Shadowing Practice: Why is there antimatter? - Learn English Speaking with Video
Kies een oefenmodus
Elke modus opent een volledig scherm oefenruimte.
445 zinnen
Als zinnen te kort of te lang zijn, klik op Bewerken om ze aan te passen.
1
In 1928, a young man shuffled onto a stage in Germany to present a lecture on his recent work.
2
He had a slightly unusual presentation style.
3
Physicist Eugene Wigner described the lecture as detached, almost like a recitation of a technical text.
4
He said the man spoke without giving any sign of enjoying his own lecture.
5
But the work this strange, unassuming man presented was about to send some of the most famous quantum physicists of the 20th century spiraling.
6
After the lecture, Werner Heisenberg described the man's theory as the saddest chapter in modern physics.
7
Heisenberg also wrote to Niels Bohr and said, I find the present situation quite absurd, and on that account, almost out of despair,
8
I have taken up another field.
9
Legend has it that Wolfgang Pauli even announced that he was abandoning quantum physics, and then he started writing a utopian novel.
10
What had the young man said to disrupt the world of quantum mechanics so profoundly?
11
Well, he had been working on a problem that physicists are still tackling today.
12
The unification of Einstein's relativity and quantum mechanics.
13
And his work had revealed something troubling.
14
A particle unlike any seen in the world.
15
A particle with negative energy.
16
In 1905, Albert Einstein published his special theory of relativity.
17
It was based on the simple idea that for anyone moving with constant speed, the laws of physics should be the same.
18
And this includes any measurement of the speed of light.
19
So it doesn't matter how you're moving relative to a beam of light, you should measure its speed to be 300 million meters per second.
20
This means that things that we ordinarily think of as fixed,
21
like time and space, have to transform so that the speed of light is always measured to have the same value.
22
In making this discovery, Einstein realized that space
23
and time are not really separate dimensions at all they're linked in a four -dimensional fabric called spacetime
24
when Einstein applied this idea to an object emitting light he found something peculiar
25
when an object loses energy by emitting photons its mass must also decrease
26
and the change in the objects mass is equal to the
27
energy of the photons emitted divided by the speed of light squared in other words he found
28
that energy must be equal to mc squared.
29
E equals mc squared.
30
Mass and energy are for different manifestations of the same thing.
31
So a particle's total energy comes from its momentum and its rest mass, giving a new relationship between energy and momentum.
32
Now if we take the square root of both sides,
33
we get an expression for the energy of a particle in terms of its mass and momentum.
34
And if we plot energy versus momentum in a single dimension, we get this curve, where mc squared, the rest mass energy of the object,
35
is the lowest possible value for energy.
36
But really, when we took the square root, we should have put a plus minus out front, which would give us two curves,
37
one for positive energies and another for negative energies.
38
But we don't observe things that have energy less than zero.
39
I mean, what would that even mean?
40
So in classical physics, the solution is simple.
41
You just ignore the negative energy solutions.
42
They can't physically represent anything, right, Casper?
43
Well, sure, that sounds right.
44
But around the same time that Einstein was coming up with his special theory of relativity,
45
physicists began observing some strange phenomena in atomic physics that were overthrowing all of these classical assumptions.
46
First of all, they noticed that when looking at the energy levels of subatomic particles like electrons, they weren't continuous at all.
47
They were discrete.
48
And they also didn't just behave as particles, but as waves.
49
So if you would take electrons
50
and fire them through two narrow slits
51
then they would create interference patterns just like light does what they were discovering was the new field of quantum mechanics
52
and in 1926 erwin schrodinger formalized this field by coming up with his now famous wave equation
53
which describes how quantum mechanical systems evolve over time this was the most radical new theory of the 20th century,
54
and would remain so.
55
This is not a bit like
56
Newton or a bit like Maxwell.
57
This was radically new.
58
The equation solution, called the wave function, psi, does not describe a particle with a precise position and momentum, as classical laws would.
59
But instead, the modulus squared can give us the probability of finding the particle in a specific location at a specific time.
60
Deriving the Schrodinger equation is actually surprisingly simple.
61
Just start by writing down the total energy, which for a free particle is just its kinetic energy, half mv squared.
62
And we can rewrite it in terms of momentum, mass times velocity.
63
So kinetic energy is just momentum squared divided by 2m.
64
Now we're going to make this quantum.
65
And to do that, we need two things.
66
The first is the wave function, psi, which describes how particles act as waves at quantum scales and the second is something called a quantum operator.
67
This is just a mathematical tool that extracts information from the wave function to reveal a specific property of the particle,
68
like its position, energy, or momentum.
69
The operators for energy and momentum look like this.
70
By inputting these operators, we can make each side of the equation act on the wave function.
71
And that gives us the Schrodinger equation for a free particle.
72
For particles that aren't free, like electrons and atoms, you need to factor in potential energy too, which gives you the full Schrodinger equation.
