I've been watching videos for days trying to understand the difference between the Copenhagen interpretation and the Many Worlds interpretation and this is the only video that made me understand. Thank you.
Yes i agree this is the best video on the interpretations mystery perhaps in the world. Which goes to show we defintrly dont know everything of nature just yet.
They had to find something that would reassure people that just in case there is a God, that they have a chance that some version of everyone will make it to heaven. Your decisions don't matter if somewhere on some other dimension you have lived a righteous life, accepted Jesus, so you will end up in heaven anyway. Many Worlds theory is wrong. It is more likely that there are only a few dimensions for specific purposes. This is what Copenhagen says and that is the widely accepted theory. Atheists are pushing hard to develop String theory but they are not bold enough to push it forward without some physical evidence, even if they have to fake it. So they have built the Hadron collider.
It is possible to observe an electron in a superposition of spin-up and spin-down states - simply measure its spin along a perpendicular axis. For example, spin-left and spin-right electrons are particular linear combinations of spin-up and spin-down electrons. I favor the Transactional Interpretation for several reasons. (Essentially, there's a "quantum handshake" between the past and the future which collapses the wavefunction.) First, it's science fictiony. (Aesthetics matter.) Second, it proceeds from Dirac's bra-ket notation, where the probability of transitioning from initial state i to final state f is given by ||², where |i> is the initial state going forward in time and
4:30 “There are four things in the box:...”. The cat, a radioactive source, a detector, a hammer and a poison vial... Looks like there’s a bit of uncertainty about the number of items in the box!
Quantum mechanics unite! Quantum 🤖ntangle yourself in the Matrix of E8 God-particle quasi crystalline science as detailed by Quantum Gravity Research! Learn to hack reality & quantum upgrade yOur human DNA with God-particle-therapy for real with quantum language/code mechanics taught via screenplay turned avant garde book! 👋🏼 -- Available today -- Read the popular Matrix 4 screenplay published as an exciting cyberpunk'd book on Facebook! Beloved by hundreds of Facebook spectators, the Matrix 4's quantum screenplay in book form online Written in painstaking detail by author & quantum screenwriter Michael Charles :: facebook.com/TheMatrix4online
Arvin, with your videos I now have a somewhat intuitive understanding of QM, Relativity, and the fundamental forces. You do this better than any other channel, thanks a lot!
This is the 1st time I finally understand 50% of what you are saying. 2021 looks promising to me! I am just happy to imagine that maybe in other world, the other me understand 100% of what you are saying :)
Fun fact, I like cats too. And I always cringe when I see the cat being poisoned in my own video...even though I know, intellectually, it is just a CGI image.
@@ArvinAsh "Perpendicularity in hyperbolic geometry is measured in terms of duality" -- Professor Norman Wildberger. Being is dual to non-being creates becoming -- Plato. Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates converging thesis or synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic. Hegel's cat: Alive (thesis, being) is dual to not alive (anti-thesis, non-being) -- Schrodinger's or Plato's cat. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas. Mind (the internal soul) is dual to matter (the external soul) -- Descartes. Noumenal (rational, analytic) is dual to phenomenal (empirical, synthetic) -- Immanuel Kant. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.
“No, no, no, no, I didn't forget. Um, there's this cat in a box and until you open it, it's either dead or alive or both. Although, back in Nebraska, our cat got stuck in my brother's camp trunk, and we did not need to open it to know there was all kinds of dead cat in there.” Penny Hofstadter.
Your a true physics genius Arvin Ash. The way you layout so clearly and coherently the full matter of these issues/mysteries show a a strong understanding of what is one most of the most complicated mysteries in the universe and allow me to ever deepen my understanding of such myself, thank you eternally!
What I like about Arvin is that he tries to describe and explain everything in a way that general audience would understand. I feel like channels like "PBS Space Time" though very detailed, they don't care whether or not the audience gets what they are saying. They only care about saying what they know, not about what the audience can understand. Keep it up Arvin, you are an amazing teacher and I have learned so much from you in the past few months
Many worlds might explain why we have dreams...? We’re just intercepting views, memories, visions, etc. from the infinitely many versions of ourselves. 🤯
Wow, I actually had to make a presentation about this exact subject just a few days ago.😄 The only things you could have added are that even before opening the box the cat gets entangled with its environment and therefore the universe "splits" and that different objects have different decoherence times. Macroscopic objects (like the Cat) decohere after such a small amount of time that you just cant see the cat in superposition. Anyways great video, this would really have saved me a lot time😂, but at least other people that want to know about interpretations of quantum mechanics have this easily accessible information.
Can you answer a doubt please: what is 'observer'- why does the system take myself or my eyes as the observer and not the walls of the box as observer?
@@levyroth You can say that there are million branches of reality, and in each reality the world is deterministic. While the number of the worlds is infinite, the likeliness for certain things to happen might manifest in the wavefunction. So, say when I jump from the ground, it is likely that in around 80% of the infinite worlds, I land successfully again to the ground while in the other 19% I tip and fall, and in 0.000000001% I just explode. In each universe the outcome can be seen as already determined, but there are just infinitely many outcomes, determined in a certain likelihood or possibilities.
“The only thing” is extremely important and exactly what most people are misunderstanding. Arvin says at one point, “The measurement is just interaction,” but all other times he says Measurement, by which a non-physicist infers consciousness. But most quantum “splits” are made without any consciousness involved
This is like flipping a coin. When the coin is midair, it’s in superposition which is both heads and tails at the same time. It’s only when the coin lands on your hand that the coin shows one result(wave function collapses)
"Perpendicularity in hyperbolic geometry is measured in terms of duality" -- Professor Norman Wildberger. Being is dual to non-being creates becoming -- Plato. Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates converging thesis or synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic. Hegel's cat: Alive (thesis, being) is dual to not alive (anti-thesis, non-being) -- Schrodinger's or Plato's cat. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas. Mind (the internal soul) is dual to matter (the external soul) -- Descartes. Noumenal (rational, analytic) is dual to phenomenal (empirical, synthetic) -- Immanuel Kant. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Duality = two sides of the same coin.
Thank you. Looking forward to see next video. I keep asking about decoherence and the meaning of those complex numbers and was told that interactions change phase of the parts of the equations (the angle in complex plain), reducing the ability of it to interact with itself. That sounds like gradual entanglement with the environment, but I do not see any need for many worlds - they are all just our imagination until we update our knowledge with observation - the world/function already "collapsed" somehow, we only get to know it a bit later. I hope I get better understanding of this in next video :)
Yes, that is correct: decoherence is just a fancy term for "very complicated entanglement." Technically, any entanglement can count as decoherence so long as you are unable to undo it or incorporate it into your measurement. Therefore, it is a red herring.
The many worlds interpretation is very likeable. To think that I ended up at this point in my life in a tremendous amount of universes and the one thing they have in common is that I couldn't tell the difference.
"Perpendicularity in hyperbolic geometry is measured in terms of duality" -- Professor Norman Wildberger. Being is dual to non-being creates becoming -- Plato. Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates converging thesis or synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic. Hegel's cat: Alive (thesis, being) is dual to not alive (anti-thesis, non-being) -- Schrodinger's or Plato's cat. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas. Mind (the internal soul) is dual to matter (the external soul) -- Descartes. Noumenal (rational, analytic) is dual to phenomenal (empirical, synthetic) -- Immanuel Kant. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.
@@LimbDee First, it's ontologically inefficient, like swatting a fly with a trillion sledgehammers. It postulates myriad universes for the purpose of explaining common, everyday phenomena, without explaining how the total number of universes can keep increasing. Even worse, an infinite number of universes is required to implement real-valued outcome probabilities. I support MW politically as a protest against Copenhagen, which is literally an expression of authoritarianism. But scientifically, MW and all other mainstream interpretations seem to me like attempts to shoehorn the wavelike behavior of fields into the classical ontology of discrete objects.
