Space oddities - with Harry Cliff
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 05. 2024
- Join University of Cambridge and CERN physicist Harry Cliff as he explores the cosmic anomalies currently perplexing scientists.
Watch the Q&A here (exclusively for CZcams members): • Q&A: Space oddities - ...
Buy Harry's book here: geni.us/5hGEtI
This Discourse was recorded at the Ri on 27 March 2024.
From particles of astonishing energies erupting from the depths beneath the Antarctic ice to enigmatic forces subtly tugging at the fundamental building blocks of matter, the universe offers us an ever-growing compendium of cosmic riddles. Notably, stars are hurtling away from us at velocities that challenge the boundaries of explanation, leaving scientists astounded by the inexplicable.
Harry will guide us on a journey that spans continents, introducing us to the brilliant minds who have dedicated their careers and reputations to unraveling the mysteries shrouding these cosmic anomalies. Are these cosmic quirks flukes of nature, or do they allude to the hidden parts of the universe we have yet to discover?
Through Harry’s trademark wit and wonder, he opens the door to the tantalizing possibility of untold cosmic realms waiting to be discovered.
---
If you'd like to watch this video without any ads, and support our charitable mission at the same time, you can do that here by becoming a CZcams channel member for just £2.99 a month: • Space oddities - with ...
You'll also get ad-free previews of all our videos, along with exclusive access to scientist Q&As.
---
Harry Cliff is a particle physicist at the University of Cambridge working on the LHCb experiment, a huge particle detector buried 100 metres underground at CERN near Geneva. He is a member of an international team of around 1400 physicists, engineers and computer scientists who are using LHCb to study the basic building blocks of our universe, in search of answers to some of the biggest questions in modern physics. His first popular science book, How To Make An Apple Pie From Scratch, was published in August 2021. From 2012 to 2018 he held a joint post between Cambridge and the Science Museum in London, where he curated two major exhibitions: Collider (2013) and The Sun (2018). He has given a large number of public talks, including at TED and the Royal Institution, and made numerous appearances on television, radio and podcasts.
---
Discourses are one of the Ri’s oldest and most prestigious series of talks. Since 1825, audiences in the theatre have witnessed countless mind-expanding moments, including the first public liquefaction of air by James Dewar, the announcement of the electron by JJ Thomson and over 100 lectures by Michael Faraday. In more recent times, we have had Nobel laureates, Fields medal winners, scientists, authors and artists - all from the cutting-edge of their field. Discourses are an opportunity for the best and brightest to share their work with the world.
Steeped in nearly two centuries of tradition, a Discourse is more than just a lecture. The Discourse lasts exactly an hour, and a bell is rung to mark the beginning and end. To keep the focus on the topic, presenters begin sharply at 7:30pm without introduction and we lock the speaker into a room ten minutes ahead of the start (legend has it that a speaker once tried to escape!). Some of our guests and speakers dress smartly for our Discourse events to add to this sense of occasion. Read more about Discourses here: www.rigb.org/explore-science/...
----
The Ri is on Twitter: / ri_science
and Facebook: / royalinstitution
and TikTok: / ri_science
Listen to the Ri podcast: podcasters.spotify.com/pod/sh...
Donate to the RI and help us bring you more lectures: www.rigb.org/support-us/donat...
Our editorial policy: www.rigb.org/editing-ri-talks...
Subscribe for the latest science videos: bit.ly/RiNewsletter
Product links on this page may be affiliate links which means it won't cost you any extra but we may earn a small commission if you decide to purchase through the link. - Věda a technologie
This lecture is so fantastic. I finally understand 1) how the age of our universe is calculated, 2) how dark matter can be detected, 3) what the proof is of different sub-atomic particles, 4) the three ways of measuring distance of stars (and galaxies via supernova's), etc. It is stuck in my brain now by this one hour video. Absolutely amazing. Thank you Harry!
If you think about it, it's an incredible challenge to condense all of mankinds history of physics down to the present day. There are generations of brilliant scientists and their discoveries only mentioned in one sentence not because it isn't vastly fascinating and important but because he's trying to catch the rest of the salt of the earth (us), up to the incredible achievements and progress that have happened in the last 100 years that have completely changed our fundamental understanding of not only the creation of the universe but everything single thing in it, to then only present that we only really see 5% of what exists, the vast majority of energy is still not understood, and who knows someone or more likely many people will make some equally incredible discoveries that further improve our understanding.