73
but there are some places where it doesn't produce the right
74
prediction for example take the element gold the schrodinger equation suggests
75
that it should be a silver gray color just like all the other metals
76
but it's not i mean it's gold and for mercury the schrodinger equation predicts
77
that it should be a solid at room temperature
78
but it's a liquid so what is wrong well i'll give you a hint
79
because both gold and mercury are heavy elements they have a high number of protons in their nuclei
80
which attract orbiting electrons more strongly so
81
if you're thinking in a classical sense the electrons would be bound tighter in
82
and they'd be whizzing around at higher speeds than in other elements
83
and for electrons in some orbits those speeds start to get a little too close to the speed of light
84
so let's go back to the schrodinger equation there we had the kinetic energy was p squared over 2m
85
but for particles moving at relativistic speeds close to the speed of light
86
that equation isn't the right one the correct equation is the
87
energy momentum relation from special relativity Schrodinger's equation is not consistent with the theory of relativity
88
so it's technically it's not right
89
so the solution seems simple enough just start with the relativistic energy momentum relation and use
90
that to derive a new wave equation well this is exactly what a physicist named oscar klein did in 1926 he
91
He subbed in the same energy and momentum operators that Schrodinger used and found this equation.
92
Klein's work was pretty well received by a number of his colleagues.
93
In fact, it turned out the two other physicists, Walter Gordon and Vladimir Falk, had independently arrived at the same equation in that same year.
94
It became known as the Klein -Gordon equation, which was a bit of a burn for Falk.
95
But that's often how it goes.
96
You do all the hard work and then no one notices.
97
Things have changed a little since Fox time, but the key to recognition is still visibility.
98
And these days, that means having a website.
99
Simple enough, you just need to write a couple thousand lines of CSS,
100
JavaScript, or HTML, or else pay someone a few thousand dollars to do it for you.
101
Oh, and then there's the hosting costs and the maintenance, or you could check out today's sponsor Hostinger.
102
Not only will they get your website online, their intuitive tools let you build it yourself.
103
There's no need to learn multiple coding languages.
104
The Hostinger Builder can get you most of the way there with just one prompt.
105
You can optimize the website with their built -in tools for SEO rating, logo design, and e -commerce.
106
And once you're happy, you're online immediately on a domain that's included with the plan.
107
That whole process is fast and straightforward, and a subscription is just a few dollars a month.
108
So sign up now to get an 85 % discount in the sale
109
and use the code VERITASIUM for an extra 10 % off.
110
Just scan this QR code or follow the link in the description to get started.
111
I wanna thank Hostinger for sponsoring this part of the video and now back to Klein, Gordon and Falk.
112
The Klein, Gordon, Falk equation even made its way over to one of the fathers of quantum physics,
113
Niels Bohr, who must've been impressed because at the 1927 Solvay Conference, Bohr was chatting to a promising young physicist about what he was working on.
114
The young man said, I'm trying to get a relativistic theory of the electron.
115
Bohr replied, but Klein has already solved this problem.
116
The young man disagreed.
117
So who was this bold 25 -year -old?
118
He was Paul Dirac, a man who Bohr would later give the nickname the strangest man
119
because he was truly one of a kind.
120
The first time I went to Princeton, I met a couple who invited Dirac and his wife, and Dirac for the whole meal,
121
which lasted three hours, didn't say a single word.
122
Not one word.
123
He wasn't sulking.
124
He wasn't angry.
125
He just saw no reason to speak.
126
That's crazy.
127
Dirac was a man of so few words that his colleagues invented a special unit, a dirac, equivalent to speaking one word per hour.
128
Legend also has it that he liked to relax by climbing trees in three -piece suits.
129
And that wasn't his only strange hobby.
130
As a student, Dirac had attended seminars on Einstein's theory of relativity, and he'd kind of fallen in love with it.
131
He was impressed by the elegance and beauty of its mathematics.
132
To Dirac, this got to the core of what a good theory must do.
133
He once said, It is more important to have beauty in one's equations than to have them fit experiment.
134
Do you know why Dirac was so drawn to relativity?
135
Einstein went in there and did it all, not all, but almost all by deductive reasoning.
136
That made a huge impression on Dirac.
137
He realized that it was advanced mathematics was really important to understanding the way that nature works.
138
So Dirac found a new hobby, obsessively updating classical equations with Einstein's theory of relativity,
139
so that they would now work for relativistic scenarios as well that are those approaching the speed of light.
140
He later said this was like a game for him.
141
And so it's maybe not too much of a surprise then
142
that he was one of the people trying to unite quantum physics and relativity.
143
Because a theory that would cover both of these would be truly beautiful in his eyes.
144
Dirac didn't see the beauty in Klein, Gordon, and Fox's relativistic update of the Schrodinger equation.
145
And he wasn't alone.
146
Fellow physicist Wolfgang Pauli, after reading Klein's paper, wrote him a letter wishing his physics a speedy recovery.
147
Pauli was known for being pretty savage, and actually the Klein -Gordon equation is useful in some cases.
