Latest / Daniel and Kelly’s Extraordinary Universe / Are there particles that don't have anti-particles?

Transcript

Are there particles that don't have anti-particles? · Daniel and Kelly’s Extraordinary Universe

• 0:08
  Speaker 1: Or Hey, I have a cartoon physics question for you.
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: Go for it. I have a PhD in cartoon physics.
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: You know, all right, I'm just glad to hear that
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: there is some physics and cartoons. But my question is,
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: if you were a superhero in a cartoon, who would
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: be your corresponding villain? Like the anti Jorge? You know,
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: working to spoil all my plans exactly? Paint us a
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: picture of who this character would be. There. Probably wouldn't
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: be an anti Jorge, you know, no, why not? Because
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: I think you know, my plans are usually pretty simple,
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: you know, draw cartoons and take naps. Who we want
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: to foil that? I guess maybe the anti Jorge would
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: just want to join you for a nap and a snack.
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: I guess that means you are the anti Jorge. M
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: I am my worst enemy him or handmay cartoonists and
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: the creator of PhD comics. Hi, I'm Daniel. I'm a
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: particle physicist and a professor at you see Irvine, and
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: I can read a comic without criticizing the physics of it.
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: You cannot, or you can't. I can, Yeah, I can
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: totally suspend my physics disbelief when I see the Green
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: Goblin floating above the streets of New York City, What
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: I mean he could be on a drone. Yeah, those
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: now like personal drones. Yeah. I don't see any spinning
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: blades on the Green Goblins platform, though there's some weird
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: anti gravity device. They're green on green, that's why you
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: can't see them. What about Marvel movies? Can you watch
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: those and and suspend your physics disbelief? That's a little harder,
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: especially when the plot revolves explicitly around bending the laws
• 1:52
  Speaker 1: of physics and ways that make no sense, or when
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: they go into the quantum universe. That's alright, it's when
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: they try to time travel and tie their plot into nonsense,
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: sical knots that it drives me bonkers. Makes you want
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: to be a villain in the Marble universe, Well, you know,
• 2:05
  Speaker 1: all the villains in the Marble Universe seem to have
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: a PhD. They do. Hey, and you could be Doctor
• 2:11
  Speaker 1: Stranger maybe. But welcome to our podcast Daniel and Jorge
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: Explain the Universe, a production of Our Heart Radio in
• 2:16
  Speaker 1: which we critique the physics of the real universe. Does
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: everything out there makes sense? Is it possible to take
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: the entire physical universe, with all of its black holes
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: and supernovas and strange bendings and ripples of space, and
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: squeeze it all down into a human brain. Is it
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: possible to build a mental, mathematical model of the universe
• 2:38
  Speaker 1: that actually describes what's going on out there? Can we
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: ever wrap our minds around this crazy, bonkers physical reality.
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: We're not sure, but we can have a lot of
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: fun trying. Yeah, because it is a pretty amazing universe.
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: It's really big and really old, and there's a lot
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: to explore in it, a lot of interesting stories and
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: lots of interesting characters to give us fascinating insight into
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: how everything works. And we exploded so many different levels.
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: We think about the physics of hurricanes, we think about
• 3:06
  Speaker 1: solar systems, we think about galaxies. We also think about
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: tiny little particles. And I am constantly amazed that, frankly,
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: any of this works, since we don't understand the universe
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: at the tiniest level of vibrating strings or little space pixels.
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: It's incredible to me that we can understand the way
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: things emerge, that there's this sort of simplicity that arises.
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: It's not always chaotic and that lets us tell nice
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: little mathematical stories about what's going on around us. Yeah,
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: because that is one of the goals of human existence,
• 3:36
  Speaker 1: I think, is to understand our context and to understand
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: how and why we're here and how we can make
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: it better. Yeah, and to make better and faster iPhones.
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: We need to understand how the world works so that
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: we can bend it to our will. But there's another
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: deeper pleasure there in just knowing and just understanding and
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: just unraveling the mysteries of the universe and having some
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: mastery of it to meet. There's a deep, deep satisfaction
• 4:02
  Speaker 1: in feeling like we have grasped something true about the universe.
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: Then it made it sound like we're here to critique
• 4:08
  Speaker 1: the universe or we physics critics. Is that what this
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: podcast is about? A little bit we are, you know,
• 4:13
  Speaker 1: we are trying to say, hey, this doesn't make any sense.
• 4:15
  Speaker 1: And because it seems like the arc of the scientific
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: universe it bends towards understanding when something doesn't make sense
• 4:22
  Speaker 1: or when something is ugly. That's sort of a clue.
• 4:25
  Speaker 1: It's a clue that says, maybe there's a simpler explanation,
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: maybe there's a beauty here that we haven't yet unwrapped.
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: It's sort of like points us in the right direction,
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: right right, or when they use the same old tired plot,
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: or it is a physical law and so therefore it's
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: not not as novel. Yeah, and sometimes we're here just
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: a critique how phys this name things, right, which isn't
• 4:45
  Speaker 1: exactly a critique of the universe as much as a
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: critique of scientists, right right. Hey, we need some kind
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: of like grading system. You know how some people have
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: the stars, and so some people use thumbs up or
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: thumbs down. Well what you would use bananas exactly? Would
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: but would five bananas be the worst or the best? Like, wow,
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: that's bananas? Is that a positive review or a negative review?
• 5:08
  Speaker 1: I think it's just kind of like a self explanatory
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: you know, like this thing is five bananas, it's one banana.
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: You know, how bonkers is it? That's the rating system? Yeah?
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: I like that, Yes, as representing the bonker's nous of
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: the universe. Well, I'm pro banana in that context. At least,
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: I want the universe to be many bananas, so that
• 5:28
  Speaker 1: when we finally understand the true nature of reality, our
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: little minds are blown well, what's the most bananas you
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: would give something like the theory of the universe. I
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: don't think we should limit ourselves. I think there should
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: be the possibility of infinite bananas. The rating system goes
• 5:45
  Speaker 1: from zero to infinity. Yes, there's always something that's more
• 5:48
  Speaker 1: bananas than anything we've ever seen before. Maybe should be
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: five bananas maximum, but then each banana can have bananas
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: inside of it, or be made up of other bananas.
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: It's a continuous banana spectrum or likes all the way down,
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: but it is. We like to talk about this universe
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: and everything in it, not just kind of the big
• 6:07
  Speaker 1: amazing things like black holes and galaxies and quasars and
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: incredible stars, but also the little tiny particles that make
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: up everything, including you and I, exactly because we have
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: this hunch that one key to understanding the true nature
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: of reality is to pull it apart, used to figure
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: out what the smallest bits are and how they relate
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: to each other. What are the rules that these smallest
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: bits have to follow. Those should be the deepest rules
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: of the universe. And if you could somehow write down
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: the list of the basic elements of the universe and
• 6:39
  Speaker 1: how they interact, you would be looking at like the
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: source code of the universe and you could finally give
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: a definitive answer to how bananas is the universe. Yeah,
• 6:48
  Speaker 1: you'd be like Neo, you know, when he's finally sees
• 6:50
  Speaker 1: the matrix, sees what everything is made out of. Behind
• 6:54
  Speaker 1: the scenes, that's the goal. But we know that we
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: aren't there yet, that the things that we are looking
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: at are now the basic constituents of the universe, because
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: there are things about them that don't make sense yet.
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: That suggests that there must be some deeper layers, some
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: smaller bits that follow even more fundamental rules. When we
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: look at the particles and we have understood there are
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: things about them that sort of jump out at us. Yeah,
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: I mean you'd like to sort of talk about the
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: sort of the story arc of humanity and our understanding
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: of what things are made of, and how it's sort
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: of like each time we get closer and smaller and
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: we sort of get down to the smaller and smaller
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: bits of Lego like you talk about how the universe
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: is sort of put together like a Lego set. Yeah,
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: that's right. It's incredible to me that all of the
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: complexity that we see in the universe. You know, the bananas,
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: the black holes, the boogie boards, all of that stuff.
• 7:43
  Speaker 1: None of that is fundamental to the universe. And the
• 7:45
  Speaker 1: way that that complexity arises is not in like the
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: nature of the boogie board or the banana, but how
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: it's little bits are put together, as you were saying,
• 7:55
  Speaker 1: like lego pieces. You can use the same little bits
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: to make boogie boards or bananas or ban in the bread.
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: It's all made out of the same fundamental ingredients. And
• 8:03
  Speaker 1: so the key is understanding how those things come together.
• 8:06
  Speaker 1: What are the rules that let you arrange things into
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: different configurations? Why are some things allowed and other things
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: not allowed? Those are the deepest rules of the universe,
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: the ones that we want to uncover, right right? And
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: why do they hurt so much when you step on them?
• 8:20
  Speaker 1: It's another big question. I think there's a whole branch
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: of philosophy devoted just to that question, to lego or
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: to letting go, to the existential pain of legos, of
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: having to pick them up all the time? Is there
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: a universe in which legos feel good on your feet? Right?
