Feynman 'Fun to Imagine' 10: Big numbers and stuff (Part Two of Two)

[BEHHHguesswho]

"nothing is faster than light, and nothing could escape" oh, how he must be turning in his grave.

[OldSkoolHustler]

Ok..now,after listening to this, I feel so small and dumb :D

[speeron]

have people now worked out why pulsars emmit radiation yet? i thought they had?

[RichandAbi]

Richard Feynman is one of the human race's finest treasures

[IloveYOUviruses]

Not newtrons starz, oscillators

Viki: "While bound neutrons in stable nuclei are stable, free neutrons are unstable; they undergo beta decay with a mean lifetime of just under 15 minutes (885.7±0.8 s)"

QSO are not ultrashiny, they are linked to host galaxies and have a non-cosmological redshift

And as Freynman said, if your guess doen't matches the experience, forget it, it's wrong

It is sad how even this genius was decieved by an electric-less cosmology

[sodasodahero]

When I am sad, I watch this guy and remember how great the universe is <3

[AnDiWaffen]

@snackajack117 the stong force is or more exactly the pauli exclusion principle is what keeps it from collapsing even more

[pyrobryan]

This guy is the awesome. Also, press 4 for bup bup bup

[snackajack117]

I thought neutron stars were held together by nuclear force, rather than gravity? His explanation here doesn't make sense to me

[Anthonyk312]

@snackajack117 no, they're held together by gravity, not the strong force.

[Aesthir]

I love the things he leaves as unknowns that I learned in my undergrad quantum physics class. He would no doubt be thrilled.

[Lord123881]

Richard Feynman WAS AMAZING

[harapanong]

When he suddenly exclaimed "BIG NUMBER" at 2:36, I laughed out loud.

- harapan. magic!

[robertwc82]

could gravity reverse entropy?

[mnagmobile1]

This old cook has a lot of balls to sit there on that couch and explain THEORIES like he is some sort of genius...

[thedavejayshow]

@mnagmobile1 I hope your joking .... or your being REALLY stupid

[daguy069]

@mnagmobile1 I think HE just explained and said that there the math has been done at it suggested these things existed. and poof it turns out that they do exist... where is the theory in that? unless u question he math? but the only way the math is questionable is if 2+2 DOES NOT EQUAL 4 in your world!. mnagmobil1, i will not call you stupid. but you do not possess the understanding of an intelligence human being...

[Roxfox]

@mnagmobile1 All you're really saying is that you don't know what "theory" means. A scientific theory is a well-documented explanation as to why things are the way they are. A theory is not a hypothesis. Hypothesis is a fancy word for "more or less educated guess". Nor is it a law. Scientific laws are observations (for instance, that each action has an opposite and equal reaction), not explanations. To get to the why, you have to have a theory; The ultimate goal of scientific research.

[hobbiz]

@mnagmobile1

he IS (well, was) a genius.

Scientific theories is not equal to guessing.

Big bang is a theory... why? Because there is no way of proving or disproving what really happened. But the level of understanding of physics that we have now points to the conclusion that we do really know there was some kind of "big bang", the beginning of our universe.

That "some sort of genius" you are talking about was a member of The Manhattan Project, and you still don't believe he was a genius?

[charrisonUNF]

Hawking proposed Hawking radiation in 1974... This was filmed in 1983... it truly is a shame that 1983 comes before 1974.

[Kitsua]

@charrisonUNF I'm suitably embarrassed about my comment. It was silly. It is to my eternal shame that I join the ranks of idiotic YouTube commenters.

[jimmyti9cer]

after 26 years of being awe inspired by nature 1 of the many things that stil blows my mind is that an object 40km in diameter like a neutron star can spin 1 or 2 or even 30+times a SECOND!!! that is nuts

[aadoza]

@jimmyti9cer It can go a lot faster than 30 times a second... :) I think one of the fastest being around 716 times a second, google millisecond pulsar

[jimmyti9cer]

209 to 0

[5eizur3]

According to wikipedia, Feynman and a few of his friends experimented with LSD, cannabis and hashish in isolation chambers in an attempt to study consciousness. Im very curious as to how much those experiences influenced his studies.