You have been making amazing videos and I'm sure you will continue to do so. I wanted to a little bit about you and your past and if you've had some interaction with the field of physics before youtube?
The "many worlds" implies that they are mysteriously somewhere else. There are trillions of shadown photos in the double slit experiment right beside the one that we ultimately observe, and which are interfering with it. It's like waves going through each other. It's like a radio that picks up thousands of waves of different stations, but they all go through each other, and the radio selectively tunes out just the station that we want. My gut tells me that there is no reason why a wave function would ever collapse. We are just in different aspect of the same reality but the slice of our reality is quite thin.
It seems like we are trying to infer infinite possible realities from the fact that an individual so-called particle doesn’t have a defined position. If it is only waves and their interference patterns and resonance no such weirdness is needed. At macro scales it all becomes very predictable and so only one "World" exists: That which is the net or average of all those probabilistic states when put together. The unpredictability cancels out.
The fact we're counting on infinite worlds and infinite versions of ourselves to explain quantum mechanics just means this is an absurd problem to solve.
Honestly having looked at Wolfram's physics framework based around computation the many worlds view seems to be wrong, closer than Copenhagen but equally wrong as Wolfram's model shows the space of quantum states has its own branchial space in analog to geometric space which must exhibit Lorentz invariance with a finite vector length for a speed of entanglement. Basically the worlds aren't separate just different reference frames. While this isn't necessarily correct it suggests that there indeed doesn't need to be infinite copies of us observers as any degenerate "world" states will necessarily collapse. Really any model based on an entanglement cone and representing the space of possible spaces in unites of energy while simultaneously naturally explaining the Quantum Zeno effect which is otherwise bizarre.
@@Dragrath1 For all us who get headaches merely watching PBS Spacetime, I think you're saying my brain does not have the power to create an entire universe where I am lord over the entire Milky Way galaxy.
@@marcosolo6491 ". MWI does nothing to help with the real issue: The how and why and when of the splitting is just as mysterious as the how and why and when of the collapse" Not quite. The math supports both so both CAN exist, since they can, they do. Basically, why is there something rather than nothing. Because there can be something so there is. Anything that can exist, does. Yes its philo crap and untestable. Same for all the interpretations. Use whatever works best for you and the situation.
There is a grown man with a family who just put raw spaghetti in his mouth to see if his saliva can turn it into real spaghetti. Can you explain what you're saying to someone is definitely..not me?
Think of a video game. In our latest games, every choice shapes the experience of a game. Our choices shape our future. In this way everything is predetermined, however gives an illusion of freewill
I loved the show! Unfortunately it didn't resolve my split personality of alternately invoking EACH theory, depending on the mood..Thanks Arvin, well done..
What's fascinating here is that, when someone dies/death of consciousness (observer), the whole universe shifts to another reality, including us, until someone dies again and we all move,again,into another reality. Every day, a different parallel reality.
Let's say that a person killed someone, made several choices that led to alcoholism, had a troubled life and so on. Do you think that after he dies, he accesses a parallel reality where he can make more thoughtful choices?
@@AislanQueiroz1 i dont think you retain the memories from a past reality, when you die. So, it's the same person but with a different set of memories and reality. There could be the retention of deja vu, but I don't think that memories move from a reality to another
I smile every time I see a photo of Olivia Newton John's grandfather in a physics video. And I frown every time I see someone saying the universe splits into two every time two particles interact. I don't like theories that can never be tested or disproved by experiment. I used to like pilot wave theory but I no longer think it really resolves anything. I prefer theories that support what I see in the physical world. Let's Get Physical. I wanna get physical. Let's get into physical.
@@TheNameOfJesus Agreed everything isn't explained in pilot wave theory but I think is still better than to settle for Copenhagen's pet cemetery interpretation
@@anonp2958 No not really that doesn’t prove anything because if something doesn’t make sense then it doesn’t exist you can’t prove or theory since there’s no known way too
Excellent video, can’t wait for your next instalment of enthusiastically education videos with great visual references to complement such challenging topics. Well done
I like the way of saying it / thinking about it, that says that it isn't that it is in the one state AND the other state, and it isn't that it is in the one state OR the other state, but instead, it is in the one state PLUS the other state (or, more accurately, a linear combination of the two states) We just have to add a fundamentally new type of thing to our ontologies. Yes, we have to put complex numbers in our ontologies, but it turns out that's the way the world works.
With Many Worlds, we’re supposed to believe that every single particle interaction is spawning another universe which would be a huge number of universes constantly generated. That sounds pretty far fetched and it violates the principle of Occam’s Razor in a fairly big way.
Actually, it's assuming "the collapse of the wavefunction" that violates Occam's Razor, since it introduces an unnecessary phenomenon into QM that is: The only non-linear evolution in all of quantum mechanics. The only non-unitary evolution in all of quantum mechanics. The only non-differentiable (in fact, discontinuous) phenomenon in all of quantum mechanics. The only phenomenon in all of quantum mechanics that is non-local in the configuration space. The only phenomenon in all of physics that violates CPT symmetry. The only phenomenon in all of physics that violates Liouville’s Theorem (has a many-to-one mapping from initial conditions to outcomes). The only phenomenon in all of physics that is acausal / non-deterministic / inherently random. The only phenomenon in all of physics that is non-local in spacetime and propagates an influence faster than light. In Occam's Razor, "simplest" means having the fewest and least complex individual 'axioms' of the explanation -- NOT the fewest resulting items due to the explanation. An example is the millions of species of beetle resulting from the simple Theory of Evolution.
Actually, a common misconception is that it 'creates' worlds. All of these 'worlds' were always there, it's just that particles entangle in different ways between each other that divides these worlds. Decoherence is also why some worlds cannot entangle with one another again.
@@rescuearch7802 Also, if MWI is correct, there is no need for any mechanism or "spooky action at a distance" to explain the behavior of quantum entangled particles over long distances. There simply is no action at a distance, just another universe. :)
Dear Arvin, Love your videos. It's quite easy to understand Quantum Mechanics. With an emphasis on Interaction, look to the famous energy mass equivalence. C2 isn't about the speed of light, it's about causation (Interaction). In other words Einstein's famous equation E=mc2 is a bridge between special relativity and quantum mechanics when you look at C2 as a reflection of causation/INTERACTION. You need to isolate C2. It's been there all these years staring us right in the face🙂
If this is intended for armchair physicists or newcomers to QM, what it lacks is any justification why we say things are in a superposition and not just in one unknown state.
"Perpendicularity in hyperbolic geometry is measured in terms of duality" -- Professor Norman Wildberger. Being is dual to non-being creates becoming -- Plato. Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates converging thesis or synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic. Hegel's cat: Alive (thesis, being) is dual to not alive (anti-thesis, non-being) -- Schrodinger's or Plato's cat. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas. Mind (the internal soul) is dual to matter (the external soul) -- Descartes. Noumenal (rational, analytic) is dual to phenomenal (empirical, synthetic) -- Immanuel Kant. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.
So with the many worlds interpretation I get hung up on conservation of energy. If every quantum decision results in a new universe where does all of that energy come from?
The otherworlds that are mentioned are not created FROM this world, and since conservation laws apply to a closed system (like our universe) these otherworlds are not part of that and so no expectation or relationship about energy between the two can be made.
I think that is a fair question that I have trouble comprehending as well. According to Sean Carroll. The total energy of all the worlds does not change, but gets further divided, similar to the way you can cut a round cake endless times. Optikon's comment above is also true.
@@ArvinAsh well then, shouldn't the entropy in our perspective decrease If the energy is subdivided (to my knowledge) the entropy of our universe is increasing?
I like the idea that if we try to entertain an idea of a different reality details of it leak into ours which brings meditation practice into light and how ideas flow from simple oberservations
@@damienasmodeus928 Any energy in other worlds would not have any affect on our world, as the two would be completely separate with no communication or awareness of each other.