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: Is there a universe in which they picked themselves up
• 8:39
  Speaker 1: by themselves? That that one I would give more bananas to.
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: Is there a universe in which legos step on us
• 8:44
  Speaker 1: and then the legos scream? Yeah. But we made a
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: lot of progress in the last few thousand years. We know,
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: we went from thinking that the universe was made out
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: of four elements win, fire, air, and another one and
• 8:55
  Speaker 1: uh dad, to like the periodic table of elements, and
• 8:58
  Speaker 1: now to like the fundamental particles. So we're golud and
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: smaller and more precise. I think it's fire, air, water,
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: and bananas. Those are the fundamental elements of the universe. Yes,
• 9:08
  Speaker 1: I agree from my reading of Greek philosophy, forget the
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: standard model. Let's switch to a hore hip banana model exactly.
• 9:17
  Speaker 1: But yeah, we have peeled back lots of layers of reality,
• 9:20
  Speaker 1: and we have a really nice description of how particles interact.
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: But you know, we look at this description and we
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: ask questions about it, questions that just sort of jump
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: out at you when you look at the patterns of
• 9:30
  Speaker 1: the particles. Yeah, and one of those interesting patterns is
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: this idea of antiparticles. It seems that every particle out
• 9:36
  Speaker 1: there that we know about has an antiparticle. Yeah, when
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: you look at a picture of the particles of the
• 9:42
  Speaker 1: standard model. They show you like up corks and down corks,
• 9:46
  Speaker 1: electrons and neutrinos. But what they don't show you is
• 9:49
  Speaker 1: that every particle that's there has a partner particle, and
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: like shadow twin electrons exist, but so do anti electrons.
• 9:58
  Speaker 1: Quarks exist, but so do anti corks. Every single kind
• 10:03
  Speaker 1: of matter particle out there, the things that make up
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: stuff that me and you and all the things in
• 10:08
  Speaker 1: the cosmos, they can exist, but also their antiparticles can exist. Yeah,
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: and these fundamental particles are not the only kind of
• 10:17
  Speaker 1: particles there are in the universe. Physicists have found sort
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: of other kinds of particles that don't necessarily make up
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: matter but kind of exist both mathematically and possibly in
• 10:28
  Speaker 1: the real world exactly. This is one of those kinds
• 10:31
  Speaker 1: of patterns. What we say, it's interesting that all the
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: particles we've seen so far have antiparticles, and it's possible
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: mathematically for there to be particles without antiparticles where they
• 10:43
  Speaker 1: are their own antiparticles. And so because it's possible mathematically,
• 10:48
  Speaker 1: physicist wonder is it real physically? Yeah, These kinds of
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: special particles have a name. They're called my Urana particles
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: named after the physicist tore Magurana, and they'd be important
• 11:01
  Speaker 1: to those to how everything works, including neutrinas and maybe
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: even making quantum computers. That's right. And they might also
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: be clues to a real true crime mystery in physics,
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: which is what happened to a Torre Marana himself. Wait what,
• 11:15
  Speaker 1: there's a murder mystery in this in this podcast too.
• 11:18
  Speaker 1: They just suddenly turned into one of those murder shows.
• 11:21
  Speaker 1: That's right. We are now a true crime podcast for real.
• 11:25
  Speaker 1: Tore My Irana, a genius Italian physicist, came up with
• 11:28
  Speaker 1: this idea for the Marana particle in the thirties, and
• 11:31
  Speaker 1: one year after he came up with this proposal, he
• 11:34
  Speaker 1: mysteriously disappeared. Whoa man, I can't wait for ratings to
• 11:39
  Speaker 1: go up. Now that we're a crime podcast, are we
• 11:42
  Speaker 1: going to interview like everyone he knew and the neighbors
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: and stuff. We're gonna take field trips to Venezuela and
• 11:48
  Speaker 1: Argentina to track down potential sightings and no or not?
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: I mean if we have the budget. Yeah, this is
• 11:57
  Speaker 1: real stuff. He bought a boat ticket from Palermo to
• 12:01
  Speaker 1: Naples and sent a really cryptic telegram and then he
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: was never seen again. But there are pictures of people
• 12:08
  Speaker 1: who look a little bit like him which surfaced later
• 12:11
  Speaker 1: in Venezuela and in Argentina, so that all these theories.
• 12:15
  Speaker 1: Was he killed by a rival physicist, did he actually
• 12:18
  Speaker 1: escape to Venezuela because he knew he was going to
• 12:20
  Speaker 1: be killed, or did he just get on the wrong
• 12:22
  Speaker 1: boat and got confused. Oh man, Daniel, I am totally serious.
• 12:25
  Speaker 1: Let's do a crime Ast episode about this man. It's
• 12:28
  Speaker 1: a crossover podcast. But anyways, this theory is that there
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: are at least things called Mariorana particles, and they're kind
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: of interesting because they're sort of not like real particles maybe,
• 12:39
  Speaker 1: and also they are their own anti particles, or at
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: least they don't have antiparticles exactly. They are fascinating new
• 12:47
  Speaker 1: idea and how the universe can exist, and so maybe
• 12:51
  Speaker 1: part of the future of understanding the nature of the
• 12:53
  Speaker 1: universe and also potentially a path to building more robust
• 12:58
  Speaker 1: quantum computers. So on the podcast, we'll be tackling the
• 13:01
  Speaker 1: question are there particles that don't have antiparticles? I feel
• 13:10
  Speaker 1: like that's a double negative question, Daniel. They don't have
• 13:13
  Speaker 1: anti parts. Does that mean they're pro particles or they're
• 13:16
  Speaker 1: they're anti antiparticles? Aren't they're not antiparticles that don't not
• 13:20
  Speaker 1: have their own antiparticles? No, never say never. No, it's
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: an interesting question, you know, are their matter particles that
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: sort of are their own antiparticles that can like annihilate
• 13:34
  Speaker 1: with themselves. Maybe that's what happened to Tori ma Uranna.
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: He realized he was his own anti ma Uranna and
• 13:42
  Speaker 1: then that the knowledge immediately annihilated him. Wow, you may
• 13:45
  Speaker 1: have just cracked this mystery podcast over. You just spoiled
• 13:50
  Speaker 1: our trip to Venezuela. Man, Now we don't have to go, well,
• 13:55
  Speaker 1: we don't. This won't air for a while, right, we can,
• 13:58
  Speaker 1: all right, But he sort of invented this idea of
• 14:02
  Speaker 1: the Mayorana particles, and it's sort of an interesting concept
• 14:05
  Speaker 1: that maybe a lot of people don't know about. So
• 14:06
  Speaker 1: it's usually we're wondering how many out there had heard
• 14:08
  Speaker 1: of this and what they think it might be. So
• 14:11
  Speaker 1: thank you very much to everybody on the internet who
• 14:13
  Speaker 1: continues to participate and give answers to these random questions.
• 14:17
  Speaker 1: They're very helpful in guiding our podcast. If you like
• 14:20
  Speaker 1: to participate and hear your own voice on the podcast.
• 14:23
  Speaker 1: Please don't be shy. Everybody is welcome just right to
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: questions at Daniel and Jorge dot com. So think about
• 14:29
  Speaker 1: it for a second. What do you think is a
• 14:31
  Speaker 1: Mayorona particle? Here's what people have to say. I've read
• 14:35
  Speaker 1: about them on wikipea, but I think they're a weird
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: combination of quirks. So Magorana particles I think are probably
• 14:44
  Speaker 1: some kind of ultraspin for me, where it's has like
• 14:52
  Speaker 1: three half spin or five half spin, and it's has
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: just a very large excessive charge to it that brings
• 15:00
  Speaker 1: about very specific and unique properties that is kind of
• 15:03
  Speaker 1: only synthetically made and has never been discovered naturally, so
• 15:07
  Speaker 1: disappeared guests. But by the looks of the name, I
• 15:11
  Speaker 1: think it's a collection of particles which are very common
• 15:19
  Speaker 1: or a very larger number around us. Major Anna particles
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: are a big part of history. They're the remnants of
• 15:26
  Speaker 1: the Fall of Berlin, produced in May when Major Anna
• 15:31
  Speaker 1: Nicolina of the Red Army hoisted a Russian flag over
• 15:34
  Speaker 1: the Rice Stagg. The Majorana particles, I have no idea,
• 15:38
  Speaker 1: sounds like something somebody might put in a pipe and
• 15:40
  Speaker 1: smoke or something. I've known no clue, but I'm guessing
• 15:45
  Speaker 1: they're bigger and more major than the minor on a particles.