148
But he and Dirac were both concerned with one particular feature of the equation.
149
And that's because the Klein -Gordon equation contains this term.
150
That's a second -order time derivative, so the wave function is being differentiated twice with respect to time.
151
Now, remember, the Schrodinger equation also contains a second -order derivative, but that's with space, not with time.
152
Time is just first order.
153
So why is this such a problem?
154
Well, think of a very simple second -order time derivative.
155
Something like d squared y over dt squared is equal to 3.
156
Now, to figure out what y is, the function that satisfies this equation, we just have to integrate it twice.
157
But notice, to find the solution, we now have two integration constants, c and d.
158
And the problem is that we can only find that if we know both y at a given time,
159
and if we know the first derivative of y at a given time.
160
This makes sense physically if you think about, say, throwing a ball in the air.
161
If you want to predict the ball's future motion, well, then you need to know where you threw it from,
162
that's its position, and how hard you threw it, that's its velocity.
163
Or in other words, you need to know both the position and the first derivative of the position.
164
Similarly, to predict a quantum system's future state using the Klein -Gordon equation,
165
you'd need the initial wave function and the initial first derivative of the wave function.
166
Now, the beauty of the Schrodinger equation was that
167
if you knew only the wave function of a system at a given time,
168
you could use it to determine all the future states of that system.
169
But in the Klein -Gordon equation, the wave function no longer told the whole story.
170
And this introduced a further problem.
171
The probability of finding a particle in a given area could
172
no longer be simply described by the modulus of the wave function, as it was for the Schrodinger equation.
173
For the Klein -Gordon equation, a new equation was needed to describe the probability using the wave function, which takes a while to derive,
174
so we won't get into that here, but it looks like this.
175
And the problem with that equation is that, unlike the simple modulus of the wave function, it can have negative solutions, negative probabilities.
176
How can the chance of something happening be less than zero?
177
As Dirac put it, that, of course, is physically nonsense.
178
So Dirac did what Dirac does best, and he set out to find his own solution that contained no second -order time derivatives.
179
First, he rewrote the relativistic energy -momentum relationship like this, which is a linear equation, so no squaring E, that is, no squaring the energy operator,
180
which is what gave rise to that second -order time derivative in the Klein -Gordon equation.
181
Now, he just had to solve this equation and find the coefficients alpha x, alpha y, alpha z, and beta, and he would have a solution.
182
To do this, we can start by squaring both sides of the equation.
183
Next, we can expand the momentum on the left -hand side into its three dimensions,
184
and then expand the right -hand side to end up with this long equation.
185
It might look pretty complicated, but there is a trick we can use.
186
Notice that all these terms on the right -hand side are multiplied by pmc cubed, but on the left -hand side,
187
there are no terms containing pmc cubed.
188
So that tells us that when you multiply these coefficients together, like alpha times beta and beta times alphas, all of that must be zero.
189
And similarly, notice that these terms are multiplied by two different momenta, like px and py times c squared,
190
which also don't have a counterpart on the left -hand side.
191
So these alpha times alpha terms must also be equal to zero.
192
And that just leaves this top row.
193
These terms do match on both sides, which tells us that alpha x squared must be equal to 1, and so must alpha y squared,
194
alpha z squared, and beta squared.
195
So Dirac now had a set of simultaneous equations for alpha x, alpha y, alpha z, and beta that he just needed to solve.
196
That sounds easy, right?
197
But it's not that straightforward.
198
To see why, let's do some examples.
199
So say alpha x is 1 and beta equals minus 1.
200
Well, then we get 1 squared, which is 1, equals minus 1 squared, which is also 1.
201
So that satisfies the top equation.
202
But if we fill it in here, we get 1 times minus 1, which is just minus 1, plus minus 1 times 1,
203
which is again minus 1, for a total of minus 2.
204
So that doesn't work.
205
So let's try another number.
206
Say alpha x is 1, and now it's alpha z that is minus 1.
207
Well, in that case, we get 1 times minus 1, so again we get minus 1, plus minus 1 times 1,
208
again minus 1, so we again get minus 2.
209
And in fact, if you look at this top equation, the only numbers that satisfy this relation is 1 and minus 1.
210
So all these coefficients have to be either 1 or minus 1.
211
But if you fill that in, then the only two possible answers you're going to get in these equations is minus 2 or positive 2.
212
Now, the two equations that are giving problems are these two.
213
And that's because alpha times beta is the same as beta times alpha.
214
So you're always going to get minus 2 or 2.
215
So the only way to get out of this is to somehow make the order of multiplication matter.
216
But where do you find something like that?
217
Let's think about a really simple vector, say 1 in the x -direction and 2 in the y -direction.
218
If I reflect this vector along the line y equals x, and then reflect it about the x -axis, I get this.
219
But if I start again and instead reflect it first about the x -axis, and then along y equals x,
220
I get this, which is totally different.
221
So the order matters.
222
How do we express this mathematically?
223
Mathematically, we need some way to represent transformations like reflections as a single coefficient, which means we need matrices.