I've watched many talks over the years on the subjects of physics and cosmology. He does a fantastic job of fitting in as much info as possible in an hour but tempering it just enough so as not to lose the average viewer/listener.
Well done sir.
Agree!
Great talk! Couldn't have been explained better or more concisely! Way to really bring it all together in one cohesive speech. That barely felt like an hour.
He knows his stuff and makes it very interesting for those of us who wish we were smarter and better informed about science, many thanks Harry.
This needed to be about another hour long. It was just getting really good when he ended it! Harry, please give us more!
One of the best lectures recently in RI. While it was nothing really new that was discovered, the way our actual knowledge about the universe and QFT was presented by Harry is truly outstanding. This is the way to speak to keep people focused and interested, thank you!
Brilliant presentation! Thank you so much, Harry Cliff.
How I wish most university teachers were like you. 54 minutes flew by without a single loss of tension. Thank you so much.
It's much easier with history and pop science
He could have talked a mite slower and I would have still been as attentive.
Abolutely. I want to put that on again.
And the Hubble tension still hasn't been resolved!
@@insane_troll Then SOLVE it, instead of complaining. Duh.
When Harry Cliff speaks, I listen with full attention.
So you might say, you're excited to see him.
Including that part about 2015 5:12 - Albert Einstein.. wasn't even alive in 2015 haha - don't you just hate saying the wrong century? Only 100 years...
What a presenter, also enjoyed his interview with Lex Fridman at the sane place some two years ago
Phenomenal presentation, Mr. Cliff! (even if the man shamelessly sleeping in the front row [7:54] doesn't agree) Thank you for sharing this with us, I really enjoyed this. I will definitely be picking up a copy of your book, good sir.
Very impressed with the way Harry Cliff presented space phenomena! If you are passionate about topics like this, don't miss it
One in 12 million Mercurial orbits,..
Is it getting warm in here..?
I love the Friday Evening Discourses! 🤵🏻♂️ Especially when they’re about space.
Very good lecture. Thank you, dear boy. Your gorgeous velvet jacket puts me in mind of Zapp Brannigan when he says "Velour..."
Zapp Brannigann...my hero.,.(.sigh)
This stuff never gets old.
Harry Cliff's previous RI talk about field theory and the Standard Model is a must watch. Everything I know about the topic began with that video.
Theory is not facts. So this guy goes around spread maybes?
@@jmp01a24 Scientifically it's our current best understanding of the facts, when the word is used correctly.
@@mostevil1082 Facts one day, the next it's considered uncomplete and hardly deserves a mention. Science and Religion.
@@jmp01a24 That's not what 'theory' means in science. It's different to the 'theory' that Sherlock Holmes might have as to who is the murderer. That's why *'the theory of evolution by natural selection'* is not a "maybe", it's a set of well-understood principles that affect all biological organisms, and it's the name for that set.
@@BenjWarrant What happened to facts? I have a theory that facts trumps maybe's.
i couldn't have said it better myself. beautiful.
10/10 Lecture! Extra point for the Father Ted joke, it’s so relevant
How very interesting this talk was. Thank you Harry.
Dark matter and dark energy is not something we have discovered, it is something we have not discovered.
Both of these constructs are admissions we don't have a clear idea of what is going on with behavior we observe in the universe.
@@johncraig2623You're both right...and yet both wrong. The first one, the fella who said dark Yada Yada Yada are things we haven't discovered...well. Ok, no, we don't know what either of those things are, exactly. But we still know they ARE there, and we still know what they both do. Insofar as it affects the universe gravitationally, anyway. Sure, they may both do many other things, but they are still discovered. Aaaaand second fella...you are right, inasmuch as we don't have much of an idea about the behavior of the universe...I mean, cmon dude! The universe is gi-freaking-normous!!! It's honestly astounding that we know as much as we do! We actually have a very good idea about the behavior of the universe, as we are allowed to interact with it. So yeah, I agree that you are both right, as far as it goes, but looking at the glass half full and realizing just how much we know about something so mind numbingly huge and impossible to ever get to, we still know a lot, relatively.