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: Sorry best guess. Yeah, not a whole lot of people
• 15:54
  Speaker 1: really knew anything about my orana particles. It did feel
• 15:58
  Speaker 1: a little bit technical, and so I thought, well, let's
• 16:00
  Speaker 1: try something new. Instead of asking random people to answer
• 16:04
  Speaker 1: a particle physical question, I thought, how well will a
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: particle physicist answer a question without any preparation? So you
• 16:11
  Speaker 1: asked your post doc who is from Scotland? That's right,
• 16:15
  Speaker 1: So here's Mike, my Scottish post doc, trying to answer
• 16:18
  Speaker 1: this question without any chance to prepare. My name is Mike, I,
• 16:22
  Speaker 1: UM post doc with Daniel at u C. I and
• 16:26
  Speaker 1: I research particle physics and machine learning, aspecifically top quarks
• 16:32
  Speaker 1: my irana particle. So you have different extensions to the
• 16:38
  Speaker 1: standard model can give you different kinds of UM interactions,
• 16:42
  Speaker 1: so you have to RAQ and my irana neutrinos and
• 16:46
  Speaker 1: I forget exactly what one is what, but they obeyed
• 16:50
  Speaker 1: different statistics and I should know which one's which, and
• 16:55
  Speaker 1: I don't. So I hope that makes you feel better,
• 16:58
  Speaker 1: and folks out there who didn't know what MYRNA particle is.
• 17:01
  Speaker 1: Even professional particle physicists people with PhDs don't always have
• 17:05
  Speaker 1: these things at their fingertips. So are you going to
• 17:08
  Speaker 1: fire him then, Daniel? Are we are we announcing that
• 17:11
  Speaker 1: here on the podcast? No, I'm giving him karma points
• 17:14
  Speaker 1: for participating Karma points. Oh, that sounds like you're going
• 17:18
  Speaker 1: to collect later on. I might have to make a
• 17:21
  Speaker 1: withdrawal at some point. You he owes you a favor. Well,
• 17:27
  Speaker 1: good luck to him in the future with that favor.
• 17:31
  Speaker 1: But it is an interesting question, this idea of mayoruna particles, Daniels,
• 17:34
  Speaker 1: So maybe step us through it first. What are they
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: and what do we know about them? So my aerna
• 17:38
  Speaker 1: particles would be like a different kind of matter particle
• 17:42
  Speaker 1: from all the ones that we are familiar with. And
• 17:44
  Speaker 1: to understand where this comes from, you sort of have
• 17:46
  Speaker 1: to go back to the early days of quantum mechanics
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: and understand how our current theory of matter arose and
• 17:54
  Speaker 1: why your anti matter comes from. And he goes back
• 17:56
  Speaker 1: to Paul DrAk He was trying to do something very difficult,
• 17:59
  Speaker 1: which is to bring together the new field of quantum mechanics,
• 18:03
  Speaker 1: which was describing how electrons and photons operated with the
• 18:07
  Speaker 1: new field of special relativity, which was trying to describe
• 18:10
  Speaker 1: how things operated at very very high speeds. Quantum mechanics
• 18:14
  Speaker 1: at that point had only really been able to solve
• 18:16
  Speaker 1: problems of sort of slow moving quantum objects, and Diract
• 18:20
  Speaker 1: was wondering, what happens when things get going really fast?
• 18:24
  Speaker 1: You have electrons at very high speed or photons moving
• 18:27
  Speaker 1: at the speed of light? Can we describe things which
• 18:29
  Speaker 1: are both quantum and relativistic? So you found a bunch
• 18:33
  Speaker 1: of particles that sort of follow this mathematical framework or
• 18:37
  Speaker 1: equations that direct made up, right, Yeah, So Diract made
• 18:40
  Speaker 1: up a mathematical framework. It's called the Dirac equation, and
• 18:43
  Speaker 1: it's basically like the super fast version of the shrouding
• 18:46
  Speaker 1: Er equation. But when he was putting that equation together,
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: he noticed something. He was trying to just describe electrons
• 18:53
  Speaker 1: and matter particles, but what he noticed was that his
• 18:56
  Speaker 1: equation had a symmetry to it that he could also
• 18:58
  Speaker 1: at the same time describe another kind of particle, a
• 19:02
  Speaker 1: particle with like a positive charge. So he called this
• 19:05
  Speaker 1: an antiparticle. He sort of discovered the antiparticle on the page. Right,
• 19:10
  Speaker 1: It's sort of like you invented the multiplying things by
• 19:13
  Speaker 1: itself and you find out that not only does one
• 19:16
  Speaker 1: kinds one equals one, but also like minus one minus
• 19:19
  Speaker 1: one is also equals one exactly. So he found that
• 19:23
  Speaker 1: the math that described the universe and the particles that
• 19:26
  Speaker 1: we saw also describe things that we hadn't yet seen.
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: And then he made this incredible sort of philosophical leap.
• 19:32
  Speaker 1: He was like, well, if the math describes it, it
• 19:35
  Speaker 1: must also be real. So he proposed that these things
• 19:38
  Speaker 1: might be real, that they might actually be out there,
• 19:41
  Speaker 1: and then pretty soon afterwards in experiments people found them.
• 19:45
  Speaker 1: They saw evidence of antiparticles, and you know, I think
• 19:48
  Speaker 1: you can't really overstate the sort of philosophical brevera. They're like,
• 19:52
  Speaker 1: if the math describes it, it is real. Is really
• 19:56
  Speaker 1: a huge step to take. Yeah, Because he was trying
• 19:58
  Speaker 1: to come up with the equations that described something that
• 20:01
  Speaker 1: he had seen, and then he found these questions also
• 20:04
  Speaker 1: worked for like the inverse of the particles, and so
• 20:07
  Speaker 1: he said, hey, maybe those exist too, Maybe those exist too, right,
• 20:11
  Speaker 1: And he was right. This guy direct was sort of
• 20:13
  Speaker 1: famous for not being short on sort of intellectual self confidence.
• 20:18
  Speaker 1: As he was giving his Nobel Prize acceptance speech for
• 20:21
  Speaker 1: basically predicting the existence of the positron the anti electron,
• 20:25
  Speaker 1: he made more predictions for more antiparticles, which were then
• 20:28
  Speaker 1: borne out a few years later. Like what in his
• 20:31
  Speaker 1: in his acceptance speech he embedded some bananas inside the bananas. Yeah,
• 20:37
  Speaker 1: and he was right about all of it. Wow, what
• 20:39
  Speaker 1: do you do? When he accepted the Nobel Prize for
• 20:41
  Speaker 1: those he predicted the anti Nobel Prize, he invented a
• 20:46
  Speaker 1: whole new kind of a prize. But he wasn't the
• 20:49
  Speaker 1: only one out there playing with the mathematics of quantum
• 20:52
  Speaker 1: mechanics and special relativity. And the formulation that he came
• 20:56
  Speaker 1: up with, it does seem like it describes the matter
• 20:58
  Speaker 1: that we see in our universe. But there was another
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: physicist at Torre Marana. He came up with another equation,
• 21:05
  Speaker 1: another equation which also unified quantum mechanics and special relativity.
• 21:10
  Speaker 1: But the symmetry of his equation was different. It didn't
• 21:13
  Speaker 1: require the existence of these anti particles. It didn't have
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: this like other shadows side to the universe that it
• 21:19
  Speaker 1: suggested in my Irana's equation. Every particle sort of was
• 21:23
  Speaker 1: its own antiparticle. Well wait, wait, wait, what do you mean,
• 21:26
  Speaker 1: like he did did he know about diras work or
• 21:29
  Speaker 1: was he working independently? You knew about diracs work, it
• 21:32
  Speaker 1: was famous, but he was just like, well, let's see
• 21:33
  Speaker 1: what else we can do. Also, you know, the communication
• 21:36
  Speaker 1: between folks back then in the thirties wasn't nearly as
• 21:38
  Speaker 1: tight as it is today. People don't just like post
• 21:40
  Speaker 1: their papers on the Internet and the next day you
• 21:42
  Speaker 1: read about it. So I'm sure it's the kind of
• 21:44
  Speaker 1: thing he had been thinking about and playing with for
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: several years, even if he was aware of Dirac's work,
• 21:49
  Speaker 1: and so you can probably treat it as an independent
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: line of study. Though I'm sure he was aware of
• 21:52
  Speaker 1: what Dirac was doing. But he came up with this
• 21:55
  Speaker 1: other equation, and this equation, unlike diracx equation, didn't sort
• 21:59
  Speaker 1: of like look different in the mirror directs equation. If
• 22:02
  Speaker 1: you flip the signs, you get equations to describe a
• 22:04
  Speaker 1: different kind of matter antimatter. My Irona's equation has a
• 22:08
  Speaker 1: symmetry in it so that if you flip the signs,
• 22:10
  Speaker 1: everything just looks the same. But what was he trying
• 22:14
  Speaker 1: to do, I guess is the question was was he
• 22:16
  Speaker 1: trying to describe regular particles like electrons and protons and
• 22:19
  Speaker 1: things like that in quirks or was he just playing
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: around with the equations. That's sort of a good question
• 22:25
  Speaker 1: for all of theoretical physics. What are you guys trying
• 22:28
  Speaker 1: to do? Are you trying to describe the universe? Are
• 22:29
  Speaker 1: you just playing around with the equations? Are you doing
• 22:32
  Speaker 1: cartoon physics or real physics? Sometimes just playing around with
• 22:36
  Speaker 1: the equations is discovering the nature of the universe, right,
• 22:40
  Speaker 1: Like what is possible mathematically might be what is real physically.