224
Matrices are arrays of numbers which encapsulate these transformations, telling us how to reflect, rotate, stretch, or squish across each dimension.
225
Mathematically, the order we multiply them matters, since we multiply the rows of the first matrix by the columns of the second.
226
A matrix that reflects along y equals x looks like this, and a matrix that reflects about the x -axis looks like this.
227
And if I apply them to that original vector one by one, you can see how we end up with different results.
228
And actually, using matrices in quantum mechanics was not completely out there.
229
Dirac had already seen it done by Werner Heisenberg, his new, if unlikely, friend.
230
Dirac and Heisenberg were very different characters.
231
Heisenberg was charming and outgoing.
232
Dirac hated socializing and small talk.
233
Once, the two were on a cruise ship to a conference together, and Heisenberg spent a lot of time dancing with women on board.
234
So Dirac asked him, why do you dance?
235
Heisenberg replied, when there are nice girls, it is a pleasure.
236
Dirac thought about this for a bit before saying, how do you know beforehand that the girls are nice?
237
So they were pretty different guys, but Heisenberg had a profound impact on Dirac.
238
Do you know what drew him to quantum mechanics initially?
239
He always said that Heisenberg gave him his start.
240
He always said that.
241
In later life, he used to begin lectures when he was 70, even 80 years old with the following words.
242
Quantum mechanics was discovered by Heisenberg in 1925.
243
As a PhD student, Dirac had closely followed Heisenberg's work.
244
And a few years earlier, Heisenberg had found that for certain properties, like position and momentum, the order of multiplication matters,
245
so x times p is not the same as p times x.
246
This was actually the beginning of Heisenberg's famous uncertainty principle,
247
which says that there's a limit to how precisely we can know certain pairs of physical properties in quantum systems.
248
It turns out that if the order of multiplication matters for two properties,
249
like position and momentum, then that means there's an inherent uncertainty in their combined measurements.
250
The order we measure them in will change the outcome.
251
Heisenberg's mentor, Max Born, suggested that he could represent this mathematically by using matrices, because there the order of multiplication also matters.
252
This led Heisenberg to a new form of quantum mechanics, which was mathematically equivalent to Schrodinger's equation, but it was based on matrix algebra.
253
Dirac recognized something similar in his coefficients, where the order of multiplication clearly mattered.
254
So he thought matrices might be the solution.
255
For his coefficients, he tried two -by -two matrices, since they're the smallest, simplest matrices that could make the order of multiplication matter.
256
He found that some worked with the equations.
257
In fact, those reflection matrices we tried earlier worked well.
258
But he just couldn't find solutions for all four coefficients that all work together.
259
This is not simple.
260
You're directly one of the smartest people of the 20th century in physics, right?
261
But it was not easy.
262
You don't have just to twiddle with bits of the Schrodinger equation.
263
You have to do something completely radical.
264
His working is in there and you could see him really struggling.
265
Then Dirac had a stroke of genius.
266
He said, I suddenly realized that there was no need to stick to quantities
267
which can be represented by matrices with just two rows and columns.
268
Why not go to four rows and columns?
269
With these four 4x4 matrices, Dirac got these solutions to his simultaneous equations.
270
A matrix with 1s on the diagonal is mathematically equivalent to a 1, and a whole array of 0s is the same thing as 0.
271
So all of the equations were satisfied.
272
Dirac had found coefficients that worked.
273
Now, we can substitute those matrices back into Dirac's linear equation, then rewrite the 3 -momenta and alpha coefficients as vectors,
274
and, just as we did with the Schrodinger and Klein -Gordon equations,
275
we can use the energy and momentum operators to make both sides act on the wave function.
276
If we substitute those operators in, we get Dirac's final equation for the relativistic free electron.
277
The young man who spent his life looking for mathematical beauty had found, perhaps, his most beautiful equation of all.
278
People were expecting the solution to be horrible, and it turned out to be a thing of beauty, right?
279
It was something you look at and you think, that is absolutely amazing.
280
It's a pattern that Dirac had found deep in nature.
281
Nothing like that had been seen in physics at that time.
282
To see some of that beauty, you only have to compare it to the Schrodinger equation, which you can see right here.
283
Now, the two look very similar, but there is a lot hidden in the Dirac equation.
284
First of all, it's relativistic, so it works at really, really high speeds because it uses Einstein's energy -momentum relationship.
285
Unlike the Schrodinger equation, which breaks down there.
286
But what's even more beautiful is that if you look at this, the Ruggs equation isn't just first order in time derivatives,
287
it's also first order in spatial derivatives.
288
Whereas the Schrodinger equation was second order in spatial derivatives.
289
So you might wonder, well, why does that matter?
290
Well, because not only does going first order in all derivatives solve the second order time derivative problem of the Klein -Gordon equation,
291
it now also treats time and space symmetrically.
292
And it becomes really important if you start thinking about relativity, where time and space are not separate dimensions.
293
They're intertwined in a four -dimensional space -time.
