Lecture 1 | New Revolutions in Particle Physics: Basic Concepts

[ficolossale]

1:41:45 EPIC MOMENT!!!!

[6Vital6Remains6]

I tripped balls at 0:32:07

[6Vital6Remains6]

Who was the old guy at 0:30:20~? Haha

[6Vital6Remains6]

I hope my physics lecturer is as personable as Leonard.

[OllieVar777]

what a good idea stanford, learning should be free

[GeetarAdam]

Lol. Good teacher. Great sense of humor and he doesn't take himself too seriously. Always an advantage in a discipline where egos can become so inflated.

[pgb2323]

For a simple pictorial introduction to particle physics try the book “ High Energy Particle Physics: A concise guide for beginners” available from Lulu.com

[jgrant142142]

It's great to revisit Stanford.



[deyomash]

planck's constant is not h-bar,

plancks constant is h

h bar is the reduced plancks constant which is h/2pi

[CorelliCollective]

Oh my....who is he giving this lecture to? Poor Leonard, some of the questions you hear just show those folks have not even the vaguest idea of what he's talking about..... he's a really patient and humble professor, in spite of his being a genius and a monument of modern physics.

[dennymac12]

@CorelliCollective to me, and everyone like me.  I am THRILLED to find this online. In my humble opinion, a search for answers is eternal. I considered not taking my time to reply. Thinking, it is my time im wasting. However im curious now as to why, such an intelligent person, would waste his time mocking one that shares knowledge ? You should be gracing the world with your answers.

[ThorkilKowalski]

c=2.99792458e8m/s, not 2.99762458e8m/s :)

[mrpdiddy1able]

iam only 15 and i think this is basic

[mostunlikely]

@mrpdiddy1able

well then... congratulations! aren't you an amazing little prodigy

[henrywiltcher]

@mrpdiddy1able Basic like your grasp of English grammar!

[DrGregoryHouse100]

@mrpdiddy1able Well, it does say "Basic" in the title.

[GeetarAdam]

@mrpdiddy1able We're all very impressed with you!

[cunnidvd]

Stanford rocks

[RAghavmulpuru]

He does a really good job explaining theoretical physics. But being such a good teacher he shoudnt have approximated 1/1837 to 1/2000 while comparing the mass to electron to that of a proton

[aqouby]

This man is ridiculous, I love everything about him. Not only does he have amazing intelligence and a very simple way of portraying his ideas, but he is funny and honest and-- And damnit, the man fought Hawking and won, in a ways. He's one of this centuries great theoretical physicists. Just wanted to give my 2 cents.

[TPSHelp]

I love it how he just randomly eats.. such Stanford standards.

[csmcmillion]

"QM is a subtle and difficult subject. Yet, in his QM series, he said "Everything in QM is easy".

[einsteindrieu]

I'd like to talk to Leonard about Time & Gravity/Anti Gravity-, to teach him Time machine and Anti gravity knowledge . It would be interesting to see his knowledge,ideals ,thoughts on my knowledge in this area & my Papers on Einsteins E =MC2,LOT OF PAPERS

[LiamDaLemon]

He pisses me off...

[universalsailor]

I'll tell you what I like about Lenny: he keeps it as simple as it can possibly be kept. For him there's none of that deliberatey jargon-drenching, I'm-smarter-than-you crap that marks out the lesser mind. He loves the subject. He keeps it simple because he has to think about it and, in that, simplicity is always going to be his friend. He really likes to tell people about what he's been thinking about, and he can spot a fool at fifty paces. Great shows, Maestro.

[7itanium452112]

@universalsailor Exactly, I'm not sure where i read this, but the quote goes something like this."If your theory can't explain something in basic words, then it's not much of a theory."

[naruto2710]

so funny. here's a guy who understands particle physics and the profound fundamentals of our universe and yet... he can't use the internet. (something most 13-yr-olds could do)

[Garrincha2014]

@naruto2710 I don't think he can't use it, but he doesn't want to. The internet really wastes a lot of your time, especially for us physicists which must study all the time for their research. It is a good source of information but a good source of misinformation and distraction too. Unfortunattely, I've been caught too. These lectures aren't that bad though, it does resemble the ideas we study.

[mountain1212]

i wasted $25 on an audio book

[flyinghotwing]

stick this lectuer in yoru ass

[Xigbar01]

Free download? OMG!!!! Thank you Stanford!