• 22:46
  Speaker 1: That's sort of the amazing thing about diracts discovery, right
• 22:49
  Speaker 1: that just because antimatter particles were possible mathematically, he predicted
• 22:53
  Speaker 1: they existed physically. And so my Irono was sort of exploring, like,
• 22:57
  Speaker 1: what other ways can we follow the rule equantum mechanics
• 23:00
  Speaker 1: and follow the rules of special relativity and be mathematically coherent.
• 23:04
  Speaker 1: Maybe that kind of matter also exists out there in
• 23:07
  Speaker 1: the universe. Was he thinking it was a different kind
• 23:11
  Speaker 1: of matter or did he think, like, hey, maybe this
• 23:13
  Speaker 1: will eventually describe the regular matter. His kind of equation
• 23:16
  Speaker 1: can't describe electrons for example, because myrona particles that they
• 23:20
  Speaker 1: exist have to have zero charge so that they are
• 23:23
  Speaker 1: their own antiparticle. That you can't be a plus one
• 23:26
  Speaker 1: charged particle and be a myrona particle because then your
• 23:30
  Speaker 1: antiparticle would be minus wine charge. So his equation can
• 23:33
  Speaker 1: only describe uncharged particles. So that rules out most matter particles, right,
• 23:38
  Speaker 1: because most matter particles have some sort of charge. If
• 23:40
  Speaker 1: it's not electromagnetic, it's you know, the strong force or
• 23:43
  Speaker 1: the weak force. Right, that's right. But there are some
• 23:45
  Speaker 1: particles that don't have electric charge and might be their
• 23:50
  Speaker 1: own antiparticle, and those are neutrinos. Neutrinos are still very mysterious,
• 23:56
  Speaker 1: and we still don't know today if neutrinos are direct
• 24:00
  Speaker 1: particles as described by directs equation or if they are
• 24:04
  Speaker 1: myrona particles as described by myron as equation. M sounds
• 24:08
  Speaker 1: like another mystery podcast. Who killed the neutrino? Why is
• 24:14
  Speaker 1: it so neutral? All right, well, let's get into more
• 24:16
  Speaker 1: about this interesting new kind of particle and what other
• 24:20
  Speaker 1: particles might fit into that category. But first let's take
• 24:23
  Speaker 1: a quick break. All right, we're talking about particles that
• 24:38
  Speaker 1: maybe don't have antiparticles. I guess they're pro particles, Daniel,
• 24:43
  Speaker 1: they're not antiparticles, so they must be pro particle. Yeah.
• 24:46
  Speaker 1: And you know, there are some particles in nature we
• 24:49
  Speaker 1: know of that are their own anti particles. For example,
• 24:53
  Speaker 1: the photon. The photon doesn't have an anti photon to it,
• 24:57
  Speaker 1: and the higgs doesn't have an anti higgs. That doesn't
• 25:01
  Speaker 1: make it a myrona particle because myerna particles describe fermions
• 25:05
  Speaker 1: matter particles like quarks and electrons or maybe neutrinos, whereas
• 25:10
  Speaker 1: photons are bosons. They're a different kind of particle and
• 25:13
  Speaker 1: aren't described by myronics equations. But in that sense, we
• 25:17
  Speaker 1: do have examples of particles that don't have antiparticles. Interesting,
• 25:22
  Speaker 1: I guess what's the difference between fermions and bosons? Like,
• 25:26
  Speaker 1: how do you where do you draw the line? Yeah,
• 25:27
  Speaker 1: well we draw the line in how they spin. Remember
• 25:30
  Speaker 1: we talked about how particles have this weird property called
• 25:32
  Speaker 1: quantum spin, which is sort of related to real spin,
• 25:36
  Speaker 1: but it's not really the same because you can't think
• 25:38
  Speaker 1: of them as like actually spinning. You think of it's
• 25:40
  Speaker 1: sort of like a label that particles have, though it's
• 25:43
  Speaker 1: deeply connected to angular momentum, so it's more than just
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: a label. Anyway, you go check out our whole episode
• 25:48
  Speaker 1: about quantum spin. It's at least one hour of material
• 25:51
  Speaker 1: right there. But fermions have half spin, which means they
• 25:55
  Speaker 1: can be spin up or spin down, and bosons have
• 25:58
  Speaker 1: integer spin. So the eggs boson just doesn't spin at all.
• 26:02
  Speaker 1: It's spin zero. The photon is spin one, which means
• 26:05
  Speaker 1: that it can spin up or can spin down. And
• 26:07
  Speaker 1: you can do another weird thing, have like a circular polarization,
• 26:11
  Speaker 1: and so it just depends on what kind of spin
• 26:14
  Speaker 1: states these particles can have. Bosons are integers and fermons
• 26:18
  Speaker 1: are half integers. Wait are you saying the only difference
• 26:21
  Speaker 1: between being a matter particle and not being matter is
• 26:25
  Speaker 1: the half spin the half spin. I think usually what
• 26:28
  Speaker 1: we call matters like stuff that feels substantial, right, that
• 26:32
  Speaker 1: sort of like makes stuff up in the in the universe.
• 26:34
  Speaker 1: And usually that's the stuff that feels gravity and force, right,
• 26:37
  Speaker 1: like dark matter. We say it's matter because it feels gravity. Yeah,
• 26:40
  Speaker 1: that's true, but remember gravity actually couples to everything with energy,
• 26:45
  Speaker 1: so gravity is influenced by photons and by Higgs bosons.
• 26:49
  Speaker 1: You know, some people think that the Higgs field is
• 26:52
  Speaker 1: the thing that's driving the accelerated expansion of the universe
• 26:55
  Speaker 1: because it's a large potential value. So actually, even though
• 26:59
  Speaker 1: matter is the thing makes up stuff, all the energy
• 27:02
  Speaker 1: inside your body is some of it's contained in bosons,
• 27:05
  Speaker 1: like gluons inside your protons contribute to your mass. So
• 27:09
  Speaker 1: I think the confusion is that we call these things
• 27:12
  Speaker 1: matter particles, but really what you are made out of
• 27:15
  Speaker 1: is both a combination of fermions and bosons, all of
• 27:18
  Speaker 1: which contributes to your gravitational effect on the universe. I
• 27:22
  Speaker 1: see you're saying, we're we're all just energy. At the end,
• 27:24
  Speaker 1: the word matter doesn't really matter. I guess um. It's
• 27:28
  Speaker 1: just really from a physics point of view, the word
• 27:31
  Speaker 1: matter just means that it has a half spin half
• 27:34
  Speaker 1: quantum spin. As usual, we've taken a word that has
• 27:36
  Speaker 1: a common sense meaning and used it in a slightly
• 27:39
  Speaker 1: different way to be very confusing. Yeah, and it seems, uh,
• 27:42
  Speaker 1: in an arbitrary way, a little bit arbitrary. But yeah,
• 27:45
  Speaker 1: we call matter fields everything that's a fermion, and radiation
• 27:48
  Speaker 1: fields everything that's a boson. And there are other differences. Right,
• 27:52
  Speaker 1: Bosons can all be in the same state, and fermions
• 27:55
  Speaker 1: can't be in the same state, so they really are
• 27:56
  Speaker 1: different kinds of fields. Okay, so the rex equations supplied
• 28:00
  Speaker 1: both matter and non matter particles, but you say my
• 28:03
  Speaker 1: urannas equations only applied to matter particles or non matter particles.
• 28:08
  Speaker 1: Dirac and my irona both just described fermions. So these
• 28:12
  Speaker 1: equations only described fermions, but directs equation describe fermions that
• 28:17
  Speaker 1: have anti fermions, whereas my irons equations described fermions that
• 28:21
  Speaker 1: are their own anti fermion, which is not a particle
• 28:24
  Speaker 1: we've seen before. Like in all the list of particles
• 28:26
  Speaker 1: we have in the universe, we have all different kinds
• 28:28
  Speaker 1: of fermions, but we haven't ever seen one that is
• 28:31
  Speaker 1: its own. Antiparticles, but we know that antiparticles exist, So
• 28:35
  Speaker 1: I guess what makes us think that my uronas equations
• 28:38
  Speaker 1: are a good way to describe the universe. You're right,
• 28:40
  Speaker 1: antiparticles exist, and that's exactly what makes us think that
• 28:44
  Speaker 1: maybe my irna was on the right track. The mantra
• 28:46
  Speaker 1: is sort of like, the universe does everything that's allowed
• 28:50
  Speaker 1: when particle physics. If something isn't prohibited. It just happens
• 28:55
  Speaker 1: like those are the rules. Particles will do everything that's
• 28:58
  Speaker 1: not like explicitly prohibited. They're sort of like children in
• 29:00
  Speaker 1: that way. You know, if you don't say that you
• 29:02
  Speaker 1: can't put chocolate chip cookies up your nose, eventually your
• 29:05
  Speaker 1: kids will try it. That's a whole different mystery right there.