294
And while the Schrodinger equation had just a single component wave function, to make the wave function work with these four -by -four matrices,
295
in the Ruck's case, you actually need a wave function that has four components.
296
So it will look something like this.
297
Psi 1, Psi 2, Psi 3, and Psi 4.
298
The four -component wave function means that the Dirac equation describes four possible states for any quantum system,
299
which reveals something Schrodinger's single wave function didn't.
300
An electron at a given energy level actually has two possible states due to different orientations of its intrinsic angular momentum, spin up and spin down.
301
This spin creates a tiny magnetic field, so these two states are like tiny magnets pointing in opposite directions.
302
And that has an interesting implication.
303
Take hydrogen, which has one proton and one electron.
304
Classically, the electron whizzes around the proton.
305
But if you switch to the perspective of the electron, well, now it's the proton that's moving.
306
And since it's positively charged, that moving charge creates a magnetic field in the electron's frame of reference.
307
So now you've got this electron, which has its own mini magnetic field, interacting with a larger magnetic field,
308
and that interaction will be slightly different for a spin -up and a spin -down electron.
309
And as a result, some energy levels of the electron split into two closely -spaced energy levels.
310
And you can actually see this if you zoom into the emission spectrum for a hydrogen atom.
311
Schrodinger's equation didn't predict that splitting, since it just had one solution for each energy level.
312
But with Dirac's four -component solution, the top two wave functions now described two different spin states with two slightly different energies.
313
Dirac admitted himself that he had never set out to capture spin in his equation.
314
I started out this work without any intention at all of bringing in the spin of the electron.
315
But hold on, because if an electron at a given energy level only has two possible spin states,
316
then why do we have a four -component wave function?
317
Why are there four states and not just two?
318
Well, that's what brings us back to that 1928 lecture at the start,
319
the one that seemed to drive even the most well -established quantum physicist mad, because that strange man presenting his work was actually Paul Dirac.
320
Sharing his new equation with the world it was Dirac's beautiful equation that Heisenberg called the saddest chapter in modern physics
321
To understand why all those physicists were losing their minds
322
We only have to look at the simple case when a particle is at rest
323
This term right here describes the momentum
324
So when the particle doesn't move this becomes zero and it drops out which gives us this
325
next we can sub in the energy for this quantum operator to get this
326
so now we know that beta times mc squared must be equal to the particle's energy
327
and if we write out beta
328
and multiplied by mc squared then we find two positive solutions
329
and two negative solutions for the energy
330
so negative energy solutions are baked right into the rock equation this idea
331
that a free electron could have negative energy was impossible for any of these physicists to accept
332
because think about it if electrons can have a negative energy then
333
that means that they could continually radiate positive energy
334
that is emit photons and drop into lower
335
and lower negative energy states there would be no limit to how far
336
they could fall into the negative energy of this it looked like to many very smart people
337
and dirac was smart enough to know they had a point
338
that this equation it got the mass
339
and the magnetic moment of the electron yes
340
but on the other hand it predicts this ridiculous situation where they have negative energy values right that's nonsense
341
so heisenberg said i give up this is just this is just ridiculous
342
so dirac he had in some very clear sense had to
343
rescue his equation dirac spent three years sticking to his guns
344
he tried all sorts of ways to interpret his new equation to explain where the negative energy was coming from.
345
Then, in 1931, he proposed something radical to explain the negative energy solutions.
346
A new kind of particle, unknown to experimental physics, having the same mass and opposite charge to an electron.
347
We may call such a particle an anti -electron.
348
We should not expect to find any of them in nature on account of their rapid rate of recombination with electrons.
349
So Dirac was proposing that those four states described in his four -component wave function are a spin -up electron,
350
a spin -down electron, a spin -up anti -electron, and a spin -down anti -electron.
351
When Dirac said that, people didn't stop running around saying where's this anti -electron, they just ignored it.
352
Cut to the laboratory at Caltech. In 1932,
353
a Caltech postdoc named Carl Anderson was working on a project trying to identify the charge particles produced by cosmic rays.
354
He photographed the tracks these particles left in a cloud chamber containing a uniform magnetic field.
355
Anderson noticed several instances of a similar track.
356
It looked a lot like the tracks he'd seen left by electrons, only it curved in the opposite direction in the magnetic field,
357
kind of like the tracks of positively charged protons.
358
But there was no way it could be a proton based on the length of the track.
359
It had traveled farther in air and therefore it had to be much lighter.
360
It had to be something with around the same mass as an electron, but opposite charge.
361
A positive electron, or as he named it, a positron.
362
He actually also tried to rebrand electrons as negatrons, but that one didn't quite stick.
363
Just one year after Dirac proposed the anti -electron, Carl Anderson found it, entirely by accident.
364
But this alone doesn't get rid of the negative energy problem.
365
Remember what we said earlier, if any particles, like these positrons,
366
can have negative energy, then they could continually radiate energy and drop into lower and lower negative energy states.