Thank you for this video. It was truly an outstanding presentation.
i came across this on my feed when i was going to bed. That was an hour ago -Nice Video.
Wow this was a fantastic talk. I know most and I was inspired to listen newly. ;). Great presenter.
Awesome! Complex topics explained in fluent, elegant and engaging way!
Thank you, Dr Cliff. I can truly say this is the first physics lecture from which I have learned something in a very long time. With only high School physics, I had nonetheless figured out from the quantum jumping phenomenon and from the behavior of photons that there must be something that you described as the quantum field, and I resisted using the term 'ether' for it because I knew it had been rejected. Your demonstration with the hydrogen will help my understanding when I eventually think it through,, if I should live so long.
I feel better tonight. The desk is back!
This is s really good talk, thanks very much.
What so amazing points of view!!!! Thank you!!
The ultimate point - in 2015 Einstein was putting the finishing touches.. lol oh wow..
Well done Mr. Cliff. More importantly, you are the first RI presenter to hawk his wares. Congratulations!
We are missing something fundamental about the universe - I would say that's more than obvious and an understatement considering just the theory of quantum physics: we can't really say what a particle really is, we can't say what an observation really is, but we do calculations based on statistics and play around with error margins and the results don't fit, when clearly the secrets of the universe hide in minute discrepancies. Just imagine how many things we miss because the measurements and the theoretical statistics calculations actually matched, even if the theory is probably wrong or off target.
I'm impressed with your insight...
Excellent lecture. Love that you explained that atoms aren't actually atoms, but simply vibrations in the medium in which we exist. Personally, I think atoms are knots in the strings that comprise our medium.
i finally understand that muon experiment. much appreciated.
But ok electrons have "spin" but don't actually spin, muons are actually rotating wave functions?
@@MadScientist267 from what i understand, The muon's wave function incorporates information about its intrinsic angular momentum (spin), but the wave function isn't actually rotating.
Great speaker and scientist. I envy your students!
It would be nice to talk about Eric Laithwaite and his gyroscopes experiments...
Laithwaite was a keen entomologist and co-author of "The Dictionary of Butterflies and Moths" (1975). The "Father of Maglev", before the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics had confirmed Quantum Entanglement, was real even.. A man ahead of his time.
I think we need more stories of all the boring anomalies. The diphoton excesses, Z prime boson 'detections', superluminal neutrinos, cosmic inflation 'discovery' by BICEP, DAMA dark matter 'detection', lepton flavor universality 'violation' by LEP etcetc, as I feel the people in the fields are far more skeptical of the anomaly du jour then the general public precisely because they've been around long enough and involved in the details of it to see so many potentially exiting things come and go.
A talk outlining the basics of all these anomalies would be fascinating and entertaining but it might also provoke/inspire someone into thinking of an explanation or two. It is generally held that the day of the 'chap in the shed' is over but the building of Jodrell Bank telescope suggests otherwise (they did have the advantage of all that army surplus electronics that used to be on sale on Shudehill) and more recently the clockwork radio showed the benefits of giving someone a problem from outside their field.
@@mikesmith2905 well, that is also a spin on it, agreed, though I was largely talking about past anomalies that are resolved, and that ended up having one of the boring explanations; statistical fluke, experimental error etc, to teach a bit of skepticism.
... though I guess DAMA still insists their measurement is correct ^^
Awesome lecture. Fascinating stuff.
Excellent video. Very interesting, informative and worthwhile video.
This was really well presented! Thanks so much!
One of my favorite channels, recommend it to everyone. Keep posting more stuff like this plz!
1:29 Note to 'Merkins: _transit_ means _passing across_ , not _public transport_ .
So cool that you showed Neptune with the correct color grading!
This is so interesting
Wonderful overview of cosmology! With a bit of new info for me. Wish i could be working at a place that studies the universe
That was a really interesting lecture. Worth a listen. Thanks to all concerned.❤
Appreciate the updated picture of Neptune!
Very much enjoy the presentation, thank you!
Brilliant lecture. Thank you.
LOL. At 15:17 "In 2015 he was putting the finishing touches ..." Really? More like 1915. I acknowledge this was just a slip of the tongue.
