What is the Schrödinger Equation? A basic introduction to Quantum Mechanics

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 24 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ •

  • @turtledruid464
    @turtledruid464 2 роки тому +1710

    I think it's really a testament to your explanation skills that the Schrodinger equation seems like it's the obvious solution once you've seen it. It was, of course, not obvious, even to Schrodinger himself. The time and effort you must put into these videos is astounding, and I thoroughly enjoy watching them. Great work!

    • @PhysicsExplainedVideos
      @PhysicsExplainedVideos  2 роки тому +156

      Thanks for the kind words, much appreciated

    • @masternobody1896
      @masternobody1896 2 роки тому +11

      @@PhysicsExplainedVideos brain left the chat

    • @ionmurgu783
      @ionmurgu783 2 роки тому +1

      ***Are you **#Mathematician** or **#Scientist**?***
      ***Then stay far away by **#Science_Charlatans**!***
      If we loss The #Road_In_Science , need maybe 1000 years to find it back.
      Because :
      *****#The_Best_Ever_Humanity_Logical_Science_Discovery*****
      *****#Best_Ever_HSCUT_Components_AEPDF*****
      where
      *****#HSCUT** = ***
      *****#Humanity_Science_And_Culture_Universal_Thesaurus*****
      *****#America_Earth_Proud_Day_Fundamentals*****
      #7_Years_Hide by #Civil_Society_Institutions - #Science_Institutions via - I can’t say exactly if - #Microsoft_Hackers, #Facebook_Hackers , #Oracle_Hackers, or #Oracle_Hackers or #Intel_Hackers !
      A lot of People , #Scientists, #Mathematicians yet are working desperate for
      *****#Fermat_Last_Theorem***** as a intuitive answer to an inexact #Proof even for n=4.
      *****#BUT***** *****#Boyss****
      , Fermat’s Last Theorem is #Fundamental in #Science by #2015_September_24 by #Ion_Murgu_From_Ohio .
      #Fermat_Last_Theorem_Certified in #Accurate, all Science rigor for n [2, #Infinity ) and sent in fundamental , keep also it’s old name as respect for #Fermat!
      Thanks for helping My as AEPDF to take theirs place into #HSCUT !
      See “www.climaticdisorder.com/hstp/” and don’t ask for what “#Climatic_Disorder_DOTCOM” . I thought the fight against all climatic disorders will be to us a duty for future as a #Good_Morning_Future for Eternity!
      ***America Earth Proud Day Fundamentals***
      are 2 #Absolute_Truth_Fundamentals which will #Stand_Up for future as
      *****#Basic_Science_Fundamentals*****
      and now are fighting to take Theirs Right Place into
      ***Humanity Science & Culture Universal Thesaurus***
      for wearing the Science in truth but also reading The Road for
      *****#Inerton*****
      or
      *****#The_Tear_Of_Geea*****
      basic even of #Life.
      *****#School** **#Teacher** **#University** **#Nobel*****

    • @888waldi
      @888waldi 2 роки тому

      Jak długi jest bok sześcianu o objętości 31 ??

    • @一个说话大声的中国人
      @一个说话大声的中国人 2 роки тому +2

      everything is a linear equation since Aristotle's freefall

  • @galangal4803
    @galangal4803 2 роки тому +582

    Having taken a physics degree many decades ago may I congratulate you on such an excellent presentation.

    • @PhysicsExplainedVideos
      @PhysicsExplainedVideos  2 роки тому +28

      Thanks!

    • @raymondfrye5017
      @raymondfrye5017 2 роки тому +11

      Taking a physics degree is not easy unless you really enjoy predicting the future. So how is the prophecy business today?

    • @sethoflagos2880
      @sethoflagos2880 2 роки тому +4

      And congratulations too from one who graduated in Chem Eng a few decades ago. If you can reduce a class of partial differential equations to merely simplifying trigonometric expressions, then you've done your job as an educator. And done it well!

    • @Imran52Feb
      @Imran52Feb 2 роки тому +5

      @@sethoflagos2880 Yes, the way he attacked the problem by guessing the relation between k^2 and omega and then fitting the double differential wrt x and single differential wrt to t Schrodinger's equation using the standard wave equation is truly a smart methodology. Even the mysterious sqrt of (- 1) got explained . Hats off to him.

    • @Imran52Feb
      @Imran52Feb 2 роки тому +2

      Even the j got explained . I write j here since I'm an electrical engineer.

  • @The578unit
    @The578unit 2 роки тому +333

    In all of my university courses, textbooks, websites, and videos I've indulged to learn intro QM, this is easily the best overview with the clearest and most well-put explanations and motivations. Thank you.

  • @ss_avsmt
    @ss_avsmt 2 роки тому +44

    I am doing my doctorate in Engineering, and studying theoretical physics is my all time favourite hobby. I am going to derive all these myself now. Many thanks for creating this wonderful presentation.

  • @robandsharonseddon-smith5216
    @robandsharonseddon-smith5216 2 роки тому +207

    Outstanding work. I somehow managed to understand all of it, whilst understanding none of it at each stage. Coming from a non-physics background, and with only a limited understanding of calculus, to be able to carry a viewer with my limited ability along is testament to your superb communication. Thank you.

    • @williamalldred2805
      @williamalldred2805 Рік тому +5

      Perfectly agree mate. Not something you can easily explain to the general public. Well done!

    • @atomgutan8064
      @atomgutan8064 6 місяців тому +2

      ​@@williamalldred2805 I honestly don't think that this video is watched by the general public or meant for the general public.

    • @luckyizzac
      @luckyizzac 3 місяці тому

      ​@@atomgutan8064 well I haven't even reached college but I understood everything in this video
      This is a perfect video for a beginner

    • @Remnants100
      @Remnants100 6 днів тому

      ​@@luckyizzac - Then you yourself are a budding prodigy. Good Luck.

  • @berryesseen
    @berryesseen 2 роки тому +44

    What I like the most about this video is that he always kept the proper math behind the theory, and all the simplifications/interpretations are clearly justified. Most UA-cam videos on quantum mechanics don't go this deep into the math, so many things like the probability interpretation of the wave function become vague. This video does a great job to fix this. I think that any Freshman with a little bit of calculus background can understand what is going on in this video.

