Added: 4 months ago
From: sixtysymbols
Views: 34,627
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (264)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I think it's hard to understand ghost particles in this video because as a "non-physicist" I don't understand the deficiency in the particle physics that Feynman or whoever was trying to fix. If the equation or the energies don't balance because of a missing factor "x", then x is the ghost particle and it is "real" in the sense that the experimental data are both consistent AND predictable using x. If you can predict results with x, x is real within the particle physical model. Or not?

  • kinda makes ghost particles sound like imaginary numbers...

  • 4:12 french fries and mustard explosion

  • The not virtual particles is basicly what you could describe as troll physics, were you simply take a number and add it to the equation to make it work like you want too. Like constants in normal equations.

    The virtual ones are particles that do take a part in the experiment, but they dont realy matter in the end. And so to make the math work, you need to count them in.

    So basicly its just a question of making the numbers work out.

    This is how i see it, but its likelly wrong.

  • so if bad ghost particle where to exist they could cancel out all of the kinetic energy of an object and therefor chill it to absolute zero?

  • They dance all around with their explanation.

  • So... the gist I'm getting is that ghost particles are like extraneous solutions.. is this right?

  • What?

  • wikipedia org/wiki/Faddeev–Popov_ghost

  • it was very interesting video Brady and thank you for the upload. Sorry, i'm completely lost. All of those good ghost particles were disappearing before they reach me, lol.

  • don't have any presentation or video for this? I'm not understand

  • Do that ghost particles have negativ mass?? Because antimatter has positiv mass and I thought that those virtual pairs are pairs of particle and antiparticle..I am confused about that.

  • im tinking of become a physist so I can tag along the gongshow which looks like a hell of a lot of fun and good times, and I can BS with the best of em put me on camera, just give me a few moments to make some shit up, and discuss with my colleagues so were all on the same page, wink;)

  • you guys dont worry if you cant understand, this is complete BS theese guys get paid to pull shit out their ass, sure some of it has been observed and exists but when they cant figure shit out, instead of having their funding cut they fabricate these crazy theories to validate their right to continue the research, which I might add a lot of which is screwing around in the lab and drinking off campus, how much actual work gets done?

  • @ricktbdgc You are mistaken.

  • WTF

    That is all

  • if you were able to essentially fire "a stream of ghost particles" at a substance and the ghost particles are constantly taking energy from that substance, would you be able to get it eventually down to 0 K since it would eventually take away all energy from the molecules?

  • this ghost particles arent similar to antimatters? they are both "opposite" and sometimes are created from nothing.

    Thinking about every particle as wave, it can have negative energy (Schrödinger equation allows it, but we ignored that because nobody ever see it). only question last why we dont see free "negative" particles? maybe this is again similar to problem like with antimatters. we live in "positive" world and because of that every ghost particles that get here, dies then hit some thing.

  • These people are the true heroes :D

  • If you could fire a beam of high-speed negative-kinetic-energy particles at something, does that mean that they would transfer negative momentum, thus creating a reaction that pulled the object towards you? If so... yay! Star Trek tractor beam :)

  • haha iam greek and when i saw the logo of this channel i spelled it :sixtps sgmblfs

  • how can negative kinetic energy exist? it's like negative distance or time, please, can some1 pm me any page, book, vid explaining this

  • I remember this video from 2 weeks ago ...only a few comments ...at that time I sooo failed at understanding ...now that I've just read all of the 231 comments I'm feeling oddly reassured again inthat I'm in plenty of company

    thanks for sharing ...cute editing guys

  • Outstanding work, Brady. I loved the ghostly fade-in and fade-out effect with our two profs. Very nice touch. So quick question: with bonfire night coming up fairly quickly, are our friends over at PToV going to do something fireworks-like? Like describing how they work, and just how badly you'll be injured if you monkey about with them? Just a suggestion. Love your stuff, Brady. Keep up the wonderful work.

  • because the infinite is equal to nothing, every force has an equal and opposite force, you just havent reached the neutron string level, what you describe is like the wake off a boat and trying to determine the path of the boat by creating a relation between the surface resistance distortion, divided by the waters current direction and then a few times by chance getting a match to prove your theory when boat is traveling with the current :D but dont listen to me im a fool..

  • ouch! - my brain has turned to Jelly and it is dribbling out my ear's

  • @tartandaddy bwah hahahaI ....sooooo resemble this remark ...I thinking what?!?!?!?

  • I didn't really understand this :(

  • @Chirigami same here

  • very transparent

  • Interesting (in a bad way)... I read a very enlightening paper not too long ago on Dirac's FULL equation and his theory of a sea of negative energy, which made a lot more sense than this explanation that sounds more like a cop-out on not being able without doing Heisenberg's 'math trick'. Could you please give us your opinion on Dirac's theory and his complete equation, which seemed to work out perfectly without all the magic hocus pocus'ghost particles?