"The distinction between the past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion." -- Albert Einstein
@@chegeny - Yeah, I remember when he said that, in 2057.
What's 100 years between friends!? I couldn't stop laughing... thinking old first cousin marrying Albutto was younger than me.. cousin diddler
I spotted it straight away too, made almost identical comment before I read yours..
Yeah, I noticed that one, too, but it's clearly just an honest mistake. Like your honest mistake that this happened at 15:17 in the video, whereas it's actually at 05:17. Let's give him a pass!
Great watch good stuff
Glued to the demonstration. Bravo!
Brilliant lecture. Thanks
Great lecture, the examples were well presented 👍
I really enjoyed that. Many thanks.
Excellent talk. Thank you. 👍😀
2015? You made an oopsie lol. Great video, Harry C. is a legend
Amazing
great talk!
Best presentation in a long time
2:16 neptune with the updated, more realistic color hue nice
A really interesting lecture, that only serves to confirm to me that the only answer to the expanding universe is the 'boring' solution: 'tired light'! If the universe is stationary, infinite and populated with galaxies, and photons lose energy (through quantum effects of dark matter etc) on their way towards us, that explains the observed increasing redshift. The Hubble constant anomaly and the varying microwave background radiation is then simply due to the radiation reaching us from slightly non-homogeneous areas of the more distant invisible universe. Obviously James Webb seeing mature distant galaxies also ties in with this, as does Einstein not needing a fiddle factor to stop the universe collapsing, as well as the current work at Lancaster University that is mapping impossibly large structures in the visible universe that are incompatible with its believed age. Obviously all our current redshift measurements within the universe are still valid regardless of its cause. So I'd love someone to be able to persuade me that the simple 'boring' explanation of light losing energy as it travels towards us is wrong. As the more I read the more I can't believe that the current theories can be the true answer!
It's a bit weird to see someone say quantum field theory is "the language with which we describe all particle physics" and, 20 seconds later, talk about something "producing a magnetic field". There is no such thing as "a" magnetic field, and nothing "produces" it. There is *the* magnetic field (which is always there - there being everywhere - it's an intrinsic property of the universe), and those phenomena simply _alter its value_ (locally). Describing those perturbations as the "creation" of a magnetic field is a bit like saying that throwing a stone into a still part of a large pool "creates" water.
A lot of the difficulty people have with quantum field theory (which is actually quite intuitive) comes from the inadequate language used to describe it. Same goes for relativity. To quote Benjamin Lee Whorf, "language shapes the way we think, and determines what we can think about". We can't expect people to feel comfortable with relativity or quantum field theory if we keep describing them in terms of 300-year-old classical mechanics.
Good reply. Can you recommend any videos explaining it in a fitting intuitive way?
@@DC_DC_DC_DC Chat GPT. You can ask it to decribe it however you want.
And it will, doesn't mean it will do so correctly though.
Don't get me wrong, i appreciate what it can but it's no good for anything you won't gk and verify later, it's not reliable enough to learn something from it, it makes too many mistakes.
@@dannyfar7989 just try it before writing here, and see.
@@GoatOfTheWoods try what, Chat GPT? Did that, even got telling me it can't lie and the dmitting that it can lie and just did. It basically majorities to figure out what's true. We all know rhat the majority is often wrong. Even Chat GPT acknowledges that when write to it " rhis n such is not correcr please verify" it does so and apologizes.
Don't get me wrong, I use it for lots of things, I still think it's a usefull tool but a tool that constantly makes Mistakes isn't to be trusted anymore than a human who does. It "knows" lots of things but it's not reliably correct.
Great talk!!
Thanks!
lol that's funny
Jean-Pierre Petit’s Janus model has the answer to dark matter and dark energy: they don’t exist…
Marvellous.
@37:00
Better example is showing a picture of random dots.....amd one 10% bigger, overlayed with different dots chosen as the "middle"
Can show the increased expansion rate eaiser and the fact that it is true everywhere
Nice and sincere. Don't make people feel like fools, it's alienating, distressing.
did anyone else get the feeling when he began describing the Quantum fluctuations in empty space, that these may be the cause of both Dark Energy & Dark Matter? no? just me? that's cool
Genuine question: Spacetime is invariably portrayed as a flat "rubber" sheet with all masses effectively sitting on top and "sinking" into it creating 3 dimensional Wells.