367
Fortunately, Dirac proposed a solution to this problem as well, although it was a little crazy.
368
He theorized something called the Dirac Sea, describing a vacuum as an infinite sea of electrons occupying all available negative energy states.
369
And since no two electrons can occupy the same state, this prevents observable positive energy electrons from falling into the negative energy states.
370
A hole or vacancy in this sea then becomes a positron.
371
When an electron and a positron meet and annihilate, well that's just an electron falling back into the sea and filling that hole.
372
The theory is mathematically sound, of course it's Dirac we're talking about, but if you feel like it's hard to come to terms with the idea
373
that we're floating on an infinite sea of electrons, well, you wouldn't be alone.
374
It's not even that crazy if, I don't know, several decades later people find that exact model in a physical system.
375
In condensed matter physics you see an exact analogy of also having electrons in the conduction
376
Band and Save Phelan's Band.
377
Yes, that's true.
378
That's true.
379
But Dirac really was, you know, out there.
380
You see what I mean?
381
Maybe it was people like, you know, really senior people saying, this is nonsense.
382
But it was a way of Dirac's rectilinear thinking, thinking, well, maybe this one.
383
And then it drove him to antimatter.
384
Thankfully, in 1941, a Swiss physicist named Ernst Stuckelberg had a clever idea.
385
The wave function contains a term that looks like this, where energy is multiplied by time.
386
So we can see that if we just change the sign of time when the energy is negative, then we get the same result,
387
because a negative multiplied by a negative gives us a positive.
388
Stuckelberg took this, and he suggested that negative energy electrons traveling backwards in time are mathematically equivalent to positive energy anti -electrons,
389
that is positrons, traveling forwards in time.
390
A few years later, around 1948, Richard Feynman took this idea and used it in one of the most powerful tools in modern physics,
391
the Feynman diagrams.
392
In his sketches of particle interactions, he showed antiparticles traveling the opposite way to particles, backwards in time.
393
It was a brilliant trick.
394
Negative energy solutions no longer had to mean there was negative energy or a Dirac -C.
395
They simply indicated the presence of an antiparticle.
396
We now know that there's a corresponding antiparticle for every subatomic particle, with the same mass but opposite charge.
397
So the proton has the antiproton, the neutrino has the antineutrino, and so on.
398
According to his friend Heisenberg, that was the biggest leap in 20th century physics,
399
to say there's a whole slew of antiparticles corresponding to particles.
400
And Dirac got that through this crazy model.
401
But all is not solved.
402
This new anti -world introduces some big questions about the very nature of our universe.
403
Because particles and their antiparticles are equal and opposite,
404
when they come together, they annihilate and produce two photons with energy equivalent to their mass and kinetic energy.
405
And this process is reversible.
406
Two photons with the right energies can produce a matter and antimatter pair.
407
This is called bright wheeler pair production.
408
During the first moments after the big bang, the universe was hot, dense, and full of these pairs popping into and out of existence.
409
If an equal number of matter and antimatter particles were created, you would expect them to all annihilate each other in this dense environment,
410
leaving behind only energy.
411
But that didn't happen.
412
We ended up with a universe full of matter.
413
If we work backwards from how much matter and antimatter is in the universe today,
414
it's actually estimated that only one particle per billion of matter needed to survive this hot, dense era and not get annihilated.
415
That tiny difference would give us the makeup of our universe today, where matter dominates.
416
so what allowed that one particle per billion to escape annihilation why did matter win out over anti -matter
417
well that's a pretty big question with some not so simple answers
418
so we're doing an entire second video where we have some pretty spectacular stuff happening
419
we're getting into the beast it's absolutely insane i feel like i should not be in here
420
So you're making anti -atoms?
421
Yes.
422
It's so cool.
423
Dirac is probably less well -known than people like Heisenberg or Schrodinger, but his contribution to quantum physics was immense, and he was recognized for it.
424
He shared the 1933
425
Nobel Prize with Schrodinger for the discovery of new productive forms of atomic theory.
426
And perhaps this gave strange, quiet Dirac some newfound confidence, because that physicist in the audience of his 1928 lecture at the start,
427
Eugene Wigner, actually became a reasonable friend of Dirac's and in 1934 introduced Dirac to his sister,
428
Majit Wigner, a woman who would change Dirac's life perhaps more than any equation or Nobel Prize.
429
They were antiparticles, right?
430
They had completely different personalities.
431
He had almost no empathy right
432
and he knew it she had buckets of it he hardly talked
433
she couldn't stop talking you could just go on like they are completely different people
434
but the marriage did work my great friend Lillia Harris Chandra who knew them
435
she came out with a great line great line
436
which is he gave her status she gave him a life
437
so I guess there is one particle antiparticle pair that that never annihilated.
438
and it's the perfect way to challenge your friends.
439
Every time we play it at Veritasium, things get a little bit heated and that is so much fun.
440
If you want to go check it out, then head over to our Kickstarter where you can pre -order your own version.