  • @dutonic
    @dutonic 2 роки тому +96

    I've spent the last few days watching through this and filling up over 25 pages with notes. I would always pause and see if I could derive/solve the problems every time. I would get stuck about half the time and when I caved and watched your walkthrough I would frequently be like "You can do that?!?!?! No way!!". Watching the solutions to the time independent schrodinger equation match up with my undergrad chemistry education was such a mind blowing moment. When I finally understood why energy was quantized was a big aha moment for me. But then when you pulled up the graph of the energy levels in the box and the probability distributions, I flipped out. What an amazing video. I cannot thank you enough for this amazing content. I can't wait to watch every video on your channel many times over.

    • @germainguerin3063
      @germainguerin3063 Рік тому +1

      I would have written exactly the same thing ie it just surprised me that i could understand these derivations, same thing with the video on E=mc^2

    • @chrisohagan8131
      @chrisohagan8131 9 місяців тому +1

      I'm a biologist who was just about to give up on this because the math is a bit above my ability. But having read your comment I'm gonna stick with it a bit longer.

    • @Am33304
      @Am33304 6 місяців тому +2

      The mathematical and symbolic writing is fascinating but enigmatic to me. I can read it and read it without any boredom at all. But I don’t really have those maths. I think it all means something incredibly beautiful to me subconsciously. There doesn’t seem to be any other explanation for the experience, and in an odd way I seem to crave it. It’s like a whole world of concepts you could just dive into, but you had better be able to keep hold of the physical world around you. The urge even at my age to lose yourself in it sure is powerful, and there’s a caution I feel - to stay functional, to keep up with the responsibilities I have. I don’t know what it’s like for maths prodigies, but I think it must be dangerous and scary in addition to being magical. Wow, do I like this video!

    • @CliffSedge-nu5fv
      @CliffSedge-nu5fv 4 місяці тому

      To me, the math is easy on the mind, but hard on my wrist. Ow, damn hand cramps writing out every step..

  • @IntiNikelaos
    @IntiNikelaos 5 місяців тому +6

    As a physics major drop-out (I dropped out because of many things, some beyond my control, but one was that I had communication issues with most professors), I’ve never seen such beautiful and rigorous explanations for both such simple concepts and different areas of knowledge as what the standard deviation is and how the quantization of energy is related to the form of the wave function (that meaning, how the oscillating nature of trigonometric functions leads to discrete equidistant answers when solving trigonometric equations which leads to the energy states when solving the wave function. Literally, mind blowing!)

  • @kidus9311
    @kidus9311 2 роки тому +284

    I love how you start building up from the historical background, something we don’t see often. I hope you will upload more often❤️

    • @PhysicsExplainedVideos
      @PhysicsExplainedVideos  2 роки тому +20

      Cheers!

    • @Casowsky
      @Casowsky 2 роки тому +12

      If you've ever listened to the Numberphile podcast, this strikes exactly the same chord; the history adds so much to be inspired about to the story. And of course the beauty in the physics and maths. Incredibly engaging.

    • @isobool3927
      @isobool3927 2 роки тому

      Because Hitler read about the Schrödinger equation - he committed the Holocaust and the robbery and murder of over 27 million Russians.

    • @Casowsky
      @Casowsky 2 роки тому

      @@isobool3927 huh

    • @isobool3927
      @isobool3927 2 роки тому +1

      @@Casowsky Think about it: near to no Nazi got punished because nobody wanted to open that kid of reality to face the truth...because it doesn't only have to be that "the cat dies" by opening that lid - it can be so horrible that it "fries" the observer. We always focus on how the observation alters the observed...but it also alters the observer at the same time.

  • @KonovDS
    @KonovDS 2 роки тому +253

    It always amazed me, that when I was in school everything about quantum mechanics was a synonym of something very difficult and counterintuitive, thanks to the pop culture and popular science articles/videos on youtube. After studying in university it turned out to be much easier, espesially considering that classcial mechanics is not that simple either. If i saw this video 5 years ago I would have understood that fact earlier. Thank you for this clear and neat explonation.

    • @PhysicsExplainedVideos
      @PhysicsExplainedVideos  2 роки тому +21

      Thanks for the kind words and feedback, much appreciated!

    • @amadalomusasia6317
      @amadalomusasia6317 2 роки тому +1

      Only graduates of Physics can follow, let alone understand all these

    • @pseudolullus
      @pseudolullus 2 роки тому +9

      @@amadalomusasia6317 Nope, many people who ain't physics graduates can understand

    • @pseudolullus
      @pseudolullus 2 роки тому

      @pyropulse back when I studied chemical engineering we had to self-study the basics of the Schrödinger Eq. as our professor took it for granted.

    • @urbankobal8154
      @urbankobal8154 2 роки тому +3

      I think you have a good idea of what quantum mechanics is but I dont think you understand it completely, I think no one does lol.

  • @michaeldamolsen
    @michaeldamolsen 2 роки тому +12

    Every time I watch one of your videos I am struck by the extreme quality of your explanations and your ability to make the material accessible to those of us without a long formal education. Thank you for all the time and efforts that have gone into producing these videos!

  • @ThatCrazyKid0007
    @ThatCrazyKid0007 2 роки тому +95

    I cannot express how incredible this video is. Thank you so much for the work you do, I've never seen anyone on UA-cam deliver the _intuition_ behind the theory, both the derivation of the maths as well as the implications and applications of said math on physical results. And to do it in such a clear and concise way that you can follow along step by step, it really is an impressive feat. I also really appreciate the history of how these theories came to be, it is such an important part of physics that often gets left out when it has an entire story to tell. Cheers mate.

  • @firstolasto1518
    @firstolasto1518 10 місяців тому +2

    Today’s generation is so lucky to have these types of videos. Your step-by-step methodical derivation answers so many questions for students just starting out…, I just wanna say thanks. Absolutely brilliant. Definitely the best video on the topic by far.

  • @crt24501
    @crt24501 2 місяці тому +4

    This might be the best video I've ever seen on UA-cam, and I'm not restricting to the educational field.

  • @JG-zs8tr
    @JG-zs8tr 2 роки тому +30

    For unexpected reasons I’ve been confined to a hospital bed for the last few days. This video was a ray of sunshine, distracting me with an hour of exciting, challenging material. You’ve earned yourself a new patron. 👍🏼

    • @PhysicsExplainedVideos
      @PhysicsExplainedVideos  2 роки тому +5

      Sorry to hear that you are in hospital, hope you feel better soon! Thank you very much for your support, it is very much appreciated :-)

  • @JC-zw9vs
    @JC-zw9vs 2 роки тому +30

    A masterpiece of outreach science work There has clearly been so much work gone into this, on every level:- academic, planning, scripting, visual representation and presentatuon. Simply superb. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you!

