Neutrinos
3:33
Added: 4 years ago
From: sciencemadefun
Views: 170,701
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (266)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • New information shows neutrinos might be faster then the speed of light!

  • earth in your animation is rotating in a wrong direction. Earth rotates towards the East.

  • is it just me, or does the speed of light seem slow...?

  • I suppose I oversimplified a bit by saying quarks seem largely vacuous to neutrinos. Beyond being a matter of neutrino position and size, it also seems it's a matter of finding a set of quarks that are in a proper configuration state for absorbing the neutrino's energy. That's my take on it anyway.

  • Apparently neutrinos have an extremely small cross-section that can be reduced further with increases in energy; they're so small that any nucleus appears vacuous to them, even quarks seem largely vacuous to them.

  • Glowing ball of plasma?

  • huge burning ball of plasma *

  • Yay the philipines

  • is this stuff accurate?

  • 1:17 it's the Philippines!!!

  • Kudos for the oblique wording "very very near the speed of light"

    He was right first time, the neutrinos just beat the speed of light, by a tiny fraction of time.

  • What's interesting about neutrinos is that they can penetrate through 3,500 light years of lead before interacting with an atom(3,500 * 180,000 = 630,000,000 miles.)That's a lot of miles!In other words, they are slow at being absorbed by an atom's nucleus.That's only for the "average" neutrino while other neutrinos can penetrate less than that while others they can penetrate more.It is so rare for any human to be absorbed by a neutrino or a antineutrino in fact it could happen once in a lifetime

  • @ShesGoinBald 3500 light years? No, not that much. There's something like a 50% chance of being absorbed by 1 light year so 3500 would be a sure thing, basically equivalent to flipping a coin with 50% probability heads 3500 times and it NOT being heads every time, or a radioactive atom with a half-life of a year NOT lasting 35 centuries, or me buying a stock and it crashing and losing all my money. All these things are so certain one need not consider the alternative possibilities.

  • So many apparently people think antimatter only exists for charged particles, I've read comments elsewhere saying this many times. I don't know where it comes from. Antineutrinos exist, what's their charge? They're supposed to act like backward neutrinos. I continue to suppose the "charge" is about time behavior, not electrostatic (electric charge) behavior.

  • Learn to breath through your nose plz >.>

  • the electron neutrino is different than the electron that we all know right?

  • I say.......

  • IDK, seems to me neutrinos don't accelerate from zero velocity, they're created as moving particles instead, and their flight paths are basically ballistic.

  • science is fun !!!!!!

    

  • OH... MY.... SCIENCE.

  • can we build a spaceship and make energie with neutrinos?i think neutrinos are the next step in energy use together or in combination with atomic power

  • @exactron -- As I see it, the problem --at least w/ respect to energy mass-momentum conservation re: action/reaction propulsion-- is that neutrinos have such tiny tiny tiny mass values.that there's no practically-conceivable way to posit on what basis they could provide thrust, at least in any way that is comparable with how chemical reaction motors produce thrust. Just because neutrinos are exotic it does not necessarily follow they may provide revolutionary breakthru in space travel tech.

  • i just saw the world change because of you. thank you.

  • "The neutrinos change flavor" So can I have strawberry?

  • XD.....

  • science isnt fun! its fucking scary!

  • Wow.

    Just learnt that if an ordinary atom was the size of the universe, then a neutrino would be the size of a golf ball in comparison.

  • @trancehi Was that on that BBC2 documentary? Amazing stuff.

  • @justatesomepizza

    Yes it was. Once again the BBC has made a top notch documentary. After watching it I have better understanding about this recent theory which is mind boggling.

  • "Hold on here we GOOOO WHOOOAAA!" lol...

  • Neutrinos are faster. It was proven to be about 60 nanoseconds faster.

  • @MantaxxatnaM I heard it was way faster. ._.

  • @Codeafo1 lol, no its not

  • @MantaxxatnaM it hasn't been proven. it's still being tested. they mostly have an error in the system which is why it is faster than light. see, the main problem is that scientists tested the speed of a neutrino from the sun and it travels slower than light from the earth to the sun. however, in CERN they made their own neutrino and it traveled fast, so most likely it is an error.

  • @VanMedia A possible reason for the result from light and nutrinos from the Sun is the gravity effecting the particles, as light is a transverse wave, gravity has either no or little effect on it, where as a nutrino, however small, has matter which is affected; and with the tiny 3/ms gap between nutrinos and light in the project between America and Switzerland, gravity would be the defining factor.

  • Ahh I love science.