What if this in an incorrect interpretation? What if all masses exist WITHIN Spacetime rather than atop? This might better explain why the Gravitational effect is seen in all directions. Spacetime would be "streched" towards masses from ALL directions which is what we actually observe. Spacetime theory suggests that this is finite (in an Einstinian Universe) and a barrier (potentially) just like surface tension on water. 17:10
It's Hubble-Lemaître law, Lemaitre made and published the discovery before Hubble. Both worked independently, Hubble's number was more precise as he worked LATER with more prices numbers.
"...galaxies rotating too fast." "...darkmatter..."
How can we tell whether the "too fast" part, is likely due to unseen mass, or that the perception of time differs over such distances.
Considering that there are gravitational waves, should there not be "time waves"?
Those gravitational waves already account for changes in time and are extremely small, as do the mass measurements. Almost always, if an answer sounds simple and isn't being considered, it's because it was already considered and found to be wrong.
@@bengoodwin2141 thx
Because dark matter around galaxy's has been observed
Thanks for a very helpful video and all the technical detail. I was just wondering today in a nap, how far is Andromeda from here. The answer was 1bl light years. Now I know its only one million light years. My other consciousness sometimes gets its guestimates wrong.
Thanks
couldn't you stretch to a fiver?
@@Mkbshg8how much did you send ?
@@Mkbshg8 Just clicked a button, mate
@@Longfellowdeeds. was just a joke, mate.
Hey.. that's much better than $2 Australian.. lol
Ok. I’m 49. And today I became deeply interested in particle physics. I have some charts to buy.
You're already too old.
44:44 this brings to mind Georges-Louis Leclerc cannonball experiment to estimate the age of earth. Both are probably completely wrong and a nice diversion for hobbyists.
18:37 (and the explanation about the quantum fields in empty space before): Now the question poses itself: Are the quantum fluctuations caused by the quantum uncertainty, or is the quantum uncertainty caused by the quantum fluctuations?
Imagine reading this lecture as a 300-page book.
There is another answer that doesn't require an unexplainable explosion.
I think black holes drive the expansion of the universe so the Hubble constant could vary with the size of the black holes at the center of galaxies. It might be that black holes have no interior in the traditional sense because when a massive object collapses into a black hole it loses any space contained within it to it's exterior. The volume contained within something can only be calculated when the surface area is known. So what is the boundary of the universe but the space time boundary of a black hole. The space between black holes is expanding with the exception of those close enough to each other to be gravitationally bound. The further away the less gravity counters the force of expansion so the faster they receed. That's my theory anyway.
Imagine how utterly humbling it would be to actually, provably discover that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate, only to realize Einstein basically had it figured out decades earlier because that was the only thing that would allow the rest of his calculations to actually work...
He _hadn't_ figured it out, though. He was just trying to solve a mathematical problem, he never considered that it was an actual thing.
I usually always have to increase the speed on every video except when it is a scientist speaking. Even the scientists on children's shows such as scishow or eons speak at the speed of us New Yorkers. I had to check if he was on normal speed or quick. I guess it's because the scientists are so smart and they think quickly.
Very interesting.
Thought provoking presentation, thank you. With regard to Dark Energy/Dark Matter?, ...i sense neither are actually dark but rather, it is theoretical physics that is actually in the dark!
what's actually funny was when i have made a video presentation of the events that occured beginning with the bigbang..it started with an explosion then cooling of the expanding universe then these matters starting to form then eventually galaxies then planets formed then when i was about to show the newly formed earth, i took a break and when i came back to my computer i decided to play first what i have finished so far and it's very weird because the video looks as if i was playing it in a reverse mode. from the explosion to the forming of the planets, it looks a complete sequence except that it's all happening in reverse. if i will have two videos, one in normal mode (explosion to planet formed) and the other one in reverse mode (formed planets to explosion) and then show it to someone who doesn't know anything about bigbang and our universe and ask him to choose which one he thinks was real and possible to happen, he would for sure choose the reversed one cause the sequence was realistic compared to what was supposed to normally happened. just sharing.
