
Speaker 1: we've talked about it being sort of this magical act

518
00:25:04,920 --> 00:25:07,919
Speaker 1: where you know, two things kind of become pure energy

519
00:25:07,960 --> 00:25:10,920
Speaker 1: and then matter pops out. And I guess the question

520
00:25:11,080 --> 00:25:13,800
Speaker 1: is is the matter that pops out like new matter

521
00:25:14,080 --> 00:25:15,680
Speaker 1: or is it possible to create new matter.

522
00:25:15,920 --> 00:25:18,280
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's a really fun question and a great question,

523
00:25:18,359 --> 00:25:20,119
Speaker 2: and it goes to the heart of like what is

524
00:25:20,280 --> 00:25:23,720
Speaker 2: matter anyway? And if you think about the universe the

525
00:25:23,720 --> 00:25:26,800
Speaker 2: way particle physicists do, you know, we have all these fields,

526
00:25:27,280 --> 00:25:30,159
Speaker 2: and you can take energy from one field to another field,

527
00:25:30,760 --> 00:25:33,320
Speaker 2: and when a field ripples in a certain way, that's

528
00:25:33,359 --> 00:25:36,000
Speaker 2: what we call a particle. Then you could just think

529
00:25:36,000 --> 00:25:39,000
Speaker 2: about energy sliding around from one kind of field to another.

530
00:25:39,160 --> 00:25:41,680
Speaker 2: So you collide one kind of particle with its antiparticle

531
00:25:42,240 --> 00:25:45,439
Speaker 2: and that turns into a photon for example. That's energy

532
00:25:45,480 --> 00:25:48,560
Speaker 2: moving from like the electron field into the photon field.

533
00:25:48,960 --> 00:25:52,080
Speaker 2: Now that photon can turn into something else even heavier

534
00:25:52,119 --> 00:25:55,600
Speaker 2: than the original electrons, like a muon and an anti muon.

535
00:25:55,960 --> 00:25:58,919
Speaker 2: That's the energy sliding from the photon field to the

536
00:25:59,000 --> 00:26:02,760
Speaker 2: muon field. And those different states can have different amounts

537
00:26:02,760 --> 00:26:06,480
Speaker 2: of mass, right, So the electron has low mass, the

538
00:26:06,520 --> 00:26:10,000
Speaker 2: photon has no mass, the muon has high mass. Mass

539
00:26:10,040 --> 00:26:13,480
Speaker 2: is just stored internal energy of some of these states.

540
00:26:13,560 --> 00:26:15,800
Speaker 2: So mass is not like a special thing or hard

541
00:26:15,800 --> 00:26:18,359
Speaker 2: to make in the universe. It's just a kind of

542
00:26:18,480 --> 00:26:20,000
Speaker 2: energy that these fields can have.

543
00:26:20,280 --> 00:26:22,919
Speaker 1: How would you define what matter is or does it

544
00:26:22,960 --> 00:26:25,280
Speaker 1: not even make sense to use the word, like maybe

545
00:26:25,280 --> 00:26:26,440
Speaker 1: we should just get rid of the word.

546
00:26:26,480 --> 00:26:28,320
Speaker 2: No, it's a good question. I think there's a couple

547
00:26:28,320 --> 00:26:31,120
Speaker 2: of concepts of what matter is, which is separate from

548
00:26:31,160 --> 00:26:33,800
Speaker 2: the idea of mass. Right, And when we talk about matter,

549
00:26:33,840 --> 00:26:35,760
Speaker 2: one sense in which it makes sense is like the

550
00:26:35,760 --> 00:26:38,840
Speaker 2: stuff we're made out of, stable stuff which hangs out

551
00:26:38,880 --> 00:26:42,439
Speaker 2: in the universe building blocks for our existence. Right, we

552
00:26:42,480 --> 00:26:45,959
Speaker 2: are made of matter. We eat things made of matter,

553
00:26:46,520 --> 00:26:49,560
Speaker 2: and you know, quarks and electrons come together to make

554
00:26:49,600 --> 00:26:53,720
Speaker 2: all this amazing complexity that's matter. Sometimes also extend that

555
00:26:53,800 --> 00:26:57,399
Speaker 2: though to other related particles that are not stable, Like

556
00:26:57,440 --> 00:26:59,760
Speaker 2: we think of a muon as a matter particle, but

557
00:27:00,119 --> 00:27:03,439
Speaker 2: muons last four microseconds before they decay into other stuff.

558
00:27:03,440 --> 00:27:06,560
Speaker 2: You can't build anything out of muons. You can't have

559
00:27:06,640 --> 00:27:09,199
Speaker 2: life made out of muons or a meal made out

560
00:27:09,240 --> 00:27:12,160
Speaker 2: of muons. So I think the concept of matter comes

561
00:27:12,160 --> 00:27:15,240
Speaker 2: from the stuff of our experience, and then we extend

562
00:27:15,280 --> 00:27:19,040
Speaker 2: it to also similar particles. So since everything we're made

563
00:27:19,040 --> 00:27:21,800
Speaker 2: out of is fermions spin one half particles, we tend

564
00:27:21,840 --> 00:27:25,400
Speaker 2: to call all spin one half particles matter and other

565
00:27:25,480 --> 00:27:28,960
Speaker 2: kinds of particles like photons. We call them force particles.

566
00:27:29,160 --> 00:27:31,919
Speaker 2: But that distinction is a little bit arbitrary.

567
00:27:31,680 --> 00:27:34,720
Speaker 1: Like basically, it's all particles in quantum field. But is

568
00:27:34,720 --> 00:27:36,960
Speaker 1: there a distinction between the ones we call matter and

569
00:27:37,000 --> 00:27:39,520
Speaker 1: the ones that we don't call matter? Is mass is

570
00:27:39,720 --> 00:27:41,560
Speaker 1: the thing that makes something be matter.

571
00:27:41,800 --> 00:27:44,760
Speaker 2: The distinction is the spin of the particles. Like all

572
00:27:44,800 --> 00:27:47,440
Speaker 2: the particles we call matter, those are fermions. There's spin

573
00:27:47,520 --> 00:27:49,760
Speaker 2: one half particles, and all the particles we call force

574
00:27:49,840 --> 00:27:53,200
Speaker 2: particles those are spin one or spin zero particles.

575
00:27:53,400 --> 00:27:56,119
Speaker 1: Like are there particles that we don't call matter but

576
00:27:56,160 --> 00:27:57,199
Speaker 1: that still have mass?

577
00:27:57,280 --> 00:28:00,679
Speaker 2: Yes? Absolutely there are, like the w and the z bosons.

578
00:28:01,040 --> 00:28:04,359
Speaker 2: These are spin one particles. They're not fermions. We don't

579
00:28:04,400 --> 00:28:06,840
Speaker 2: call them matter, but they do have mass, in fact

580
00:28:06,840 --> 00:28:08,959
Speaker 2: that they're quite massive. They have the mass of like

581
00:28:09,040 --> 00:28:13,400
Speaker 2: eighty or ninety times the mass of a proton. Extraordinarily

582
00:28:13,440 --> 00:28:16,119
Speaker 2: massive particles, but we don't call them matter. They are

583
00:28:16,160 --> 00:28:18,840
Speaker 2: the particles that communicate the weak force. But yeah, we

584
00:28:18,880 --> 00:28:21,240
Speaker 2: don't call those matter particles, but they do have mass.