Thanks for the video 👍, but after hearing what you had to say, I'm pretty sure we are in the equivalency stage of chemistry call Alchemy, where we know there something but we can't nail it down completely yet, it nice in a way to helps us understand what it must have been like in the primordial begins of the science of chemistry.
Sean Carroll replaces the poisonous gas with sleeping gas in his book promoting the Many Worlds interpretation, Something Deeply Hidden, so the cat is either awake or asleep. He tells the story that Schrodinger's daughter claims that her father must have just hated cats.
I was thinking we could substitute a bacterium for the cat but I'm also a subscriber to the YT channel "Journey to the Microcosmos" and those guys adore bacteria! Soooooo...... any other suggestions?
Copenhagen and many worlds are just ways to explain the fact that we have outcomes. I think they they might neither describe what actually happens in reality. Great video!
maybe not when you buy, but each quantum collapsing event before you buy the ticket, that makes your buying delayed to the right ticket or the right booth. So observing a known person during the road to the ticket booth might be a quantum event where you see that person and talk with it and loose time until the tickets are bought or you didn't see it and get in time to the booth.
...Schrödinger's point in his cat thought experiment was not to demonstrate superposition but to demonstrate his belief that the idea of superposition is absurd. His point was that the cat, a macroscopic classical system was certainly either dead or alive; and certainly not in a superposition of the two states. If the cat was in one state or the other, then, by connection back through the mechanism of the scenario, the particle was either decayed or not decayed, not in a superposition of the two states. One could argue that the cat and the mechanism constitute a measurement mechanism which caused the collapse of the wave function, but one could not reasonably argue that the particle within the scenario was at any time in a state of superposition. ...By extension from the cat thought experiment, it could be supposed that all particles are in discrete states. The fact that there is a range of possible states for particles of any particular class, and the fact that the physicist cannot know that state without measuring the state, does not force particles into superposition. I am not aware of any experiment which has demonstrated any particle being in a state of superposition, and I am not aware of any formula or calculation which proves that any particular particle must be in a state of superposition. The superposition exists only in the POSSIBILITIES of particle positions, not in the actual positions of particles. ...I suspect that Heisenberg's and Bohr's attachment to mysticism has tainted the interpretation of the mathematics of physics for nearly a century. Of course, no measurement can prove that superposition does not exist for a particle, but, by the same token, no measurement has ever proved that it does. ...The interpretation that actual particles are in states of superposition is logically equivalent to a 'many worlds' interpretation with the exception that "observation" causes all but one of the 'many worlds' to vanish.
Most famous experiments in QM (double slit, quantum eraser, tests of Bell's inequalities and even quantum computers) all rely on that property of particles to be in superposition. Are you simply saying you're not aware of any QM history at all?
"Perpendicularity in hyperbolic geometry is measured in terms of duality" -- Professor Norman Wildberger. Being is dual to non-being creates becoming -- Plato. Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates converging thesis or synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic. Hegel's cat: Alive (thesis, being) is dual to not alive (anti-thesis, non-being) -- Schrodinger's or Plato's cat. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas. Mind (the internal soul) is dual to matter (the external soul) -- Descartes. Noumenal (rational, analytic) is dual to phenomenal (empirical, synthetic) -- Immanuel Kant. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.
@@thedeemon ...The double slit experiment produces an interference pattern, either in short term with electrons flowing freely through the double slits, or over a period of time when electrons are released one at a time to flow through the double slits. At no time in the double slit experiment is any electron actually observed to pass through both slits. And, with a single slit, you do not produce a bell curve type distribution. There are parts of the pattern which are not impacted by electrons. Electrons passing through the single slit experience edge diffraction. They can only be diffracted by certain amounts because they can only have certain energy values and their energy can only change by certain energy values, and thus can only undergo certain amounts of diffraction. So cancellation is not necessary to produce the some of the null regions attributed to destructive interference. A parsimonious interpretation is that, when electrons are allowed to flow freely, the interference pattern is at some locations caused by destructive interference and at some locations caused by the nulls which result from edge diffraction. ...It might be enlightening to calculate the sum of the wave distributions for two single slits and comparing that to the result of the double slit; particularly for the case in which electrons are allowed to pass through the slits one at a time.
@@stevejeffryes5086 > they can only have certain energy values and their energy can only change by certain energy values This is not correct, for a free electron (not bound in an atom) its energy spectrum is continuous, it can have pretty much any value of energy and change the energy by any value.
Dear Arvin Ash, this might seem a bit weird. I've been following your programming, ever since you first premiered. Your calm and clear teaching style is a beautiful example, That the deepest mysteries in the universe can be compressed into a sample. The most scientific principles still depend on interpretation, so thank you for all the years, of providing illumination.
holy crap. Quick warning to anyone out there thinking of watching this stoned.......don't. My head almost blew up there. Just soooooo much info to absorb. Awesome stuff my man!
@@karlwest437 - How are solutions to differential equations found? Guessing. Always guessing. When the guess works, it is indeed a valid solution. Does that solution preclude other solutions? No. No, it does not. For example, we have solutions for Maxwell's wave-equation (E & H). Now let us plug in another solution? Instead of E&H, let's try ¥? Not Psi, but a nearly identical statistical PDF called, ¥? Of the form, ¥e = ∫¥eo(k)·e^i·(kx-wt)dk, where ¥eo(k) is a PDF instead of a measured quantity? (more...) Wouldn't ¥e also be a valid solution of Maxwell's equation? Just as valid as our normal everyday Electric-field solution? (hint: Yes it would). But instead of yielding Electric field lines and exact, measurable answers, our new ¥e = PDF produces only statistical probabilities of where Electric-field energies might be found. Both E and ¥ are valid solutions and both are correct, however E provides much more information than ¥, solely because ¥ is a less accurate initial choice (guess). The reason Schrodinger's Psi yields only statistical answers is because Psi was poorly chosen as a statistical function in the first-place. Noyb's existence-theorem: There exists an exact solution to Schrodinger's wave equation that doesn't smear results with statistics in time or space. Corollary-1: There are no such thing as "collapsing probabilities."
Great movie! Also check out Tenet from same director.
3 роки тому+1
@@ArvinAsh maybe worth a video explaining it. I tried really detailed analysis (interactions between reversed and non-reversed matter, pretending that reversed matter is not antimatter) but couldn't finish it due to huge complexity.
@ Yes, it is very difficult to understand. There are many videos on youtube explaining the movie though.
3 роки тому
@@ArvinAsh I don't feel like they really are sufficient. Many of them claim for instance that reversed heat transfer was illogical, but I don't think it has to be. If heat transfered over time, then at the end he had to be at normal body temperature, so in the past he had to be at LOWER temperature. But it does seem to contradict that the hole from bullet traveled forwards in time. As I said, I got lost in the analysis and didn't have time to untangle it. 🙂
This is a great video. Would love to see more on some of the more exotic interpretations. Also, would like to see your take on the controversy surrounding super symmetry.
What’s interesting is that anything projected on a screen is “2-dimensional” in the sense that you can only measure it’s height and width (but you’re also measuring it at a certain location in the time dimension, so that makes it “3-dimensional), but it’s actually quadruple dimensional in that if something doesn’t exist in any one of the four physical dimensions of the physical universe, you would not be able to see it because it wouldn’t exist. So, even the light that is projected onto a TV screen could be measured in all four dimensions (its height, width, depth, and time measurements, if you had a measuring apparatuses to measure its physical location in quadruple-dimensional spacetime). I find that interesting. What are the implications of that, you might ask. There are none. Light has always existed. You can model it in a diagram or using math as either a ray of light or a wave of light or a stream of individual spheres of light called photons. However, making a model of something doesn’t change anything about reality. Light existed for billions of years exactly the same way that it exists now. It didn’t come out of light bulbs billions of years ago. Back then, it came out of the Sun, like it still does today. It doesn’t matter where light originates from. It’s just light. Stop studying quantum mechanics because it’s just making mathematical models of electricity and light. All the “theories” in the field of quantum mechanics are unnecessary and some are complete nonsense that people simply made up in their imagination. I have a feeling it has something to do with money.