  • "neutrinos travel very near to the speed of light" are they faster or slower though? ;)

  • @adsfasdkjfh Well some recent experiment's at CERN has proven that neutrinos can travel slightly faster a light ........ by some 0.0025% faster then light to be precise

  • get a job

  • This video was posted in 2007

  • They found a new discovery that neutrinos are faster than the speed of light and that Einstein's theory of physics is all wrong :0 everything they thought about the universe is wrong

  • queridos não podemos chegar a números conviciosos nem a provas supostas. A teoria é muito complexa qualquer erro seria fatal, isto tem que ser muito debatido, discutido muitas vezes, cientes de que em um simples ensaio pode extinguir a humanidade feito cobaia. Cuidado é pouco ´com átomos não se brinca e não podemos dar uma de DEUS onde pensamos que sabemos tudo e não sabemos nem gatinhar sequer, todos os dias aprendemos algo mas as vezes o que aprendemos nem tudo podemos colocar em pratica .

  • It wouldn't be a complete surprise if neutrino speed oscillates in value (v) at an angular rate (w) over time (t) by a small amount (dv) centered around lightspeed (c), v = c + (dv)(sin(2pi wt)), possibly with an energy-proportional variable rate.

  • neutrnos's faster 60nanosecond than the light .. without electric charge .. maby it's possible to send a signal to past..

  • can neutrinos be produced from the earth itself from the processes going inside the earth !???

  • (faster) than light. Its possible

  • FASTER-THAN-LIGHT DATA WAS SENT TO THE PAST

    Einstein the figurehead. Tesla died on the cross for our sins. Disaster the sacrifice that was let to be... or no more Vegas and Wall Street you see. Revelation I'll write and one day send Faster-Than-Light.

  • Neutrinos versus Luz, Eistein no se equivoco

  • These are just Chuck Norris's boogers; he must have sneezed again. 

  • @JGrayzz I remember when Chuck Norris jokes were funny. About 6 years ago. Social life must be hard for you sometimes isn't it?

  • @AngrySackBoy You must have had a horrible encounter with Mr. Norris himself. Hopefully, your sack may regenerate from the injuries sustained.

  • @AngrySackBoy hahaha coming from a douchebag named "angrysackboy"

  • Have traveled back in time because we found that out yesterday ..lol

  • If thats all you got to tell us you must hab

  • Im typing my message for you to be in 2011 to tell u that we are in 2033 discovered that Neutrinos are faster than the light and we are sending this information back in time to inform you thx :)

  • Ok you just said "neutrinos don't interact" and then you say "neutrinos interact with water" ?! Or is it interacting only when it fits the theory?

  • the pinnacle of speed in the universe may be the speed of neutrinos and light being slightly slower. Dont be surprised when we discover more strange phenoms in nature in the near future. just a thought.

  • fack its faster than light : S

  • But still, they said that it only goes a little bit faster than light, only slightly. Maybe they miscalculated something and it actually doesn't go faster than light. They said they weren't sure if it goes faster than light.

  • So what does this 'faster than light' mean? Can it provide proof for inflation or interaction with exotic quantum fields? I'm no scientist, but i do enjoy a good popular science book and cosmology articles, so I'd like to know.

  • could we ride one of these neutrinos?

  • at 1:00 i thought i saw another planet down there but it was just some junk on my monitor.

  • Speed of light? SPEED OF LIGHT! NEUTRINO DOESN'T GIVE A SHIT!

  • he said "at very very near the speed of light:

    this is where he wronged!

    FASTER THAN THE SPEED OF LIGHT! NEW DISCOVERY :)

  • FASTER THAN THE SPEED OF LIGHT!

  • Neutrinos can travel faster than the speed of light through a vacuum... recently research by scientist have proven the fact

  • @Vi3txDud3 They got ONE reading saying that yes but that doesn't make it true.

  • It is 333 THOUSAND times bigger than the earth...

  • 330? are you nuts :D

    there are fire tornadoes that are the size of earth on the face of the sun... its a LOT more 330

  • science made fun? their voices sound like the most boring teachers. id rather sleep.

  • Astrology.

  • It was so nice of Jude Law to explain that to us!

  • I've been using "reverse" and "invert" interchangeably here. Anyway, the general principle I'm using here is that when a symmetry product is broken, like CP violation, it implies another symmetry factor 'X' needs to be coupled into the product, making it a CPX symmetry that is conserved. The strong force seems to obey CP, but the weak force can violate it. Weak bosons don't typically link quark to quark and they have rest mass, maybe indicating the 'X' factor is G (gravity charge, aka mass).