• 29:11
  Speaker 1: That's right now, this is switched into being a parenting podcast.
• 29:14
  Speaker 1: Oh man, those are also super popular. Let's just make
• 29:17
  Speaker 1: like the one podcast that unified, the grand unifying podcast
• 29:22
  Speaker 1: of everything exactly. But the philosophy here is, Look, if
• 29:26
  Speaker 1: the mathematics says it's okay, quantum mechanics says it has
• 29:29
  Speaker 1: no problem with it, relativity says it has no problem
• 29:31
  Speaker 1: with it, then maybe the universe is doing it. Right,
• 29:35
  Speaker 1: if there's no reason not to do it. Then what
• 29:37
  Speaker 1: we've seen in the past is that the universe does
• 29:40
  Speaker 1: it just like with antiparticles. We had never seen one before,
• 29:43
  Speaker 1: but the mathematics said it's possible, and then turns out, yeah,
• 29:46
  Speaker 1: the universe has a lot of antiparticles in it also.
• 29:49
  Speaker 1: So the idea is just like, if it's allowed, then
• 29:52
  Speaker 1: probably the universe is doing it. I see and so
• 29:55
  Speaker 1: you're saying that there are particles that don't have an
• 29:58
  Speaker 1: antiparticle like their their own antiparticle, and so does that
• 30:02
  Speaker 1: mean that they can't be described within the wract equations
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: or they still can, but there also could be described
• 30:07
  Speaker 1: by mayoranas equations. So there are bosons like photons that
• 30:11
  Speaker 1: are their own antiparticle. They are not my aerona particles
• 30:14
  Speaker 1: because their bosons Myrona only describes fermions. So what we're
• 30:19
  Speaker 1: looking for is whether there are fermions that are their
• 30:22
  Speaker 1: own antiparticle. And so we know that electrons are not
• 30:25
  Speaker 1: myorona particles. They're definitely direct because we've seen their antiparticles.
• 30:29
  Speaker 1: We know that quarks are direct particles because we've seen
• 30:32
  Speaker 1: anti quarks. One question is what about neutrinos. Are neutrinos
• 30:37
  Speaker 1: direct particles? Are there anti neutrinos or are they actually
• 30:41
  Speaker 1: myrona particles Like a neutrino is its own antiparticle. Oh,
• 30:46
  Speaker 1: I see, like maybe a new trina shouldn't be grouped
• 30:48
  Speaker 1: in with the other particles. Maybe it's like its own
• 30:50
  Speaker 1: whole other category of mathematical particles. Yeah, because neutrinos are
• 30:55
  Speaker 1: very very weird. Not only do they have no electric charge,
• 30:59
  Speaker 1: which means that they could theoretically be their own anti particle.
• 31:02
  Speaker 1: They're also just different in so many other ways. Right.
• 31:06
  Speaker 1: For example, neutrinos have very very very tiny little masses. Particles,
• 31:12
  Speaker 1: as we talked about, get their masses from the Higgs boson,
• 31:15
  Speaker 1: but that doesn't explain like why particles have certain masses,
• 31:19
  Speaker 1: and there's a huge range of these masses, like top
• 31:22
  Speaker 1: corks are billions of electron bolts, and leptons are millions
• 31:27
  Speaker 1: of electron bolts, and then really far down on the
• 31:31
  Speaker 1: other edge of the scale are neutrinos, which have masses
• 31:34
  Speaker 1: of like single electron bolts or even less, so they're
• 31:38
  Speaker 1: like one million the mass of everything else. And that
• 31:41
  Speaker 1: makes people wonder, like do they really talk to the Higgs?
• 31:45
  Speaker 1: That's the way the other particles do. It seems sort
• 31:47
  Speaker 1: of like a different kind of thing. But they do
• 31:49
  Speaker 1: have some mass, even if it's super little. That means
• 31:52
  Speaker 1: it does interrite with the Higgs. Well, there are other
• 31:54
  Speaker 1: ways to get mass. Remember, the Higgs is one way
• 31:58
  Speaker 1: to get particles mass. It's a meta chanism that can
• 32:01
  Speaker 1: give mass to particles, but it's not the only way
• 32:04
  Speaker 1: that particles can get mass, and we suspect that there
• 32:07
  Speaker 1: are other things out there in the universe that are
• 32:09
  Speaker 1: not getting mass from the Higgs. For example, dark matter.
• 32:12
  Speaker 1: Dark matter we're pretty sure is out there. We think
• 32:14
  Speaker 1: it might be a particle, and if so, it's almost
• 32:17
  Speaker 1: certainly not getting mass from the Higgs. In order to
• 32:21
  Speaker 1: be a particle and get your mass from the Higgs,
• 32:23
  Speaker 1: you have to satisfy a couple of requirements. One is
• 32:27
  Speaker 1: you have to be a direct particle, you have to
• 32:29
  Speaker 1: have an antiparticle, and the other is that you have
• 32:32
  Speaker 1: to feel the weak force, because the Higgs boson is
• 32:35
  Speaker 1: all tied up with the weak force. So dark matter
• 32:38
  Speaker 1: might have an antiparticle, So there might be anti dark matter.
• 32:41
  Speaker 1: We don't know, but it doesn't feel the weak force
• 32:43
  Speaker 1: and so it doesn't get its mass from the Higgs.
• 32:47
  Speaker 1: The ntrino definitely feels the weak force, it's definitely part
• 32:50
  Speaker 1: of that. So that's possible, but we don't know if
• 32:53
  Speaker 1: it has an antiparticle, and that's necessary in order to
• 32:56
  Speaker 1: get your mass from the Higgs boson, because remember the
• 33:00
  Speaker 1: way the Higgs boson gives a particle it's mass is
• 33:02
  Speaker 1: that you have like this particle sort of swimming through
• 33:05
  Speaker 1: space and it can sort of emit a Higgs boson,
• 33:09
  Speaker 1: But in order for that to happen, you have to
• 33:11
  Speaker 1: be able to have a Higgs boson talk to a
• 33:13
  Speaker 1: particle and an antiparticle at the same time. It means,
• 33:17
  Speaker 1: for example, like a Higgs boson needs to be able
• 33:19
  Speaker 1: to decay into that particle and it's antiparticle. There's just
• 33:23
  Speaker 1: no way for a Higgs particle to talk to particles
• 33:26
  Speaker 1: that don't have their own antiparticles. Well, I feel like
• 33:29
  Speaker 1: it's a really big change from how people usually talk
• 33:32
  Speaker 1: about things because you know, when they describe the Higgs boson,
• 33:35
  Speaker 1: even like here on the podcast, we usually say it's
• 33:37
  Speaker 1: the particle that gives other particles mass, but really we
• 33:41
  Speaker 1: should be saying it's the particle that gives some particles mass.
• 33:44
  Speaker 1: Like maybe other particles don't get their mass from the Higgs,
• 33:48
  Speaker 1: like maybe the Higgs um. That is not the last
• 33:51
  Speaker 1: word on giving things mass. Yeah, we're pretty sure it's
• 33:54
  Speaker 1: not the only way to give mass. Two particles. We
• 33:56
  Speaker 1: haven't ever seen other particles get mass in other ways.
• 34:00
  Speaker 1: So it's like we know for sure it's not the
• 34:02
  Speaker 1: only way for particles to get mass, but we've never
• 34:05
  Speaker 1: seen anything else do it, and so it's sort of
• 34:08
  Speaker 1: like the possibility is there theoretically, but you know, until
• 34:12
  Speaker 1: we've seen another example, the Higgs is sort of the
• 34:14
  Speaker 1: only one on the playing field I see. So I
• 34:17
  Speaker 1: guess the question or the story is that when you're
• 34:19
  Speaker 1: you're saying that maybe some particles like neutrinos or maybe
• 34:22
  Speaker 1: even dark matter could be the whole different kind of particle,
• 34:26
  Speaker 1: like maybe a urana particle that doesn't interact with the Higgs,
• 34:30
  Speaker 1: it gets mass in a totally different way exactly. And
• 34:32
  Speaker 1: and for neutrinos, really the only clue we have is
• 34:35
  Speaker 1: that their masses are weird. Right. The way the particles
• 34:38
  Speaker 1: get masses from the Higgs field is that they interact
• 34:41
  Speaker 1: with the Higgs field, and different particles get different masses
• 34:44
  Speaker 1: because they interact with the Higgs field that different strengths.