[Midevilshadow]

@5eizur3 @5eizur3 I'm not so sure it very much did. In "Surely You're Joking" he mentions his use of ketamine and pot to enhance the hallucinatory effects of the isolation chambers. He was able to achieve OBE, as well as other spiritual experiences, but in the end he labels them hallucinations rather than realizations of reality. One time in the tank he thought up an "ingenious" theory of how the brain stores memory, but it took 45 minutes out of trip to realize the theory had no substance.

[Midevilshadow]

@5eizur3 As for LSD, he only mentions it once in the book: "You see, I get such fun out of thinking that I don't want to destroy this most pleasant machine that makes life such a big kick. It's the same reason that, later on, I was reluctant to try experiments with LSD in spite of my curiosity about hallucinations." Though it was most likely written before he had such experiences. I haven't yet found a recollection of his LSD use.

[5eizur3]

@Midevilshadow Perhaps Feynman was such a genius that he was able to answer the deepest questions of life without perturbing his own neurochemistry. I wish I could say the same about myself. ;)

[chandruae]

God !! Feynman Rules !!! he was the most original physicist of the 20th century as bethe described him . Wish he was a Contemporary of Hawking

[doap321]

Just had a directed epiphany. This is the first time I get the concept of a black hole. This guy is good

[Kargoneth]

It would burrow to the center of the Earth?! Holy crap!

[hobbiz]

@Kargoneth

remember, the earth is 99,999...++% empty space, as are all materials. the distance between electrons, protons and neutrons in difference to their size could be much like our solar system, where you can't even see all the planets with a human eye. It is the electromagnetic bindings between the atoms that makes molecyles, and thus solid matter.

But who cares? we are all made of stardust anyway :)

[Kargoneth]

@hobbiz

Indeed. It was just mind-boggling to think of something with so much density that solid rock is shoved out of its way (buoyed up) when it moves towards the center of the earth. That's one hell of a drill bit.

[TheSleepaholic]

Well I just listened to this under the premise that quasars and atoms are alike, so that there might be a blackhole inside the atoms and I am astounded of how much sense this seems to make.

[lytrigian]

@TheSleepaholic Except that if that were true then there are certain things we'd expect to see -- but we don't. For instance, there would be noticeable gravitational effects at the subatomic scale. But no one has ever seen that.

Which is to say, there have never been any observations that would lead anyone to form such a theory. In science, you *start* with observation, and then let your imagination work from there, not the other way around (usually).

[TheSleepaholic]

@lytrigian Obviously there are two usual methods. The one is from theory to observation (deduction) and the other is the one you seem refer to (empirically).

Also the subatomic effects that come to my mind are the strong and weak nuclear forces. These could maybe be replaced by gravitation in some form. This at least seems to be a simpler solution. And afaik simple solutions tend to be correct. Also imho the subatomic scale is not very good understood and there is a lot of guessing going on.

[lytrigian]

No, you never go from theory to observation, not in the sense you seem to mean. You can make predictions based on a theory -- but this is used to test the *theory*, not the observations.

And you're simply wrong about the nuclear forces. Those interactions cannot be explained by gravity. To simply wave your arms and say "quantum!" is no help. There's also a lot less guessing (in your examples anyway) than you seem to think.

[TheSleepaholic]

@lytrigian I think you misinterpreted me. What you say in your first paragraph is in fact what I meant. The observations are that there is a great mass in the center and some immensely smaller masses swirling around it, with the whole system releasing energy.

[lytrigian]

The resemblance is *very* superficial, and valid only in the kind of oversimplification commonly foisted on schoolchildren.

[turkeyburgers]

So is the singularity inside a blackhole any way different than the singularity that is described as the big bang? Laws break down, temperature is so high building blocks cannot build?

[ppirilla]

There's a theory out there that every black hole in our universe has caused or will cause a big-bang like event in some alternate dimension

How much truth there is in that theory, however, I leave to you to question.

