By measuring the distance between two points

By tracking the motion of celestial bodies

It is too complex for experimental verification

Objects with mass can never attain the speed of light

Objects with mass can attain the speed of light

Objects with mass do not exist at the speed of light

Objects with mass exist only at the speed of light

Neutrinos emitted by the sun change species en route to Earth

Neutrinos emitted by the sun travel at the speed of light

Neutrinos emitted by the sun decay into another species

Neutrinos emitted by the sun do not reach the Earth

Neutrinos oscillate at the speed of light

Neutrinos oscillate between different species if there's an internal clock

Neutrinos oscillate only when they stop traveling at the speed of light

Neutrinos oscillate due to changes in the Earth's atmosphere

Parallel lines never intersect in a completely flat space

Parallel lines always intersect on a sphere

Parallel lines intersect in the fourth dimension

Parallel lines are defined by their curvature

- The video is an episode of StarTalk, where science and pop culture collide.
- The host, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and his co-host, Chuck, answer questions from viewers.
- They discuss whether future scientists will view particle colliders as barbaric, and explain that these colliders are used to observe particles and create conditions similar to the Big Bang.
- They also address the question of how clouds and helium balloons defy gravity, explaining that objects float or sink based on their density relative to the medium they are in.

- The video discusses the weight of clouds and the buoyant force of air, concluding that it doesn't really matter to us.
- The size of particles, particularly electrons, is a mystery in particle physics as they have never been measured.
- The video course mentioned explores the unknown in astronomy and physics, including the mystery of the size of electrons.
- The James Webb Space Telescope has observed mature galaxies after the Big Bang, which challenges current understanding and suggests the existence of unfamiliar galaxies.
- The idea of a different early universe catalog is proposed, comparing it to seeing a baby doing unexpected things on an ultrasound.

- The video discusses the concept of space and time being emergent rather than fundamental.
- Quantum physics suggests that empty space actually contains energy, known as vacuum energy.
- This energy can manifest as particles popping into existence and then rejoining, creating a seething soup within the vacuum of space.
- These particles, known as virtual particles, are connected through quantum entanglement, which suggests the existence of wormholes.
- The fabric of space-time may be composed of these wormholes, weaving together the universe.
- Time is measured by repeating cycles, and if nothing repeats, it becomes difficult to measure time.
- The closer one is to a source of gravity, the slower time ticks, while the faster one moves, the slower time ticks as well.
- The combination of these factors affects the perception of time for astronauts traveling to Mars.
- The cumulative effect of these factors would result in a minimal difference in age between an astronaut and their twin on Earth.

- The video discusses string theory and its challenges in being proven
- The host questions why string theorists haven't solved the problem yet
- He suggests that there may be a different solution that hasn't been thought of yet
- The host also mentions Copernicus' incorrect assumption about perfect circles in the universe
- He argues that there may not be one coherent theoretical understanding of all phenomena in the universe
- The host explains Einstein's equivalence principle and its implications
- The video also mentions a thought experiment involving free fall and acceleration
- The video ends with a discussion about Click & Collect with Tesco.

- Objects with mass cannot reach the speed of light, while massless objects only exist at the speed of light.
- Neutrinos emitted by the sun change species en route to Earth, leading to discrepancies in detected neutrinos.
- Neutrinos cannot travel at the speed of light because they require an internal clock to transition between species.
- Parallel lines on a curved surface, such as a sphere, will eventually intersect at two points.
- The center of the universe exists in time 14 billion years ago, as the universe was smaller in the past.

- The video is an episode of StarTalk with Neil deGrasse Tyson and Chuck answering viewer questions.
- They discuss particle colliders, clouds and helium balloons, the size of particles, the James Webb Space Telescope, the concept of space and time, string theory, and the speed of light.
- They also mention the existence of unfamiliar galaxies, the idea of an early universe catalog, vacuum energy, virtual particles, quantum entanglement, wormholes, and the perception of time for astronauts.
- The host questions why string theorists haven't solved the problem yet and suggests there may be a different solution.
- They mention Copernicus' incorrect assumption and argue that there may not be one coherent theoretical understanding of all phenomena in the universe.
- The video ends with a discussion about Click & Collect with Tesco.

Is it time to rethink string theory? Neil deGrasse Tyson and comedian Chuck Nice explore a mix of questions about the fundamental properties of the universe, particles, the speed of light and more!

I just love that the neutrino is like Tom Cruise in the Mission Impossible.

It leaves the sun and then it gets to Earth and it's just like...

Pulls his face off like, it was me all along!

Your place in the universe where science and pop culture collide.

Neil deGrasse Tyson here, your personal astrophysicist.

Today we're gonna do a Cosmic Queries Grab Bag Edition.

It means that anything that people want to know, we just throw it in a bag and they get a chance to do it.

I haven't had gumbo in a while, but last I had it, yeah, it did kind of have pretty much everything in it.

Whatever might've been left in the fridge overnight.

Let's go to Chris Hampton, who says, easy name here, Chuck.

I should really read these before the show thanks Chris anyway do you think future scientists Neil will look back at our particle colliders and think that they were somewhat barbaric, i.e.

Smash, smash, smash, which would also imply that they found a better way to observe particles and parts of atoms while they're still intact.

That's a very, you know, peace-loving question.

Yeah, because atom smashers and particle accelerators, they're entirely designed to smash particles.

I don't think particles have feelings, so to be worried about them, and to think that we're committing violence upon them?

If you smashed a particle and then it was destroyed, right, and it would never, then okay.