585
00:28:21,280 --> 00:28:23,760
Speaker 2: So you can have mass and not be matter.

586
00:28:23,640 --> 00:28:26,400
Speaker 1: And can you be madder without mass? Are there things

587
00:28:26,440 --> 00:28:28,080
Speaker 1: that we call matter that don't have mass.

588
00:28:28,160 --> 00:28:30,960
Speaker 2: Well, that's a great question. Until recently, we didn't know

589
00:28:31,000 --> 00:28:34,280
Speaker 2: if neutrinos had mass. Neutrinos are in the matter category

590
00:28:34,320 --> 00:28:37,440
Speaker 2: because they're fermions. Now we know they do have mass,

591
00:28:37,440 --> 00:28:41,959
Speaker 2: but have an extraordinarily small, tiny, tiny, tiny amount of mass.

592
00:28:41,960 --> 00:28:44,600
Speaker 2: But no, there are no particles we call matter particles

593
00:28:44,760 --> 00:28:45,840
Speaker 2: which are massless.

594
00:28:46,040 --> 00:28:48,960
Speaker 1: And why do we pick the spin of these particles

595
00:28:49,000 --> 00:28:52,400
Speaker 1: to be the thing that distinguishes it as matter? Is

596
00:28:52,440 --> 00:28:54,360
Speaker 1: that significant to like our existence?

597
00:28:54,640 --> 00:28:57,240
Speaker 2: I don't think it's fundamentally significant. I think we just

598
00:28:57,360 --> 00:28:59,760
Speaker 2: noticed that the stuff we're made out of is comprised

599
00:28:59,800 --> 00:29:02,760
Speaker 2: of spin one half particles, and that forces tend to

600
00:29:02,840 --> 00:29:06,520
Speaker 2: use spin one particles to communicate. But again, matter and forces,

601
00:29:06,520 --> 00:29:08,840
Speaker 2: you know, these are sort of colloquial terms. I think

602
00:29:08,840 --> 00:29:11,000
Speaker 2: the way you put it is pretty good. Like everything

603
00:29:11,120 --> 00:29:13,720
Speaker 2: is just particles in a quantum field, and there's lots

604
00:29:13,760 --> 00:29:15,800
Speaker 2: of different kinds of quantum fields that can do all

605
00:29:15,840 --> 00:29:18,000
Speaker 2: sorts of weird things. Some of them are spin one,

606
00:29:18,040 --> 00:29:20,160
Speaker 2: some of them are spin half, some of them are massless,

607
00:29:20,160 --> 00:29:22,520
Speaker 2: some of them are not. There's all sorts of weird

608
00:29:22,520 --> 00:29:24,000
Speaker 2: different kinds of fields out there.

609
00:29:24,040 --> 00:29:26,120
Speaker 1: So then I wonder if the ass for us if

610
00:29:26,240 --> 00:29:28,640
Speaker 1: is that there's just thing is matter, you know, like

611
00:29:28,640 --> 00:29:31,920
Speaker 1: there's only energy that slashes around between these quantum fields,

612
00:29:32,120 --> 00:29:34,480
Speaker 1: and sometimes this energy ends up in a quantum field

613
00:29:34,480 --> 00:29:36,360
Speaker 1: that we just happen to call matter.

614
00:29:36,520 --> 00:29:39,600
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly, And so he's totally right that new matter

615
00:29:39,720 --> 00:29:42,840
Speaker 2: can be generated from collisions. Like you pour a bunch

616
00:29:42,880 --> 00:29:45,560
Speaker 2: of energy into a collision, you can make something heavy.

617
00:29:45,600 --> 00:29:49,000
Speaker 2: You can turn that energy into mass, right, and that

618
00:29:49,040 --> 00:29:52,120
Speaker 2: can make new matter. So yeah, and principle, you could

619
00:29:52,160 --> 00:29:54,800
Speaker 2: like take two protons and smash them together and make

620
00:29:54,960 --> 00:29:58,120
Speaker 2: like a gold nucleus if you had enough energy. It's

621
00:29:58,120 --> 00:30:00,440
Speaker 2: pretty unlikely. And most of the time when you make

622
00:30:00,480 --> 00:30:04,560
Speaker 2: something that's massive from something that's low mass, it's unstable.

623
00:30:05,040 --> 00:30:06,920
Speaker 2: Like if you make a w boson or a z

624
00:30:07,080 --> 00:30:10,440
Speaker 2: boson these massive particles, then it don't last very long.

625
00:30:10,480 --> 00:30:13,600
Speaker 2: Because the universe doesn't typically like to have a lot

626
00:30:13,640 --> 00:30:15,680
Speaker 2: of mass or a lot of energy in one place.

627
00:30:15,920 --> 00:30:19,120
Speaker 2: It tends to prefer configurations with lots of possibilities, which

628
00:30:19,320 --> 00:30:21,920
Speaker 2: tend to prefer configurations with lots of options, lots of

629
00:30:22,120 --> 00:30:25,880
Speaker 2: quantum possibilities, and those are the ones with low mass particles.

630
00:30:26,040 --> 00:30:28,480
Speaker 2: That's why things decay. That's why muans DeKay down to

631
00:30:28,520 --> 00:30:31,320
Speaker 2: electrons or w particles don't last very long.

632
00:30:31,840 --> 00:30:34,000
Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't like to have all of my mass

633
00:30:34,000 --> 00:30:34,840
Speaker 1: in one spot.

634
00:30:34,600 --> 00:30:37,720
Speaker 2: Either, exactly, diversified, diversified, diversify.

635
00:30:37,440 --> 00:30:40,160
Speaker 1: Right, No, it just cuts a slimmer figure.

636
00:30:41,080 --> 00:30:42,880
Speaker 2: And that's why most of the stuff we're made out

637
00:30:42,880 --> 00:30:45,680
Speaker 2: of it are the lightest particles out there, because they

638
00:30:45,720 --> 00:30:48,440
Speaker 2: can't decay down any further. Electrons and upquarks and down

639
00:30:48,480 --> 00:30:52,120
Speaker 2: quarks are stable because there's nothing below them on the ladder.

640
00:30:52,200 --> 00:30:54,600
Speaker 2: And so yeah, it's possible to take the light particles,

641
00:30:54,640 --> 00:30:57,880
Speaker 2: give them energy, smash them together, make heavy particles, but

642
00:30:58,080 --> 00:31:00,720
Speaker 2: typically they will not last for very long and less lucky,

643
00:31:00,760 --> 00:31:02,840
Speaker 2: and you happen to form something which is stable, like

644
00:31:02,880 --> 00:31:03,920
Speaker 2: an iron nucleus.