  • @chuckstarwar7890
    @chuckstarwar7890 2 роки тому +19

    you did a great job. Nine out of ten physics professors today just brings out the " Schrödinger equation", on board. This is exactly how the Quantum Physics was taught in 1950s, 60s, 80s, 80s, then all on keyboard now.

    • @manavshah8335
      @manavshah8335 16 днів тому

      same, my professor just wrote it on board, and i am glad as it led me to this amazing video

  • @jamesgalante993
    @jamesgalante993 2 роки тому +35

    Bro. Wtf I love you. This was the best explanation of ANYTHING I've ever seen. It's so freaking intuitive I'm actually flabbergasted. Without a doubt, the world is a better place because of people like you. There's so many videos on UA-cam about the Schrödinger equation and quantum mechanics in general. I've watched so many, and none of them capture it like you do in this video. Truly, you are the best teacher I've ever watched on UA-cam--and I've watched an unhealthy amount of educational UA-cam videos. Like Walter Lewin level. BUT BETTER. Omg I can go on and on. Never understood differential equations or partial differential equations before... now I feel like I can approach those topics by myself. You literally explained why quantum mechanics can be ignored in classical systems because they have large amounts of energy, which make the probability distribution indistinguishable with our instruments. And you did this as an aside. Like I'm halfway through the video and so excited to keep watching. Kudos dude.

    • @PhysicsExplainedVideos
      @PhysicsExplainedVideos  2 роки тому +3

      Cheers for the very kind feedback, it means a lot!

    • @naayerhs7300
      @naayerhs7300 2 роки тому +2

      Bro, I actually share your love for this guy. Na f that, I’m gonna flipping power that love to the 5000. Bruv, I’m with you, I thought water lewin was godly. Na, it’s this guy, I actually can’t believe even how well he explained everything from the beginning. I’m only 12 mins in, but I can tell it’s amazing. Thank you so much.

    • @jeanlucas2834
      @jeanlucas2834 3 місяці тому

      I KNOW EXACTLY HOW YOU FEEL

  • @millya6005
    @millya6005 11 місяців тому +4

    This is hands down the best explanation of the Schrodinger eqn. I have ever listened to. You answered all my questions about it that my professors and other videos weren't completely answering. Thank you for putting in so much time and effort into making this. I finally understand.

  • @Bzl_777
    @Bzl_777 Рік тому +9

    After a decade I can understand the formulation and intuition behind the Schrodinger wave equation and brother this is the most phenomenal work and explanation I have got till now I paused the video in between just to say thankyou for your work and effort.and thanks to the technology so this information could be shared across the continent

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 Рік тому +1

      Your mind will be blown by the insight, then, that the SE does not even preserve energy, momentum and angular momentum and that it can't explain chemistry, either. ;-)

    • @johnjeffreys6440
      @johnjeffreys6440 Рік тому +1

      I think his equation is both right and wrong simultaneously

  • @jeroenritmeester73
    @jeroenritmeester73 2 роки тому +22

    I particularly love 33:10 where, without even applying the equation to the real world, the math just collapses into giving such a clean an interpretable result for K. Blew my mind.

  • @seancheng3550
    @seancheng3550 Рік тому +6

    Best explanation ever, better than any of the textbooks out there; you explain it better than any professors I've ever encountered.

  • @diribigal
    @diribigal 2 роки тому +16

    I just recently watched a video on the Schroedinger equation from another channel, and it made a much bigger assumption in the derivativation and it felt unmotivated. The beginning of this video really helped me feel like the equation makes sense.

  • @dominus_ignaviae
    @dominus_ignaviae 4 місяці тому

    There's no way my teacher finished such an eloquent concept in under 30 mins and went straight to problem solving. Thank you so much, teachers like you are a rarity these days❤

  • @hughmungous1539
    @hughmungous1539 2 роки тому +89

    Watching your content is like watching a new lemmino video for me; an absolute treat!

    • @PhysicsExplainedVideos
      @PhysicsExplainedVideos  2 роки тому +7

      Thanks, very much appreciated!

    • @seanleith5312
      @seanleith5312 2 роки тому +2

      I am a science person, not a political person. But now I see the rainbow, it evokes the memory of disgusting flag flying in kids school. A beautiful image is ruined by those political hacks.

    • @KalebPeters99
      @KalebPeters99 2 роки тому +14

      @@seanleith5312 Totally unrelated and deeply unnecessary, Sean. Stick to being a science person...

    • @seanleith5312
      @seanleith5312 2 роки тому +2

      @@KalebPeters99 I know, but can you blame me?

    • @joshuaolian1245
      @joshuaolian1245 2 роки тому

      @@seanleith5312 are you shitting on gay people? or gay pride? like wtf are you saying?

  • @NoName-qv4zm
    @NoName-qv4zm 2 роки тому +42

    Man, you should be given a Nobel prize for putting this all together. Very good explanation!

    • @PhysicsExplainedVideos
      @PhysicsExplainedVideos  2 роки тому +2

      Thanks!

    • @justanotherguy469
      @justanotherguy469 2 роки тому +2

      @@PhysicsExplainedVideos Heaven holds a beautiful place for those who try to help others.

    • @Potencyfunction
      @Potencyfunction 9 місяців тому

      what bel is coming prize for who bcz I dont understand phisics and chemestry relation. I ussualy talk about CO2 but I dont understand how pleaseant or unpleaseant I am to talk with. I cant see the degree of one ´s intelligence in having a nobel .

  • @mdahdolan
    @mdahdolan 2 роки тому +20

    One of the best Physics UA-cam channels, probably top 2 or 3 in my opinion.

    • @PhysicsExplainedVideos
      @PhysicsExplainedVideos  2 роки тому +4

      Thanks!

    • @mdahdolan
      @mdahdolan 2 роки тому

      @John Casali Probably PBS Space Time and/or Dr. Becky

    • @mdahdolan
      @mdahdolan 2 роки тому +1

      @John Casali I agree that he doesn't offer much mathematical derivation, but this approach isn't everything. Sometimes having abstract discussions or analogies help understand certain phenomena, and it isn't completely invaluable. Personally, sometimes I need someone to just point out phenomena and abstractly present them.

