Gravitational waves: the long journey of science | Gabriela González | TEDxCórdoba
-
0:29 - 0:331,300 million years ago,
-
0:33 - 0:39there were two huge black holes
that were dancing tango. -
0:40 - 0:46They were, while dancing,
forming waves in space-time, -
0:46 - 0:49deformations of space-time.
-
0:49 - 0:53And they were getting closer and closer,
turning faster and faster, -
0:53 - 0:55almost at the speed of light,
-
0:55 - 0:59until, embracing each other,
they formed a single black hole, -
0:59 - 1:0360 times the mass of our Sun,
-
1:03 - 1:05with a radius of 200 km.
-
1:06 - 1:10And gravitational waves
took the message of that embrace, -
1:10 - 1:14at the speed of light,
to the rest of the Universe. -
1:15 - 1:21This, sounding like science fiction,
a Hollywood movie, was true. -
1:22 - 1:24And we know it was true
-
1:24 - 1:28because we measured
those gravitational waves, -
1:28 - 1:30last year in 2015.
-
1:31 - 1:36The story of this discovery
is also pretty long. -
1:36 - 1:40When this event happened
1,300 millions years ago -
1:41 - 1:43in a faraway galaxy,
-
1:44 - 1:49on Earth, the first multicellular
organisms were just appearing. -
1:50 - 1:55Life, humanity, societies grew, advanced,
-
1:55 - 1:58and a little over 100 years ago,
-
1:58 - 2:00in 1915,
-
2:00 - 2:04Einstein published his
theory of general relativity. -
2:05 - 2:07It's a theory of gravity.
-
2:07 - 2:11Relativity and gravity don't sound like
the same thing, but they are. -
2:11 - 2:14His theory says that two masses
attract each other, -
2:14 - 2:17two black holes,
or the Earth and the Sun, -
2:17 - 2:20attract each other, not because,
as we're taught at school, -
2:20 - 2:22there's a gravitational force,
-
2:22 - 2:26but because all masses,
according to this theory, -
2:26 - 2:28deform space-time,
-
2:29 - 2:32just as we do when
we lie down on a mattress. -
2:32 - 2:35When we, a physical mass,
lie down on a bed, -
2:35 - 2:38we deform the mattress,
making a depression. -
2:39 - 2:44And if someone else lies down on the bed,
they will roll closer to us. -
2:44 - 2:48That is the force of gravity
as Einstein imagined. -
2:48 - 2:52The Sun deforms space-time.
-
2:52 - 2:55The Earth does not feel
an instant gravitational force, -
2:55 - 2:59but it sees the space-time curvature,
-
2:59 - 3:04and the Earth spins around the Sun
as we know it to do. -
3:05 - 3:07What is space-time?
-
3:07 - 3:11We have to imagine space-time as a grid,
-
3:11 - 3:15not a two dimensional grid,
but a three dimensional one, -
3:15 - 3:18the three spatial dimensions
that we can measure with rulers, -
3:19 - 3:21with time, with clocks.
-
3:21 - 3:24A grid of rulers and clocks.
-
3:24 - 3:28Four dimensions,
and all of them are connected. -
3:28 - 3:33That is the space-time that gets deformed
according to Einstein's theory. -
3:34 - 3:36The theory is pretty complicated,
-
3:36 - 3:39but what matters with theories
are the predictions they make, -
3:39 - 3:41and the checking of those predictions
-
3:41 - 3:43to prove them right or wrong
experimentally, -
3:43 - 3:45so as to know whether to believe
the theory or not. -
3:45 - 3:49And Einstein's theory
makes many predictions, -
3:49 - 3:51all of them very crazy,
-
3:51 - 3:52quite incredible.
-
3:52 - 3:54One, for example,
-
3:54 - 3:58the first to be verified
a few years later in 1919, -
3:58 - 4:00is that light does not travel
in a straight line -
4:00 - 4:05but deflects when it passes
close to a mass, -
4:05 - 4:09it deflects a little bit,
by a certain amount. -
4:10 - 4:12And that was verified in 1919,
-
4:12 - 4:16and the theory
was rather better believed. -
4:16 - 4:18But it also made other predictions.
-
4:19 - 4:22For example, it being
a theory of space and time, -
4:22 - 4:26that clocks are not always synchronized.