But when you smash a particle, what you're doing is you're putting energy into the system empowering it to make other particles.

So atom smashers, particle accelerators, they're means of infusing a system with high levels of energy to see what pops out the other side, because some particles exist only under those conditions.

So what you have to say is, is there a way to observe those conditions without being barbaric to arrive at them?

There you go, with your microscope or with your telescope, go back to the Big Bang because those are the conditions we are trying to duplicate in the laboratory.

The conditions of density and temperature and pressure.

These are the conditions of the Big Bang, and this is what started the field of astroparticle physics.

Astroparticle physics deals with what happened in the early universe when the universe was small and very hot, and you couldn't have matter as we know it, you know, physical objects.

Everything was a particle soup, seething back and forth between energy and matter, and this is what we're trying to create in the laboratory.

So these laboratories are actually Portals back to the origin of time itself.

that So basically they're giant replicators is what they're doing.

Exactly and really he shouldn't have to be We're not gonna 1 day find out the particles have feelings.

Whatever it should be, that's what it is.

This is Walkera from Georgia, originally from the Bronx, Neil.

If gravity pulls everything down, then how do clouds defy gravity?

So let me ask a different question that's exactly the same.

If gravity pulls everything down, why do helium balloons go up?

So you can ask the question, what does a helium balloon weigh?

You have to take the scale and put it upside down above it and have it press upwards.

Things that- And it's weight relative to something, right?

So, so we, as physical objects called humans, are so much denser than air.

Yeah, and you mean that as in a physical sense.

Because, you know, the other part is true, too.

When did dense become like you can't learn anything?

Dense to me means you have a lot of information in there.

See, and that it lets you know who you are.

Okay, because you look at dense as a good thing as in a great deal of information compacted.

Whereas dense as in thick-headed, it's about getting it in there.

Don't talk, don't implicate the whole head here.

Just, it's, okay, I didn't, I swear to you, I did not know that.

The density of the barrier of entry of information into your mind,

you can ask what, so we are so much denser, physically denser than air.

We don't think about how much less we weigh in air.

Air has a buoyant force that makes you weigh a little bit less.

OK, we are almost the same density as water.

So, some people float, and those who sink, they don't sink very fast.

Well, if you're floating, do you weigh 0?

So what's happening here is everything has weight unless you're floating in something, okay?

So the helium Balloon is lighter than air.

If you started evacuating all the air of the earth, then all the helium balloons, however many are still up there, the Chinese balloon, whatever, whatever, whatever, whatever balloon is up there, it will come to earth.

And then you can stick a scale under it and figure out how much it actually weighs with no buoyant force assisting it.

Now you fill, now you pour air back into our atmosphere and things lighter than air will float above it, but that doesn't mean they're weightless.

And by the way, there's a lot of videos on social media right now circulating that speak to this questioning gravity because of things that float.

And the fact that there are things that are on parts of the earth that they say are upside down so it's keeping you upside down but yet at the same time the same so-called supposed force is allowing these other things to float around, so.

is a case of a person who thinks they know enough about a subject to believe they're right, but they don't know enough about the subject to know that they're wrong.

No, so here's the, in all the lands down under, you know, that's because like civilization and to the dominant forces of cultures have all been like in the Northern Hemisphere, right?

So we have Northern Hemisphere bias on Southern Hemisphere residents, and we say that they're upside down.

And any of us, if we saw a map with South up, we'd say that's upside down.

In the blackness of space, when you're floating in a void, right?

And so, well, you can point to places that locally will have an up or down where they are.

It's relative to where the center of gravity is of your closest object.

So anyhow, all I'm saying is if you're floating it's because there's a buoyant force, that's all.

And I did, I once did this calculation for

pound person, what would that be in kilos?

That would be you know something like 70, 75 kilos.

So that person you know there's a few, I mean it's a measurable amount, but no 1 cares.

You know, is it a hundred grams less because of the buoyant force of air?

Like I said, we don't typically think about that because it doesn't really matter to us.

Is particle a placeholder word for things that are so small we don't know what they are yet?

well every other particle we play with in the laboratory, every other particle that we control and play with has a measured size.

An electron, we have never measured how big an electron is.

And as far as we know, it's infinitesimally small.

This is a profound point of mystery in particle physics.

We don't dwell on it because we can still invoke it.

We can still do all manner of things with an electron, this thing we call an electron.

But it is a spot in space-time that we have never measured.

We can measure its mass, but what the, have we ever seen it?

I just learned something, I did not know this.

I have an entire video course with the great courses.

What I do in each lecture is I take you to the frontier of our ignorance, and then I just drop you there.

Peer out, and your guess is as good as mine,

So I take the viewer to the edge of the unknown in astronomy and physics.

In there I talk about the fact that we have no idea how big an electron is.

Neutrinos are pretty elusive as well, and we do manipulate them.

And I don't know the latest on those and what size we have ascribed them.

Maybe they're equally as intractable in our ability to measure their dimensions.

But we do know the size of protons and they're composed of quarks, 3 quarks, protons and neutrons.

I don't know what our latest thinking is on that.

But the fun 1 is electrons, because we've all heard of electrons.

Well, yeah, they quote orbit the nucleus.

But we didn't want to use the word orbit because that applies to planets.

Just to put a little distance between it and astronomy.

Dude, what a great little question you had there, Michael Ranger.

See all StarTalk Radio transcripts on Applepodcasts

Cosmic Queries – The Fabric of Spacetime