645
00:31:04,240 --> 00:31:05,920
Speaker 1: Well, I wonder if it's if it's more of a

646
00:31:05,960 --> 00:31:09,640
Speaker 1: philosophical question, you know, does the term new matter even

647
00:31:09,680 --> 00:31:12,600
Speaker 1: make sense? What does the word new here mean? Like

648
00:31:12,640 --> 00:31:15,640
Speaker 1: it didn't exist before, but you know, the energy that

649
00:31:15,720 --> 00:31:18,200
Speaker 1: making that matter, it sort of existed before it just

650
00:31:18,240 --> 00:31:19,560
Speaker 1: it came from a different field.

651
00:31:19,720 --> 00:31:21,920
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's sort of like the particle of thesus question,

652
00:31:22,080 --> 00:31:24,160
Speaker 2: you know, like is this particle new or is this

653
00:31:24,200 --> 00:31:25,080
Speaker 2: particle not new?

654
00:31:25,320 --> 00:31:27,000
Speaker 1: Or what does it mean to have an old particle?

655
00:31:27,320 --> 00:31:29,040
Speaker 1: Like is there such a thing? Right?

656
00:31:29,200 --> 00:31:32,520
Speaker 2: Particles never retire, man, they work forever, so their age

657
00:31:32,560 --> 00:31:35,880
Speaker 2: doesn't matter. I think he's asking about new matter in

658
00:31:36,000 --> 00:31:39,640
Speaker 2: the concept of like new elements of the periodic table,

659
00:31:39,800 --> 00:31:42,520
Speaker 2: Like could we create elements of the periodic table we've

660
00:31:42,560 --> 00:31:45,760
Speaker 2: never seen before by smashing particles together?

661
00:31:46,000 --> 00:31:49,520
Speaker 1: Oh? Like, uh, you think as if it's asking about

662
00:31:50,000 --> 00:31:52,560
Speaker 1: creating an element we had never seen before.

663
00:31:52,760 --> 00:31:56,200
Speaker 2: Yeah, he says, generate all different elements of the periodic table.

664
00:31:56,600 --> 00:31:58,560
Speaker 2: And to me, the question is, like, well, what are

665
00:31:58,640 --> 00:32:01,160
Speaker 2: all the different elements? Even know? There might be some

666
00:32:01,240 --> 00:32:04,239
Speaker 2: really heavy new ones that are very stable, that are

667
00:32:04,320 --> 00:32:07,080
Speaker 2: very massive we've never made before. And so yeah, and

668
00:32:07,160 --> 00:32:08,960
Speaker 2: so if one way to do that is to smash

669
00:32:09,000 --> 00:32:11,560
Speaker 2: stuff together and see if we can make those heavy elements,

670
00:32:11,560 --> 00:32:13,040
Speaker 2: we haven't been able to do that yet.

671
00:32:13,120 --> 00:32:16,840
Speaker 1: Well, I guess maybe the question then is what's the

672
00:32:16,840 --> 00:32:19,600
Speaker 1: biggest or heaviest element we have made out of scratch

673
00:32:19,840 --> 00:32:22,400
Speaker 1: in in a particle collision? And I think it means

674
00:32:22,440 --> 00:32:26,040
Speaker 1: like spontaneously making something right, not just like you know,

675
00:32:26,120 --> 00:32:29,400
Speaker 1: like building up a matter like by adding one proton

676
00:32:29,440 --> 00:32:29,880
Speaker 1: at a time.

677
00:32:30,000 --> 00:32:32,800
Speaker 2: I think the heaviest thing we've ever made is element

678
00:32:32,920 --> 00:32:36,280
Speaker 2: one eighteen, But that's not really what he's asking about

679
00:32:36,560 --> 00:32:38,760
Speaker 2: to do that. You take lighter elements and you like

680
00:32:38,840 --> 00:32:42,960
Speaker 2: gently toss protons into them, hoping not to smash them apart.

681
00:32:43,440 --> 00:32:45,640
Speaker 2: So that's one technique. But if you just like start

682
00:32:45,680 --> 00:32:48,080
Speaker 2: from two protons and smash them together and hope to

683
00:32:48,080 --> 00:32:51,240
Speaker 2: make something like element one forty seven, that's not something

684
00:32:51,240 --> 00:32:53,880
Speaker 2: we've ever done. When we smash protons together, we don't

685
00:32:53,880 --> 00:32:56,720
Speaker 2: ever get helium, for example. It's possible, yeah, absolutely, but

686
00:32:56,720 --> 00:32:59,280
Speaker 2: it's very delicate because you put too much energy and

687
00:32:59,320 --> 00:33:01,920
Speaker 2: you just destroy the protons and you get the quarks interacting,

688
00:33:02,200 --> 00:33:04,320
Speaker 2: you get fragments of the protons flying out.

689
00:33:04,440 --> 00:33:06,120
Speaker 1: No, but I wonder if he means, like, you know,

690
00:33:06,200 --> 00:33:08,720
Speaker 1: you take two protons, you accelerate them, you smash him,

691
00:33:08,920 --> 00:33:12,320
Speaker 1: you create pure energy, like the old protons are gone,

692
00:33:12,480 --> 00:33:15,040
Speaker 1: even the old quarks are gone, and then somehow all

693
00:33:15,080 --> 00:33:19,600
Speaker 1: that energy somehow reforms into a complex atom.

694
00:33:19,920 --> 00:33:23,000
Speaker 2: Yeah that's possible, right, and be careful again with pure energy.

695
00:33:23,040 --> 00:33:25,600
Speaker 2: That's something we say sometimes, but really what's happening is

696
00:33:25,640 --> 00:33:29,200
Speaker 2: that energy is going into another field. Typically it's photons

697
00:33:29,280 --> 00:33:32,160
Speaker 2: or z bosons or something. But yeah, then that field

698
00:33:32,280 --> 00:33:35,480
Speaker 2: can dump the energy back into quark fields, which could

699
00:33:35,520 --> 00:33:38,520
Speaker 2: form protons and make a crazy heavy element. That it's

700
00:33:38,560 --> 00:33:42,160
Speaker 2: totally possible. It's not something we've ever done. It's very unlikely.

701
00:33:42,320 --> 00:33:44,800
Speaker 2: It requires a lot of things to go right, all

702
00:33:44,840 --> 00:33:47,840
Speaker 2: at the same time. But there's nothing saying it's not possible.

703
00:33:48,000 --> 00:33:49,880
Speaker 1: Well, I wonder if you've done it, you just haven't

704
00:33:49,920 --> 00:33:51,840
Speaker 1: noticed or measured it or look for it.

705
00:33:52,000 --> 00:33:54,560
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's absolutely possible too, because in these collisions we

706
00:33:54,600 --> 00:33:57,680
Speaker 2: get huge sprays of particles, more than we can ever

707
00:33:57,760 --> 00:34:00,520
Speaker 2: track or count, and we're not like sift through them

708
00:34:00,600 --> 00:34:02,880
Speaker 2: usually to look for new, weird heavy nuclei.