[abouttobeadad]

why be a dick i watch ur channel to learn i dropped out of high school cause it was all gaings in my neiberhood not every one has a chance to be some fucking big shot so unless u wanna teach me something shut the fuck up

[johnsdevid]

I hate this guy asking questions. He obviously isn't listening and is wasting time.  "Well what is rest energy?" HE FUCKING POINTED IT OUT ALREADY.

[themooddisorders]

at 25:30 he draws Alberta!

[sam9072000]

All you guys are 13 - 20+ years old.....

[PelicanGodOfJupiter]

If that guy at 1:23ish asks one more question I'm going to jump on the next plane and slap him.

[MaieMaie1]

@PelicanGodOfJupiter LOOOL :'D

[teenageguruz]

I feel like I am in Stanford

[deyomash]

@teenageguruz I feel like being Susskind.

[SeTorsken]

So I skipped along to 1:06:00 and there I see him writing meters/second like M/S and calling h-bar for planck's constant. He even wrote kilograms like Kg, with a capital K. Is this some kind so sick joke I'm not getting? :P

I guess you can make up new symbols and stuff, but there are some standards in this world you should follow. Like not calling K for kilo, it should be k! :O

[TheFrancisJames]

i was born at stanford

[APPOCALYYPS3]

Fuck dat...i'm not going to college anymore, just gonna watch videos on youtube edu

[mattias2099]

Love these lectures!

(Speed of light is 299792458 m/s not 299762458 m/s.)

[Nabo00o]

@mattias2099

And the meter is the distance traveled by light per 1/299,792,458 second.

I find it funny that no one else finds this funny.

[fqforever]

Lol stop hating on abouttobeadad. I see the point he is making, even if its not put very well :p

[numberJ5]

I wish people would shut up and go to his office hours for explanation instead of ruining the lecture for everyone.

[tr14lz]

@numberJ5

Well, that wouldn't be a very conducive learning atmosphere, would it?

[checklic]

shmere...I like this guy

[TirianB]

Lol. What is the point of writing 2.99762458x10^8 instead of just 299762458?

[TheCrocoduck]

@TirianB scientific notation; n00b try writing 1.05x10^-34 in long form :) also so we know how many significant digits we're working with; it saves us the hassle of counting the digits :D

[TirianB]

@TheCrocoduck There is a difference between 1.05 and a number with 34 digits, but when you already write all significant digits down to the very last one, then what is the point of using sientific notation? About being able to ealisy count the number of digits, why do you think there are such thing as thousands separators? Write 299,762,458 and no one will have any trouble with it at all.

[Jessewb]

@TirianB I lolled when I read this XD

[yp06407012]

@TirianB writing 2.99762458x10^8 instead of just 299762458 will help us know that the number has 9 digits all together. Othewise with just 299762458 one has to count the digits to understand its magnitude.

[hafrox]

That's amazing - free for download, over an hour and a half high quality lectures from a professor in a renowned university. Thank you Stanford University and YouTube!

[Ubernoob85]

Another thanks to Stanford University for the great (and free!) lectures. I had an interest in this subject but never dreamed I could get a lecture (from Stanford, none-the-less) for free.

[valzer84]

"Don't try to picture it, it's impossible to picture" --Haha thanks. I've been trying to picture it all along...

[112233jjooee]

yeah, when ge wrote g he referred To it as newtons constant

[abouttobeadad]

lol i see but it was what i figured if i was wrong than i was wrong

[pete789123]

I thought that G=9.82ms/sq not 6.7????? where did he get that from????

[kaminariuchi]

@pete789123 Yes it is true that in dealing with earth-based problems a lowercase "g" is often used to represent acceleration due to gravity. However, Susskind was referring to the gravitational constant set forth in the expression F=G(m1)(m2)/(r^2). This "G", unlike acceleration due to gravity, is constant no matter where you go in the universe. It is the coefficient of gravitational attraction between any two objects.

[pete789123]

@kaminariuchi

Hey thanks. Now i understand- well sort of. i'll google it for better understanding.

[mindtrix00]

I am practically new to physics, especially particle physics and this video has been extremely helpful. I'm more into social science but I have found interest in physics (astro physics and particle physics) lately and this is extremely helpful :)

[bhigr]

The motivation for Planck was thermodynamics, the motivation for Einstein was the photoelectric effect.. But süsskind's experiment does demonstrate the wave and particle nature of light

[imthetopstoner]

I have a question about energy and heat. Why does the heat of the sun decrease as you get further away from it in space? What law of physics forces the sun to be hotter 100miles away than 1000miles away what in empty space slows or transforms the energy heat ? -and if energy cant be destroyed or created where does this energy go? is the first law of thermodynacics wrong?