-
4:27 - 4:30If we start, me and you,
-
4:30 - 4:35with atomic clocks synchronized
to the millionth of a second here, -
4:36 - 4:40but then you go and hike up the Aconcagua,
-
4:40 - 4:43our clocks will no longer be synchronized.
-
4:43 - 4:46Yours will be always ahead of mine.
-
4:48 - 4:49And why is that?
-
4:49 - 4:52It's because space-time is dynamic,
-
4:52 - 4:56and your clock is further
from the Earth than mine. -
4:57 - 5:02Distances and gravity change time too.
-
5:03 - 5:07Another prediction was
this prediction of gravitational waves. -
5:07 - 5:11Since masses distort space-time,
-
5:11 - 5:13and masses are moving,
-
5:13 - 5:17those little ripples in space-time
are also moving, -
5:17 - 5:19and they are traveling
at the speed of light. -
5:19 - 5:23And what they do, is to take distances
and stretch and shrink them, -
5:23 - 5:27stretch and shrink them,
in proportion to distance. -
5:27 - 5:29But when Einstein,
-
5:29 - 5:32or any of the other scientists
that followed him, -
5:32 - 5:35calculated how much
the distances distorted, -
5:35 - 5:36it was very, very little.
-
5:36 - 5:41He even wrote that this would
probably never be measured. -
5:41 - 5:43And many people thought he was right,
-
5:43 - 5:46that this was one of those predictions
that cannot be measured. -
5:47 - 5:49As I said, it is a long story.
-
5:49 - 5:54In the 70s, people thought that
it indeed could be measured. -
5:54 - 5:55There are some instruments
-
5:55 - 5:58that are widely used
in physics and engineering -
5:58 - 6:01to measure distances very precisely,
-
6:01 - 6:03which are called interferometers.
-
6:03 - 6:07Interferometers because they use light,
and the interference of light. -
6:07 - 6:09We take a ray of light,
-
6:09 - 6:11split it in two
with a half-silvered mirror, -
6:11 - 6:13reflect them back with mirrors,
-
6:13 - 6:16and when the two rays
arrive back, they interfere. -
6:16 - 6:19The waves interfere destructively,
-
6:19 - 6:22they destroy each other,
and there is no resulting light, -
6:22 - 6:25if this distance
and this distance are the same. -
6:25 - 6:28But if this distance gets shorter
and this one gets longer, -
6:28 - 6:30or the other way round,
-
6:30 - 6:35then the interference out here
is not totally destructive, -
6:35 - 6:38and we can see a little light, or not.
-
6:38 - 6:44So, by measuring with a photodetector
how much resulting light there is, -
6:44 - 6:50we can measure the difference in distance
between this distance and that distance. -
6:50 - 6:53It looks simple enough
to measure distances, -
6:53 - 6:54and it is used a lot,
-
6:54 - 6:56but what's the amount we have to measure?
-
6:56 - 6:58That is the big question.
-
6:59 - 7:03The theory predicts that,
resulting from these black holes, -
7:03 - 7:06the distance between
the Earth and the Sun -
7:06 - 7:11changed by an atomic diameter.
-
7:12 - 7:15And all smaller distances
by less than that. -
7:15 - 7:20But those scientists in the 70s,
starting with scientists at MIT, -
7:20 - 7:22said this can be measured.
-
7:22 - 7:27If we construct interferometers 4 km long
-
7:27 - 7:30in a vacuum with hanging mirrors,
-
7:30 - 7:37we could get to measure differences
between this 4 km and that 4 km -
7:37 - 7:40of a millionth of a proton.
-
7:41 - 7:45Many laughed; others didn't.
-
7:45 - 7:48Many other people
started believing this. -
7:49 - 7:53The national science agency
of the United States -
7:53 - 7:56bet on this in the 90s.
-
7:56 - 7:59From the 70s to the 90s,
-
7:59 - 8:02when these interferometers
began to be constructed, -
8:02 - 8:05two interferometers, two LIGOs,
-
8:05 - 8:07one in the state of Washington,
-
8:07 - 8:10and one in the state of Louisiana -
quite close to where I live - -
8:10 - 8:123,000 km apart.
-
8:13 - 8:15They were completed in the 2000s.
-
8:15 - 8:19First generation technology
was operated and it went well. -
8:20 - 8:22It didn't discover gravitational waves,
-
8:22 - 8:25but it was known that the technology
had to be made more advanced. -
8:26 - 8:30In 2010, the second generation
of this technology began to be installed. -
8:31 - 8:32It worked.