• 34:47
  Speaker 1: The top cork interacts a lot with the Higgs field,
• 34:49
  Speaker 1: so it gets a big mass. The electron interacts less
• 34:52
  Speaker 1: with the Higgs field, so it gets less mass. So
• 34:54
  Speaker 1: it's possible the neutrinos just like very barely hardly interact
• 34:58
  Speaker 1: with the Higgs field and so get any tiny masses.
• 35:01
  Speaker 1: But that would be really weird, like why are those
• 35:03
  Speaker 1: numbers so so tiny a million times smaller than the
• 35:07
  Speaker 1: other particles. Maybe instead it's a more natural, simpler explanation
• 35:12
  Speaker 1: if they're getting their mass another way, if they have
• 35:15
  Speaker 1: Myerona masses instead of direct masses from Higgs field. WHOA,
• 35:19
  Speaker 1: and you're saying they could also explain maybe dark matter,
• 35:22
  Speaker 1: like maybe dark matter is good to also be a
• 35:24
  Speaker 1: mi Orona particle. That would also explain why we can't
• 35:27
  Speaker 1: see it. Dark matter could be a Myrona particle. Exactly,
• 35:29
  Speaker 1: we know that dark matter, if it has mass and
• 35:32
  Speaker 1: it's a particle, it has to get its mass in
• 35:34
  Speaker 1: some other way from the Higgs field, because we don't
• 35:36
  Speaker 1: think that it feels the weak force. So exactly, it's
• 35:39
  Speaker 1: possible that dark matter also gets its mass through a
• 35:41
  Speaker 1: Myrona mechanism. We cracked the mystery releasa how to ask
• 35:46
  Speaker 1: about it? Maybe dark matter killed my ironic because it
• 35:49
  Speaker 1: didn't want it to like spill its secrets. Cosmic conspiracy.
• 35:54
  Speaker 1: All right, Well, let's get into whether or not we've
• 35:55
  Speaker 1: actually seen my Orana particles and what we can claim
• 35:58
  Speaker 1: we've seen about them. First, let's take another quick break,
• 36:14
  Speaker 1: all right, we're talking about murder mystery. Welcome back to
• 36:19
  Speaker 1: what happened to a torm Rana? Only particles in the building.
• 36:25
  Speaker 1: It was a dark and stormy night. It probably was
• 36:27
  Speaker 1: a dark and stormy night. Yeah. He might have gone
• 36:29
  Speaker 1: to Argentina. He might have gone to Venezuela. He might
• 36:32
  Speaker 1: have also sadly killed himself. There are also some theories
• 36:36
  Speaker 1: that he gave up physics and his entire life and
• 36:38
  Speaker 1: just became a beggar wandering the streets of Naples forever?
• 36:43
  Speaker 1: Does that happen often with physicists? I think there's sometimes
• 36:46
  Speaker 1: this dream of a simpler life, you know, you're not
• 36:49
  Speaker 1: struggling with funding agencies and intellectual rivals. I don't know,
• 36:53
  Speaker 1: not something that I've been tempted by. Interesting. All right, well, um,
• 36:56
  Speaker 1: so we talked about how there might be this whole
• 36:59
  Speaker 1: new class of particles called magorona particles. There's totally different
• 37:03
  Speaker 1: than the other particles we know about the quarks and
• 37:05
  Speaker 1: the electrons, because they're described by totally different mathematical equations.
• 37:09
  Speaker 1: But the only reason we think they might exist is
• 37:11
  Speaker 1: because there is a mathematical equation that might describe them,
• 37:14
  Speaker 1: which is kind of a loop and thinking there, but
• 37:18
  Speaker 1: we haven't actually seen any, have we We have not
• 37:20
  Speaker 1: seen any Myrona particles in the universe. But there's sort
• 37:23
  Speaker 1: of two ways that we could see them. We could
• 37:25
  Speaker 1: see like fundamental Myrona particles, like things we think are
• 37:29
  Speaker 1: fundamental elements of the universe, like electrons and quarks, whatever,
• 37:33
  Speaker 1: and in neutrino would be in that category. If a
• 37:35
  Speaker 1: neutrino was a Myrona particle instead of a direct particle,
• 37:38
  Speaker 1: that would be mind blowing, That would be a huge discovery.
• 37:41
  Speaker 1: Another way is to see like quasi particles that follow
• 37:45
  Speaker 1: the same mathematics of the myron equation, but there aren't
• 37:48
  Speaker 1: really particles in the exact same sense of the word, right,
• 37:51
  Speaker 1: Like they're not fundamental to the universe. They're just they
• 37:54
  Speaker 1: just kind of like come up kind of like um
• 37:56
  Speaker 1: sometimes atoms get together and they form a little ball,
• 38:00
  Speaker 1: and you can treat that as a particle. Sort of
• 38:02
  Speaker 1: goes to a deeper question, which is like what is
• 38:04
  Speaker 1: a particle anyway? You know? And quasi particles we have
• 38:08
  Speaker 1: a whole fun podcast episode about what they are. They're
• 38:11
  Speaker 1: like persistent quantized discrete you know, excitations of solids instead
• 38:17
  Speaker 1: of like persistent, quantized, discrete excitations of fundamental fields of
• 38:22
  Speaker 1: the universe. So instead of like you know, an excitation
• 38:25
  Speaker 1: in the electron field, you have an excitation in some
• 38:28
  Speaker 1: like weird semiconductor or in some crystal or in some fluid.
• 38:33
  Speaker 1: But mathematically they follow the same rules, and so we
• 38:35
  Speaker 1: call them quasi particle. Right. It's sort of like an
• 38:38
  Speaker 1: ocean wave, like a wave in the in the ocean
• 38:40
  Speaker 1: or a lake. It's actually a wave in water. It's
• 38:43
  Speaker 1: not a wave in the sort of fundamental field of
• 38:46
  Speaker 1: the of the universe, but it's still described by a
• 38:48
  Speaker 1: wave equation. Yeah, exactly, it's the same mathematics. And so
• 38:52
  Speaker 1: you know, you could say, hey, quasi particles are particles too,
• 38:56
  Speaker 1: and that's this reasonable point, you know, philosophically, Really, what's
• 38:59
  Speaker 1: the difference. It's just the underlying thing that is oscillating,
• 39:03
  Speaker 1: Like an ocean wave is still a wave. Ocean waves
• 39:05
  Speaker 1: are definitely still waves, especially when they slam down upon you.
• 39:08
  Speaker 1: Even if they're not waves in the fundamental fabric of
• 39:10
  Speaker 1: space time still powerful. Be funny if people could serve
• 39:14
  Speaker 1: a strap concepts, it'd be cool to be a gravity
• 39:18
  Speaker 1: wave surfer. That sounds like a cool superhero, right, yeah,
• 39:21
  Speaker 1: I think that has already been invented actually by Marvel.
• 39:25
  Speaker 1: He's called the Silver Surfer. What is he sing on anyway,
• 39:29
  Speaker 1: I don't know, maybe gravitational waves. But it's still possible
• 39:32
  Speaker 1: that we could discover fundamental myron of particles. Like the
• 39:36
  Speaker 1: jury is still out on whether the neutrino is its
• 39:39
  Speaker 1: own antiparticle or not. And if it is its own antiparticle,
• 39:42
  Speaker 1: it can do something really interesting. You can annihilate itself.
• 39:46
  Speaker 1: So like when a neutrino hits another neutrino, they could
• 39:49
  Speaker 1: just like poof, turn into a little blob of energy,
• 39:53
  Speaker 1: the same thing that happens when an electron it's a positron,
• 39:55
  Speaker 1: they annihilate and turn into like a photon. So if
• 39:58
  Speaker 1: neutrinos are my or on a particles, they can annihilate
• 40:01
  Speaker 1: into each other. Well, but I guess the question is
• 40:05
  Speaker 1: with the netrino, if it is a ma Urona particle,
• 40:08
  Speaker 1: does that mean that it's it's like it's writing some
• 40:10
  Speaker 1: other type of quantum field, like a Maurana quantum field,
• 40:14
  Speaker 1: or would it still be right in the same kind
• 40:16
  Speaker 1: of field as the other particles, or maybe not even
• 40:18
  Speaker 1: a field at all. Yeah, great question. It's still would
• 40:20
  Speaker 1: be a quantum field, and it still would be an
• 40:22
  Speaker 1: oscillation in that quantum field. But yeah, it would be
• 40:25
  Speaker 1: sort of a different field that follows a slightly different equation.