709
00:34:03,120 --> 00:34:05,960
Speaker 1: That the collider is not suddenly covered in gold you

710
00:34:06,000 --> 00:34:09,960
Speaker 1: haven't noticed that, or white chocolate? Perhaps, would that be

711
00:34:09,960 --> 00:34:11,759
Speaker 1: a tragedy if you like went to work one day

712
00:34:11,960 --> 00:34:14,720
Speaker 1: and everything's covered in white chocolate, You're like, no.

713
00:34:17,840 --> 00:34:20,080
Speaker 2: It's an exciting day every day at the particle collider.

714
00:34:20,160 --> 00:34:21,480
Speaker 2: Are we going to make a black hole? Are we

715
00:34:21,520 --> 00:34:23,600
Speaker 2: going to cover the Earth in white chocolate? Who knows?

716
00:34:23,680 --> 00:34:29,120
Speaker 1: Let's turn it, who knows, Let's find out exactly.

717
00:34:29,520 --> 00:34:31,240
Speaker 2: Let's go as the kids say.

718
00:34:31,239 --> 00:34:34,319
Speaker 1: So then what's the answer for ounce of here? Is

719
00:34:34,360 --> 00:34:36,799
Speaker 1: that it is possible to make a matter is just

720
00:34:36,880 --> 00:34:37,720
Speaker 1: kind of unlikely.

721
00:34:38,040 --> 00:34:40,960
Speaker 2: Yeah, the answer is that it's totally possible. And I

722
00:34:41,040 --> 00:34:43,919
Speaker 2: love your vision of a space station orbiting the Sun

723
00:34:44,040 --> 00:34:47,600
Speaker 2: building all sorts of crazy building blocks, but I'm not

724
00:34:47,640 --> 00:34:48,840
Speaker 2: ready to invest.

725
00:34:48,640 --> 00:34:50,840
Speaker 1: I see you need to see. The proof is in

726
00:34:50,840 --> 00:34:51,840
Speaker 1: the white chocolate pudding.

727
00:34:52,000 --> 00:34:54,040
Speaker 2: Yeah. If this was physics Shark Tank, I would not

728
00:34:54,080 --> 00:34:54,600
Speaker 2: be in.

729
00:34:54,640 --> 00:34:55,880
Speaker 1: Ooh, physics shark that.

730
00:34:56,000 --> 00:34:56,400
Speaker 2: I like that.

731
00:34:57,239 --> 00:34:58,040
Speaker 1: Let's make that show.

732
00:34:58,960 --> 00:35:01,080
Speaker 2: All right, listen, bite, let's and designed the pictures a

733
00:35:01,440 --> 00:35:02,320
Speaker 2: start the projects.

734
00:35:02,320 --> 00:35:03,879
Speaker 1: Oh, I think they have that already. I think it's

735
00:35:03,880 --> 00:35:08,800
Speaker 1: called the National Science Fundation. All right, well, great question. Answer.

736
00:35:09,320 --> 00:35:11,479
Speaker 1: Now let's get to our last question of the day,

737
00:35:11,600 --> 00:35:16,080
Speaker 1: and this one is about the ultimate particle and possibly

738
00:35:16,360 --> 00:35:20,040
Speaker 1: it's anti particle. Let's dig into that, but first let's

739
00:35:20,080 --> 00:35:35,280
Speaker 1: take a quick break. All right, we're answering listener questions

740
00:35:35,280 --> 00:35:37,839
Speaker 1: and our last question comes from Brett.

741
00:35:38,200 --> 00:35:39,840
Speaker 5: Hey, my name is Brett. I'm full Ty from the

742
00:35:39,960 --> 00:35:44,000
Speaker 5: United Kingdom. I'm currently studying an integrated masters and bachelor's

743
00:35:44,000 --> 00:35:48,280
Speaker 5: degree in my spare time, and I have a question

744
00:35:48,320 --> 00:35:52,239
Speaker 5: for the podcast. I've been thinking about ultimate particles, God

745
00:35:52,280 --> 00:35:57,400
Speaker 5: particles and fundamental particles, and I was wondering if there

746
00:35:57,600 --> 00:36:03,320
Speaker 5: is a true ultimate fundamental particle that everything else comes from,

747
00:36:03,640 --> 00:36:06,960
Speaker 5: would also have an anti version of itself? And also,

748
00:36:08,560 --> 00:36:10,680
Speaker 5: if we can't see them now, is it possible that

749
00:36:10,680 --> 00:36:12,880
Speaker 5: they're all used up in the Big Bang? And if so,

750
00:36:13,400 --> 00:36:15,560
Speaker 5: would we be able to see any evidence in the CMB.

751
00:36:16,960 --> 00:36:20,480
Speaker 5: And finally, third part of the question, would it be

752
00:36:20,520 --> 00:36:23,719
Speaker 5: the case that different configurations of the particle make up

753
00:36:23,760 --> 00:36:26,200
Speaker 5: the ones that we see in the standard model? I

754
00:36:26,280 --> 00:36:28,239
Speaker 5: realized this is a bit more than one question, but

755
00:36:28,320 --> 00:36:30,480
Speaker 5: thank you for your time and thank you for your responses.

756
00:36:30,960 --> 00:36:34,480
Speaker 2: Hey Bretat, congrats on studying for your master's degree in

757
00:36:34,520 --> 00:36:36,760
Speaker 2: physics in your spare time. That's awesome.

758
00:36:36,920 --> 00:36:40,000
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's a pretty cool a master's and bachelor's degree

759
00:36:40,040 --> 00:36:43,320
Speaker 1: at the same time. Well, the question is kind of cool,

760
00:36:43,480 --> 00:36:46,920
Speaker 1: I guess, you know, because in popular science you hear

761
00:36:47,080 --> 00:36:50,040
Speaker 1: talk of the god particle, the ultimate particle, or maybe

762
00:36:50,040 --> 00:36:52,839
Speaker 1: finding out that the whole universe is just made out

763
00:36:52,880 --> 00:36:56,759
Speaker 1: of one particle. And I think Brett's question is if

764
00:36:56,800 --> 00:36:59,400
Speaker 1: we ever find such a particle, would it have an

765
00:36:59,440 --> 00:37:01,040
Speaker 1: antipe article version of it?

766
00:37:01,239 --> 00:37:04,880
Speaker 2: Yeah, super awesome question, Brett. The short answer to your

767
00:37:04,960 --> 00:37:08,000
Speaker 2: question is, we have no idea because we don't know

768
00:37:08,040 --> 00:37:12,680
Speaker 2: the inside these particles, but we can talk about what

769
00:37:12,719 --> 00:37:16,719
Speaker 2: the current theories do predict. You know, we suspect strongly

770
00:37:16,960 --> 00:37:20,200
Speaker 2: that what we're looking at now, the electrons and the quarks,

771
00:37:20,480 --> 00:37:23,960
Speaker 2: are not the fundamental description of the universe. We think

772
00:37:23,960 --> 00:37:27,839
Speaker 2: that probably there's some deeper explanation that accounts for all

773
00:37:27,840 --> 00:37:31,480
Speaker 2: the weird patterns and like baroque details of all of

774
00:37:31,480 --> 00:37:33,239
Speaker 2: these particles.