  • Wait this is a BS theory to explain a problem with your theory.

  • First time ever i can't understand ANYTHING they explained.

  • @xeel224109 He's talking about an invented type of particle that doesn't actually exist, but in mathematical terms it does. The trick is that you place this "ghost particle" as a factor in a open part of an ecuation making it a valid or invalid depending on where you need to go. As they said, there isn't only one path to getting a result there are numerous ways of getting the same result, what the ghost particles do is they clear the other ways and so you get the real, physical way of doing it.

  • Damn. I love science and Scientists.

  • if he had used grapefruit i would understood all this perfectleee

  • Quantum physics as a whole seems kind of spooky.

  • i felt like i almost got this.... and then he lost me at apples and ghosts :/

  • I feel the explanation of the ghost particle was weak in that I don't know if it is an actual particle or a math construct. Fibonacci's Series is a beautiful concept that explains nature very well; but, at no point, would I ever say that nature itself is based off Fibonacci or that they are directly correlated. Something truly real might be Helium which is a definition of a particle that we know exists in Nature. We can call Helium real, but not Fibonacci's Series. Is the ghost particle real?

  • @kmica2008 Calm down.

  • WTF

  • I'm learning so much its spooooooooky.

  • nicely explained... and I still don't understand...

    but I don't understand a little bit more than before :))

  • Love it Brady that you plays devil's advocate and ask questions, that as a viewer, I had watching the video. Continue the wonderful work.

  • Another question: Would it be possible to produce a ton of particles with both positive and negative energy from nowhere, then get rid of the particles with negative energy by, lets say sending them to space, and then be left with particles with normal energy? You take nothing, zero, and make a plus one and a minus one from it, but you only salvage the plus one. Could something like that be used as a source of "free energy"?

  • @AudioJustG You will have to spend a lot of energy on producing these particles. And then you will spend energy on separating those particles, since they will be attracted to each other. Beside, a load of charged particles isn't really that useful.

  • @AudioJustG No.

  • Particles with negative energy, huh? I remember in the sixtysymbols video on wormholes, prof. Copeland explained that to have a stable wormhole, you'd need particles with negative energy, so could the "bad ghosts" be the possible solution to this? Or am I completely missing something?

  • Great job, Brady! You all are a fine group of people.

  • @itsMinuteMaid unless your measuring it as a Vector

  • So these ghost particles, are like imaginary numbers in Maths, they exist as, for example the square root of negative one so you can't give them a solid value, but you can still use them to get to your final conclusion.

  • Negative kinetic energy is not possible. That's like saying something is traveling at "negative 1 MPH". Kinetic energy is motion (movement). Potential energy is no motion. Negative kinetic energy would be less than zero movement. That's just not possible. Well... Unless that's a 4th dimensional "movement".

  • I'm more confused than ever.

  • Ghost Particles burn cold, sink up, float down, explode slowly and exist in non-reality

  • Comment removed

  • halloween, really?

  • I love the editing, great job :)

  • Wait. I'm having a problem understanding how a theory only holds up with actual "not real" particles required. I don't have the physics background, but I do have math and chemistry, and I just don't get how to make something that you say doesn't actually exist.

  • @hevyAccel In a very simplified way, something like this is a way of saying "we know something is happening, we know its effects, we know what properties it displays and we know how it would have to happen in order to get the observable results we get, but we can't actually see this process occurring". This is actually somewhat common in physics.

  • @hevyAccel Think of it like imaginary numbers. It may not represent an actual physical thing, but it can be used to get the right answer. (And imaginary number do have uses in describing physical phenomena, such as circuits)

  • @cyphern I can square "-i" and try to rationalize "d(x, y) = |x − y|" but I still don't "get" the existence of the ghost particle. Using something that is defined as not existing SHOULD NOT BE NEEDED! Fake mumbers make sense for a defined reason - things that don't actually exist don't have a reason. I can't wrap my head around intentionally invented things.

  • Weird, with this particular vid I don't get sound :s

  • I am absolutely certain I don't understand this. I will make it my mission to at least be able to pretend I do. :P

    Any good sources for this sort of stuff, anyone?

  • i love the symbol for this sixty symbols video XD

  • And obviously they dont cancel out because they exert a force.

  • My point is, if they cancel out why do you need to calculate them? Is there any proof? Because how can something transmit negative kinetic energy like in magnet's photons?

  • awkward moment when a scalar value is negative

  • 304 views but 567 likes n 4 dislikes ,so 267 are GHOST viewers !!!