441
And right now we've enabled global shipping, so no matter where you are in the world, you can get your own version.
442
We're coming close to the final few days of the Kickstarter campaign,
443
so this is your last chance to get your hands on the exclusive launch edition.
444
So if you want to support us, head over to Kickstarter by clicking the link in the description or scanning this QR code.
445
I want to thank you for all your support and most of all, thank you for watching.
App downloaden
Alles wat je nodig hebt om vloeiend te spreken
AI UitspraakScoor elke zin
IPA OefeningBeheers elk geluid
WoordenschatBouw je woordenschat op
WoordenspelLeren terwijl je speelt
Zelfde Kanaal
C11
White holes and wormholes are probably real. Here's why.
Daily ConversationUniversity Students
C11
Something is jamming GPS over Europe. Here's what we found
Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C11
No device could prove Einstein wrong... until now
Daily ConversationUniversity Students
C11
Why It Was Almost Impossible to Make the Blue LED
Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C12
You've (Likely) Been Playing The Game Of Life Wrong
Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
B22
We're trying something new...
Daily ConversationWorking Adults
C120
How does light 'know' the shortest path?
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C13
Why Cold Drinks Were Deadly Before 1914
Business EnglishUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C14
Exposing The Flaw In Our Phone System
Business EnglishUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C12
Our Greatest Delusion
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C13
The Most Controversial Problem in Philosophy
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C13
We've Been Using The Wrong Science In Court For 50 years
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
B24
Explaining Pi With Pizza
University Students
B214
5 Fun Physics Phenomena
Daily ConversationUniversity Students
C12
The Absurd Engineering Behind the Internet
Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C11
The Most Misunderstood Concept in Physics
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
B11
Falling ladders - why does this happen?
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepHigh School Students
C110
How a slinky falls in slow motion #shorts
University StudentsWorking Adults
C13
We're 99.9% sure this pattern is true, but no one can prove it
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
B23
What is the secret of a good life? Lessons from the longest study on happiness
Business EnglishDaily ConversationUniversity Students
FOR YOU
Aanbevolen Video
C11
128 zinnen
The Terrible Paradox of Self-Awareness | Fernando Pessoa
Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C14
39 zinnen
Why Walls STOP Light Waves But Not Radio Waves?
Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C13
279 zinnen
LET THERE BE... Voltage? | Maxwell's Equation #2 Explained for Beginners
Daily ConversationUniversity Students
C1370 zinnen
Are We Living Inside an Alien Control System?
Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C15
147 zinnen
We Traveled Back in Time. Now Physicists Are Angry.
Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C13
62 zinnen
A mind-blowing explanation of symmetry | Frank Wilczek for Big Think
Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C16
32 zinnen
What if quantum physics could eradicate illness? | Jim Al-Khalili for Big Think
Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C13
245 zinnen
Oppenheimer Wrote One Letter About Feynman — It Changed His Life
Daily ConversationUniversity Students
C13
234 zinnen
The Philosophy of Rick Sanchez
Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C17
73 zinnen
Superfluid Dark Matter
Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
Woordenschat en spreektips bij deze les
Deze spreekles is gebaseerd op de video “Why is there antimatter?”. Deze woorden komen het vaakst terug: equation, energy, dirac, electron, particle. Deze video bevat 445 zinnen en 6013 woorden om na te spreken. Het gesproken deel duurt 35:22. De spreker praat in een natuurlijk tempo van ongeveer 170 woorden per minuut, dicht bij een alledaags gesprek. Slechts 77% van de woorden hoort bij de 3.000 meest gebruikte Engelse woorden, dus de woordenschat is pittig.
Belangrijke woorden in deze video
15 woorden uit de video die het leren waard zijn, met uitspraak en betekenis:
| Woord | Uitspraak | Betekenis |
|---|---|---|
| equation zelfstandig naamwoord | /ɪˈkweɪ.ʒən/ | vergelijking |
| particle zelfstandig naamwoord | /ˈpɑɹtək(ə)l/ | deeltje, partikel |
| electron zelfstandig naamwoord | /ɪˈlɛk.tɹɑn/ | elektron |
| momentum zelfstandig naamwoord | /ˌmə(ʊ)ˈmɛntəm/ | impuls |
| quantum zelfstandig naamwoord | /ˈkwɑntəm/ | kwantiteit |
| alpha zelfstandig naamwoord | /ˈæl.fə/ | alfa |
| minus | /ˈmaɪ.nəs/ | min |
| physics zelfstandig naamwoord | /ˈfɪz.ɪks/ | natuurkunde, fysica |
| spin werkwoord | /spɪn/ | draaien |
| derivative zelfstandig naamwoord | /dɪˈɹɪvətɪv/ | afgeleide, derivaat |
| beta zelfstandig naamwoord | /ˈbeɪtə/ | bèta |
| operator zelfstandig naamwoord | /ˈɑpəˌɹeɪtɚ/ | bediener |
| magnetic bijvoeglijk naamwoord | /mæɡˈnɛtɪk/ | magnetisch |
| mechanic zelfstandig naamwoord | /mɪˈkænɪk/ | mecanicien, werktuigkundige |
| reflect werkwoord | /ɹɪˈflɛkt/ | weerkaatsen |
Phrasal verbs die je zult horen
| Woord | Uitspraak | Betekenis |
|---|---|---|
| come up with werkwoord | bedenken, verzinnen | |
| turn out werkwoord | uitvallen, resulteren | |
| break down werkwoord | stukgaan, kapot gaan | |
| check out werkwoord | onderzoeken | |
| come together werkwoord | /ˈkʌm tʊˈɡɛðɚ/ | bijeenkomen, samenkomen |
| figure out werkwoord | uitvogelen, er achter komen | |
| give up werkwoord | zich overgeven | |
| leave behind werkwoord | achterlaten |
Zinnen om te herhalen
Korte, volledige zinnen uit de video die je in alledaagse gesprekken kunt gebruiken:
- I mean, what would that even mean?