775
00:37:32,480 --> 00:37:34,719
Speaker 1: Sort of like you know, when we discovered the elements,

776
00:37:34,760 --> 00:37:36,840
Speaker 1: we found out there was some sort of order to

777
00:37:36,920 --> 00:37:41,280
Speaker 1: them that explain why gold behaved differently than carbon, for example.

778
00:37:41,440 --> 00:37:44,560
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly, there are these patterns, these features to the

779
00:37:44,560 --> 00:37:46,960
Speaker 2: particles that we see. We don't understand them. There are

780
00:37:47,000 --> 00:37:49,600
Speaker 2: strong hints that they might be made out of something smaller,

781
00:37:49,719 --> 00:37:53,280
Speaker 2: something simpler that explains all of these weird details. Also,

782
00:37:53,480 --> 00:37:55,800
Speaker 2: we know that our theory breaks down at a certain

783
00:37:55,840 --> 00:37:58,200
Speaker 2: point we have really high temperatures or like we had

784
00:37:58,200 --> 00:38:01,239
Speaker 2: in the very early universe, that our current theory just

785
00:38:01,280 --> 00:38:03,960
Speaker 2: doesn't work anymore. You need to fold in gravity. We

786
00:38:03,960 --> 00:38:06,400
Speaker 2: don't know how to do that, so at some point

787
00:38:06,440 --> 00:38:09,319
Speaker 2: our theory breaks down and that very high temperature also

788
00:38:09,320 --> 00:38:12,319
Speaker 2: corresponds to very short distances. So the point of the

789
00:38:12,320 --> 00:38:14,680
Speaker 2: story is we think our current theory is not complete.

790
00:38:14,719 --> 00:38:17,359
Speaker 2: We hope to figure out one day what's there. And

791
00:38:17,360 --> 00:38:20,239
Speaker 2: your question is basically, when we do, will that be

792
00:38:20,360 --> 00:38:23,120
Speaker 2: some sort of particle antiparticle or is it possible for

793
00:38:23,239 --> 00:38:25,560
Speaker 2: everything that made out of something that doesn't have an

794
00:38:25,600 --> 00:38:26,400
Speaker 2: anti particle?

795
00:38:26,560 --> 00:38:28,439
Speaker 1: Well, I guess maybe take a step back and let's

796
00:38:28,440 --> 00:38:31,000
Speaker 1: think about whether it's possible, Like, is it possible that

797
00:38:31,320 --> 00:38:35,920
Speaker 1: everything that we know about electrons, quarks they're all actually

798
00:38:36,000 --> 00:38:37,960
Speaker 1: made out of one particle.

799
00:38:38,080 --> 00:38:39,520
Speaker 2: Yeah, absolutely, that's possible.

800
00:38:39,640 --> 00:38:41,680
Speaker 1: What wouldn't mean for the fields right right? Like don't

801
00:38:41,680 --> 00:38:44,600
Speaker 1: we talk about the electron having its own quantum fields

802
00:38:44,600 --> 00:38:47,799
Speaker 1: and quarks having their own quantum quark fields. That mean

803
00:38:47,840 --> 00:38:50,160
Speaker 1: those fields don't really exist, they're just sort of like

804
00:38:50,560 --> 00:38:52,280
Speaker 1: made up of other fields.

805
00:38:52,480 --> 00:38:55,759
Speaker 2: It would mean that those fields are effective instead of fundamental.

806
00:38:55,920 --> 00:38:58,320
Speaker 1: Wait, what was that word you said? If they're effective?

807
00:38:58,719 --> 00:39:01,920
Speaker 2: Yeah, an effective field is one that's not fundamental. For example,

808
00:39:01,920 --> 00:39:04,080
Speaker 2: if you want to think about like pressure waves in

809
00:39:04,160 --> 00:39:06,759
Speaker 2: a material, you can write that down in terms of

810
00:39:06,760 --> 00:39:11,160
Speaker 2: a field theory. Wave equations for how oceans work. But

811
00:39:11,360 --> 00:39:13,759
Speaker 2: we know that oceans are not a fundamental field in

812
00:39:13,800 --> 00:39:16,560
Speaker 2: the universe. Right, we can still think about waves in

813
00:39:16,600 --> 00:39:19,400
Speaker 2: the ocean as if the oceans are a field. But

814
00:39:19,480 --> 00:39:22,680
Speaker 2: that's just like useful mathematics that describes a lot of

815
00:39:22,719 --> 00:39:26,240
Speaker 2: complex stuff, sweeping it under the rug without really understanding

816
00:39:26,239 --> 00:39:29,200
Speaker 2: the details. So we don't know whether the fields we

817
00:39:29,239 --> 00:39:32,640
Speaker 2: have now are fundamental fields or they're just effective fields.

818
00:39:32,880 --> 00:39:35,520
Speaker 2: It could be that there is no electron field, that

819
00:39:35,560 --> 00:39:38,680
Speaker 2: there's something deeper the squiggly on field or several squiggly

820
00:39:38,719 --> 00:39:41,640
Speaker 2: on fields, and when you zoom out a little bit

821
00:39:41,719 --> 00:39:44,440
Speaker 2: and so you can't see the squigglions anymore, they act

822
00:39:44,760 --> 00:39:47,400
Speaker 2: like an electron field. So you can use the electron

823
00:39:47,440 --> 00:39:51,000
Speaker 2: field as an effective theory. It works, it's helpful and

824
00:39:51,120 --> 00:39:53,200
Speaker 2: lets you do calculations, but it might not be a

825
00:39:53,280 --> 00:39:56,560
Speaker 2: true description of the deepest nature of the universe.

826
00:39:56,960 --> 00:39:59,480
Speaker 1: Whoa so like all this time we thought the electron

827
00:39:59,520 --> 00:40:03,520
Speaker 1: field was a fundamental and like basic feature of the universe.

828
00:40:03,560 --> 00:40:05,680
Speaker 1: But no, it could just be an illusion kind of.

829
00:40:05,840 --> 00:40:08,520
Speaker 2: It might be an emergent phenomena. Right, this is something

830
00:40:08,560 --> 00:40:12,240
Speaker 2: we see all over the universe that you can describe things,

831
00:40:12,400 --> 00:40:15,560
Speaker 2: lots of different scales. You can talk about galaxies without

832
00:40:15,640 --> 00:40:19,480
Speaker 2: understanding the particles inside every planet and inside every rock. Right,

833
00:40:19,520 --> 00:40:23,080
Speaker 2: you can zoom out and find simple mathematical laws. Kepler

834
00:40:23,120 --> 00:40:26,680
Speaker 2: discovered those without even understanding gravity. Right, you can find

835
00:40:26,719 --> 00:40:30,240
Speaker 2: simple mathematics that lots of different length scales, distance scales,

836
00:40:30,400 --> 00:40:33,200
Speaker 2: energy scales in the universe. That's sort of a mystery,

837
00:40:33,239 --> 00:40:36,000
Speaker 2: like why that's even possible, But yeah, you can zoom

838
00:40:36,040 --> 00:40:38,880
Speaker 2: in or out in the universe and find mathematical laws.