• 40:29
  Speaker 1: But these rules for what happens to fields are all
• 40:33
  Speaker 1: following quantum mechanics and relativity. Right. But you're saying, like,
• 40:36
  Speaker 1: maybe there are many fields in the universe, some of
• 40:38
  Speaker 1: them follow one set of equations and others follow another
• 40:42
  Speaker 1: different set of equations. Absolutely, And we know that's true
• 40:44
  Speaker 1: already because we see like Fermion fields and Boson fields
• 40:48
  Speaker 1: and fields with mass and fields without mass. Right, you
• 40:51
  Speaker 1: can unify these all into like one grand equation perhaps,
• 40:55
  Speaker 1: but there are different equations that describe the emotions of
• 40:58
  Speaker 1: different fields. And again here we're talking about are like
• 41:01
  Speaker 1: how oscillations move through the fundamental fields of the universe,
• 41:04
  Speaker 1: And we're developing mathematics wave equations, for example, to describe
• 41:08
  Speaker 1: that that are also consistent with the underlying quantum mechanics
• 41:12
  Speaker 1: and rules of special relativity. And so we're saying, hey,
• 41:15
  Speaker 1: if the fields can do this kind of wiggle and
• 41:16
  Speaker 1: some other fields can do that other kind of wiggle,
• 41:19
  Speaker 1: oh interesting, alright, So then um, but you're saying that
• 41:22
  Speaker 1: we've seen we've sort of seen myrna particles, but maybe
• 41:25
  Speaker 1: at like the water wave level, but not at the
• 41:28
  Speaker 1: like the fundamental level. They are really cool experiments trying
• 41:31
  Speaker 1: to see fundamental myrona particles neutrinos, And if you're interested
• 41:35
  Speaker 1: in that, you should check out our episode on neutrino
• 41:37
  Speaker 1: masses and neutrino lists double beta decay, which is crazy
• 41:41
  Speaker 1: set of experiments that are basically trying to smash neutrinos
• 41:45
  Speaker 1: into each other to see if they annihilate. But there
• 41:47
  Speaker 1: are other ways to look for myrona particles, and those
• 41:50
  Speaker 1: are myron a quasi particles, as you say, like the
• 41:53
  Speaker 1: wave level version, and here people are trying to create
• 41:57
  Speaker 1: myrona fermions not as neutrinos, but as like emergent properties
• 42:03
  Speaker 1: of semiconductors. But they wouldn't be fundamental, right like they
• 42:07
  Speaker 1: wouldn't They would just be sort of like a thermodynamics
• 42:09
  Speaker 1: law or something something that describes links at a much
• 42:12
  Speaker 1: sort of higher level than fundamental particles. Yeah, not individual
• 42:16
  Speaker 1: fundamental particles, but if you can get fundamental particles to
• 42:19
  Speaker 1: act together so that together they do something which follows
• 42:23
  Speaker 1: the rules of the Myron equation. Then you can say, oh, look,
• 42:27
  Speaker 1: we've seen an emergent Myron AFFIRMI on the same way, like, yeah,
• 42:31
  Speaker 1: if you're talking about waves, they're following the wave equation.
• 42:34
  Speaker 1: What are the individual particles of the way of doing
• 42:37
  Speaker 1: Who knows? They're not following the wave equation. But together
• 42:40
  Speaker 1: all those particles acting in concert are following the wave equation.
• 42:43
  Speaker 1: So now you get a bunch of electrons together, put
• 42:46
  Speaker 1: them under very strange conditions nano wires and very strong
• 42:50
  Speaker 1: magnetic fields, and get them to do a funny dance,
• 42:53
  Speaker 1: a dance which is described by the mayrona equation. Then
• 42:56
  Speaker 1: you can say I've seen a Mayer on a quasi particle. Woa.
• 43:01
  Speaker 1: But I guess that would just validate that the equation works.
• 43:04
  Speaker 1: But it wouldn't. Would it tell you something fundamental about
• 43:07
  Speaker 1: the universe. Oh, that's a really good question and a
• 43:09
  Speaker 1: huge argument between different fields of physics. You know, people
• 43:13
  Speaker 1: say like, well, if you discover myronof fermions in solid
• 43:16
  Speaker 1: state physics as quasi particles, does that tell you that
• 43:19
  Speaker 1: they're allowed in the universe? I don't really know. It
• 43:21
  Speaker 1: tells you that the physics of the equation is valid
• 43:25
  Speaker 1: the same way like seeing waves tells you. Yeah, the
• 43:27
  Speaker 1: wave equation works, and that helps you have confidence that
• 43:31
  Speaker 1: you can use the wave equation to talk about fluctuations
• 43:34
  Speaker 1: of quantum fields. Also, it doesn't mean that there are
• 43:37
  Speaker 1: quantum fields following that same equation necessarily, So there's a
• 43:41
  Speaker 1: deep argument there about what it really tells you about
• 43:44
  Speaker 1: the universe. Yeah, just because you see an ocean wave
• 43:46
  Speaker 1: doesn't mean wouldn't necessarily mean that fundamental particles act like waves, right,
• 43:51
  Speaker 1: that's right. But you know there's a lesson there, Like
• 43:53
  Speaker 1: it says that the mathematics is correct, that the mathematics
• 43:56
  Speaker 1: really does describe something the physical universe does, and so
• 44:00
  Speaker 1: that suggests that there might also be parts of the
• 44:02
  Speaker 1: universe that behave the same way, that this might be
• 44:04
  Speaker 1: sort of a universal phenomena in the wave equation. We
• 44:07
  Speaker 1: see it everywhere, right, and so there is some reason
• 44:11
  Speaker 1: to think that if you found a mathematically valid description
• 44:14
  Speaker 1: of what the universe does, that maybe it also does
• 44:16
  Speaker 1: at other places. Oh, I see, we're sort of at
• 44:18
  Speaker 1: the point where we have worked out the my Urano
• 44:21
  Speaker 1: equations or my Urona did and people like it, but
• 44:24
  Speaker 1: we haven't actually seen them even in a sort of
• 44:27
  Speaker 1: ocean wave level. I thought that we had because we
• 44:29
  Speaker 1: talked about sort of seeing holes in materials that act
• 44:32
  Speaker 1: like my Orona particles. So there's been a controversy because
• 44:35
  Speaker 1: there's a group in eighteen that claimed to have seen
• 44:39
  Speaker 1: my Irna fermions in matter. They created these nano wires
• 44:43
  Speaker 1: that were like a hundred nanometers wide and one micrometer long.
• 44:47
  Speaker 1: They put them at a very very cold temperatures and
• 44:50
  Speaker 1: very strong magnetic fields actually made them into a topological
• 44:54
  Speaker 1: superconductor that we talked about on the podcast recently, And
• 44:56
  Speaker 1: they claimed in that these were Myrona fermions, that they
• 45:00
  Speaker 1: had arranged the electrons in this fancy way, that they
• 45:03
  Speaker 1: followed the rules of myron Its equation. Then people couldn't
• 45:06
  Speaker 1: reproduce their results. Then people dug into the details of
• 45:09
  Speaker 1: their paper and found some mistakes, so they actually had
• 45:11
  Speaker 1: to retract this paper and this claim that they remiron
• 45:15
  Speaker 1: A fermions. Wow, it seems like there's a lot of
• 45:18
  Speaker 1: ever going into confirming this theory, Like is this theory
• 45:22
  Speaker 1: that interesting or beautiful or like we've only ever found
• 45:26
  Speaker 1: two theories that describe maybe things at the fundamental level,
• 45:29
  Speaker 1: it's not easy to bring quantum mechanics and relativity together.
• 45:32
  Speaker 1: They're sort of famously difficult to get to play together
• 45:35
  Speaker 1: in the same field. It's not something we've achieved in general,
• 45:38
  Speaker 1: like general relativity and quantum mechanics just do not cooperate.
• 45:41
  Speaker 1: This special case of quantum mechanics and special relativity is
• 45:45
  Speaker 1: easier task, but still difficult. So the fact that there
• 45:48
  Speaker 1: are two solutions to it is really intriguing makes people
• 45:51
  Speaker 1: really want to dig into it. There are also possible applications.
• 45:55
  Speaker 1: If you could develop myron a fermions in sort of
• 45:57
  Speaker 1: solid state physics, and these like excitation of electrons their
• 46:01
  Speaker 1: applications to quantum computing. They can make quantum computing much
• 46:05
  Speaker 1: much more powerful and much more robust to errors. Oh
• 46:08
  Speaker 1: why is that because they're they're bigger. Has to do
• 46:11
  Speaker 1: with building a very different kind of quantum computer than
• 46:13
  Speaker 1: the one we're used to thinking about. Normal quantum computers
• 46:17
  Speaker 1: are like individual ions in a certain quantum state. Maybe
• 46:21
  Speaker 1: it's been up, maybe it's been down, And the power
• 46:23
  Speaker 1: of the quantum computer comes from not knowing exactly. And
• 46:26
  Speaker 1: it's key that for those cubits, those quantum bits that
• 46:29
  Speaker 1: they stay isolated that they don't get like bothered by
• 46:32
  Speaker 1: the environment, because then they decohere and they lose all
• 46:35
  Speaker 1: of their quantum fuzziness. They're like forced to choose already
• 46:38
  Speaker 1: spin up, already has been down. That's the typical quantum
• 46:40
  Speaker 1: computer that we've been talking about. But there's a new
• 46:43
  Speaker 1: idea for a quantum computer called a topological quantum computer,
• 46:47
  Speaker 1: where the information isn't stored in the state of an
• 46:49
  Speaker 1: individual particle, but rather in the relationships between particles. Like
• 46:54
  Speaker 1: I have these two particles over here and they're sort
• 46:56
  Speaker 1: of entangled with each other, and myrono fermions can do
• 47:00
  Speaker 1: that because myrona fermions don't come from an individual particle.