It's not really an interpretation. Interpretation brings meaning to equations. Just calculating doesn't being any meaning, it's the absense of interpretation. Without meaning there's no understanding, no progress further.
Where are the many worlds located? It doesn't make sense to me that the cosmos is trying to hide its true nature from us, there are simpler interpretations in my opinion.
I am not sure because I am only a theoretician but, according to my studies, there are many probabilities in the paralel world that were not accessed, and we live in the world that is the option accessed, like a creationism theory, applied to Schrödinger better interpreted: "If nothing is nothing, how can nothing exist!” Like Schrödinger first described about his theory of the paralel universes, that inside a sealed chamber, a cat and a poison trap, it was alive and dead, depending on the observer. Here is where I applied his theory: "The Big Bang as part of creationism, that is: Big Bang happened and did not."
The cosmos is not trying to hide anything and the many world are located in the same place they were before, we just lose the ability to interact with those particles that are accomodated in wavefunctions farther from us.
@@ArvinAsh Actually this isn’t the most difficult question that proponents of the Many Worlds interpretation have to deal with. There is potentially enough “space” for these worlds.
@@jvcscasio It isn't hiding, that's just figure of speech, the problem is that the many worlds aren't falsifiable since we will never be able to interact with them, it's a big jump to conclude that there needs to be many universes to explain something like wave function collapse.
What if the person opening the box is in a box himself, which is then opened by someone outside his box? Maybe the whole universe is a closed box and there is no outside observer. In that case the wave function never collapses.
Many philosophy and some snippets of religion have science embedded in them. Oppenheimer was supposed to have got the idea of atomic bomb from the Hindu holy book Gita.
Born of philosophy BUT the scientific worldview is philosophies (And Aristotles) magnum opus.. Yes llike ALL philosophies assumptions are made ..Only in physics tho do we get signposts along the road SHOWING us we're on the RIGHT path, like your phone..Peace.
"Perpendicularity in hyperbolic geometry is measured in terms of duality" -- Professor Norman Wildberger. Being is dual to non-being creates becoming -- Plato. Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates converging thesis or synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic. Hegel's cat: Alive (thesis, being) is dual to not alive (anti-thesis, non-being) -- Schrodinger's or Plato's cat. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas. Mind (the internal soul) is dual to matter (the external soul) -- Descartes. Noumenal (rational, analytic) is dual to phenomenal (empirical, synthetic) -- Immanuel Kant. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.
@@hyperduality2838 I noticed You have cut and pasted that text on other threads, which is fine.. BUT, you should realize that it is a philosophical faux pas to quote authorities as evidence of a theories legitimacy.. it's called an "Appeal to Authority".. Authorities have WIDELY differing views..You should attempt instead to present the ACTUAL arguments that support dualism, if you can..Peace friend.
I've been watching videos for days trying to understand the difference between the Copenhagen interpretation and the Many Worlds interpretation and this is the only video that made me understand. Thank you.
Yes i agree this is the best video on the interpretations mystery perhaps in the world. Which goes to show we defintrly dont know everything of nature just yet.
They had to find something that would reassure people that just in case there is a God, that they have a chance that some version of everyone will make it to heaven. Your decisions don't matter if somewhere on some other dimension you have lived a righteous life, accepted Jesus, so you will end up in heaven anyway. Many Worlds theory is wrong. It is more likely that there are only a few dimensions for specific purposes. This is what Copenhagen says and that is the widely accepted theory. Atheists are pushing hard to develop String theory but they are not bold enough to push it forward without some physical evidence, even if they have to fake it. So they have built the Hadron collider.
@@georgerevell5643 We know exactly where the error is in MWI. It's in the second sentence of Everett's thesis. All you have to do is to read it.
Which is what?@@schmetterling4477
It is possible to observe an electron in a superposition of spin-up and spin-down states - simply measure its spin along a perpendicular axis. For example, spin-left and spin-right electrons are particular linear combinations of spin-up and spin-down electrons.
I favor the Transactional Interpretation for several reasons. (Essentially, there's a "quantum handshake" between the past and the future which collapses the wavefunction.) First, it's science fictiony. (Aesthetics matter.) Second, it proceeds from Dirac's bra-ket notation, where the probability of transitioning from initial state i to final state f is given by ||², where |i> is the initial state going forward in time and
I have been trying to wrap my head around this concept for a long time. Thank you for getting me 1 step closer.
“Its all coming up.........RIGHT NOW!!”
I freaking love this guy.
I know as long as I dont look into my wallet, there is a possibility that there's a $100 note in it.
I can deliver the note to AGU safely, you can trust me
Better still, a winning lottery ticket
4:30 “There are four things in the box:...”. The cat, a radioactive source, a detector, a hammer and a poison vial... Looks like there’s a bit of uncertainty about the number of items in the box!
Thinking the same thing. Now the universe doesn't make sense again.
Depends on whether you consider the cat a "thing".
Because it's a quantum box, it's subject to Heisenberg uncertainty principle: you can count the items, or you can list them, but not both.
What a great evening: PBS Spacetime with an episode on relativity and Arvin Ash with an episode on Quantum Mechanics!
Quantum mechanics unite! Quantum 🤖ntangle yourself in the Matrix of E8 God-particle quasi crystalline science as detailed by Quantum Gravity Research!
Learn to hack reality & quantum upgrade yOur human DNA with God-particle-therapy for real with quantum language/code mechanics taught via screenplay turned avant garde book! 👋🏼 -- Available today -- Read the popular Matrix 4 screenplay published as an exciting cyberpunk'd book on Facebook!
Beloved by hundreds of Facebook spectators,
the Matrix 4's quantum screenplay in book form online
Written in painstaking detail by author & quantum screenwriter Michael Charles
::
facebook.com/TheMatrix4online
Hello Einstein! How are you?
Haha, we’re nerds! 😂
Arvin, with your videos I now have a somewhat intuitive understanding of QM, Relativity, and the fundamental forces. You do this better than any other channel, thanks a lot!
This is the 1st time I finally understand 50% of what you are saying. 2021 looks promising to me! I am just happy to imagine that maybe in other world, the other me understand 100% of what you are saying :)
LMAO
Possibly my favorite UA-cam channel! Your ability to present complex subjects in an understandable way is quite astonishing. Thank you!
Thank you for putting us in the universe where the cat lives.
Fun fact, I like cats too. And I always cringe when I see the cat being poisoned in my own video...even though I know, intellectually, it is just a CGI image.
@@ArvinAsh you should solve that like Sean Carrol does and just makes it sleeping gas instead
@@ArvinAsh "Perpendicularity in hyperbolic geometry is measured in terms of duality" -- Professor Norman Wildberger.
Being is dual to non-being creates becoming -- Plato.
Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates converging thesis or synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic.
Hegel's cat: Alive (thesis, being) is dual to not alive (anti-thesis, non-being) -- Schrodinger's or Plato's cat.
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas.
Mind (the internal soul) is dual to matter (the external soul) -- Descartes.
Noumenal (rational, analytic) is dual to phenomenal (empirical, synthetic) -- Immanuel Kant.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
@@ArvinAsh Do you think there could be any relation between the many worlds interpretation and elements of modality like rigid designators?
Is there a possible world where the cat turn into a mutant by the radiation?
🤔Shakespeare: hold my "To be or not to be."