    Sixty Symbols Plz make vdo abt ghost viewers

  • @aki20947 thumbs up fail

  • Once again my brain hurts so good.

  • @zebruh That was an awesome comment

  • The apple and inflatable ghost were essential. :-)

  • So there's a theory with a mathematical model that fits reality really well, but to do so you have to pretend that some extra particles are interacting (that do not exist at the start or finish)? Conversely, sometimes you find a *real* particle that gets in the way in the theory and screws up the model, which is bad?

  • Is it me, or is Ed looking a little see thru? :p

  • So are ghost particles same as dark matter in some sense?

  • aaaw.. my head :D

  • naa naa professor you're lying.... jk jk :P

  • well over 200 "ghost viewers"

  • @mrwill711 well then I guess you have a problem. It's called... wait, you know what... I'm not in the mood for this. You were right all along. Peace my friend :)

  • Brady always asks the perfect questions. I was thinking: If they're not real why use them? Is it not like finding random words just to finish a crossword? Of course, I'm wrong. I really tried to follow this but like so much of particle physics I just have to accept that it is beyond me. Oh boy, but I do love to try!

  • =3= sounds made-up.

  • great job with the editing Brady !

  • and this is my freind i want to become a chemist. i study particals that i can see with the naked eye like raw elements not as complex like a hax Bozon

  • Much appreciated.

  • Ow my brain...

  • I ain't afraid of no ghost.

  • So do they actually exist? I listened to it twice but it still makes no sense lol. It it just that they are undetectable but must be there for the maths of what we observe to work?

  • Don't get it...

  • Brady, I have a request.

    A series of videos on the standard model, the different category of particles as well as the particles, how did we detect them, what do they mean for use on day to day life, and so on and so forth.

    What do you say?

  • @lugosky02 great idea; I would enjoy watching a series like that.

  • This whole thing makes no sense to me whatsoever.

  • Since pacman ghosts are shown occasionally, wouldnt cherries have been a more fitting positive particle? :D

  • @passwordresetisbroke Well no, they're stable :D

  • so would the negative energy be based on heisenburgs uncertainty principle? since it is happening in a really small space?

  • 2:19 penis action

  • Is dark matter ghost particles in a sense?

  • When something is this complicated to explain you need some new theories. Sounds like an exercise in mental masturbation to me.

  • please do a bose einstein condensate video :)

  • i think i get it!

    

  • am i the only one who is extremely confused. so ghost particles are both virtual and physical? ok so their used to describe the path intergral model mathmatically but......

  • I like science. But I hate this. I'm more baffled now than before when I knew nothing of ghost particles.

  • This is very hard to understand when your mother's tongue isn't English... ;)

  • @pabloenis Sorry, i never heard that saying. What does it mean? XD

  • @crewealexboy

    Mother tongue refers to the first language that a person learns and the language used in that person's home country. (noun)

    An example of mother tongue is English for someone born in America.

    YourDictionary Definitions. Copyright © 2011 by LoveToKnow Corp.

  • awesome

  • love a good MindBlow in the AM :D

  • Quantum theory is actually scarier than any fiction ever written!

  • @QuantumGh0st In what way is it scary? o_0¿

  • This is the first clip where I don't understand the things being explained.

  • @janeyanna Hawking's The Grand Design explains path integral theory pretty well. It's actually a great book that is easily digestible.

  • @ninjasownpirates Thanks for the tip :)

  • That's the best symbol so far!

  • @mrwill711 Ahaha that's a bit far fetched don't you think?

  • Very cool. But if you can combine the negative kinetic energy of ghost particles with the positive kinetic energy of say protons or electrons, could you in theory create perpetual motion? Or is it just too unstable to form such a system on a large scale?

  • DID HE GET HIS Ph.D???

  • What? If they are not a real thing, how do they cause something real to be altered?

  • Brady, you should have a warning at the beginning of the video for small children and those with delicate sensibilities. The spookiness may be too much for some.

  • Nice video! Spooky stuff.

  • @mrwill711 yes I did. why is that?

  • hahah very awesome video!

  • Brady - really going nuts on the editing tricks on this one. I think you've already got quite the reel, you didn't need this to show off your skills. But this is a nice, condensed orchestra of Brady and his editing. Good on you.

  • I'm reminded of the Look Around You episode about the haunted laboratory.

  • I love theories, in fact i have one now. If I should rub my girlfriends magic button then i theorize i will eventually spurt an ectoplasmic residue which i will then need to wash off in the shower.......That's my theory.........yeah i can feel the energy build up now.

  • failed theory

    ghost particle

    ???

    profit?

  • 322 likes, 3 dislikes but just 304 people selected this video.

    Neutrinos anyone?