There are no 17 quantum-fields. Our models for describing reality are based on conceptualizing 17 fields ! That’s a subtle but important difference. The map is NOT the territory.
Agreed. In the 1970s when I learned about heterodyning while doing an electronics course I decided the universe is simply an unevenly distributed 'field' and we are a pattern generated by the field interacting with itself whilst finding its own level. Ever since I have been asking people who know more than I what is wrong with that idea but to date everyone has told me it fits the observed phenomena. Not that it helps but it panders to my fondness for the absurd.
It would be more accurate to say that the model may or may not be what reality truly is, and we don't know. We don't even know if such a distinction even has any real meaning.
I remember pointing out to someone that the particles in and out for a particular Cern Experiment weren't how they were interpretating it.
For instance, all measurement of a Neutrino is done by measuring everything else and whatever can't be accounted for is attributed to the Neutrino.
In this patricular case what was observed were high speed particles in and other particles out at unexpected angles. I happened to point out that the combination in could also result in the collision which output the muon, and the missing energy was actually attributable to the increase in mass called the muon and not they fabian neutrino. Even the impact angles were quite precise. It could be attributed to the energy conversion and the increased mass ejected which we call the muon.
Of course this goes against tradition but ive never held tradition as senior to truth.
Ultimately it is Einstein's own equation (E = MC^2) which suggests matter can convert to energy as well as energy can convert to matter. Which itself should be enough to unify Einsteinian Physics with Quantum Physics (without the need for complexities such as String Theory). Of course what it suggests is quite a bit more than I have let on here.
I'll leave that for you to deduce and give you something to think about.
I though Einstein was long dead and here the man was still kicking ass less than a decade ago
Bike wheel > the rope was slightly twisted when he started. Or
The weight of the wheel pulling down , also caused the inherent slight twist in the rope to slightly un twist.
The demo would have looked better if there had been no twist factor at all.
Very interesting! However the description of an electron orbiting the nucleus rather like a planet around the sun hasn’t been used for decades…
This is true, but it is also a good enough approximation for some applications
Its just a easy way to show to the average person who doesnt know physics about hiw they work.
Might as well use the plum pudding model. Lol
"Space Realities, making "Laws of Physics" the Oddities". Fixed your title.
Spent over a minute wondering why there was a roulette wheel on the lectern.
Quantum Field Theory was preceded by "Aether or Ether. A highly rarified "gas" that somehow permeates throughout everything, everywhere. Turns out there is a pervasive "something" but it is a field, not a substance.
It's easier for me to think that all the matter in the universe is shrinking instead of saying the empty space between the galaxies is expanding. It makes more sense in my mind that way. To me it's the same thing in the sense that the distance berween objects changes relative to the objects. I'm not sure but that would also seem to explain red shift if the light waves from long ago kept their frequency the same then the wavelength would appear longer to an observer millions of years from now who had shrunk. If the universe is expanding and we aren't then light would have to stretch backwards though time to explain what we see. For instance, say a photon travells 100 million light years and we say it redshifted so much, but we see a continuous image of a galaxy. If light were a flexible string connecting two points that would make sense, Say two photons are travelling in a line one in front of the other, then space expands and increases the distance between them, we should see gaps. It also makes more sense to me to think about gravity as matter swallowing space at the speed of gravity. If I am wrong abut the shrinkage thing then maybe dark matter spits space out and pushes everything away while curving light around it.
Going with the new fangled bland-Neptune coloring.
5:17 2015? wow! very impressive
Thankyou
Mind is reality creation device, brain is a reality filtration device.
Body is poop making device 💩
Source please
@@un-Lawyer source? i am Esah son of maryam, sent to bare witness over you all.
@@esahg5421 , then it can't be a true statement
It's the opposite. Your brain creates reality and your mind filters it
How's about a lecture on that minor anomaly that is "what is our universe expanding into?" ....
I'm curious how parallax gets calculated when after 6 months, the Earth has traveled more than just the diameter of its orbit since you still have the motions of our star and galaxy to include in your leg of the triangle. I'd love to know how this is calculated.
Liked and shared.
The Quantum Field sounds like the Luminiferous Ether by another name.
40:00 when he actually talks about the hubble constant