  • @GoldInforcer
    @GoldInforcer 2 роки тому +11

    Only 20 minutes in and this answered so many questions that I never know how to ask during my physics degree. Absolutely incredible, better than some professors

  • @EMWave
    @EMWave 2 роки тому +30

    It is truly remarkable your mastery over the subject and ability to express it so lucidly. Well you have cleared many of my doubts in quantum physics and probability theory. Specially why imaginary 'i' is present in quantum mechanics and how quantum physics explains the behavior of classical physics too. It is true we just need quantum physics to explain the world around us. There are no words to express my happiness, when I watch your videos. Looking forward to video on deep dive into Schrodinger Equation. Thank You!

  • @m_bm_a7884
    @m_bm_a7884 4 місяці тому +1

    The best explanation of Schrödinger Equation I have ever seen, now I know from where this equation did come from ...you have answered many questions I had before .. Thank you very much !

  • @haydenwayne3710
    @haydenwayne3710 2 роки тому +3

    Well done! Congratulations. As a composer/librettist, I have been pursuing the transition of one vibrational mode to another for most of my life and am convinced vibrational resonance is the essential component of not only matter, but the entirety of the cosmos.

  • @thanoskorovilas8899
    @thanoskorovilas8899 5 місяців тому +1

    WOW. I am just left speachless at your work. This is truly a masterclass of teaching physics, the viewer never feels like something is missing from the explanation or something is arbitrary. Amazing work. I cant even imagine how long it took you to write the script for this video. Your channel is super underrated!

  • @roeljoseph7905
    @roeljoseph7905 2 роки тому +12

    I have a theoretical degree in Physics, and I gotta say, you did a good job presenting this equimation.

  • @kanishkchaudhary9683
    @kanishkchaudhary9683 8 місяців тому +1

    Very nice explanation. I found it very easy to understand. The great part is you have also focused on maths used in it. So it becomes very easy to understand.
    Thank You So Much Sir

  • @JohnDoe-wi6nq
    @JohnDoe-wi6nq 2 роки тому +3

    You are one of best teacher, I've ever known. Feynman was famous for his teaching ability, i don't know him much. But you have made me understood physics at a different level, so thanks a ton for your videos 👌👌👌

  • @bogardchango.d.4598
    @bogardchango.d.4598 2 роки тому +1

    I have never heard anyone explained the schrodinger equation as clear and concise as you are.

  • @peterwan9076
    @peterwan9076 2 роки тому +7

    Great work in explaining the equation. Having an undergraduate degree in engineering is enough to follow the video in every step of the way. Thank you very much.

  • @douglasstrother6584
    @douglasstrother6584 2 роки тому +4

    This video squeezed all of the Physics out of the infinite square well! Nice!
    The time-independent, one-dimensional Schrödinger Equation is an example of a Sturm-Liouville differential equation, in which the concepts of eigenfunctions, eigenvalues, orthogonality, completeness, etc. are developed in the general case; these concepts are also expressed in the context of Linear Algebra. The mathematics of symmetry (Group Theory) constrain the allowed transitions between different states.
    The Mathematics of Quantum Mechanics is simpler than the Physics of Quantum Mechanics. One can grind through the demanding computations, but the physical comprehension is still challenging: "What is happening between the states?"

  • @MyEyesAhh
    @MyEyesAhh 2 роки тому +12

    I wish i clicked on this earlier, im about to fall asleep, but i can tell that this video is very thorough and deserves my full attention when i can give it. In any event you gained a subscriber, i thought i was subscribed already, but i genuinely appreciate the level of effort and clear passion that goes into your explanations

  • @wayneyadams
    @wayneyadams 2 роки тому +10

    6:23 Generally speaking solutions to second order partial differential equations of this form will be sine or cosine functions, as well as exponentials. Which makes sense since sine and cosine can be written in terms of exponentials, and exponentials can be written in terms of sines or cosines. That means that if one type of function is a solution to an equation, then so is the other.
    8:02 If you are new to physics and are not sure why the relationship in the equation is true, here is a simple explanation. Frequency is nothing more than a count of the number of waves that pass a point in one second. If you stand on a dock and count the number of waves striking the dock in one second you have the frequency. The wavelength is the length of one complete eave, an easy way to measure it is to measure the distance from the crest (peak or highest point) of one wave to the crest of the next.
    With the terms defined, here is a simple analogy I used to teach this. Imagine two lanes of cars driving along a highway at 60 MPH. You stand at the side of the highway and watch. The cars in the lane closest to you are well behaved drivers and are separated by six car lengths. The drivers in the next lane over are separated by only three car lengths, or half the distance of the cars in the first lane. The distance from car to the next will represent the wavelength. It should be obvious that in any given time twice as many cars will pass you in the far lane where the distance between them (wavelength) is half the distance (wavelength) of the cars in the near lane. In other words, when we decrease the distance the number of cars (frequency) increases. Cut the distance in half and the number of cars (frequency) passing you doubles. It is an inverse relationship, meaning one variable decreases by the same factor the other increases.
    9:13 Those two equations are exactly the same except they are written with different variables. A little algebra allows you to transform one into the other.
    13:53 hf = E on the right side. On the left side he substituted p = h/lambda in the p^2/2m term for kinetic energy.

  • @UjwalAroor
    @UjwalAroor 2 роки тому +43

    I hope you know this video came at the perfect time for me. Ive been teaching myself quantum chemistry from a physical chemistry textbook recently and i was using your channel to understand blackbody radiation haha. Glad to see a new video from you man! You always put in an insane amount of time into these

    • @PhysicsExplainedVideos
      @PhysicsExplainedVideos  2 роки тому +4

      Glad the videos have been helfpul!

    • @justanotherguy469
      @justanotherguy469 2 роки тому +2

      Its nice to see that there are people not involved in a university setting, that still enjoy and try to educate themselves on this most beautiful topic.

    • @UjwalAroor
      @UjwalAroor 2 роки тому +1

      @@justanotherguy469 yup a 100 percent! Im actually doing a degree in electronics engineering but i love quantum chemistry (and physics) way too much to also not learn it on the side.

    • @justanotherguy469
      @justanotherguy469 2 роки тому +1

      @@UjwalAroor Oh so that's your side piece. Nice!

  • @attilauhljar3636
    @attilauhljar3636 2 роки тому +24

    Just the perfect amount of details. The depth and breadth of these videos are fantastic, thank you for putting all this effort into them!

  • @blythewarland6688
    @blythewarland6688 2 роки тому +14

    for a lay person that is interested in science and physics, this is a great explanation of something I have struggled with for years

  • @georgeaymes9211
    @georgeaymes9211 2 роки тому +2

    This was a beautiful description that delved into the shrodinger equation without making it seem like a unbreachable concept. This is exactly the introduction I've wanted

  • @solutions2exist556
    @solutions2exist556 2 роки тому +2

    You are a gift. The transformation of the complex to a simpler state of comprehension. Yes, you are gifted; but you are a gift to the rest of us. Incredible video.