The Shakespeare's quantum version is "To be and not to be"
@@LeopoldoGhielmetti exactly
“No, no, no, no, I didn't forget. Um, there's this cat in a box and until you open it, it's either dead or alive or both. Although, back in Nebraska, our cat got stuck in my brother's camp trunk, and we did not need to open it to know there was all kinds of dead cat in there.”
Penny Hofstadter.
Your a true physics genius Arvin Ash. The way you layout so clearly and coherently the full matter of these issues/mysteries show a a strong understanding of what is one most of the most complicated mysteries in the universe and allow me to ever deepen my understanding of such myself, thank you eternally!
What I like about Arvin is that he tries to describe and explain everything in a way that general audience would understand.
I feel like channels like "PBS Space Time" though very detailed, they don't care whether or not the audience gets what they are saying.
They only care about saying what they know, not about what the audience can understand.
Keep it up Arvin, you are an amazing teacher and I have learned so much from you in the past few months
One of the best explanations I’ve come across regarding this difficult subject.
Many worlds might explain why we have dreams...? We’re just intercepting views, memories, visions, etc. from the infinitely many versions of ourselves. 🤯
Is the cat dead or alive?
Schrödinger: yes.
So tru tbh
Also Schrödinger: yes'nt
Hahah that’s the first time I laughed at these kinds of comments. It’s the only answer.
You will have to ask Bon Jovi.
Old joke
It's easy to learn when Arvin is teaching. Thank You.
Arvin Ash, I’m so happy you made another video. Thank you!
Wow, I actually had to make a presentation about this exact subject just a few days ago.😄
The only things you could have added are that even before opening the box the cat gets entangled with its environment and therefore the universe "splits" and that different objects have different decoherence times.
Macroscopic objects (like the Cat) decohere after such a small amount of time that you just cant see the cat in superposition.
Anyways great video, this would really have saved me a lot time😂, but at least other people that want to know about interpretations of quantum mechanics have this easily accessible information.
Can you answer a doubt please: what is 'observer'- why does the system take myself or my eyes as the observer and not the walls of the box as observer?
Does QM make sense in a deterministic universe? That's what I can't wrap my mind around.
@@levyroth You can say that there are million branches of reality, and in each reality the world is deterministic. While the number of the worlds is infinite, the likeliness for certain things to happen might manifest in the wavefunction. So, say when I jump from the ground, it is likely that in around 80% of the infinite worlds, I land successfully again to the ground while in the other 19% I tip and fall, and in 0.000000001% I just explode. In each universe the outcome can be seen as already determined, but there are just infinitely many outcomes, determined in a certain likelihood or possibilities.
@@rgudduu great question never saw it in that way
“The only thing” is extremely important and exactly what most people are misunderstanding. Arvin says at one point, “The measurement is just interaction,” but all other times he says Measurement, by which a non-physicist infers consciousness. But most quantum “splits” are made without any consciousness involved
This is like flipping a coin. When the coin is midair, it’s in superposition which is both heads and tails at the same time. It’s only when the coin lands on your hand that the coin shows one result(wave function collapses)
"Perpendicularity in hyperbolic geometry is measured in terms of duality" -- Professor Norman Wildberger.
Being is dual to non-being creates becoming -- Plato.
Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates converging thesis or synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic.
Hegel's cat: Alive (thesis, being) is dual to not alive (anti-thesis, non-being) -- Schrodinger's or Plato's cat.
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas.
Mind (the internal soul) is dual to matter (the external soul) -- Descartes.
Noumenal (rational, analytic) is dual to phenomenal (empirical, synthetic) -- Immanuel Kant.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
Duality = two sides of the same coin.
Thank you. Looking forward to see next video.
I keep asking about decoherence and the meaning of those complex numbers and was told that interactions change phase of the parts of the equations (the angle in complex plain), reducing the ability of it to interact with itself. That sounds like gradual entanglement with the environment, but I do not see any need for many worlds - they are all just our imagination until we update our knowledge with observation - the world/function already "collapsed" somehow, we only get to know it a bit later. I hope I get better understanding of this in next video :)
Yes, that is correct: decoherence is just a fancy term for "very complicated entanglement." Technically, any entanglement can count as decoherence so long as you are unable to undo it or incorporate it into your measurement. Therefore, it is a red herring.
I have a UA-cam Channel of Science in Brazil, and I think this is the best channel I know.
Thanks. I hope the Portuguese subtitles are helpful?
The many worlds interpretation is very likeable. To think that I ended up at this point in my life in a tremendous amount of universes and the one thing they have in common is that I couldn't tell the difference.
That's why many worlds is popular: it's not good science, it's good fiction.
"Perpendicularity in hyperbolic geometry is measured in terms of duality" -- Professor Norman Wildberger.
Being is dual to non-being creates becoming -- Plato.
Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates converging thesis or synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic.
Hegel's cat: Alive (thesis, being) is dual to not alive (anti-thesis, non-being) -- Schrodinger's or Plato's cat.
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas.
Mind (the internal soul) is dual to matter (the external soul) -- Descartes.
Noumenal (rational, analytic) is dual to phenomenal (empirical, synthetic) -- Immanuel Kant.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
@@hyperduality2838 Derrida: 'the Other'
@@Raging.Geekazoid can you explain yourself? What exactly makes the MWI bad science?
@@LimbDee First, it's ontologically inefficient, like swatting a fly with a trillion sledgehammers. It postulates myriad universes for the purpose of explaining common, everyday phenomena, without explaining how the total number of universes can keep increasing. Even worse, an infinite number of universes is required to implement real-valued outcome probabilities.
I support MW politically as a protest against Copenhagen, which is literally an expression of authoritarianism. But scientifically, MW and all other mainstream interpretations seem to me like attempts to shoehorn the wavelike behavior of fields into the classical ontology of discrete objects.
Well done Alvin. Thank you for your curiosity and not good enough for me approach. You represent a cutting edge to humanity’s quest for knowledge.
You have been making amazing videos and I'm sure you will continue to do so. I wanted to a little bit about you and your past and if you've had some interaction with the field of physics before youtube?
Thanks. I taught advanced physics in college as a grad student in engineering.
The "many worlds" implies that they are mysteriously somewhere else. There are trillions of shadown photos in the double slit experiment right beside the one that we ultimately observe, and which are interfering with it. It's like waves going through each other. It's like a radio that picks up thousands of waves of different stations, but they all go through each other, and the radio selectively tunes out just the station that we want. My gut tells me that there is no reason why a wave function would ever collapse. We are just in different aspect of the same reality but the slice of our reality is quite thin.
It seems like we are trying to infer infinite possible realities from the fact that an individual so-called particle doesn’t have a defined position. If it is only waves and their interference patterns and resonance no such weirdness is needed. At macro scales it all becomes very predictable and so only one "World" exists: That which is the net or average of all those probabilistic states when put together. The unpredictability cancels out.
I believe in life after love... and the pilot wave theory. Psyched for the next video
aren't those the lyrics to a Sher song? Including the part about pilot wave theory? kidding, obviously not the part about pilot wave theory.
same :)
Im reading The Secret of the Multiverse and I NEEDED this extra explanation. Thank you!!
The fact we're counting on infinite worlds and infinite versions of ourselves to explain quantum mechanics just means this is an absurd problem to solve.
Honestly having looked at Wolfram's physics framework based around computation the many worlds view seems to be wrong, closer than Copenhagen but equally wrong as Wolfram's model shows the space of quantum states has its own branchial space in analog to geometric space which must exhibit Lorentz invariance with a finite vector length for a speed of entanglement. Basically the worlds aren't separate just different reference frames.
While this isn't necessarily correct it suggests that there indeed doesn't need to be infinite copies of us observers as any degenerate "world" states will necessarily collapse.
Really any model based on an entanglement cone and representing the space of possible spaces in unites of energy while simultaneously naturally explaining the Quantum Zeno effect which is otherwise bizarre.