839
00:40:39,080 --> 00:40:42,160
Speaker 2: We don't know if we found the deepest layer yet,

840
00:40:42,280 --> 00:40:44,840
Speaker 2: or if there even is a deepest layer, or what

841
00:40:44,920 --> 00:40:45,440
Speaker 2: that looks like.

842
00:40:45,600 --> 00:40:48,040
Speaker 1: Well, what would make more sense? I guess would it

843
00:40:48,080 --> 00:40:49,960
Speaker 1: make more sense for there to be like all these

844
00:40:50,080 --> 00:40:54,759
Speaker 1: multiple fields electron field, quark fields, muan fields, or would

845
00:40:54,800 --> 00:40:57,640
Speaker 1: it make sense to just have one field to rule

846
00:40:57,719 --> 00:40:58,080
Speaker 1: them all.

847
00:40:59,360 --> 00:41:02,480
Speaker 2: It's a great philosophical question. We don't have a scientific

848
00:41:02,520 --> 00:41:03,480
Speaker 2: answer for it, right.

849
00:41:03,640 --> 00:41:04,839
Speaker 1: What do we have a song? Though?

850
00:41:07,000 --> 00:41:09,359
Speaker 2: We don't have a song or a scientific answer for it.

851
00:41:09,480 --> 00:41:11,279
Speaker 2: Maybe there is a song for all the particles. I

852
00:41:11,280 --> 00:41:14,280
Speaker 2: don't know, but you know, if this is the fundamental theory,

853
00:41:14,520 --> 00:41:16,920
Speaker 2: there is nothing below it that means that there's a

854
00:41:16,960 --> 00:41:19,480
Speaker 2: lot of unanswered questions, you know, like why are there

855
00:41:19,560 --> 00:41:22,960
Speaker 2: three copies of every particle electrons, muons, and towels, all

856
00:41:23,000 --> 00:41:25,480
Speaker 2: sorts of questions that are out there that would be unanswered,

857
00:41:25,520 --> 00:41:27,080
Speaker 2: and you might just be like, h, I don't know,

858
00:41:27,200 --> 00:41:29,239
Speaker 2: that's just kind of the way it is. You'd be

859
00:41:29,320 --> 00:41:32,680
Speaker 2: much more satisfying if we found a simpler explanation, because

860
00:41:32,680 --> 00:41:35,080
Speaker 2: simplicity is always more satisfying because there are a few

861
00:41:35,080 --> 00:41:37,840
Speaker 2: work follow up questions, but we don't know. The universe

862
00:41:37,920 --> 00:41:40,800
Speaker 2: is not required to be satisfying to our minds.

863
00:41:41,040 --> 00:41:43,839
Speaker 1: I wonder if you could maybe like start with one

864
00:41:43,920 --> 00:41:47,200
Speaker 1: field and then try to invent or figure out how

865
00:41:47,200 --> 00:41:50,160
Speaker 1: that one field could give rise to all the other fields.

866
00:41:50,520 --> 00:41:52,560
Speaker 1: Is that something that people have done and discount it

867
00:41:52,680 --> 00:41:56,160
Speaker 1: or is that basically what string theory is or what?

868
00:41:56,400 --> 00:41:59,479
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's basically string theory. String theory says the whole

869
00:41:59,560 --> 00:42:02,360
Speaker 2: universe it's man out of one kind of thing, a string,

870
00:42:02,920 --> 00:42:05,120
Speaker 2: and that string can do lots of different things. They

871
00:42:05,120 --> 00:42:07,560
Speaker 2: can vibrate in different ways, so it's sort of like

872
00:42:07,600 --> 00:42:10,600
Speaker 2: a meta field theory. Instead of having ten different quantum

873
00:42:10,640 --> 00:42:14,080
Speaker 2: fields or eighteen quantum fields, you have a string which

874
00:42:14,200 --> 00:42:16,799
Speaker 2: can oscillate in different ways, and different modes of those

875
00:42:16,840 --> 00:42:20,920
Speaker 2: strings correspond to the different fields that we see. So

876
00:42:21,080 --> 00:42:24,160
Speaker 2: string theory can describe everything we see out there. It

877
00:42:24,200 --> 00:42:28,560
Speaker 2: can even unify gravity and quantum mechanics and describe everything.

878
00:42:28,640 --> 00:42:30,400
Speaker 1: But I wonder if you need to get that complicated,

879
00:42:30,400 --> 00:42:32,400
Speaker 1: because I know string theory is super complex, right, it

880
00:42:32,400 --> 00:42:35,719
Speaker 1: has like a bazillion dimensions to it. Couldn't you just

881
00:42:35,840 --> 00:42:39,239
Speaker 1: start with like the danelon or something and then try

882
00:42:39,280 --> 00:42:42,640
Speaker 1: to create one particle that's not a string, like a brierrating,

883
00:42:42,840 --> 00:42:45,320
Speaker 1: just a particle, and then try to come over with

884
00:42:45,360 --> 00:42:47,560
Speaker 1: the rules that would make electrons and quarks.

885
00:42:47,800 --> 00:42:50,920
Speaker 2: Yeah, you definitely want the simplest explanation, right. The reason

886
00:42:50,960 --> 00:42:52,920
Speaker 2: that people do string theory is that it is kind

887
00:42:52,920 --> 00:42:55,720
Speaker 2: of the simplest way people have made all these pieces

888
00:42:55,719 --> 00:42:58,040
Speaker 2: work together because there's a lot to describe. You know,

889
00:42:58,080 --> 00:43:01,360
Speaker 2: we have all these different particles or the daniel On field,

890
00:43:01,360 --> 00:43:03,520
Speaker 2: whichever has to be able to do lots of different

891
00:43:03,600 --> 00:43:05,440
Speaker 2: kinds of things. That has to be able to wiggle,

892
00:43:05,480 --> 00:43:08,359
Speaker 2: like an electron and a muon and a towel, and

893
00:43:08,440 --> 00:43:11,799
Speaker 2: the neutrinos and the quarks and all the force particles,

894
00:43:11,880 --> 00:43:13,920
Speaker 2: and it has to be able to explain quantum gravity,

895
00:43:13,960 --> 00:43:17,160
Speaker 2: so you need gravitons in there as well. And string

896
00:43:17,200 --> 00:43:19,560
Speaker 2: theory is sort of the simplest way people have ever

897
00:43:19,600 --> 00:43:23,120
Speaker 2: made that work. A simpler theory can't explain everything that

898
00:43:23,160 --> 00:43:25,320
Speaker 2: we see so far, and it's pretty simple. You just

899
00:43:25,360 --> 00:43:26,120
Speaker 2: got one string.

900
00:43:26,400 --> 00:43:29,200
Speaker 1: Well, I guess. Then the question is, can a string

901
00:43:29,440 --> 00:43:32,640
Speaker 1: in a string theory have an anti version of itself?

902
00:43:32,880 --> 00:43:35,880
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a really cool question. And you know, somebody

903
00:43:35,960 --> 00:43:38,239
Speaker 2: might one day come up with a theory of some

904
00:43:38,360 --> 00:43:42,239
Speaker 2: fundamental thing that explains everything and has an anti fundamental thing.