  • Seems to me CP symmetry violation arises because G (gravitational charge) becomes significant at higher energies, presumably an SR effect. In other words, it seems to me the symmetry becomes a CPG symmetry. Accounting for antimatter's CP (and apparently G) reversal means antimatter particles can be treated as particles moving forward in time with positive energy. The equivalence principle thus apparently wouldn't mean antimatter's seeming positive energy indicates noninverted G (positive mass).

  • Neutrinos and antimatter are a natural mix. Antimatter positrons are supposed to have charge (C) inverted and orientation, i.e. parity (P), inverted, whereby they supposedly can be considered electrons going backward in time, i.e. with their time (T) inverted. I'd also add gravity (G) inversion to the general symmetry relations, I suppose it's the same thing as mass inversion i.e. negative mass. It seems CPG inversion together cover T inversion, consequently also covering negative energy.

  • I referred to neutrinos as anti-neutrinos in the previous reply. Unconventional and wrong, I suppose, but it seems to me lately that solar-type neutrinos could be antimatter, because they can gain energy by flavor state oscillation on the way up to Earth. Probably wrong there too, it seems practically tachyonic. Geo-neutrinos are supposed to be anti-neutrinos, apparently they oscillate faster than solar neutrinos. My WAG is it might be because they are slower, not being accelerated.

  • The sun has been imaged in anti-neutrinos after the particles have passed completely through the planet, this ani-neutrino solar image has a radius that is apparently five times the sun's expected optical radius. Reasonable low-magnitude terrestrial lensing curvature interpetations seem to me to favor viewing gravity (Earth's, in this case, but presumably also gravity in general) as having an antifocusing effect on the imaged anti-neutrinos.

  • Did you just say nucular? I thought only fools like dubya said that...

  • All your knowledge of science and you can't determine that the audio for your video upload completely sucks. Way to go, Einstein.

  • hold on tight! Here wE GOOO!

  • @Daledoo0 Sometimes I an get urge to start a post on something that is mystifying to me, beginning only with half an idea and not really knowing where I will take it, but with the resolve that I will generate something really interesting before I hit the 250 word limit. I'd like my stuff to produce a lot of mind-blown readers, that would make my day. Some things require a lot of misses before there is a connect, and though I can get it wrong, at least I gave it a try. Thanks again for replying.

  • @Daledoo0

    Sorry, I apologize. I think I got a lot of things wrong there, and neutrinos still thoroughly confuse me.

    I'd forgotten which video I'd posted those comments under. Thank you for reminding me where they went.

  • Neutrinos could lose charge by inter-neutrino resonant exchanges in the process of making it out into intergalactic space. Maybe extremely weak neutrinos around galaxies can form a cell-scale-spaced tunneling charge-exchange lattice capable of small quantum incremental parametric downconversions, reradiating microwaves in the process.

  • Maybe neutrinos could be massless bosons in a flat-space sense, supposing they do not necessarily follow curved geodesics but can easily tunnel up to just below the macro scale, they could appear to have more mass where gravity is strongest, and switch from particle to anti-particle depending on whether they're going with the geodesic light-curve or against it. Flavor-changing probably involves tunneled exchanges between neutrinos when the interneutrino spacing is sufficiently small.

  • Funny story about neutrinos. You mentioned that the move at very near the speed of light. It is well known that neutrinos are created in great abundance when supernovas explode, so when SN1987A, 186,000 light years away was sighted, a check of three neutrino traps showed an unprecedented 24 hits within 13 minutes, 3 hours before the light pulse arrived. It known that the light created by the implosion takes a couple of hours to climb through the rest of the star's mass, ...

  • ... from the core, unlike the neutrinos which are free to leave immediately, carrying off a lot of the energy that might have fought the core collapse, and explaining the early arrival. This and other experiments have so far failed to yield a speed for neutrinos less than the speed of light.

  • If it is less, it cannot be more than by more than 1 part in 16.6 trillion, conservatively.

  • no, alpha decay is not due to weak interaction but to alpha particle in a nucleus which is released by tunel effect.

  • does alpha decay release neutrinos?

  • Rotten History: You cannot mention neutrinos without giving massive credit to Ray Davis. He was the one busy extracting 3 atoms of argon a week from a huge tub of chlorine to prove the existence of neutrinos. It was his persistence over 40 years that you should credit.

    And that's ignoring his work with The Kinks!

  • 0:54 was way overdone....

  • nice vid, but better microphone would be great ;)

    and better than "7 with ten zeroes" is to say 700 billions

  • @VortexCZ, 7 followed by ten zeroes is 70 billion, not 700 billion! PWND!

  • anyone else looked at their thumbnail when he said the fact at the end?

  • What is this "wa-ta" you talk about at about 1:38 and a few time more?