@@Dragrath1 For all us who get headaches merely watching PBS Spacetime, I think you're saying my brain does not have the power to create an entire universe where I am lord over the entire Milky Way galaxy.
@@marcosolo6491
". MWI does nothing to help with the real issue: The how and why and when of the splitting is just as mysterious as the how and why and when of the collapse"
Not quite. The math supports both so both CAN exist, since they can, they do. Basically, why is there something rather than nothing. Because there can be something so there is. Anything that can exist, does.
Yes its philo crap and untestable. Same for all the interpretations. Use whatever works best for you and the situation.
There is a grown man with a family who just put raw spaghetti in his mouth to see if his saliva can turn it into real spaghetti. Can you explain what you're saying to someone is definitely..not me?
Best explained video on UA-cam
Think of a video game. In our latest games, every choice shapes the experience of a game. Our choices shape our future. In this way everything is predetermined, however gives an illusion of freewill
It's a great explanation; I do prefer when Sean Carroll changes the poison gas to sleeping gas, though.
Well, as Schrodinger said, "who needs cats?"
I do and so do millions of others. Who needs an Arvin Ash??@@ArvinAsh
I loved the show! Unfortunately it didn't resolve my split personality of alternately invoking EACH theory, depending on the mood..Thanks Arvin, well done..
Haha. I vacillate on this as well. Good to keep an open mind.
What's fascinating here is that, when someone dies/death of consciousness (observer), the whole universe shifts to another reality, including us, until someone dies again and we all move,again,into another reality. Every day, a different parallel reality.
Let's say that a person killed someone, made several choices that led to alcoholism, had a troubled life and so on. Do you think that after he dies, he accesses a parallel reality where he can make more thoughtful choices?
@@AislanQueiroz1 i dont think you retain the memories from a past reality, when you die. So, it's the same person but with a different set of memories and reality. There could be the retention of deja vu, but I don't think that memories move from a reality to another
@G Tan Interesting, I also see it that way
I was born in January,1956. Which means I was conceived around April 1955....when Einstein died. Just saying.
@@Boogaboioringale What we are talking about is not reincarnation. We are talking about quantum mechanics related to consciousness and reality
Looking forward to your pilot wave vid
Coming soon!
kid: "Dad, why the cat is dead?"
Feynman: "Don't ask me, Just shut up and calculate!"
Sounds cool, but Feynman among all was trying to explain to the public what the calculations mean. He didn't do a good job, but he was trying.
I smile every time I see a photo of Olivia Newton John's grandfather in a physics video. And I frown every time I see someone saying the universe splits into two every time two particles interact. I don't like theories that can never be tested or disproved by experiment. I used to like pilot wave theory but I no longer think it really resolves anything. I prefer theories that support what I see in the physical world. Let's Get Physical. I wanna get physical. Let's get into physical.
pilot wave oil droplet experiment - look it up and see oil droplets dance around and form probability patterns, all seen with the naked eye
@@effectingcause5484 Yes I've seen that video, but pilot wave theory doesn't explain everything either.
@@TheNameOfJesus Agreed everything isn't explained in pilot wave theory but I think is still better than to settle for Copenhagen's pet cemetery interpretation
Very nice and clear video. Would be nice if you elaborate on photosynthesis as quantum phenomenon and quantum motors on membranes of cells.
Would be nice to popularize those topics because only few people work in that field.
Interesting!
Great video👍❣️
There's a *reason* all science are still called THEORIES or THESEUS.
Thank you for a very clear articulation of a difficult topic. I love your presentation. Very calming. 👍
Man, this episode is my favorite from the channel. I love this epistemology paradox in quantum physics.
The fact it is a paradox and doesn't make sense suggests it is not quite correct.
@@anonp2958 No not really that doesn’t prove anything because if something doesn’t make sense then it doesn’t exist you can’t prove or theory since there’s no known way too
Excellent video, can’t wait for your next instalment of enthusiastically education videos with great visual references to complement such challenging topics. Well done
Glad you enjoyed it, thank you!
I like the idea that in another universe I'm explaining quantum mechanics and Arvin is watching on UA-cam.
And a universe where the cat is watching a video about Arvin in the box.
I like the way of saying it / thinking about it, that says that it isn't that it is in the one state AND the other state, and it isn't that it is in the one state OR the other state, but instead, it is in the one state PLUS the other state (or, more accurately, a linear combination of the two states)
We just have to add a fundamentally new type of thing to our ontologies. Yes, we have to put complex numbers in our ontologies, but it turns out that's the way the world works.
With Many Worlds, we’re supposed to believe that every single particle interaction is spawning another universe which would be a huge number of universes constantly generated. That sounds pretty far fetched and it violates the principle of Occam’s Razor in a fairly big way.
Also it seems pointless. It's just another materialiats argument.
Actually, it's assuming "the collapse of the wavefunction" that violates Occam's Razor, since it introduces an unnecessary phenomenon into QM that is:
The only non-linear evolution in all of quantum mechanics.
The only non-unitary evolution in all of quantum mechanics.
The only non-differentiable (in fact, discontinuous) phenomenon in all of quantum mechanics.
The only phenomenon in all of quantum mechanics that is non-local in the configuration space.
The only phenomenon in all of physics that violates CPT symmetry.
The only phenomenon in all of physics that violates Liouville’s Theorem (has a many-to-one mapping from initial conditions to outcomes).
The only phenomenon in all of physics that is acausal / non-deterministic / inherently random.
The only phenomenon in all of physics that is non-local in spacetime and propagates an influence faster than light.
In Occam's Razor, "simplest" means having the fewest and least complex individual 'axioms' of the explanation -- NOT the fewest resulting items due to the explanation. An example is the millions of species of beetle resulting from the simple Theory of Evolution.
Actually, a common misconception is that it 'creates' worlds. All of these 'worlds' were always there, it's just that particles entangle in different ways between each other that divides these worlds. Decoherence is also why some worlds cannot entangle with one another again.
@@rescuearch7802
Also, if MWI is correct, there is no need for any mechanism or "spooky action at a distance" to explain the behavior of quantum entangled particles over long distances.
There simply is no action at a distance, just another universe. :)
@MRShockwave - Well put! That's a great way to explain it!
i get hypnotised while watching your videos ..
i get hypnotised all the time
Like iPhone users? Lol, try pretty much most devices nowadays aren’t familiar with the internal processes that allow the device to function.
Dear Arvin,
Love your videos.
It's quite easy to understand Quantum Mechanics.
With an emphasis on Interaction, look to the famous energy mass equivalence. C2 isn't about the speed of light, it's about causation (Interaction).
In other words Einstein's famous equation E=mc2 is a bridge between special relativity and quantum mechanics when you look at C2 as a reflection of causation/INTERACTION. You need to isolate C2. It's been there all these years staring us right in the face🙂
Great video. Keep it up with this great and quality content
Signed up to Blinklist. Thx Arvin :)
I was looking for this just 30 minutes ago, wow
And now, your comment is 30 minutes ago. Coincidence? I think not.
@@FabianReschke everything is a coincidence.
Lol. You win the internet today!
Wow
What do you mean?
If this is intended for armchair physicists or newcomers to QM, what it lacks is any justification why we say things are in a superposition and not just in one unknown state.
"Perpendicularity in hyperbolic geometry is measured in terms of duality" -- Professor Norman Wildberger.
Being is dual to non-being creates becoming -- Plato.
Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates converging thesis or synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic.
Hegel's cat: Alive (thesis, being) is dual to not alive (anti-thesis, non-being) -- Schrodinger's or Plato's cat.
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas.
Mind (the internal soul) is dual to matter (the external soul) -- Descartes.
Noumenal (rational, analytic) is dual to phenomenal (empirical, synthetic) -- Immanuel Kant.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
true yeah it sounds more like does a tree make a sound if it falls in an empty wood
Thank you for yet another simply explained video of a complex concept. Keep being brilliant, or to quote homeboy philosophy, Keep doing you, boo.