[orsozapata]

@imthetopstoner simply, the flux of energy from the sun is distributed on concentric spheres of larger and larger radius, so the energy per unit surface is smaller and smaller. :)

[MultiMikey321]

energy takes on many forms. Heat is a form of energy known as thermal energy. heat and energy are not two separate entities.

Convection occurs when rapidly moving particles collide with other molecules in the surrounding air and propagate outward. In a vacuum like space it is photons streaming out of the sun as thermal radiation. Thermal radiation does not need a medium it is an electromagnetic wave. it can transfer heat energy in a perfect vacuum. RESEARCH THERMAL RADIATION.

[Kostly]

Susskind is phenomonal...

[artofnick]

is he eating stallone cuts?

[coldironhands1]

thanks for putting these lectures up!!!! This is great.

[abouttobeadad]

look im a highscoole drop out but ur looking at e=mc2 wrong instead of an object look at it as time if u spend 30 being board it seems like 2 hours but 30 minuts haveing a blast seems tofly by faster it is ilrelative

[coldironhands1]

@abouttobeadad

>highschoole

wat?

[Heyga4Huk]

@abouttobeadad it makes sense that you are a high school dropout!

[richhagenchicago]

I would like to add my thanks to Stanford for posting these lectures. I am in Chicago, and although we have colleges and universities here, it would have been very difficult for me to fit refresher physics courses into my schedule. Thank you for delivering physics to the masses. Thanks Professor Susskind.

[Blindastronomer]

Who the hell needs expensive books and bus fare when you have Leonard Susskind. :D

[CursedToExist]

A heartfelt Thank You.

[yasushime]

An interesting introduction to the particles physics,i really appreciate Susskind's method! thank you standford university!

[Zantorc]

I think he confused yards and metres. The yard is related to King Henry I's arm, whereas the metre was originally defined as a ten millionth of the distance between the pole and equator (on a particular line of constant longitude).

[jessrlee88]

I cannot begin to say how thankful I am to Leonard Susskind and Stanford University. I had to leave school at 16 and never got a chance to further my education but this subject has always fascinated me. Now I have a chance to understand it, the only problem is I have so many questions. :D He is a brilliant teacher though.

[mjjuna]

if anyone is interested in the discrete vs continuous debate, check out ZENO, some greek dude who predates pythagoras (or the one who didn't eat beans).

[ben3580]

i hate this kind of lecturing style - meandering around the topic as thoughts come into his head

[laboye]

@ben3580 From what I understand so far (I'm just a quarter into this video), his lecturing style is meant to start in a wide scope, and increase the resolution of detail as he exposes the finer understandings of the subject, but not necessarily in the order they were discovered. It lets the common day understanding of previous knowledge come out. Like a tree view of the subject--not just random thoughts that come up. Great for note taking, imho.

[ben3580]

@laboye

Each to their own, personally I get little from it.

[BarriosGroupie]

Such an effortlessly gifted teacher, yet a pioneer - such a rare combination

[mjjuna]

mole, barn, pile, spin. a bit of humorous jargon.

[zingaya]

Wavelenght smavelength...

In order to see a hair on your head we first have to travel back in time.

:)

kidding of cource:)

Thanks for making this lectures available to everyone..

[Chronosaur]

Didn't realise there were 100 different Adams either... :)

[mehrtann]

Middle school program in Ukraine.

Elementary things

[Pentazoid111]

Is this the type of particle physics course that graduate students take.

[docjodoc3]

No. None of these Susskind lectures are the type of courses taken by physics. or even undergraduates. It is real physics, but course work covers topics in more depth and mathematical detail. If you watch these lectures, you will learn a great deal of real physics on which all current physical knowledge depends, but you will not know how to "do" physics, even theoretical, and certainly not experimental physics. But it's the real thing, and he's a terrific and interesting teacher.

[ATiredDogsMouth]

Yeah great man.

[TristanTheSaint]

I could not agree more with you, these are the best lectures I have ever attended... and some of my teachers were very good ones (Balian, Basdevant, Cohen-Tanoudji etc...etc...)

I only began to understand gravitation after watching Susskind's course. If I were to seek a comparison I would say that as a teacher, he is better then Feynman: and Feynman's book are great :)

[JESSFALLINGDOWN]

Thank you Dr. Susskind for sharing part of your life with us

[KingArcturus]

matter at rest? The Planet is always moving around the sun, the sun is always moving through the galaxy and the galaxy moves through the universe.

All of these equations have been measured on a gravitational center. the relation of the center of the forces that interact on the atomic scale. Study of the current motion may be accurate. There should always be a change in the mass of things as we accelerate and decelerate through the universe/galaxy, Even light.

