Dancing in the Dark: The End of Physics?
- Year:
- 2015
- 18 Views
an alarming discovery.
He found that wherever
he pointed his telescope,
it revealed that everything
The universe seemed to be expanding,
and if it was expanding -
they checked and it was -
and you think about it for any
length of time, which they did,
you have to conclude that it must be
expanding from some kind
of starting point.
Hubble had stumbled across what was
then a revolutionary idea,
but something that is now
scientific orthodoxy.
Our universe started 13.8 billion
years ago in an instant.
ALL:
This was the first period ofthe birth of the universe.
It is known as the Big Bang.
Nowadays, our understanding
of the birth of the universe is
extremely detailed.
Then it underwent
a dramatic expansion.
ALL:
This was the secondperiod in the birth of the universe.
It is called inflation.
Thanks to science, we think
we know exactly how we got to now.
to form the stars
and planets that make our universe.
ALL:
This is the standardmodel of cosmology.
And not content with painting
science has also created
a comprehensive list
of what the atoms we're
made from, are made from.
There are six quarks.
ALL:
Four types of gauge bosons.ALL:
Six leptons.And the Higgs boson.
ALL:
This is the standardmodel of particle physics.
Together, these two paradigms
should explain everything.
And yet, just at the point where
things seem to be coming together,
some researchers are worried that
there's an increasingly
strong possibility that we might
have got the science wrong.
That our current theories
are looking shaky.
That we don't understand
our universe
or what we're made of,
or anything, really.
How does any theorist sleep at night
knowing that the standard
model of particle physics is off by
so many orders of magnitude?
We have no idea
what 95% of the universe is.
understand everything.
This is about what the
universe is made of.
This is about our existence.
What is it that they say? They say
that cosmologists are always wrong
but never in doubt.
There are more theories than
there are theoreticians.
OK, I'm going to be honest here,
but we're in the strange situation
that it seems like every other year
there's a new unexplained signal.
Maybe we're just going to have to
scratch our heads
and start all over again.
Nestling beneath the huge
Andes Mountains that dominate
the whole of Chile lies its capital.
It was founded by the Conquistadors
in 1541, who gave it its name,
Santiago, St James, after the
patron saint of the motherland.
But in Spanish, Iago also means
Jacob, and it was Jacob who,
according to the Bible, dreamt
about climbing a ladder to heaven.
While the mountains may
hint at a metaphorical stairway
to paradise, they also provide
a practical route to enlightenment.
That's why British astrophysicist
Bob Nichol is here.
He's en route to some of the biggest
telescopes on the planet,
perched aloft on the roof
of the world, where he's continuing
the work of trying to understand
how the universe works.
So the amazing thing about cosmology
is that it only really started
in the 1920s, so when people started
looking through their telescopes,
they didn't know whether these fuzzy
things out there in the universe
were actually within our own galaxy
or actually separate galaxies from
our own. And then it was the great
astronomers like Hubble that came
along and measured the distances to
could see in your telescopes, and
suddenly discovered that they were
much further away than we expected
and therefore had to be outside
our galaxy and therefore discovered
The discovery of a universe that was
far more complicated
than anyone could have imagined...
..and the idea that it all
started in an instant...
..suddenly provided a credible
creation story
that didn't rely on myths and magic.
The idea of the Big Bang
and the expanding universe was
a triumph for modern astronomy.
And everyone was happy with it,
until 1974, when astronomers
discovered a big problem.
So in the solar system,
we have a sun in the middle, which
provides all the gravity.
And then coming further out from
that, we have all the planets.
They're lined up
go round the sun decreases
as a function of the
distance away from the sun.
So by the time you
get to the outer planets,
they are moving a lot slower than
the ones in the centre.
So, for example, Neptune takes 165
Earth years to go round the sun.
So if I was to draw a graph of
that, it would look a bit like this.
So...
of the planets in the centre to be
high, and as the gravity got weaker,
and smaller and smaller
until you got out here.
Now, we have the same
set-up in our galaxy.
We have a large supermassive
black hole in the centre
and we have stars orbiting
around the centre of the galaxy.
So you'd expect that the stars
further away from the centre
of the galaxy would be moving slower
than the ones on the inside.
But that's not what we see.
What we see is the speed of the
stars is constant with distance,
so the stars out here
are travelling at the same
speed as the stars in the centre.
Wherever the speed of stars
in spiral galaxies were measured,
they produced the logic-defying
flat rotation curves.
The only way they made sense was
we thought, producing more gravity.
couldn't be seen, it was given
"dark matter".
Dark matter is a really
interesting problem.
It sounds exotic, but
it doesn't have to be.
a theoretical physicist.
That is to say, the physics
she deals with is theoretical.
Katie herself is real.
There's a lot of dark things out
there in the universe.
Until I shine my light at these
bottles, I can't see them
and as soon as I take away
the light, they're dark.
That's what people thought. They
thought it might be gas,
it might be dust.
ordinary stuff that you can't see.
These ordinary, but dark, dark
matter creatures are called MACHOs -
massive compact halo objects.
But the trouble was that even
the most generous
estimates for how much the MACHOs
might weigh fell pathetically
short of what would be needed to
explain the strange
goings-on in spiral galaxies
like ours.
Another explanation was required.
Well, there's an alternative idea
for what the dark matter could be.
What we think it is, is that it's
some new kind of fundamental
particle. Not neutrons, not protons,
everywhere in the universe.
Translation
Translate and read this script in other languages:
Select another language:
- - Select -
- 简体中文 (Chinese - Simplified)
- 繁體中文 (Chinese - Traditional)
- Español (Spanish)
- Esperanto (Esperanto)
- 日本語 (Japanese)
- Português (Portuguese)
- Deutsch (German)
- العربية (Arabic)
- Français (French)
- Русский (Russian)
- ಕನ್ನಡ (Kannada)
- 한국어 (Korean)
- עברית (Hebrew)
- Gaeilge (Irish)
- Українська (Ukrainian)
- اردو (Urdu)
- Magyar (Hungarian)
- मानक हिन्दी (Hindi)
- Indonesia (Indonesian)
- Italiano (Italian)
- தமிழ் (Tamil)
- Türkçe (Turkish)
- తెలుగు (Telugu)
- ภาษาไทย (Thai)
- Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
- Čeština (Czech)
- Polski (Polish)
- Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
- Românește (Romanian)
- Nederlands (Dutch)
- Ελληνικά (Greek)
- Latinum (Latin)
- Svenska (Swedish)
- Dansk (Danish)
- Suomi (Finnish)
- فارسی (Persian)
- ייִדיש (Yiddish)
- հայերեն (Armenian)
- Norsk (Norwegian)
- English (English)
Citation
Use the citation below to add this screenplay to your bibliography:
Style:MLAChicagoAPA
"Dancing in the Dark: The End of Physics?" Scripts.com. STANDS4 LLC, 2024. Web. 19 Nov. 2024. <https://www.scripts.com/script/dancing_in_the_dark:_the_end_of_physics_6271>.
Discuss this script with the community:
Report Comment
We're doing our best to make sure our content is useful, accurate and safe.
If by any chance you spot an inappropriate comment while navigating through our website please use this form to let us know, and we'll take care of it shortly.
Attachment
You need to be logged in to favorite.
Log In