    Where do scientists get this "wa-ta" you talk about?

    Is it natural, or do the make it?

  • @bigboy45454545 Hilarious! No, not really, go play with a coloring book.

  • @bigboy45454545 water?

  • ...did they at least try to find neutrinos above ground before this crazy idea?

  • they cant because of cosmic radiation interference. deep underground is the only place they can be observed without interference because neutrinos are the only particles that can penetrate that deep

  • Neutrinos are created when a neutron decays. Neutrino literally means tiny neutron. This is because when a neutron decays, an electron and proton are produced ( which is almost equivalent to the mass of a neutron) along with a neutrino which is the remaining mass left over from the decay of a neutron.

  • neutrino means "little neutral one"

  • back before their existence was prooven directly , they where theorized becayse of that missing energy

    the neutron decays into a proton and electron .. charge is conserved but mass isnt , so they knew a tiny neutral particle had to exist , one that didnt even have color charge , it only had to have weak charge and they called it neutrino

    well....tehnically .....its anti neutrino ...but a neutrino and anti neutrino are identical ...and dont interact with eachother as far as i know ...

  • Wow, what an accent.

  • nice. 5/5

  • quite good

  • frizzzzzal... no, he must have been EDUCATED when he thought of this.... dumb ass.

  • The sun is 333000 times larger than the Earth, not 333.

  • nuker1337. im to lazy to look it up. but he did say massive not volume. i doubt the difference is a perfect division of 1000. so he probably did make a mistake. just pointing that out.

  • Look it up.

    Characteristics of the Sun:

    Volume: 1,300,000 × Earth

    Diameter: 109 × Earth

    Mass: 332,900 × Earth (The literal meaning of 'massive', I am correct in my original comment.)

  • @Nuker1337 i believe you. haha

  • To be fair, he did say the sun was *more* than 330 times more massive than the Earth, which is perfectly true... (^;

  • well ...depends if ur referring to volume , lenght , or surface ...

    i forgot the exact numbers.

  • he said 333 times more massive not larger moron

  • @Daman101ification Well, size depends on mass unless you mean the physical space it occupies. Regardless, the size I was alluding to was obviously in terms of the amount of massive particles it is consisted of.

  • @Nuker1337

    uhm depends ...if u refer to lenght or volume ....

  • @sidewaysfcs0718 Mass.

  • The Sun is 1,287,000 km bigger than the Earth.

    The Suns diameter is 1,392,000 km (865,000 miles)

    The Earths diameter is 12,742 km (7,918 miles)

    You could fit almost 1,000,000 Earths in the Sun

  • @Nuker1337 He didn't say larger, he said more massive, moron.

  • @Nuker1337 and he said more massive, mass does not equal denisty. sun is very dense

  • @Nuker1337 he said massive not larger

  • @Nuker1337 he said MORE than 330 times, so he's still correct ahahha

  • @rugsyofspurs lolol good point haha :p

  • @rugsyofspurs Unfortunately he ALSO said "NUCULAR fusion".

  • @Nuker1337 mass and size arent the same thing though

  • @Nuker1337 333,000 times larger is still larger than 330 times larger, so what he said actually was correct. Nice try, though.

  • @Nebuli2 Just like saying you are more then 10x the size of an electron is technically true. But meaningless to say, because if your going to interupt it that way, means your somewhere between the size of an atom, and the size of the entire known universe.

  • That was fun. (no sarcasm intended)

  • FaceOfGod2. i feel like a real troll now, making a 3rd comment on this video... sorry to come across this way. but did you just stumble upon a video helping to understand HOW the universe works... and tell us to get a life? yet in contrast, your page is devoted to the idea of god? i mastered that idea when i was 7. i got a life and its devoted in part to understanding my world.

  • HERE WE GOOO.....

  • Too damn loud!

  • This would have been so much better if not for that unexpected and artificially enthusiastic "woah!"

  • Sorry, i still am not sure about what a neutrino is. I have gathered that it is a small object that rarley interacts with water. What is this about it changing its state to an electron and a muon or whatever? Is it emmited from the sun? How were they formed and why do they exist? Thanks

  • According to the video--if you were to listen carefully you would have gotten this--(Pretend it's a rap song if that helps) a neutrino is created in the sun as a byproduct from the nuclear fusion where hydrogen is converted to helium.

    As to why they exist? Probably just to piss off Creationists and/or give rap music devotees something to not want to understand.

  • 5/5 awesome!

  • thank you for educating me about neutrinos, that last fact really suprised me

  • Excuse my noob-ility, but, are neutrinos, when interacting with say, chlorine to form argon atoms, converted themselves in the process, or do they carry on through the chlorine atoms? Are they actually "stopped" by matter at all? If so, can matter intervene in any way with them to travel at their speed? Or is that just stupid?