-
8:33 - 8:34It works - more or less.
-
8:34 - 8:38In 2015, we said that we should start
taking a look at what is happening, -
8:38 - 8:42in spite of needing
to do more work on the detectors. -
8:42 - 8:47In 2015, we started collecting data
with these two detectors. -
8:48 - 8:49And in September,
-
8:49 - 8:52on September 14th, 2015,
-
8:53 - 8:56these photodetectors told us
-
8:56 - 9:02that, 3,000 km away, we had signals
indicating this gravitational wave. -
9:03 - 9:04We couldn't believe it.
-
9:06 - 9:09And in December it happened again.
-
9:10 - 9:12Listen.
-
9:12 - 9:18(Sounds)
-
9:20 - 9:23That sound seemed impressive to us.
-
9:25 - 9:26We marveled.
-
9:27 - 9:30It left us speechless
and dancing afterwards. -
9:31 - 9:33This is the sound of the Universe.
-
9:34 - 9:36This is the music of the Universe.
-
9:36 - 9:39We felt that from that moment -
-
9:39 - 9:42Before that we were looking
at the Universe -
9:42 - 9:46with electromagnetic waves
and telescopes and observatories, -
9:46 - 9:49and now we were listening to it,
-
9:50 - 9:51with gravitational waves.
-
9:51 - 9:54We had added another sense.
-
9:54 - 9:55And from then on,
-
9:55 - 9:59we have not only been working
to measure more gravitational waves, -
9:59 - 10:04but we have also been talking about this.
-
10:04 - 10:05And many people ask me:
-
10:05 - 10:08"And what are gravitational
waves good for?" -
10:09 - 10:12And I say, "And what are
gravitational waves good for? -
10:13 - 10:17What is astrophysics good for?
What is science good for?" -
10:17 - 10:20Ah, that we know. We all know
what science is good for. -
10:20 - 10:24All the technological advances
that we use in communication, -
10:24 - 10:28in transport, in medicine,
all that is based on science, -
10:28 - 10:29we all know.
-
10:29 - 10:32But gravitational waves, astrophysics?
-
10:33 - 10:36Actually the path
science takes, is very long. -
10:37 - 10:41It starts with basic theories
relating to how the Universe works, -
10:43 - 10:45and then, they are applied.
-
10:45 - 10:48First they test to see
if the theories are good or bad. -
10:48 - 10:51After that, ways in which
they can be applied are discovered, -
10:51 - 10:56in general, in other areas
of physics or chemistry. -
10:57 - 11:01Engineers take hold of it all
to build precision instruments. -
11:02 - 11:07And finally, sometimes,
new useful technologies appear. -
11:08 - 11:15If Einstein had been asked in 1915:
"What is your theory good for, sir?" -
11:16 - 11:19He would have said:
"To better understand the Universe, -
11:19 - 11:20to explain gravity.
-
11:20 - 11:22What else does a theory
need to be good for?" -
11:24 - 11:31Yet, today, many of you
are going to use the theory of relativity -
11:31 - 11:32when leaving here
-
11:32 - 11:34if you are going somewhere you don't know.
-
11:34 - 11:39Because GPS needs
the theory of relativity. -
11:39 - 11:40It needs many other things,
-
11:40 - 11:45but if it doesn't take into account
that the clocks in the GPS satellites -
11:45 - 11:48and ours, our clock, our little device,
-
11:48 - 11:50are desynchronized
-
11:50 - 11:53because they are
at different distances from Earth, -
11:53 - 11:56the GPS will lead us to the wrong place.
-
11:56 - 12:00And I, that uses it all the time,
would get lost. -
12:01 - 12:05So the theory of relativity,
almost 100 years later, -
12:06 - 12:08has practical applications.
-
12:09 - 12:10And so it is with everything.
-
12:10 - 12:14Science takes a lot of time
-
12:14 - 12:17in producing useful
applications and technologies, -
12:17 - 12:21and many people working
with many different abilities. -
12:23 - 12:27If we think what technologies
we wouldn't have today, -
12:28 - 12:30what wouldn't have been invented
-
12:30 - 12:35if basic effects in physics,
in chemistry, in mathematics, -
12:35 - 12:39had not been studied a 100 years ago,
-
12:39 - 12:44there would be a lot of technologies
that would not exist today. -
12:44 - 12:51The laser, GPS, medicines,
medical applications. -
12:51 - 12:53A whole load of technologies.