Loved the iPhone analogy.. something my simple mind could actually grasp 😅😅
So with the many worlds interpretation I get hung up on conservation of energy. If every quantum decision results in a new universe where does all of that energy come from?
The otherworlds that are mentioned are not created FROM this world, and since conservation laws apply to a closed system (like our universe) these otherworlds are not part of that and so no expectation or relationship about energy between the two can be made.
I think that is a fair question that I have trouble comprehending as well. According to Sean Carroll. The total energy of all the worlds does not change, but gets further divided, similar to the way you can cut a round cake endless times. Optikon's comment above is also true.
@@ArvinAsh 🤯
@@ArvinAsh and... thanks for the reply. Very much appreciated.
@@ArvinAsh well then, shouldn't the entropy in our perspective decrease If the energy is subdivided (to my knowledge) the entropy of our universe is increasing?
I like the idea that if we try to entertain an idea of a different reality details of it leak into ours which brings meditation practice into light and how ideas flow from simple oberservations
Where does all of the mass come from in the Many Worlds interpretation?
Check out my prior video on MWI where Sean Carroll explains this. ua-cam.com/video/5cYwvzmZLx8/v-deo.html
what if that's what dark matter is?
@@damienasmodeus928 Any energy in other worlds would not have any affect on our world, as the two would be completely separate with no communication or awareness of each other.
Magic. That is the explanation. It's the most looney tooney explanation world ever.
@@ArvinAsh So it would break every law of physics we know but it's ok since it's physicist who explains it with magic thinking. Great.
Thanks for the video 👍, but after hearing what you had to say, I'm pretty sure we are in the equivalency stage of chemistry call Alchemy, where we know there something but we can't nail it down completely yet, it nice in a way to helps us understand what it must have been like in the primordial begins of the science of chemistry.
Fantastic that you have Arabic subtitles. Sent it to my mum. People of all ages and backgrounds are interested in the quantum world.
I love this channel. I understand what is explained with Arvin Ash👍
who the hell dislike this?
love it❤️
You have disliked it an infinite amount of times
@@Hyp3rborean I got that one
Can't wait for the deterministic interpretations!
It is here: ua-cam.com/video/eNJFUo7yHhQ/v-deo.html
@@ArvinAsh Oh my bad, Thank you!
Is the cat alive?
Schrodinger:Yesn't
Very good content. One of the best in YT.
If the cat meows it’s alive, if not it’s dead...
it can be a non-cat speaking cat, tho
Ash you need to add the Ad right after you say "coming up right now", we are used to it. that builds curiosity
Sarcasm?
I would've been fine hearing the hammer hit glass really.
I can't wait for the next video,the topic even amazes me
We really need a variation of the Schrodinger thought experiment that is less offensive to cat lovers.
Sean Carroll replaces the poisonous gas with sleeping gas in his book promoting the Many Worlds interpretation, Something Deeply Hidden, so the cat is either awake or asleep. He tells the story that Schrodinger's daughter claims that her father must have just hated cats.
The observer must be a christian from the dark ages when they killed all the cats in Europe .
@@ChadEnglishPhD such a great book.
I was thinking we could substitute a bacterium for the cat but I'm also a subscriber to the YT channel "Journey to the Microcosmos" and those guys adore bacteria! Soooooo...... any other suggestions?
@@ChadEnglishPhD that's genius! I think the idea of a sleeping cat is much more sensitive to animal lovers.
Copenhagen and many worlds are just ways to explain the fact that we have outcomes. I think they they might neither describe what actually happens in reality. Great video!
So, everytime I buy a lottery ticket, there is one more me filthy rich 'somewhere'.
Only if the machine shuffling the tickets uses quantum randomness to do that, which I doubt.
maybe not when you buy, but each quantum collapsing event before you buy the ticket, that makes your buying delayed to the right ticket or the right booth. So observing a known person during the road to the ticket booth might be a quantum event where you see that person and talk with it and loose time until the tickets are bought or you didn't see it and get in time to the booth.
@@damienasmodeus928 false. sumilidero is correct.
'It could be you'.
This was so well explained, thank you so much!
...Schrödinger's point in his cat thought experiment was not to demonstrate superposition but to demonstrate his belief that the idea of superposition is absurd. His point was that the cat, a macroscopic classical system was certainly either dead or alive; and certainly not in a superposition of the two states. If the cat was in one state or the other, then, by connection back through the mechanism of the scenario, the particle was either decayed or not decayed, not in a superposition of the two states. One could argue that the cat and the mechanism constitute a measurement mechanism which caused the collapse of the wave function, but one could not reasonably argue that the particle within the scenario was at any time in a state of superposition.
...By extension from the cat thought experiment, it could be supposed that all particles are in discrete states. The fact that there is a range of possible states for particles of any particular class, and the fact that the physicist cannot know that state without measuring the state, does not force particles into superposition. I am not aware of any experiment which has demonstrated any particle being in a state of superposition, and I am not aware of any formula or calculation which proves that any particular particle must be in a state of superposition. The superposition exists only in the POSSIBILITIES of particle positions, not in the actual positions of particles.
...I suspect that Heisenberg's and Bohr's attachment to mysticism has tainted the interpretation of the mathematics of physics for nearly a century. Of course, no measurement can prove that superposition does not exist for a particle, but, by the same token, no measurement has ever proved that it does.
...The interpretation that actual particles are in states of superposition is logically equivalent to a 'many worlds' interpretation with the exception that "observation" causes all but one of the 'many worlds' to vanish.
Most famous experiments in QM (double slit, quantum eraser, tests of Bell's inequalities and even quantum computers) all rely on that property of particles to be in superposition. Are you simply saying you're not aware of any QM history at all?
"Perpendicularity in hyperbolic geometry is measured in terms of duality" -- Professor Norman Wildberger.
Being is dual to non-being creates becoming -- Plato.
Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates converging thesis or synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic.
Hegel's cat: Alive (thesis, being) is dual to not alive (anti-thesis, non-being) -- Schrodinger's or Plato's cat.
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas.
Mind (the internal soul) is dual to matter (the external soul) -- Descartes.
Noumenal (rational, analytic) is dual to phenomenal (empirical, synthetic) -- Immanuel Kant.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
@@thedeemon ...The double slit experiment produces an interference pattern, either in short term with electrons flowing freely through the double slits, or over a period of time when electrons are released one at a time to flow through the double slits. At no time in the double slit experiment is any electron actually observed to pass through both slits. And, with a single slit, you do not produce a bell curve type distribution. There are parts of the pattern which are not impacted by electrons. Electrons passing through the single slit experience edge diffraction. They can only be diffracted by certain amounts because they can only have certain energy values and their energy can only change by certain energy values, and thus can only undergo certain amounts of diffraction. So cancellation is not necessary to produce the some of the null regions attributed to destructive interference. A parsimonious interpretation is that, when electrons are allowed to flow freely, the interference pattern is at some locations caused by destructive interference and at some locations caused by the nulls which result from edge diffraction.
...It might be enlightening to calculate the sum of the wave distributions for two single slits and comparing that to the result of the double slit; particularly for the case in which electrons are allowed to pass through the slits one at a time.
@@stevejeffryes5086 > they can only have certain energy values and their energy can only change by certain energy values
This is not correct, for a free electron (not bound in an atom) its energy spectrum is continuous, it can have pretty much any value of energy and change the energy by any value.
I'm excited to see you go back to the work done by Penrose and Hameroff!
Dear Arvin Ash, this might seem a bit weird.
I've been following your programming, ever since you first premiered.
Your calm and clear teaching style is a beautiful example,
That the deepest mysteries in the universe can be compressed into a sample.
The most scientific principles still depend on interpretation,
so thank you for all the years, of providing illumination.