  • @MLexploring
    @MLexploring 6 місяців тому +2

    I made a 30 page notes watching this entire video to delve into the world of quantum mechanics!
    Believe me, my thinking frame has changed a lot in QM upon completion this video.
    Thank you for this knowledge!

    • @dice-uj2sr
      @dice-uj2sr 6 місяців тому

      Were able to derive 2 integral 1/2cos(piex/a)-cos(3piex/a) from 2sin(piex/a)sin(2piex/a)
      I am stuck here 1:12:32

    • @MLexploring
      @MLexploring 6 місяців тому +1

      I haven’t done this by my own. I just followed what he did. I also found a confusion in a previous integration in this video. But I skip as it is not my headech!

    • @dice-uj2sr
      @dice-uj2sr 6 місяців тому

      @@MLexploring oh sadge 😔

    • @phart
      @phart 4 місяці тому +1

      @@dice-uj2sr trig identity sinAsinB = 1/2 [cos(A-B) - cos(A+B)]

    • @dice-uj2sr
      @dice-uj2sr 4 місяці тому +1

      @@phart thank you so much really 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏👏 it just all clicked thanks a lot

  • @EvillClown11
    @EvillClown11 2 роки тому +3

    I’m a 1st year engineering student, and while I do enjoy my course my real passion lies with physics. These type of videos are perfect for exploring that using the foundations I have learned studying and I couldn’t be more grateful.

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 2 роки тому

      Why are you learning engineering if your real passion is physics? You aren't making any sense. Just walk over to the physics department and learn physics. If you don't love engineering, then you will never be a good engineer.

    • @EvillClown11
      @EvillClown11 2 роки тому +2

      @@schmetterling4477 Career prospects my friend. I cannot afford to base my degree solely on enjoyment given the cost of getting one. The graduate destinations of people with a physics degree did not appeal to me whereas the engineering ones did. I can always self educate as I have been doing, while still perusing my desired career path.

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 2 роки тому

      @@EvillClown11 That's what every physicist wannabe thinks. In reality you are simply making fools of yourselves on the internet. :-)
      In any case... with regards to job prospects: I interviewed seven times in my life in total (that includes a student job and the interview for my PhD position) and I always got the job. Don't tell me that physicists can't get jobs, kid. You are completely clueless. ;-)

  • @Kanjeeroboocho
    @Kanjeeroboocho Рік тому +5

    Having a brief stint as a college lecturer myself, I can clearly see the passion you have for physics. Your simplicity of presentation and yet, not giving up on the rigor is just too good. Schrodinger's wave equation (I wish we had these kinds of videos back in our college days) was one of those toughest topics I couldn't grasp, but knew it was definitely something. One of my professors spent a lot of time explaining to me, but alas, sometimes it takes time for things to percolate 🙂!! Good job my friend !

    • @Potencyfunction
      @Potencyfunction 9 місяців тому

      I talk about past tense how do they found the correlation between those things ?

  • @AndersWelander
    @AndersWelander Рік тому +3

    I have seen a few of your videos now and I just love them. You are great. I have a PhD in fusion plasma physics and my expertise is magnetized plasma but I have studied QM, GR, etc a bit in my life out of curiosity. I believe your videos can be seen by pretty much anyone with an interest in physics regardless of prior knowledge, except of course they need to know a bit of math. But if they are interested in physics it is very likely that they do know this little bit of math.

  • @enriquemillanvalbuena5241
    @enriquemillanvalbuena5241 Рік тому +3

    Thanks a lot for making this knowledge so accesible. I had recently read an non-technical book about quantum physics, and I was curious to understand how the math worked out. Your explanations are so well-derived, built with so much patience.
    Thank you again :)

  • @cursed_dylan33
    @cursed_dylan33 2 роки тому +9

    cant believe you came back with this absolute 90 minute banger. your work always inspires me to keep studying and it keeps me motivated

  • @steveklehfoth1503
    @steveklehfoth1503 2 роки тому +5

    Wow! Excellent video and explanation. I wish this video had been available back in 1986 when I took a class in "Modern Physics" as part of my electrical engineering degree. I appreciate the effort you put into this.

    • @Imran52Feb
      @Imran52Feb 2 роки тому

      I too am an Electrical Engineer very much interested in Modern Physics. This video beautifully explains how our j appears in the wave function

  • @pedrokahn5717
    @pedrokahn5717 Рік тому +2

    By far one of the best materials concerning the basics of quantum mechanics on UA-cam. Thanks for that, I feel privileged to have had this video as my very first approach on the subject, certainly other sources would confuse me a lot more, what didn't happen on the last 1h27min. Congratulations!👏👏👏

  • @hgtrad7655
    @hgtrad7655 Рік тому

    I have dwelled during the last 20 years into advanced electromagnetics struggled into Poisson's equations
    to solve boundary conditions using the Gradient operator, Maxwell's equations, potential vector, Gaussian probability function, Poisson's probability cumulative distribution functions, Swerling I and II and III, Markov's memory less probability to name a few...so I could understand every bit of your very successful work in producing such clarity, it even helped me put into perspective the importance of Louis de Broglie work on the dual nature of a wave, he definitely fulfilled the missing link between Einstein and Schrodinger and you have highlighted that so well. Respect to all the effort you have consumed in producing an excellent work.

  • @psy7251
    @psy7251 2 роки тому +6

    Thank you for your excellent and very clear explanation. I appreciate the hard work put into the video. When I was in university, my lecturers wasn't even a fraction as clear and enthusiastic as you. Well done!

  • @jakkakasunset5485
    @jakkakasunset5485 2 роки тому +2

    I love how you mention that this is a brief explanation of Schrödinger's Equation, and it's an hour long video

  • @sekus
    @sekus 2 роки тому +22

    Beautifully explained! What a great refresher of QM with valuable illustrations

  • @ae-thermalconsulting1800
    @ae-thermalconsulting1800 Рік тому +2

    This is the best and the simplest explanation I have ever listened to
    Very good job I indeed- thank you
    This lecture covered all of the basic and fundamental concepts in quantum physics, mathematics, and probability
    Thank you again

  • @mayfield3314
    @mayfield3314 2 роки тому +8

    When we had to study quantum mechanics in university (albeit only at surface level) it was presented as merely factual. The way you put it in historical context as something being derived from classical mechanics with its secrets and deeper meanings slowly being uncovered, somehow makes it much more understable. Thank you!
    I was slightly dissapointed by the lack of cats in your video 😁

  • @scienceclick9092
    @scienceclick9092 5 місяців тому +1

    This has to be the greatest video on UA-cam ever.

