|
|
|
|
Title: Lecture 1 | String Theory and M-Theory
Added: Mar 30, 2011
Author: StanfordUniversity
Duration: 106:55
Description:
(September 20, 2010) Leonard Susskind gives a lecture on the string theory and particle physics. He is a world renown theoretical physicist and uses graphs to help demonstrate the theories he is presenting.String theory (with its close relative, M-theory) is the basis for the most ambitious theories of the physical world. It has profoundly influenced our understanding of gravity, cosmology, and particle physics. In this course we will develop the basic theoretical and mathematical ideas, including the string-theoretic origin of gravity, the theory of extra dimensions of space, the connection between strings and black holes, the "landscape" of string theory, and the holographic principle.This course was originally presented in Stanford's Continuing Studies program.Stanford University:http://www.stanford.edu/Stanford Continuing Studies Program:http://csp.stanford.edu/Stanford University Channel on YouTube:http://www.youtube.com/stanford
Related Videos:
Videos related to 'Lecture 1 | String Theory and M-Theory'
Channel: Education
Tags: physics science atoms energy string theory einstein electrons protons neutrons graphs regge slope particle physics theoretical black hole spin scattering
physics science atoms energy string theory einstein electrons protons neutrons graphs regge slope particle physics theoretical black hole spin scattering
Youtube Comments: 406
jeromekerngarcia Says:
May 2, 2012 - Thanks for reading & a thoughtful reply. You're right- 1 instance of discouagment prob will not stop him; 100 might. I don't know "how he acred" all I saw was his 1 comment. @ some point we're all at the "know what this is" phase-aware that something exists, but not understanding it. I can't pay back the people that encouraged me, so I "pay it forward". So, I hope you keep the interest as well.
jeromekerngarcia Says:
May 2, 2012 - Sorry for typo/misquote; should be I don't know "how he acted" not "how he acred"
Cityj0hn Says:
May 4, 2012 - The sad part is that you're not in Stanford right now.
Colinski03 Says:
May 4, 2012 - I sat down and thought "I'm going to try and understand this"....five minutes later....wat dafuq did I just watch?
grazzitdvram Says:
May 4, 2012 - this guy is really teaching at stanford, good thing the name stanford carries weight
jonaswox Says:
May 5, 2012 - If you cannot understand the first five minutes .................. then you dont care!
wellpastcaring Says:
May 7, 2012 - This lecture series is designed for people who have a good grounding in physics, including particle physics and the basics of quantum mechanics. It is not a beginner's course. Go back a step or two. Nothing is difficult when you're ready for it.
jnotary Says:
May 9, 2012 - He is widely regarded as one of the fathers of string theory,having, with Yoichiro Nambu and Holger Bech Nielsen, independently introduced the idea that particles could in fact be states of excitation of a relativistic string. He was the first to introduce the idea of the string theory landscape in 2003... so he may have a good idea of what he is talking about
ihungrynica Says:
May 12, 2012 - If you're not interested in this, then your part of the problem of laziness and stupidity in this country.
wasdcontrols1 Says:
May 14, 2012 - I too understand this, I am still partially in my father's ballsack.
sulfuric72 Says:
May 17, 2012 - I was not paticularly impressed with his lack of recognition for others work and willingness to diminish the findings of his predecessors but alas no man is perfect.
astriedinger Says:
May 17, 2012 - I am not a physicist, But If I am rigth, then in minute 29, when he explains the string never stops enlarging if "pulled out", it sets the basics of why universe is ever expanding. But then if more particles or whatever is in between is created or holds the field to maintain both ends linked together, what happens to the energy of this connection, if energy is constant in the universe?. It seems to my understanding that this explanation may suggest that in reality energy is not constant....?
astriedinger Says:
May 17, 2012 - sorry before minute 29
93tomb Says:
May 18, 2012 - Close, but no cigar :P In theory, yes, you could pull two quarks apart the width of the universe without breaking the 'string'. But, as you rightly assert, the energy contained within the connection grows. However, conservation of energy is not violated. The mass energy in the string comes simply from the work you would have to put in pulling the quarks apart. The energy involved is why you don't see the strong force acting on those scales; the quarks are too tightly locked together.
93tomb Says:
May 18, 2012 - There are two things you need to know for the first five minutes. You need to know about quantum-mechanical spin, and mass-energy equivalence. I can't explain in 500 characters I'm afraid, but don't give up. Go read some Feynman. Find out about the standard model of particle physics. Get comfortable dealing with concepts that no-one can properly comprehend.
omgzitsmilk Says:
May 18, 2012 - Knowing it and understanding it are two totally different things. Now shut up and stop acting like you're god.
astriedinger Says:
May 18, 2012 - Thanks man... I really dont know why I forgot that litle detail: the energy in work done by pulling the "string".jaaja So in principle it would be like that, though I cannot even conceive the mechanism. But then how is the universe ever expanding.... if it is really expanding .? I imagine that energy is required for that (guessing energy left from the big bang or many bangs happening). This expansion surly must come to a stop right? what does the theory say about that.. =p.
93tomb Says:
May 20, 2012 - The idea is that it is energy left from the big bang. New evidence apparently suggests that the expansion is speeding up, which would appear to violate conservation of energy- this anomaly has been dubbed 'dark energy', and I'm not sure what the current state of play is with regards to explaining it. I gotta come clean and say I really don't know any string theory (that's why I'm watching this lecture lol) so I don't know what it has to say on the matter.
willwork4superpowazz Says:
May 23, 2012 - Huge fan of Susskind. Good lecture.
aqwertgbvcxz Says:
May 25, 2012 - For some reason, I always thought he was German and English was his second language. But I was amazed for his profeciency of the second language. lolThis man is simply brilliant. He has an Amazing memory and visualization ability. He should get another Award.
aqwertgbvcxz Says:
May 25, 2012 - Do you understand any of it though? He is very hard to understand, in my opinion. I feel sorry for the students. They have to work their asses off to just get by this course I would imagine.
aqwertgbvcxz Says:
May 25, 2012 - What he is forgetting is that he has almost 40 years of theoratical as well as practical experience of this material. The students on the other hand are pretty new to this topic so to teach at this level is not productive at all, I would say. Even at a school as Stanford. Unless your dad is a physics professor or you have a million dollar to spend on tutors, good luck learning this.
aqwertgbvcxz Says:
May 25, 2012 - A two dimensional object has no mass.
esraretin Says:
May 27, 2012 - are u physicist? then black holes has no mass? u know v/m=density. then how do black holes have density?
sams31415 Says:
May 2, 2012 - True, but I am 13, and I can act more mature than that. Besides that, I'll assume his personality type is INTJ or of the sorts, considering how he acted, and a comment like that certainly won't stop him from learning science. If he is truly interested, and not just a casual, he'll learn more. But interesting story anyway :)