Thanks for sharing!
This explanation is sooooo elaborate, so good!
I really enjoyed this, thanks for your hard work! Can't wait for the next one.
holy crap. Quick warning to anyone out there thinking of watching this stoned.......don't. My head almost blew up there. Just soooooo much info to absorb. Awesome stuff my man!
Awesome video!! I don't think you've made a video about bohmian mechanics (pilot wave theory)... I'd love to hear about that!
Personally, I'm inclined towards pilot wave theory... but I do realize it's out of fashion these days
That'll be the next video.
@@ArvinAsh wow... thanks!
QM assumes a probabilistic solution, then by circular argument, contends the outcomes are probabilistic.
@@karlwest437 - How are solutions to differential equations found? Guessing. Always guessing. When the guess works, it is indeed a valid solution. Does that solution preclude other solutions? No. No, it does not. For example, we have solutions for Maxwell's wave-equation (E & H). Now let us plug in another solution? Instead of E&H, let's try ¥? Not Psi, but a nearly identical statistical PDF called, ¥? Of the form, ¥e = ∫¥eo(k)·e^i·(kx-wt)dk, where ¥eo(k) is a PDF instead of a measured quantity? (more...)
Wouldn't ¥e also be a valid solution of Maxwell's equation? Just as valid as our normal everyday Electric-field solution? (hint: Yes it would). But instead of yielding Electric field lines and exact, measurable answers, our new ¥e = PDF produces only statistical probabilities of where Electric-field energies might be found. Both E and ¥ are valid solutions and both are correct, however E provides much more information than ¥, solely because ¥ is a less accurate initial choice (guess).
The reason Schrodinger's Psi yields only statistical answers is because Psi was poorly chosen as a statistical function in the first-place. Noyb's existence-theorem: There exists an exact solution to Schrodinger's wave equation that doesn't smear results with statistics in time or space. Corollary-1: There are no such thing as "collapsing probabilities."
I just saw interstellar and now I like physics most
Great movie! Also check out Tenet from same director.
@@ArvinAsh maybe worth a video explaining it. I tried really detailed analysis (interactions between reversed and non-reversed matter, pretending that reversed matter is not antimatter) but couldn't finish it due to huge complexity.
@ Yes, it is very difficult to understand. There are many videos on youtube explaining the movie though.
@@ArvinAsh I don't feel like they really are sufficient. Many of them claim for instance that reversed heat transfer was illogical, but I don't think it has to be. If heat transfered over time, then at the end he had to be at normal body temperature, so in the past he had to be at LOWER temperature. But it does seem to contradict that the hole from bullet traveled forwards in time. As I said, I got lost in the analysis and didn't have time to untangle it. 🙂
@@ArvinAsh don't forget The Prestige, which is a giant wink to quantum physics.
This is a great video. Would love to see more on some of the more exotic interpretations. Also, would like to see your take on the controversy surrounding super symmetry.
“What’s in the box?”
I know the reference 😂😂
"Risc score" is in the box. Polymaths will know.
internal organs
Very cool. Cheers to your health from Canada Arvin Ash
My mind hurts and doesn't hurt after watching this and after not watching this!🤯
What’s interesting is that anything projected on a screen is “2-dimensional” in the sense that you can only measure it’s height and width (but you’re also measuring it at a certain location in the time dimension, so that makes it “3-dimensional), but it’s actually quadruple dimensional in that if something doesn’t exist in any one of the four physical dimensions of the physical universe, you would not be able to see it because it wouldn’t exist. So, even the light that is projected onto a TV screen could be measured in all four dimensions (its height, width, depth, and time measurements, if you had a measuring apparatuses to measure its physical location in quadruple-dimensional spacetime).
I find that interesting. What are the implications of that, you might ask. There are none. Light has always existed. You can model it in a diagram or using math as either a ray of light or a wave of light or a stream of individual spheres of light called photons. However, making a model of something doesn’t change anything about reality.
Light existed for billions of years exactly the same way that it exists now. It didn’t come out of light bulbs billions of years ago. Back then, it came out of the Sun, like it still does today. It doesn’t matter where light originates from. It’s just light.
Stop studying quantum mechanics because it’s just making mathematical models of electricity and light. All the “theories” in the field of quantum mechanics are unnecessary and some are complete nonsense that people simply made up in their imagination.
I have a feeling it has something to do with money.
every visualisation of Schroedinger's cat makes me sad :(
😢 poor cat
Another excellent video - thanks Arvin!
I like 'shut up and calculate interpretation.' 😀
It works :)
It's not really an interpretation. Interpretation brings meaning to equations. Just calculating doesn't being any meaning, it's the absense of interpretation. Without meaning there's no understanding, no progress further.
Quantum mechanics proves free will.
Jeremy Frost, Obviously you've never been married....
Where are the many worlds located? It doesn't make sense to me that the cosmos is trying to hide its true nature from us, there are simpler interpretations in my opinion.
Yeah, good question. This is indeed a problem that many people have with the MWI.
I am not sure because I am only a theoretician but, according to my studies, there are many probabilities in the paralel world that were not accessed, and we live in the world that is the option accessed, like a creationism theory, applied to Schrödinger better interpreted: "If nothing is nothing, how can nothing exist!” Like Schrödinger first described about his theory of the paralel universes, that inside a sealed chamber, a cat and a poison trap, it was alive and dead, depending on the observer. Here is where I applied his theory: "The Big Bang as part of creationism, that is: Big Bang happened and did not."
The cosmos is not trying to hide anything and the many world are located in the same place they were before, we just lose the ability to interact with those particles that are accomodated in wavefunctions farther from us.
@@ArvinAsh Actually this isn’t the most difficult question that proponents of the Many Worlds interpretation have to deal with. There is potentially enough “space” for these worlds.
@@jvcscasio It isn't hiding, that's just figure of speech, the problem is that the many worlds aren't falsifiable since we will never be able to interact with them, it's a big jump to conclude that there needs to be many universes to explain something like wave function collapse.
What if the person opening the box is in a box himself, which is then opened by someone outside his box? Maybe the whole universe is a closed box and there is no outside observer. In that case the wave function never collapses.
Math really feels like philosophy a lot of times does it not
The physics sure does. And math is part and parcel of that.
Many philosophy and some snippets of religion have science embedded in them. Oppenheimer was supposed to have got the idea of atomic bomb from the Hindu holy book Gita.
Born of philosophy BUT the scientific worldview is philosophies (And Aristotles) magnum opus.. Yes llike ALL philosophies assumptions are made ..Only in physics tho do we get signposts along the road SHOWING us we're on the RIGHT path, like your phone..Peace.
"Perpendicularity in hyperbolic geometry is measured in terms of duality" -- Professor Norman Wildberger.
Being is dual to non-being creates becoming -- Plato.
Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates converging thesis or synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic.
Hegel's cat: Alive (thesis, being) is dual to not alive (anti-thesis, non-being) -- Schrodinger's or Plato's cat.
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas.
Mind (the internal soul) is dual to matter (the external soul) -- Descartes.
Noumenal (rational, analytic) is dual to phenomenal (empirical, synthetic) -- Immanuel Kant.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
@@hyperduality2838 I noticed You have cut and pasted that text on other threads, which is fine.. BUT, you should realize that it is a philosophical faux pas to quote authorities as evidence of a theories legitimacy.. it's called an "Appeal to Authority".. Authorities have WIDELY differing views..You should attempt instead to present the ACTUAL arguments that support dualism, if you can..Peace friend.
Arvinash is the best.
13:40 Everything will go to hell...... if Born rule will fail .......
Nothing goes anywhere , its all conservation of energy
Thank you. Really looking forward to this one!
Plot twist: all interpretations are true
The particle can be in many positions because it is in motion. As simple as that. When it's position is measured, it is measured at one position.