  • @goldengoat1737
    @goldengoat1737 Рік тому +12

    This is an highly under rated channel… you can tell you really understand these concepts… I’m reading 6 numbers by Martin Reese right now it is nice to get some more detail on these subjects

  • @garffieldiscool1163
    @garffieldiscool1163 2 роки тому +22

    Brilliant explanation.There is so much content squeezed into this single lecture.

  • @dcrespin
    @dcrespin 2 роки тому +10

    This video starts with an excellent overview of Schrödinger´s life. Then his unitary evolution equation is presented. Congratulations to the authors. For those already initiated in QM I repeat here some comments previously made to similar videos. They may clarify debatable points.
    The Schrödinger time dependent equation (STDE) when applied to a wave representing an initial state of, say, an electron bound to a proton and together forming a hydrogen atom, predicts and retrodicts all the future and previous states of the electron wave, in the same fashion than the evolution equations of classical mechanics predicts the movement of the Earth around the Sun. Note that the STDE is energy conservative, that is, the initial state as well as the predicted and retrodicted ones all have the same energy.
    As is well known the bound electron has a completely different conduct. Whatever the initial state and in absence of other interactions an excited electron will settle in a stationary state radiating energy (in the form of a photon) along the way. If the stationary state is the ground state the electron will stay there forever (in absence, as said before, of other interactions). Otherwise the stationary electron state is ephemeral and will be abandoned to radiate a photon and assume a new stationary state of even lower energy. This "down the staircase" process repeats until the ground state is reached. There is no manner to adapt the STDE to this physical process. This inconsistency was discovered by none other than Niels Bohr, as can be inferred from the report of Werner Heisenberg. See our note
    www.researchgate.net/publication/356193279_Deconstruction_of_Quantum_Wave_Mechanics
    After discovering the tremendous inconsistency it would have been natural to announce that the STDE contradicted with physical facts, and ask for a correct equation. I assume as true, but only know from hearsay very long ago, that in Einstein's viewpoint the correct deterministic time dependent wave equation had to be non-linear. References to this historical detail would be appreciated.
    It is hard to believe but, against reasonableness and common sense, Bohr decided to adopt the STDE as correct and that continuity, causality and determinism of physical processes were wrong because they contradicted the STDE. Apparently mathematical equations on paper were more relevant than the experience of the whole human race. Then a series of new and fanciful "quantum physical principles" were adopted.
    In my opinion the powerful quantum establishment dogmatically defends Quantism and strongly rejects any attempt to correct its misdeeds, even if the correct deterministic time dependent wave equation available.
    With best regards to all.
    Daniel Crespin

  • @midaspool6229
    @midaspool6229 7 місяців тому +1

    Even though the video is 1,5 hours long, I still had to pause every 30 seconds because it was going too fast for my brain. Really helpful video, 10/10!

  • @heliogabrieldacunhabarroso5541
    @heliogabrieldacunhabarroso5541 2 роки тому +7

    That is the clearest introductory video about this subject I've ever seen. 👏👏
    I'm very excited for the next video

    • @Potencyfunction
      @Potencyfunction 9 місяців тому

      You shouldnt stop learning becauze something big will come. And when you are limitless than what can stop you ?

  • @wayneyadams
    @wayneyadams 2 роки тому

    This is a complete lesson that is thorough. Anyone trying to learn this for the first time will have to freeze the video study the equations and should derive the equations. That is the best way to get a thorough understanding. Obviously, this requires a good understanding of advanced math as well as an ability to perform calculations.
    Here is an interesting note on the applications. The electron orbitals in atoms are actually three-dimensional standing waves which are calculated using the Schrodinger Wave Equation. The results as with all wave equation solutions result in the probability of the finding electron within that region of space. Those shapes you learned about in your Chemistry class are like the constraints imposed on the particle in the one-dimensional box he used in this lecture.

  • @go-away-5555
    @go-away-5555 2 роки тому +6

    I'm going to take like 6 weeks to review Calculus again and come back to this one. And I don't mean that sarcastically! Your videos really inspire me to take topics seriously which I got C's in school. These are great videos, there are just some parts in the solving of the schrodinger equation section that I'm having to pause for a long time to be able to process.
    But please don't take that as a request to simplify your videos. It would be a disservice to this equation to not get so into the maths of it. Your method of explanation is still the best on youtube.

    • @trumanhw
      @trumanhw 2 роки тому +2

      Right, bc unless you understand what he's saying before he says it, you can't after.
      (how exactly would that constitute teaching ... verses summarizing? )
      But FINALLY, someone who actually posts an honest comment.
      Everyone else here either already studied & was _SUPPOSED_ to understand it, or literally did before.
      Must've been a mystery to him why HIS teachers spent time explaining each idea when they need only assert it once?
      As [if] students need only hear assertions to have information transferred.
      Is this when he's supposed to say, "stop trying to hit me and hit me already." ??

    • @go-away-5555
      @go-away-5555 5 місяців тому

      I did it 😃

    • @go-away-5555
      @go-away-5555 5 місяців тому

      And yeah I planned on going hard on studying for 6 weeks and ended up taking 2 years don't judge me lol

  • @50PullUps
    @50PullUps 2 роки тому +1

    I wish we had UA-cam back in the early 2000's when I was struggling to barely learn QM in college. You kids have it so good today.

  • @shrirangsavale571
    @shrirangsavale571 2 роки тому +4

    Sir, you are one of the best at explaining things. You made me see the underlying beauty of quantum mechanics. I understood each and every single bit of information you conveyed. I just love you keep working on such videos and keep enlightening the world.

  • @OSAMAMAful
    @OSAMAMAful Рік тому +1

    Complete explanation, you solve both simple problems and the difficult ones too which are given at the end of text books without solution! Thank you very much!!

  • @karlkarlsson9126
    @karlkarlsson9126 2 роки тому +3

    Thanks a lot for doing this. Just two days ago I was thinking about googling Schrödinger's Equation to look for a video that explained it once and for all, and here you are. I remembered your voice 30 seconds into the video and got reminded that I already was subbed to your channel, and now I remember why. Probably the best presenter for physics videos on UA-cam in my opinion! Will try to support you somehow.