905
00:43:42,719 --> 00:43:46,520
Speaker 2: But this current idea of string theory doesn't have anti strings.

906
00:43:47,080 --> 00:43:49,719
Speaker 2: And the whole idea of anti particles I think is

907
00:43:49,760 --> 00:43:52,520
Speaker 2: sometimes a little bit misleading. It tells people that, like,

908
00:43:52,840 --> 00:43:55,640
Speaker 2: there's an opposite kind of matter, instead of thinking of

909
00:43:55,640 --> 00:43:57,920
Speaker 2: antimatter as an opposite kind of matter, thinking of it

910
00:43:57,960 --> 00:44:00,399
Speaker 2: as like a complementary kind of matter, or think about

911
00:44:00,400 --> 00:44:03,080
Speaker 2: it as like fields can do two different kinds of things.

912
00:44:03,280 --> 00:44:05,319
Speaker 2: Your favorite band can play rock, they can also play

913
00:44:05,360 --> 00:44:08,920
Speaker 2: alternative the electron. Fields can wiggle in an electron like way,

914
00:44:08,960 --> 00:44:11,680
Speaker 2: you can also wiggle in an anti electron like way.

915
00:44:11,880 --> 00:44:15,040
Speaker 2: It's just another thing. The same field can do. They're

916
00:44:15,040 --> 00:44:17,480
Speaker 2: just strings. They can wiggle to make the electron field,

917
00:44:17,560 --> 00:44:21,000
Speaker 2: which then can make electrons or anti electrons. So the

918
00:44:21,000 --> 00:44:24,200
Speaker 2: short answer is there are no anti strings in string theory.

919
00:44:24,400 --> 00:44:26,800
Speaker 2: You don't need them because the strings can make the field,

920
00:44:26,800 --> 00:44:28,960
Speaker 2: and the field can do either the particle or the

921
00:44:29,000 --> 00:44:29,800
Speaker 2: anti particle.

922
00:44:30,640 --> 00:44:33,000
Speaker 1: Well, I know, and we've talked about it before. How

923
00:44:33,640 --> 00:44:36,920
Speaker 1: like an antiparticle, something is just the same thing except

924
00:44:36,920 --> 00:44:39,880
Speaker 1: what the charge. Charge is flipped And so I guess

925
00:44:40,000 --> 00:44:42,480
Speaker 1: maybe I wonder if the question is do strings have

926
00:44:42,560 --> 00:44:45,320
Speaker 1: a charge? Is such a thing as charge in string

927
00:44:45,360 --> 00:44:48,480
Speaker 1: theory or is charge something that comes from the different

928
00:44:48,560 --> 00:44:49,640
Speaker 1: vibrations of the string.

929
00:44:49,880 --> 00:44:52,200
Speaker 2: Yeah, charge is something that comes from the different vibration

930
00:44:52,280 --> 00:44:54,719
Speaker 2: of the string, because the same string can make a

931
00:44:54,840 --> 00:44:57,840
Speaker 2: charged field like the electron field, and a non charge

932
00:44:57,840 --> 00:45:01,080
Speaker 2: field like the electromagnetic field. And so that tells us

933
00:45:01,120 --> 00:45:03,800
Speaker 2: something about like what charge is in the universe. Currently

934
00:45:03,840 --> 00:45:07,520
Speaker 2: we imagine charge is conserved in the universe. But if

935
00:45:07,760 --> 00:45:09,960
Speaker 2: charge things are made up of the same stuff, is

936
00:45:10,120 --> 00:45:12,960
Speaker 2: not charge things, And you could might imagine you might

937
00:45:12,960 --> 00:45:14,960
Speaker 2: be able to convert one to the other. You might

938
00:45:14,960 --> 00:45:18,160
Speaker 2: be able to destroy or create charge by getting the

939
00:45:18,200 --> 00:45:19,480
Speaker 2: string to wiggle differently.

940
00:45:19,680 --> 00:45:21,680
Speaker 1: It sounds like maybe you're saying, you know, if we

941
00:45:21,719 --> 00:45:26,120
Speaker 1: ever discover the ultimate theory of everything, it wouldn't have charges,

942
00:45:26,440 --> 00:45:29,320
Speaker 1: in which case it wouldn't have an anti version of itself.

943
00:45:29,560 --> 00:45:31,359
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think I'd pull back on that a tiny bit.

944
00:45:31,400 --> 00:45:33,680
Speaker 2: I'd say it doesn't have to have charges. It might.

945
00:45:33,880 --> 00:45:36,240
Speaker 2: There's no guarantee that string theory is the right description

946
00:45:36,440 --> 00:45:38,960
Speaker 2: of the universe. There's lots and lots of problems with

947
00:45:39,080 --> 00:45:41,240
Speaker 2: string theory and lining it up with reality and figuring

948
00:45:41,280 --> 00:45:43,960
Speaker 2: out which string theory to use, et cetera. Somebody might

949
00:45:43,960 --> 00:45:46,120
Speaker 2: come along with a much better, you know, rubber band

950
00:45:46,160 --> 00:45:49,000
Speaker 2: theory of the universe, or the whohe On theory of

951
00:45:49,040 --> 00:45:52,760
Speaker 2: the universe that might have Antijoheans in it. Who knows,

952
00:45:53,239 --> 00:45:54,960
Speaker 2: So I'm not ruling it out. I'm just saying, we

953
00:45:55,040 --> 00:45:59,600
Speaker 2: don't know, but our best current theory doesn't require anti strings, right,

954
00:45:59,640 --> 00:46:00,520
Speaker 2: you can out.

955
00:46:00,520 --> 00:46:02,760
Speaker 1: But I wonder like, if you do get to that theory,

956
00:46:02,960 --> 00:46:06,120
Speaker 1: like the whorehe On theory of everything, and there's a

957
00:46:06,160 --> 00:46:09,040
Speaker 1: plus Horray and a minus horhe, if them wouldn't just

958
00:46:09,080 --> 00:46:10,520
Speaker 1: ask like, why is there a plus oriy and a

959
00:46:10,560 --> 00:46:14,759
Speaker 1: minus hoorge. There must be something even deeper explain the

960
00:46:14,760 --> 00:46:18,160
Speaker 1: plus and minus warges, right, in which case you couldn't

961
00:46:18,160 --> 00:46:19,440
Speaker 1: call this the ultimate theory.

962
00:46:19,680 --> 00:46:22,040
Speaker 2: Maybe, and you'll have a hard time ever proving that

963
00:46:22,080 --> 00:46:24,719
Speaker 2: you have the ultimate theory because you can almost never

964
00:46:24,760 --> 00:46:27,800
Speaker 2: distinguish between the two scenarios of we have the ultimate

965
00:46:27,800 --> 00:46:30,040
Speaker 2: theory or we don't have the ultimate theory, but we

966
00:46:30,080 --> 00:46:32,799
Speaker 2: don't have the power to see inside this one. You know,

967
00:46:32,840 --> 00:46:35,439
Speaker 2: it's a question of resolution always, like can you zoom

968
00:46:35,480 --> 00:46:37,360
Speaker 2: in far enough to tell what this is made out of?