  • they are basically so small they pass right through the atoms, even through the core without being deterred (to my knowledge)

  • Thanks mate.

  • fantastic! :)

    gr8 video thanks alot,

    this is what youtube is really about

  • you can't understand general relativity without understanding tensor mechanics or invariance laws. Nor can you understand quantum field theory without tensor, spinor and vector mechanics and the Feynman rules and his path integrals. most of theoretical physics is just mathematics, visualization is very difficult and although general relativity can be visualised the loops of space-time at the quantum level annot.how many people realise that the universe is made up of loops that form networks?

  • Einstein was an unrepentant plagiarist. Any one who has performed more than a superficial research of him, his peers, and the claims of controversy should be well aware of this. The perception of Einstein held by the masses is the result of media conditioning. Joe six pack would rather be spoon fed than independently learn.

  • Right and we didn't land on the moon and mars isn't really red and every single UFO in the sky is not from earth. Idiot.

  • Ignorance of the Van Allen Belts makes it easy to believe in Moon landings. The rest of your response is more ignorant tripe. Come back when you're ready to address the elements of my argument rather than spouting off random unrelated bullshit.

  • You have no argument, in fact your a hypocrite you plagiarized that from somewhere you heard it from like family guy is very popular for that joke. Just as I thought you actually believe that we didn't land on the moon so I already know just how smart you are because NASA put an end to that argument in 2007 when they gave scientific proof for every thing. Your entire look out on life appears to be constructed of negativity, you didn't even catch my joke and took it as a derogatory comment.

  • I have no clue wtf you're speaking about. Some sentence and grammar corrections might help you to convey your message. Any one who accepts the arguments of "government" institutions which are backed up by propaganda and appeals to authority is a FUCKING moron. So you've clearly demonstrated where you stand in that regard. There is no point in wasting any more of MY time responding to you. Get a fucking grip and go research what Van Allen said about the radiation in the belts himself.

  • People who vote someone down with out supporting their argument only shoot themselves in the foot. You all are too fucking lazy to research the abundant commentary put forth by Einstein's peers regarding his lack of intellectual integrity. Brainwashed dupes.

  • The space shuttle pases through the Van Allen Belts at great speed, so it only takes a little time to get through it. I doesn't see how such small amount of radiation could affect the people and instruments aboard. Human bodies can withstand prolonged periods of times subjected to radiation.

  • 茨城県の加速機で造った人工のニュートリノを飛騨のカミオカンデ­まで飛ばして確認出来れば勿論,世界初の快挙でノーベル賞は間違­いないでしょうね

  • science is fun! :D

  • then if a guy flipped you off from the sun, he really flipped you off about 8 minutes ago.

  • The sun is more than 330 THOUSAND times more massive than the earth.

  • Brilliance is making very complicated things simple and elegant.

    Thank you for your brilliance.

  • "whoa!!!" X-D. awesome man! This actually helped me understand my physics class a little better. Thanks!! :)

  • Because children get Soul's for neutrino's in Sine-aesthesis subconscious memory, especially if they were born naturally - $!

  • Why do they only teach about electrons neutrons and protons in science class.

  • They don't. It's just that you're taught about those first. Why? Because, historically, they were discovered first and, practically, it's easier to talk just those 3 particles without going into extra detail.

  • Because you can't learn everything there is to know about everything all at once. They have to select which details to include in any course to make it reasonable for you to assimilate that amount of information in the given timeframe of your course.

    If you continued to study physics, you would learn about a lot of the other particles discovered. Electrons, neutrons and protons are good enough for the basics.

  • true true. but it's also great to know as much as you can. you know?

  • We really should use the energy from all these neutrinos. This would be an incredible source of continuous energy.

  • Well unfortunately we can't very well do that. Since neutrinos don't react much with most things there isn't much to do with them. I mean, I suppose we could synthesise a material to absorb the radiation and transmit it through a conventional energy form. But honestly, that doesn't seem too practical. Hydrogen is a much greater idea, being the most abundant element in the universe and all.

  • Why don't we use all the energy from all these billions of neutrions per square inch zooning through us at almost the speed of light for energy?

  • @IslandCave that would be incredible but from what I understand we can't because for the most part the neutrinos pass through matter unaffected. The detectors only catch the very tiny percent that happen to strike an atom which then produces a photon. I think we're better of expanded photovoltaic technology. I just watched a video on space based solar that could provide energy almost continuously energy: watch?v=V9YD9-_WTjk According to the presenter it's could be built within a decade.