  • @jonquil3015
    @jonquil3015 2 роки тому +1

    Wow! When I did physics decades in the past, no one (NO ONE) in the class understood the mumbling about the Schrödinger Equation. There was more value in just the first half hour of this video than in the several hour-long lectures inflicted on us!

    • @jonquil3015
      @jonquil3015 2 роки тому

      Bug: sin is squared twice at ua-cam.com/video/2WPA1L9uJqo/v-deo.html

  • @thegreatveil5699
    @thegreatveil5699 2 роки тому +8

    Granted, I haven't had the time to watch the whole video at this point, but I'd still like to write this down before I forget it, in case some future reader will find the idea interesting. As it happens, when looking at things at a more fundamental level, one needn't postulate the form of the Schrodinger equation for a general potential. The equation itself follows from the deeper assumption that the canonical structure of Hamiltonian mechanics is preserved when going from the classical realm into the quantum one. Following with the appropriate expressions for the generators of transformations (such as translations, rotations, time evolution) and the commutation relations for operators associated to observables that preserve this structure, one ends up with the general differential equation of the time evolution operator itself in terms of a Hamiltonian operator reminiscent of the Hamiltonian functions found in classical dynamics. From there on it follows immediately that the Schrodinger equation in the form presented here holds in any Hilbert space, be it one of abstract state vectors or a representation in terms of coordinates or momenta, for an arbitrary potential operator. Equivalently, one can set up a more general version of Hamilton's principle, the so-called path integral formulation of quantum mechanics due to Richard Feynman, which culminates in the same result for the equation of motion.
    It is also worthwhile to note that the Schrodinger equation treats only the dynamics of the particle as "quantum". Fields introduced via potential operators are still classical in nature, and this discrepancy leads to some of the "weirdness" of non-relativistic quantum mechanics. For example, the non-local nature that appears in the non-relativistic treatment of phenomena such as the Aharonov-Bohm effect vanishes when the field itself is also quantized.

  • @karkaroff1617
    @karkaroff1617 2 роки тому +8

    Schrödinger also said:
    " I do not like it [the probability interpretation of quantum mechanics], and I am sorry I ever had anything to do with it. "
    Undergrads can relate.

  • @jezza10181
    @jezza10181 2 роки тому +3

    This is a superb presentation. Extremely detailed. A lot to take in in an hour and a half maybe, but it would be a superb study tool alongside lecture notes.

  • @SS1981-m2L
    @SS1981-m2L Рік тому +3

    It is amazing how you develop and relate this beautiful equation (math-physical theory) in very simple way!! Thank you for your work!!

  • @mrpyfisher1995
    @mrpyfisher1995 2 роки тому +36

    BEAUTIFUL!!! Just barely starting to get the grasp of it and you're the one whose giving me the motivation to study physics. Thank you so very much!

    • @PhysicsExplainedVideos
      @PhysicsExplainedVideos  2 роки тому +3

      Great to hear! Thanks for the kind words 🙂

    • @craigfowler7098
      @craigfowler7098 Рік тому

      I studied this all over thirty years ago and forgot how beautiful the Maths was.
      This is an excellent video that brings it all back to me. Enjoy your course.

  • @TIO540S1
    @TIO540S1 2 роки тому +8

    You and Elliott ("Physics With Elliot") are gifts to those of us who yearn for explanations that are deeper than the usual Pop Sci. Thank you!

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 2 роки тому

      What stopped you from reading a science textbook on the matter? Too hard? :-)

  • @feandil666
    @feandil666 2 роки тому +4

    Thanks, a lot of concepts of quantum mechanics that I had just accepted, now make total sense as a natural consequence of the analysis of this equation.

  • @phlynniii
    @phlynniii Рік тому +3

    Thank you so much for generating these explanations on this topic. Thank you for your hard work. It is one of the best explanation in the whole Internet. I like it very very much

  • @chaostheory567
    @chaostheory567 2 роки тому +43

    Massively excited for the new content. Everyone of your videos is a treat for the mind. Cheers!

  • @omerbar7518
    @omerbar7518 Рік тому +1

    Amazing. You can really learn anything on the internet these days. Thank you very much.

  • @LiamDennehy
    @LiamDennehy 2 роки тому +6

    I never attended college and self-taught rudimentary integral and differential calculus. Some of the symbols and techniques on display are a bit foreign, but allows me to feel unintimidated when you do the heavy lifting off-screen as I can recognise the correlations. Finally! I have a semblance of an answer to question that's bugged me for decades: WTF is a wave function?
    Also, seeing i being introduced in the theory then wiped out in the practical is deeply satisfying.

    • @jonasdaverio9369
      @jonasdaverio9369 2 роки тому +1

      You really should bridge that small gap you have in calculus. It won't take you that much time, and it really will help in your understanding of physics (and I think it will be much more gratifying)

  • @tochukwuezeaba1352
    @tochukwuezeaba1352 2 роки тому +1

    I wish I can give you an award right now.
    You really demystified QM.
    May your life be as easy and beautiful as this video.
    I can't stop playing this video.
    Great work.

  • @Space-Duckas
    @Space-Duckas 2 роки тому +12

    Best physics videos I've ever seen, thank you for creating these videos.

  • @atomgutan8064
    @atomgutan8064 6 місяців тому +1

    Watching this was really hard but really rewarding! Extremely interesting video, thank you!

  • @Imran52Feb
    @Imran52Feb 2 роки тому +6

    This is the best video I have watched on Schrödinger's equation. I'm an electrical engineer by profession but modern physics fascinates me. The step by step heuristic approach by guessing a differential equation kind of relationship between k.squared and omega is just amazing. I always wondered as to how sqrt of minus 1 appears in the wave function and found the answer here. Thanks a lot, sir.

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 2 роки тому

      Schroedinger is not modern physics. Schroedinger is the state of physics of 1926. It was obsolete in physics proper by 1928, when Dirac published the Dirac equation. You can't even do ordinary chemistry with Schroedinger alone.

    • @Imran52Feb
      @Imran52Feb 2 роки тому

      @@schmetterling4477 Could you suggest a video which lucidly explains Dirac's approach. Probably the makers of this video can throw some light on your comments about Schrodinger 's equation not being not Modern Physics ! I am not a Physicist but have found that Schrodinger's equation can explain some strange phenomena like quantum tunneling.

