>> ^siftbot:
"All this sounds like science fiction..."
Am I the only one whose sick of hearing this used all the time in consumer level science programs?


No, you're not. This whole video is... wait a minute, I'm talking to a freaking robot. *ahem* Sounds like science fiction...

Energy has mass too, though it's probably more correct to say that mass and energy are equivalent.

>> ^dag:
Yes, my mistake- I think my high school science is insufficient. And as they have mass, albeit a very tiny amount- I guess they are "matter" and not energy? >> ^rychan:
>> ^dag:
From the video "he had discovered particles of anti-matter"
Wouldn't positrons be "anti-energy" as they don't have any mass? - and if they follow the same rules as an electron - not quite a "particle".

Electrons (and positrons) have mass.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Yes, my mistake- I think my high school science is insufficient. And as they have mass, albeit a very tiny amount- I guess they are "matter" and not energy? >> ^rychan:
>> ^dag:
From the video "he had discovered particles of anti-matter"
Wouldn't positrons be "anti-energy" as they don't have any mass? - and if they follow the same rules as an electron - not quite a "particle".

Electrons (and positrons) have mass.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron

>> ^dag:
From the video "he had discovered particles of anti-matter"
Wouldn't positrons be "anti-energy" as they don't have any mass? - and if they follow the same rules as an electron - not quite a "particle".


Electrons (and positrons) have mass.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron

>> ^MaxWilder:
When I heard about the seemingly spontaneous creation and destruction of particles, as described by this theory, I was immediately struck that this is probably related to the big bang. The universe as we know it, spontaneously created from nothing and eventually disappearing again, on a time scale unimaginable by we who popped up in the brief moment between.


They're probably not related at all since "before" the big bang, space and time didn't exist, which is not the case for spontaneous appearance of matter and antimatter pairs. Also, we have no theory that describes what happens at the time of the singularity, or "before" it, as opposed to QED.

Your video, The Dirac Equation and QED: Part 2, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I love that they covered this. The derivation of the Dirac equation is one of the masterpieces of modern physics and it rarely gets talked about.

Your video, The Dirac Equation... What is antimatter?, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Here is the second part.

http://www.videosift.com/video/The-Dirac-Equation-and-QED-Part-2

The Dirac equation is a pretty incredible step in physics. Dirac made a huge leap from standard quantum mechanics to modern day field theory.

Dirac tried to rectify quantum mechanics with relativity and in the process proved that negative energy - i.e. antiparticles - had to exist. But there was still a major problem. The Dirac Equation didn't take into account electrodynamics. A great question here is how can macroscopic electrodynamic fields be justified for point particles like fermions and bosons... The answer is that the are understood as spin, torque, and charge. QED was the next big step. But it all started with the elegant and simple dirac equation.