[KingArcturus]

forms of light, solids, liquids, gases, plasmas, variations in gravity, motion, energy and time all fall into this category.

When it is said that the speed of light has limits, what type of light is referred to? If nothing can move faster then the speed of light.

Sorry if this seems arbitrary. I am not a physics expect just a theorizer. Please feel free to enlighten me.

I suppose you could try an experiment on mars simultaneously as on earth to prove the correct speed of light.

[jankokomuszek]

By light physicists mean any form of electromagnetic radiation (UV, microwave, gamma ray etc) across the electromagnetic spectrum.

[KingArcturus]

Possibly not a gravitational center but i suppose making experiments in separate places of the galaxy at the same time to find out. if that were possible

[KingArcturus]

I do understand that this is about physics and not astrophysics, but to truly know the nature of the center of the galaxy, ie the "black hole" in the center and its relation to our solar system, also the relation of this galaxy to others, then the true nature of matter/mass etc will be discovered.

[jankokomuszek]

By matter at rest it is understood that the differential of the position vector of the body within the inertial frame of reference if zero. Obviously we set up the frame of reference. Therefore it is purely a matter of choice, wheter or not a body is moving with a constant speed, accelerating, not moving at all etc.Imagine observing an object rolling with a constant speed on a frictionless plane and looking at it with a camera's viewfinder.

[jankokomuszek]

Say an object goes to the right along the x-axis in the two-dimensional cartesian coordinate system.Go at the same speed and the object will appear to be at rest (or rotating if it has distinguishable features).If you outrun it (by acelerating constantly)it will appear to decelerate(go toward left at a varying speed).If you outrun it by instantly increasing your speed to , say, twice the speed of the object - it will appear to move at it's original speed toward left.

[jankokomuszek]

Bottom line - it is all a concept that works for convenience of deriving laws and simplifying problems in physics, mechanics etc.

[KingArcturus]

Thanks for your input it was useful.

I suppose i was leaning on Meta-physics, but your reply explains things on the physical side.

cheers and thanks for the Video Doctor

[ATiredDogsMouth]

I think we can differentiate between an object acceperating and one at rest. This was a key part of the development of our understanding of space time.

[jankokomuszek]

I'm stationary now in respect to the surface of the Earth, but (for example) if we pick a "stationary point" in the universe that is expanding at an increasing rate then I'm accelerating with respect to that point(frame of reference). Think, dammit.

[ATiredDogsMouth]

I did. Spatial expansion is not the same as acceleration. Einstein proved even in an empty universe with no reference points acceleration is distinct from being at rest or moving at constant speed. Acceleration creates a curved path through space time.

[omarzanusso]

@ATiredDogsMouth "Einstein proved even in an empty universe with no reference points acceleration is distinct from being at rest or moving at constant speed" is a totally wrong statement. Indeed he assumed the converse.

[ATiredDogsMouth]

He did? I thought he established that you can determine whether or not you were acclerating in an elevator cars with no windows, ie no opprtunities to take reference from the apparent motion of external objects.

And that an accelerating object with track a curved path in spacetime whether or not the universe even has any other objects in it to take reference from, and would so be distinct from a stationary or nonaccelerating one.

[ATiredDogsMouth]

Incidentally, you are stationary with respect to the earth but you are also accelerating toward it. If you werent you would be floating in free fall.

Also you are confusing spatial expansion with acclerating through space. They are not the same thing.

Think, dammit.

[sidewaysfcs0718]

acceleration and rest are both relative concepts ...

it all depends on whats the object measured relative to ..

all particles (except photons and gluons) can be found at rest if ur at the same speed and direction with them ...

the speed of light however is always "c" relative to any observer at any speed moving in any direction , now THAT is what prooven relativity :) it prooven time ticks at different rates

[IanBillings00]

Dr. Susskind covers this at about 1:27:00.

Energy is always given relative to a certain frame of reference.

[TUBEnAsif]

Thank you soooooomuch

[mrtp]

STANFORD FTW

[flav2009]

Thanks

[karlwashere123]

Yes. Thank you.

[henriksultan]

I don't think this has been said enough, thank you Standford for these free lectures. Thank you!

[vtwin1981]

@henriksultan no offense, but he is talking about things you can retrieve from the library

[henriksultan]

@vtwin1981 Non taken, and I do know this is available at any library around. But I and others prefer the stimuli of listening and seeing then just reading, I have a hard time focusing when reading.. and I am not alone.

[dmtr987]

wonderful :)