  • @Doenerwa Nope, it's called youtube math.

  • @Doenerwa It is a Youtube thing - until someone at YouTube reviews the video the view count stays around 300.

  • @Doenerwa No, YouTube just doesn't update in real time and freezes the view count at ~300 to check for bots/view spam. I realise you were trying to make a joke, but it is annoying that the joke was from being misinformed.

  • @Doenerwa I vote that it was an error with the IPS (Internet positioning system) not taking into account the gravitational field of google warping space-ping-time near and around youtube.

  • "mind-mendind" Brady? Don't you mean "mind-bending"? 

  • @xarepe1 I noticed that too, wondered if it might be some sort of deliberate physics in-joke, but then I remembered "never attribute to malice what can be easily explained by stupidity".

  • this is all so counter-intuitive.... i love it

  • Ghost particle BOO!! haha. Or would that be an anti BOO? Which wouldn't be a BOO! at all :( 

  • Richard Feynmann wrote an excellent book entitled QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter, which explains the ghost particles and path integrals in a very thorough and understandable way.

  • I realize your not trying to teach a math class, however, it could be an opportune time to give people a simple introduction to some of the more complex mathematical ideas used in entry level physics (i.e. Lagrangian in this instance).

  • The fact you guys attempted too explain this subject shows you respect your audience’s intelligence, why then post the comment “Bit of... simpler Halloween video about astronomy soon!”? This is like saying; we can’t explain this in a way you will understand so here are some beautiful pictures of the eagle nebula.

  • I can't help but notice that this sounds exactly like Taoism.

    You have yin and yang (ie good and bad ghost particles), canceling each other out and what's left is the "Tao"; the infinitesimally thin line between those two invisible forces which makes up our physical universe.

  • It was an admirable attempt. It seems to me the whole idea is to sweep the ugly bits under the rug (sacrificing any chance at a physical interpretation for an increase in your ability to make calculations). It may be that I am of a simple mind, but I believe this gives rise to the public perception that most theoretical physicists are just solipsistic scholars propping up (certainly false) abstract concepts with arcane mathematics, an opinion I do not hold.

  • Don't cross the beams of ghost particles or you'll get protonic reversal!

  • I thought virtual photons did exactly what you said the "bad" ghost particles did.

  • this doesnt even sound interesting to me because i know that you cant find these particles even if you try... it realy does sound like you are making up bullshit... just like the "higgs particle" the "god particle" ect ect... FIND ONE! this is rediculouse

  • @666alilthrowedoff666 did you mean that or 'ridiculous'

  • The renormalization of math turned it into the dogma you see here.

  • It still sounds a bit wishy-washy to me... ;)

  • Fun video! :)

  • hey brady would you mind telling me how much you get paid by youtube and does any of the money go to the sciencists you interview?

  • I think this video could have been hours long, and I wish it was! Great video.

  • Yeah, Im confused and cannot grasp negative energy but, thats not the only reason why Im confused.

  • no subtitles (cc) -rage-

  • Things can be.. un... physical... *bangs head*

  • Sixty Symbols im my subscription box!! im happy now!

  • This is rather strange and hard to understand, but great video nonetheless!

  • Haha I really enjoyed this ghost effect, it was rather simple but the subject they were talking about was so complex that the idea in the end closed perfectly.

    Good job Brady

  • DR. COPELAND! YOU DA MAN!

  • I can't help but think of complex numbers and imaginary parts. As if matter is complex, having a real and an imaginary/virtual part.

  • omg, why does writing sometimes appear on the white board when a "ghost" appears in front of it?

    Now THAT is scary.

  • @PBDPBD Ooohh, I know why. The writing is always there, except that in the normal video it is overexposed. By combining the footage of the interview with the background footage, it's like applying a filter that decreases the exposure of the background video, thus letting some of the writing come through.

    Cool example of an interaction effect (and an emergent property).

  • Interesting, but a particle of mathematical convenience. A discussion of how we would quantify and detect actual ghosts would have been great =)

  • My brain is full of ghosts, this is seriously confusing

    Neat editing though!

  • This sounds a lot like virtual particles and particle pair creation.

    I would be interested to know if this phenomena might account for things such as the Casimir effect, and much of the hidden mass of the universe.

    Maybe the mass of Dark Matter is countless pair-created particles?

    Maybe the force behind Dark energy is tied to their interaction with the rest of the universe?

    If so, then 95% of the universe is virtual... *boggle*

  • I give up on this one xD

  • 1=0.9999...

  • Sorry, I've been drinking tonight, if this comment is inappropriate I apologise on behalf of my sober self.

    Lambda=0?

  • Have these so called ghost particles been observed or are they just theoretical waiting to be observed?