[turkeyburgers]

@ppirilla

Compared to some of the other theories about the Universe expanding forever, or collapsing I do not think it is any more hard to believe. If the black hole is taking in more matter and energy than it is dishing back out then one would be inclined to say that the matter and energy is going SOMEWHERE! The problem is that the amount of matter and energy in our own Universe is too high for it to have come from a blackhole so that destroys the a "blackhole starts a new universe" theory.

[RealeloH]

surely youre joking is better than a brief history of time.

sorry

[Kitsua]

Man, he would have dug A Brief History of Time. Shame he just missed out on Hawking's discoveries.

[BIZEB]

@Kitsua I'm sure he was up to date with most of a brief history of time. He didn't need to read the finished book to know what had been discovered at the time.

[bicnarok]

@Kitsua now that is made up, but great imagination.

[bicnarok]

just wondering, if the speed of light would is 7 1/2 times arround the earth in 1 second as mentioned in a previous part of this interview, then the outer molecules in the neutron star mentioned here, spinning at 30 x per second and being the size of our sun, would mean they are moving faster than the speed of light or not?

[Another1LikeYou]

@bicnarok

Actually the density of the star would be something like 10^14 higher, and that would result in something smaller than earth. But one interesting thing is that some scientist like João Magueija are fundamenting a theory that shows that the speed of light is not the limit. A strange and more interesting question is that why restrict relativity doesn't apply to light (if it would, its speed would be infinite).

[bicnarok]

@Another1LikeYou On a science question radio show I was listening to, someone asked " if the speed of light cannot be exceeded then why are far away galaxies moving away from each other faster than the speed of light"

The answer was that the speed of light is a "local effect". :) make of that what you will.

[christhatguy22]

@bicnarok I think the idea was that the neutron star was the same MASS as our sun, not the same DIAMETER (it's more dense), so a 1/30th of a second circuit of its radius wouldn't be nearly that fast.

[bicnarok]

@christhatguy22 Even if the neutron star had a diameter similar to the moon, the extremeties would still exceed the speed of light at the rotational speed.

[ActiveStorage]

@Kitsua what hawking's discoveries?

[ActiveStorage]

stars as well as planets and galaxies might be powered from outside. not inside.

and gravity is a by-product of electromagnetic forces outthere

[dredawgz1]

@Kitsua Apart from black holes Stephen hawking has not made a serious contribution to the world of science and certain does not come close to the breadth and depth of the phenomenon that Dr. Feynman discusses in these videos.

[Kitsua]

@dredawgz1 Yeah, I'm actually well aware of that. I think I must have been drunk when I wrote my comment (likely) as for the life of me I don't quite know what I was thinking at the time. It's not very coherent and I wouldn't write it now. Unfortunately, it's probably the most responded-to comment I've made on YouTube! :P

[gorgolyt]

@Kitsua > implying scientists publish new science in, and learn about new science from.... pop science books?

[gorgolyt]

@Kitsua wait what... i just watched more and feynman is talking about black holes, the main thing hawking discovered. do you have any clue?

[Kitsua]

@gorgolyt Please see my responses to other people's reactions to my comment. I was drunk. What I said was stupid. For some reason it's the only comment I've made on YouTube that has garnered views and discussion. Feel like an idiot. The annoying thing is that I usually *do* have a clue. Ah well. :P

[gorgolyt]

@Kitsua lol okay. shame so many people rated your drunkenness so highly.

[Kitsua]

@gorgolyt I know, it's exceedingly embarrassing. The one facepalming comment I make and it's the one everyone sees. And on a Feynman video too of all things! Oy.

[majestic93]

@Kitsua Hawking's what exactly? He didn't miss out on them. He died in '88, ABHOT came out in '88 also. Feynman was well aware of Hawking's scientific accomplishments (although I doubt he cared much as Feynman didn't work with black holes and relativity in the same way as Stephen).

[Kitsua]

@majestic93 Please see my many responses to everyone's justified criticism of my silly comment.