• 47:03
  Speaker 1: They come from like the connection of two electrons into
• 47:06
  Speaker 1: this sort of emergent state of a myrona particle. And
• 47:10
  Speaker 1: if you put them under these very special conditions, then
• 47:12
  Speaker 1: it's much easier for those particles to retain that quantum
• 47:15
  Speaker 1: information because the information is instored in like the details
• 47:18
  Speaker 1: of where the electron is, but how these two electrons
• 47:21
  Speaker 1: are sort of connected to each other, so they're sort
• 47:23
  Speaker 1: of protected by some of the symmetries of the myrona
• 47:25
  Speaker 1: behavior from decohering. Yeah, and that's good for like error protection, right,
• 47:30
  Speaker 1: Like if you have a quantum computer that uses these things,
• 47:34
  Speaker 1: because the cupids are tied together, they they're less likely
• 47:38
  Speaker 1: to get kind of a destroyed exactly. And that's the
• 47:40
  Speaker 1: problem with comin and computing is that it's very hard
• 47:43
  Speaker 1: to keep your quantum bits isolated from the environment. But
• 47:46
  Speaker 1: a topological quantum computer sort of doesn't care as much
• 47:50
  Speaker 1: if it gets bothered by the environment because the interesting parts,
• 47:53
  Speaker 1: the parts that you care about, aren't in the details
• 47:56
  Speaker 1: of where the particles are, but how those particles are
• 47:58
  Speaker 1: related to each other. So connected to this idea of topology,
• 48:02
  Speaker 1: you know, there's this famous example, like a topologist says that,
• 48:05
  Speaker 1: like a coffee cup is the same thing as a donut,
• 48:08
  Speaker 1: because fundamentally they're the same shape. They both have like
• 48:10
  Speaker 1: one hole in them. There's this property of having one
• 48:13
  Speaker 1: hole which doesn't change as you like slowly deform a
• 48:17
  Speaker 1: coffee cup into a donut or back. I mean, obviously
• 48:19
  Speaker 1: there are different things. You wouldn't want to dunk your
• 48:22
  Speaker 1: coffee cup in your coffee cup, but topologically those are similar.
• 48:26
  Speaker 1: You don't want to know your own a lot tap
• 48:29
  Speaker 1: and The idea is that a topological quantum computer the
• 48:32
  Speaker 1: information and it is invariant to the kind of transformations
• 48:35
  Speaker 1: that the universe typically applies to quantum computers, which is
• 48:38
  Speaker 1: that it pokes them, it bumps them, it it's hard
• 48:40
  Speaker 1: to keep them separate. So the information there is sort
• 48:43
  Speaker 1: of invariant to the kinds of things that the universe
• 48:45
  Speaker 1: typically does. Two objects, and so it's easier to keep
• 48:48
  Speaker 1: the information preserved and to not have a deco here.
• 48:52
  Speaker 1: And that's the kind of thing you can do with
• 48:53
  Speaker 1: myron affermions if you can build them, but nobody's successfully
• 48:57
  Speaker 1: done it so far. Yeah, speaking of cart and physics
• 49:00
  Speaker 1: actually made a video about to his I don't know
• 49:01
  Speaker 1: if you know that, like seven years ago, about this
• 49:04
  Speaker 1: idea of using my uranna particles and quantum not to
• 49:07
  Speaker 1: like do error protection and quantum computers. Oh very cool. Well,
• 49:10
  Speaker 1: I know that this big group of cal Tech that
• 49:12
  Speaker 1: are experts in this, John Preskill and Jason Alca, they
• 49:15
  Speaker 1: work on this kind of stuff. It's mind boggling and amazing. Yeah, yeah,
• 49:19
  Speaker 1: I know. I work with them to make the videos.
• 49:21
  Speaker 1: So if you're interested, you can on YouTube. You can
• 49:23
  Speaker 1: search for quantum knots and maybe also PhD comics and
• 49:26
  Speaker 1: you'll see the video that might help you. Yeah, awesome,
• 49:29
  Speaker 1: because a lot of this stuff is very tricky to visualize,
• 49:31
  Speaker 1: and so I'm sure you're awesome. Cartoons would be helpful
• 49:34
  Speaker 1: to listeners, So go check that out if you want
• 49:36
  Speaker 1: a better visual for what's going on. But I guess
• 49:38
  Speaker 1: the main point is that, you know, we have these
• 49:40
  Speaker 1: equations in my Uranna, equations that also maybe potentially describe particles,
• 49:45
  Speaker 1: and they might describe from the mental particles like the
• 49:48
  Speaker 1: neutrino or dark matter, and they might describe things that
• 49:52
  Speaker 1: we can use pretty usefully for quantum computers exactly. And
• 49:56
  Speaker 1: it's a sort of fun question to explore, Like the
• 49:59
  Speaker 1: math says that this can exist, so does it exist?
• 50:02
  Speaker 1: And some physicists are totally convinced. Professor Sarma from University
• 50:06
  Speaker 1: of Maryland. As his quote in one article I read,
• 50:08
  Speaker 1: he says, I guarantee you the myrona will be seen
• 50:12
  Speaker 1: because the theory is pristine. This is an engineering problem,
• 50:15
  Speaker 1: this is not a physics problem. That's a direct quote.
• 50:19
  Speaker 1: So wait, are you saying, Daniel, that physicists are really
• 50:22
  Speaker 1: just here to confirm the math for mathematicians. Are you
• 50:25
  Speaker 1: saying mathematicians are really at the top here. You know,
• 50:27
  Speaker 1: mathematicians explore universes that might not exist. Also, they don't
• 50:32
  Speaker 1: have to follow the rules of quantum mechanics and special relativity.
• 50:35
  Speaker 1: But mathematics that follows the rules of the universe. You know,
• 50:38
  Speaker 1: that's likely to be physics. Yeah, I feel like you're
• 50:41
  Speaker 1: saying that the physics are religious. The middleman between mathematicians
• 50:44
  Speaker 1: and engineers exactly, as long as we get our cut,
• 50:46
  Speaker 1: we're happy to be the middleman put on top. Well,
• 50:52
  Speaker 1: maybe that explains what happened to myrona right, Maybe the
• 50:55
  Speaker 1: mathematicians and the engineers got together to cut out the middleman.
• 50:58
  Speaker 1: Oh man, don't dun't done the plot? Thinkins It was
• 51:03
  Speaker 1: his closest collaborator, the engineer. You got to watch out
• 51:07
  Speaker 1: for those engineers. Yeah, they'll stab you in the back.
• 51:13
  Speaker 1: But it's interesting to think that, you know, how we
• 51:15
  Speaker 1: um this process of discovering how the universe works. You know,
• 51:18
  Speaker 1: it's a sort of a combination of poking around but
• 51:21
  Speaker 1: also kind of thinking about these equations and seeing what's
• 51:23
  Speaker 1: possible from a mathematical sense, because sometimes that means that
• 51:27
  Speaker 1: it is true Yeah, we can do exploration in different ways.
• 51:30
  Speaker 1: We can go out and see what the universe is
• 51:31
  Speaker 1: actually doing, and you can follow the breadcrumbs of the
• 51:34
  Speaker 1: mathematics to think what else the universe might be doing.
• 51:37
  Speaker 1: And sometimes that's right. Often that's right, you know. The
• 51:40
  Speaker 1: Higgs Boson is another great example. The mathematics says this
• 51:43
  Speaker 1: is the simplest way for particles to get mass, and
• 51:45
  Speaker 1: then we went out and found it. So there really
• 51:47
  Speaker 1: are two different arms of exploration that are working hand
• 51:51
  Speaker 1: in hand. Well, we hope you enjoyed that and then
• 51:53
  Speaker 1: made you think a little bit about what we know
• 51:55
  Speaker 1: and don't know about the universe. It seems like maybe
• 51:57
  Speaker 1: we don't know how all of the quantum field in
• 51:59
  Speaker 1: the univers could work. And thanks for joining us. See
• 52:02
  Speaker 1: you next time. Thanks for listening, and remember that Daniel
• 52:13
  Speaker 1: and Jorge Explain the Universe is a production of I
• 52:15
  Speaker 1: Heart Radio or more podcast For my heart Radio, visit
• 52:19
  Speaker 1: the I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you
• 52:22
  Speaker 1: listen to your favorite shows.