-
12:54 - 12:56The challenge I put to you
-
12:56 - 12:58is to imagine
-
12:58 - 13:02when you hear about a discovery
like the one of gravitational waves -
13:02 - 13:09or any other discovery in astronomy,
in physics, in mathematics, -
13:09 - 13:12that show up in the newspapers
many times a year, -
13:12 - 13:14when you hear about those discoveries,
-
13:15 - 13:19what technologies
will there be in a 100 years -
13:19 - 13:22that will use these theories?
-
13:23 - 13:25That is the challenge for you.
-
13:25 - 13:27Thank you.
-
13:27 - 13:34(Applause)
- Title:
- Gravitational waves: the long journey of science | Gabriela González | TEDxCórdoba
- Description:
-
Gabriela is a renowned scientist from Córdoba. She proposes to reflect on what was most asked during the last year following the discovery of gravitational waves: what is science good for?
Gabriela has a B.Sc. in physics from the National University of Córdoba (Argentina) and a Ph.D. from Syracuse University (USA). Nowadays, she is a professor at the Louisiana State University, where, together with her research group, she is dedicated to the calibration, characterization and data analysis of the gravitational waves detectors in the states of Louisiana and Washington (USA). She is the elected spokeswoman of the LIGO scientific collaboration project (Laser Interferometer Gravitational waves Observatory), and she was part of the scientific team that announced to the world the discovery of gravitational waves in February 2016. This work, led by Gabriela and carried out by a team of more than a 1000 scientists from 15 countries, corroborates propositions of the theory of relativity enunciated by Einstein a century ago. From that moment on she has achieved great international recognition, and the journal "Nature" has named her one of the 10 most influential scientists of 2016.
This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at http://ted.com/tedx
- Video Language:
- Spanish
- Team:
- closed TED
- Project:
- TEDxTalks
- Duration:
- 13:58
Virginia Dal Lago
Hello. Thank you for the revision of the English subtitles. I have some doubts about two changes that were performed during it.
First, Valentina changed "distort the space-time" by "deform the space-time" in many sentences. I asked Gabriela what was the correct one or which one she thought was best for this translation, and she told me "distort" that is why I used it. Is there any other reason why "deform" should be use? Or can we leave the one Gabriela told me?
Second, I looked up for the English name of the parts of the interferometer in the LIGO webpage (since this talk is about LIGO) and it was used "photodetector". Even though "photocell" (as Valentina wrote) exists, it is not commonly used in this context (it can be checked also by the number of results that show in Google when looking "photodetector interferometer" and "photocell interferometer"). Is it possible to change back the word to photodetector?
Thanks for your help and time!
Valentina Chacon Rovati
Hi there. The reason I changed distort to deform is that strictly speaking distort could be both used meaning to twist something out of shape (as you're using in this context), but also meaning to give a disproportionate meaning to something (as in the world "tergiversar" in spanish). To deform however, it's generally used only meaning to change the shape of something. By no means I'm implying that your translation is incorrect, as this is only a review (and as such, not the final approved version).
About the photodetector/photocell issue, the only reason I changed it was that this world kept showing up as not found in my browser's dictionary. I checked this world in several places (more general dictionaries, to be honest) and photocell is what I found the most. Also, I happen to be familiar with this photocell term in a totally different context (specifically, in a more technical setting where photocells are used to detect the presence of objects passing through an emitted infrared beam that is detected by said photocell). Perhaps I'm a bit biased in this regard, because since I'm no expert in laser interferometers, I haven't really heard this photodetector term all that much.
In any case, I have to say that your translation was very much on point Virginia! Keep up the good work.
Kind regards,
Valentina
Virginia Dal Lago
Hi Valentina. Thank you for your explanations! With respect to the photodetector word I checked for example in the LIGO webpage where they explain the interferometer and all its parts (http://www.ligo.org/science/GW-IFO.php). Also in the paper published in 2016 about the discovery of gravitational waves (http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102), the authors talk about photodetectors and not photocells. That was my reason to choose "photodetector" at the end.
Once again, thanks for your time and explanations!
Kind regards,
Virginia.
Robert Tucker
I read that the LIGO photodetector is based around a photodiode.
Virginia Dal Lago
Hello Robert. Yes, as you stated, the photodetector is based around a photodiode. However I thought that photodiode was a pretty technical word that Gabriela does not use in her talk. That's why I used photodetector.
Thanks for your help!