[majestic93]

@Kitsua Oh. I apologize as well for being a dick and pointing it out.

[drewmandan]

@Kitsua The axial jets of black holes have nothing to do with Hawking radiation, just so you know. Even our sun produced jets when it was forming. The jets are caused by the kinetic energy (heat) generated when sufficient matter falls in any gravitational field of sufficient strength.

[dustimus1]

wow.

[saleall]

ya but if nothing can escape, not even light can escape, how did the jet of matter escaped ?????

[adudzik]

The jet of matter escapes from a star that is in the process of falling in.

It's like figuring out that there's a sea monster nearby because you see lots of damaged pieces of ships :)

[mbarkhau]

That's just the point, it doesn't. The jet is in fact from the matter that is still around the black hole and in the process of falling in. As it does that, it reaches high enough speeds, that along the axis of the black hole the matter can in fact escape.

[saleall]

why only at the north and south pole?. actually black holes should appear as the brightest stars in the space because of all that lights that gets trapped around the black hole just before it fall inn. i know there is still a lot cosmologists are not sure about yet, but black holes have a lots of glowing matters around it. so it should be visible.

[cjinaustin]

If the light is trapped then it can't make it to your retina.

[kmichaelaye]

maybe you want to watch the video again.

[RhondaH]

Have you ever poured, say milk into a glass too fast and some of it hits but doesn't stay in the glass but splashes out back at you? Not the best explanation, but something like that.

[SquirrelGott]

That is a damn good question. Always wondered that myself.

[dbgameace]

Imagine a funnel, the amount of matter trying to fit through the hole at one time is limited to a much smaller size that actually goes through the funnel, that's why a funnel fills up faster than it drains. Now imagine a funnel with a hole the size of a pin, and a person trying to fill the funnel with a pressure washer.

[dicker70]

@saleall

Nothing can escape from a blackhole, matter/antimatter is created, literally, at the horizon, that's where the jets of matter come from.

Search for the serie "Physics for Future Presidents", a physics professor at berkeley will explain it to you.

[dicker70]

It's called Hawking radiation, it causes black hole evaporation with time.

[MacHans78]

@dicker70 "matter/antimatter is created, literally, at the horizon, that's where the jets of matter come from."

That is Hawking radiation, and it is not the source of the jets of matter. First of all, Hawking radiation is not very energetic, especially when the black hole is very large. Second, if it was Hawking radiation, the 'jets' would be spherical, in stead of two cones coming from opposite sides of a black hole.

[jimmyti9cer]

@dicker70 there is zero matter and or antimatter created at a BH event-horizon. none whatsoever, nor at any other place in the known cosmos.

[dicker70]

@jimmyti9cer

What about the Virtual Particles and the Hawking radiation then ?

[soccom8341576]

Neutron stars are awesome. I would really want to see what actually happens on these stars, because their density is so enormous and they are so dense.

At 4:25, Feynman looks like he got 3 nostrils. His hair always look good.

[arsenelupin123]

Hello the centrifugal force... 30 times a second, that blows my mind.

[soccom8341576]

yeah. That's true.

The model doesn't go 30 times a second though.

[NoSz4]

The idea is that the "beam: of light hes talking about is electrons passing along the magnetic field of the neutron star. Wich is why we see it as a pulsar we only see the light from the top or bottom where it has escaped the magnetic field.

[mip0larity]

Thanks for this upload Chris, I can't find any torrent for the full series, I'd love more of this. Such an excellent scientific orator. If you've any tips, lemmie know. :)

[JohnBlack345]

@mip0larity Buy it then you fuckwit!

[mip0larity]

@JohnBlack345 You're on youtube too you fuck.

[aadoza]

@mip0larity not sure if it's to your liking. But he did a series of lectures and released a bunch of books on these lectures and even a notebook about the lectures. They contain more information than any of his videos released, well, all the ones I've found anyway... :)

[bjf5027]

@mip0larity Agreed!! Christopher JSykes. I dont know who you are, but you are my new hero