969
00:46:37,520 --> 00:46:39,560
Speaker 2: Can you tell whether it's made out of itself or

970
00:46:39,600 --> 00:46:41,799
Speaker 2: something smaller? But you could also end up in a

971
00:46:41,840 --> 00:46:44,319
Speaker 2: situation where you have a theory with a plus Jorge

972
00:46:44,400 --> 00:46:47,359
Speaker 2: and a minus Orge, and you understand why that there's

973
00:46:47,400 --> 00:46:49,759
Speaker 2: a symmetry to it, it's a balance to it, or there's

974
00:46:49,800 --> 00:46:52,640
Speaker 2: some sort of structure to it that demands requires a

975
00:46:52,640 --> 00:46:55,040
Speaker 2: plus and a minus. So it might be that the

976
00:46:55,120 --> 00:46:57,319
Speaker 2: question is answered on its own without going to a

977
00:46:57,320 --> 00:46:57,960
Speaker 2: deeper theory.

978
00:46:58,000 --> 00:47:01,000
Speaker 1: But who knows, well, I guess for it to have

979
00:47:01,040 --> 00:47:04,600
Speaker 1: an anti version of itself, you would have to kind

980
00:47:04,600 --> 00:47:08,120
Speaker 1: of pick one as the dominant one, right, kind of

981
00:47:08,160 --> 00:47:11,759
Speaker 1: like because we only call antimatter antimatter because it's not

982
00:47:11,800 --> 00:47:13,600
Speaker 1: the same as the kind that we're made out of.

983
00:47:13,719 --> 00:47:16,400
Speaker 2: Yeah, and that's not something we understand in our universe.

984
00:47:16,480 --> 00:47:18,600
Speaker 2: Like why we tend to be made out of one

985
00:47:18,640 --> 00:47:20,719
Speaker 2: half of this symmetry and not the other half. That's

986
00:47:20,920 --> 00:47:22,200
Speaker 2: a huge open question.

987
00:47:22,480 --> 00:47:24,440
Speaker 1: Well, any theory of everything that has me at the

988
00:47:24,480 --> 00:47:27,360
Speaker 1: center of it, For me, I think that's the ultimate theory.

989
00:47:27,920 --> 00:47:28,600
Speaker 2: That's everything.

990
00:47:28,680 --> 00:47:30,920
Speaker 1: Let's just stop right there. Yes, if I'm at the

991
00:47:30,920 --> 00:47:34,320
Speaker 1: center of the universe, let's not look any further.

992
00:47:34,480 --> 00:47:38,480
Speaker 2: Forget Aristotle, forget Copernicus. We have the whoreey theory, the

993
00:47:38,520 --> 00:47:40,200
Speaker 2: whoregey centric theory of the universe.

994
00:47:40,520 --> 00:47:42,560
Speaker 1: That's right, Yes, that's all you need.

995
00:47:43,560 --> 00:47:44,839
Speaker 2: Nobody tell the Catholic Church.

996
00:47:44,920 --> 00:47:47,280
Speaker 1: And at the core of it is just to handwavy cartoon.

997
00:47:50,360 --> 00:47:54,279
Speaker 2: It's a good way to live, man, Yeah.

998
00:47:53,719 --> 00:47:56,160
Speaker 1: I know, all right. Well, I think that's the answer

999
00:47:56,239 --> 00:47:59,080
Speaker 1: for bread, which is that it is possible if we

1000
00:47:59,120 --> 00:48:03,000
Speaker 1: find the god part or the ultimate particle of matter

1001
00:48:03,080 --> 00:48:06,399
Speaker 1: in the universe and forces that it might have its

1002
00:48:06,400 --> 00:48:10,279
Speaker 1: own anti particle, it's anti god particle. Would it be

1003
00:48:10,320 --> 00:48:12,720
Speaker 1: the anti god particle or the godless particle?

1004
00:48:13,320 --> 00:48:15,880
Speaker 2: The devil particle. Yeah, who knows, But the dog particle

1005
00:48:17,120 --> 00:48:18,000
Speaker 2: I like that better.

1006
00:48:18,080 --> 00:48:20,640
Speaker 1: Yeah, but then are we made out of dog particles

1007
00:48:20,680 --> 00:48:21,520
Speaker 1: or God particles?

1008
00:48:22,239 --> 00:48:24,000
Speaker 2: I want to be a cat particle. I don't know,

1009
00:48:24,160 --> 00:48:25,960
Speaker 2: but I love that Brett is thinking about this. I

1010
00:48:26,000 --> 00:48:28,400
Speaker 2: want everyone out there to think about the deep nature

1011
00:48:28,560 --> 00:48:30,960
Speaker 2: of the universe. You don't have to be a professional

1012
00:48:30,960 --> 00:48:33,480
Speaker 2: physicist or even on your way to becoming one. This

1013
00:48:33,600 --> 00:48:35,560
Speaker 2: is a mystery that belongs to everyone.

1014
00:48:35,800 --> 00:48:38,960
Speaker 1: Yeah, we hope everyone has questions and also anti questions.

1015
00:48:39,120 --> 00:48:40,920
Speaker 2: Are our answers anti questions?

1016
00:48:40,960 --> 00:48:44,800
Speaker 1: To Zach Can, they're definitely anti answers most of the time.

1017
00:48:45,960 --> 00:48:48,080
Speaker 2: Well, I hope when we collide our anti answers with

1018
00:48:48,160 --> 00:48:51,400
Speaker 2: your anti questions, we're not annihilating your curiosity. That's right.

1019
00:48:51,440 --> 00:48:53,600
Speaker 1: We're just creating positive why.

1020
00:48:53,400 --> 00:48:56,120
Speaker 2: Is all over the place and hoping it matters.

1021
00:48:56,360 --> 00:48:59,760
Speaker 1: All right. Well, I think that answers all of our questions.

1022
00:48:59,760 --> 00:49:02,680
Speaker 1: Thanks to everyone who sent in their questions. We always

1023
00:49:03,239 --> 00:49:08,640
Speaker 1: enjoy talking about these adventures into people's curiosity. We hope

1024
00:49:08,680 --> 00:49:11,439
Speaker 1: you enjoyed that. Thanks for joining us. See you next time.

1025
00:49:16,200 --> 00:49:19,400
Speaker 2: For more science and curiosity. Come find us on social media,

1026
00:49:19,520 --> 00:49:23,040
Speaker 2: where we answer questions and post videos we're on Twitter,

1027
00:49:23,160 --> 00:49:26,759
Speaker 2: this Org, instant and now TikTok. Thanks for listening and

1028
00:49:26,840 --> 00:49:29,560
Speaker 2: remember that Daniel and Jorge Explain the Universe is a

1029
00:49:29,600 --> 00:49:35,480
Speaker 2: production of iHeartRadio. More podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,

1030
00:49:35,760 --> 00:49:39,200
Speaker 2: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.