- To see why, let's do some examples.
- How do we express this mathematically?
- Do you know what drew him to quantum mechanics initially?
- You see what I mean?
Grammatica in deze video
De structuren die de spreker het meest gebruikt, met de exacte woorden uit de video:
| Structuur | In de video |
|---|---|
| Lijdende vorm be + voltooid deelwoord — het gaat om wat er gebeurt, niet om wie het doet | was based · is always measured · would be bound |
| Betrekkelijke bijzinnen who / which + zin — extra informatie over een persoon of ding | equation, which was · man who Bohr · this, which is |
| Present perfect have/has + voltooid deelwoord — iets uit het verleden dat nu nog telt | have taken · have changed · has already solved |
Uitspraak om op te letten
De spreker gebruikt 57 samentrekkingen en verkorte vormen, zoals didn't, you're, we're. Spreek ze kort uit, zoals je ze hoort.
- De “th”-klanken: mathematics /mæθ(.ə)ˈmæt.ɪks/, mathematical /ˌmæθ(.ə)ˈmæt.ɪ.kəl/
- De klanken “sh” en “zh”: equation /ɪˈkweɪ.ʒən/, dimension /daɪˈmɛn.ʃən/, relation /ɹɪˈleɪʃ(ə)n/, transformation /ˌtɹæns.fɔɹˈmeɪ.ʃən/, dimensional /daɪˈmɛn.ʃə.nəl/
- Lange woorden — let op de klemtoon: momentum /ˌmə(ʊ)ˈmɛntəm/, derivative /dɪˈɹɪvətɪv/, operator /ˈɑpəˌɹeɪtɚ/, probability /ˌpɹɑ.bəˈbɪl.ə.ti/, ridiculous /ɹɪˈdɪk.jə.ləs/
Klanken die Nederlandstaligen lastig vinden:
- Stemhebbende eindmedeklinker — /b/, /d/, /g/, /z/, /v/ niet verscherpen: derivative /dɪˈɹɪvətɪv/, solve /sɒlv/, columns /ˈkɑləmz/, backward /ˈbækwɚd/, legend /ˈlɛd͡ʒ.ənd/
- /æ/ — opener dan de Nederlandse “e”: alpha /ˈæl.fə/, magnetic /mæɡˈnɛtɪk/, mechanic /mɪˈkænɪk/, classical /ˈklæs.ɪ.k(ə)l/, radical /ˈɹædɪkəl/
- /g/ — een harde plofklank, geen Nederlandse “g”: magnetic /mæɡˈnɛtɪk/, ignore /ɪɡˈnɔː/, colleague /ˈkɒliːɡ/, recognition /ˌɹɛkəɡˈnɪʃ(ə)n/, gray /ɡɹeɪ/
Zo oefen je met deze video
- Luister de hele video één keer zonder te spreken en noteer de woorden die je niet kent.
- Begin op 0,75× snelheid, spreek zin voor zin na en ga terug naar normale snelheid zodra het makkelijk gaat.
- Neem jezelf op en vergelijk met het origineel; let daarbij op woorden als equation, particle, electron.
Wat is de Shadowing-techniek?
Shadowing is een wetenschappelijk onderbouwde taalleermethode die oorspronkelijk is ontwikkeld voor professionele tolkentraining en gepopulariseerd door polyglot Dr. Alexander Arguelles. De methode is eenvoudig maar krachtig: je luistert naar native Engelse audio en herhaalt het onmiddellijk hardop — als een schaduw die de spreker volgt met slechts 1–2 seconden vertraging. In tegenstelling tot passief luisteren of grammaticadrills, dwingt shadowing je hersenen en mondspieren om echte spraakpatronen tegelijkertijd te verwerken en te reproduceren. Onderzoek toont aan dat het de uitspraaknauwkeurigheid, intonatie, ritme, verbonden spraak, luisterbegrip en spreekvaardigheid aanzienlijk verbetert — waardoor het een van de meest effectieve methoden is voor IELTS Speaking-voorbereiding en echte Engelse communicatie.