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 2 роки тому

      @@Imran52Feb Not really. The reason why you won't find "real quantum mechanics" (by which I mean relativistic quantum field theory) on UA-cam is very simple: it's tough sh*t. I mean, seriously tough. Mathematically you have to work a hundred times harder to understand the real theory than Schroedinger's toy model. That's why we teach non-relativistic QM to all of our physics students and maybe a few percent will go on and learn the real theory.
      Schroedinger doesn't explain quantum tunneling. It gives you an approximation, but doesn't tell you what is really going on. The reason for that is very simple: you have to stuff a classical potential in and there are no classical potentials in nature. There are only quantum fields. So all you are really doing with Schroedinger is to kid yourself.

    • @Imran52Feb
      @Imran52Feb 2 роки тому

      @@schmetterling4477 After your critical statement about the SE, I Google searched the difference between the two methodologies . Yes, the relativistic QM appears quite different and tough . I tried to understand the theory of tensors, but found it abstract and tough.Understanding the real beauty of Relativity requires a thorough knowledge of tensors. I have read somewhere that even Einstien had difficulty in getting full grasp on tensors and needed ( probably Le Cevita) to guide him.
      Could you please suggest how to Crack tensors?

    • @Imran52Feb
      @Imran52Feb 2 роки тому

      @@schmetterling4477 Further I think you are a professor of physics and have deep knowledge in this field. My regards.

  • @Rmachoman007
    @Rmachoman007 2 роки тому +1

    Your videos made me believe again why everything visible and measurable around us can be put into a simple but yet complicated mathematical equations. Wonderful!

  • @edwardarruda7215
    @edwardarruda7215 2 роки тому +17

    Excellent. I wish this was available 30 years ago when I took physical chemistry.

  • @farzanroshdieh698
    @farzanroshdieh698 10 місяців тому

    The way all these are explained in this video is astounding. What an achievement.

  • @mrmadmaxalot
    @mrmadmaxalot 2 роки тому +3

    I remember when I first started following this series on the quantum world a while back. I could tell from the first video that it was going to be great, and this just proves all of it! Thanks so much for putting these together. If could make a request, can you please make a video (or a few if required) to explain the wave functions of boson and fermions? The Pauli exclusion principle comes out of this, and basically everything we would call "structure" in the world comes out of that, so I think it would be fascinating!
    Edit: There are plenty of people on YT talking about the weirdness of QM, but not so many talking about the fundamentalness of it. If it were not for antisymmetric wave functions and fermions, the world as we know it would not exist. That is where "normal" begins. I think that is far more relevant than any strangeness. Keep on keeping on friend! Great videos!

  • @NumbToons
    @NumbToons Рік тому +2

    I have rewatched the video and also written all your explanation myself by memory. I will watch it again sometime.

  • @tototriceps
    @tototriceps 2 роки тому +3

    These videos are PERFECT, not so thourough as a college course, but detailed enough to get a real understanding of the concepts. Great job keep it up :D

  • @umami0247
    @umami0247 2 роки тому +1

    I'm not going to even speculate on this. I'm just glad there our people out in this world that can do this and understand it. You do a great job of presenting this as you do with all the video's I've seen from you.

  • @caltechharvard
    @caltechharvard 2 роки тому +3

    Absolutely marvelous. Reminded me of the days I learned this from Feynman himself when I was a freshman at Caltech. Many, many thanks.

    • @PhysicsExplainedVideos
      @PhysicsExplainedVideos  2 роки тому

      Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for the kind words :-)

    • @raymondfrye5017
      @raymondfrye5017 2 роки тому

      Harvard? Why not Stanford?

    • @caltechharvard
      @caltechharvard 2 роки тому

      @@raymondfrye5017 Because those are the two schools I have degrees from. Post-doc was MIT.

    • @raymondfrye5017
      @raymondfrye5017 2 роки тому

      @@caltechharvard Active in pure research? Most of my friends who went into physics ended up in Engineering to apply what they learned: Applied Physics.
      Regards

    • @caltechharvard
      @caltechharvard 2 роки тому

      @@raymondfrye5017 Med School, then molecular biology. Wasn't smart enough for theoretical physics but did extremely well in MB. Research, pharma executive, then hedge fund. Now retired, dabbling in undergraduate reviews as in Feynman, Apostol, etc.

  • @bkerdas
    @bkerdas 2 роки тому +1

    Thanks a lot. This video will certainly find its place in the heart of undergraduate physics students in the world.

    • @PhysicsExplainedVideos
      @PhysicsExplainedVideos  2 роки тому

      Glad it was helpful!

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 2 роки тому

      And why would a smart undergrad come here to get a really poor presentation on the matter when he/she can find a hundred textbooks in the library that are much better? ;-)

  • @bharatgopalakrishna1812
    @bharatgopalakrishna1812 2 роки тому +8

    Thank you very much for the simple derivation. Literally every Schrodinger Equation video I watch just explains what it is without deriving it. Total Energy (Hamiltonian) = Potential Energy + Kinetic Energy. Yes yes yes, but how did he COME UP with it? To which I was told he just conjured it up out of his rear end, because that's his genius (facepalm).

  • @rayhill7066
    @rayhill7066 6 місяців тому +2

    Sailing along quite nicely with this. One small niggle at about 6.59 the trig Acos part gets discarded without apparent reason, can’t find any obscure trig identity. Other texts I have searched have done similar. Other than that its a very well presented and comprehensive work that has filled in some of the many gaps in my knowledge.

    • @narfwhals7843
      @narfwhals7843 6 місяців тому +1

      What do you mean by "discarded"? It is equal to y. So instead of writing the whole expression, we write y. y=Acos(kx-wt) so -w²Acos(kx-wt)=-w²y

    • @CliffSedge-nu5fv
      @CliffSedge-nu5fv 4 місяці тому

      Yeah, it's just an algebraic substitution.

    • @rayhill7066
      @rayhill7066 4 місяці тому

      @@CliffSedge-nu5fv Yeah got there eventually thx.

  • @saadaijaz6403
    @saadaijaz6403 2 роки тому +5

    I cannot thank you much for this refresher as I just planned on studying Quatum Mechanics again but in more detail this time

    • @peterfireflylund
      @peterfireflylund 2 роки тому +1

      Did you accidentally leave out the word “too”?

  • @ladanimanthan4270
    @ladanimanthan4270 2 роки тому

    I am from India... But littrally your understanding about wave equation is unbelievable... I am fond of your explanation.... From last 3 years I am finding about such a very deep explanation.. you have full field my curiosity... A very big thanks From my side🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏😊😊😊😊