Parallel Worlds Probably Exist. Here’s Why

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 21 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 50 тис.

  • @Sei783
    @Sei783 4 роки тому +2071

    USB plugs exist in one of three states: the up state, the down state, and the super positioned state. Only when you look at the USB plug does its state collapse into one or the other which is why it never goes in until you look at it.

    • @artryxx7481
      @artryxx7481 4 роки тому +108

      this is genius

    • @pekkalaitinen8769
      @pekkalaitinen8769 4 роки тому +91

      this is the only possible explanation

    • @RowynOfficial
      @RowynOfficial 4 роки тому +76

      That’s terrifyingly funny

    • @notyetskeletal4809
      @notyetskeletal4809 4 роки тому +50

      Profound, topical and extremely relatable to a potentially infinite amount of people.

    • @alexswanson655
      @alexswanson655 4 роки тому +31

      Comment of the year hahahaha

  • @FayazPA
    @FayazPA 4 роки тому +129516

    There's a version of me out there that understood the whole video.

    • @FakeIdolatry
      @FakeIdolatry 4 роки тому +5942

      Yeah but it would be extremely unlikely
      xD

    • @sakshamchowdhary1841
      @sakshamchowdhary1841 4 роки тому +3019

      @@bakedevvo why so salty

    • @FayazPA
      @FayazPA 4 роки тому +4333

      @@bakedevvo The fact that people even try to understand these videos should be appreciated. You think everyone works around science?
      People like you not being able to take a joke says a lot about the state of things here nowadays.

    • @MrTriple3D
      @MrTriple3D 4 роки тому +1930

      @@FayazPA leave the kid alone, he probably thinks that trying to sound smart is the same as being smart

    • @fundemort
      @fundemort 4 роки тому +439

      Also there's a version of me out there that don't have atomic clue what the video is all about.

  • @sacation6057
    @sacation6057 4 роки тому +1364

    “You have to remember that the whole idea of branching is just a human convenience” Glad he added this line in the end, this is exactly the point of all of it. The true laws of the universe are nowhere near the way we are describing it. It's just a matter of having a more fitting and more complete mathematical explanation of the bahaviour of the universe.

    • @user255
      @user255 4 роки тому +62

      _"The true laws of the universe are nowhere near the way we are describing it."_
      Or maybe they are, we have no way to know it. But fortunately it doesn't matter at all, as long as they work.

    • @numbereightyseven
      @numbereightyseven 4 роки тому +9

      And woop-de-doo for that. I'm just going to stay in n the real world of having fun, loving our families, doing kind and generous things, and/or struggling for survival.

    • @SugarTouch
      @SugarTouch 4 роки тому +50

      vsauce has video about physical laws and their role in universe as explanations. Michael tells the same - laws are not the reasons of events in universe. They are just assuming the relationship in-between. He tells about nail in the desk and the shadow from it. Length of the shadow is determined by physical laws and depends on height of the nail. You could even calculate the height of the nail by knowing length of the shadow and position of light. This is the law. BUT length of the shadow isn't a _reason_ for height of nail. Nail's height isn't caused by length of its shadow. These values are tangled but not in cause-effect way. It's just our way to describe relationship in-between. Absolutely real and existing relations but NOT the reasons of things. You're talking exactly about the same. Our math is the way to find out relations and consequences, not the way to discover the reasons. And our theories are always just a models. Robert Anton Wilson tells us not to mess territory and its map :) Laws of physics are our map of reality. It's not a good idea to mess it with reality itself :) Maps are useful are reflects real things but they are just a models.

    • @rickybruce472
      @rickybruce472 4 роки тому +4

      @@user255 As long as the rules seeming to work doesn't obscure some less obvious pattern that might become obvious if we accept that eventually under some conditions this rule fails.

    • @user255
      @user255 4 роки тому +2

      @@rickybruce472 Yes, the reason why science is cycle of predictions and tests for the predictions.

  • @collegeman1988
    @collegeman1988 Рік тому +3287

    In one alternate universe, Schrödinger is in the box and the cat is the one who developed the experiment and is recording the results.

    • @Rakscha-Sun
      @Rakscha-Sun Рік тому +89

      Quantum physics is in just so great for making jokes, for this reason alone everyone should have a grasp of it 😂

    • @AntonioKc
      @AntonioKc 11 місяців тому +55

      Take it a step forward, the hammer is using a cat to trigger Schrödinger that entangles to a radioactive molecule that its self could be decaying or not. And what is it called when the hammer views the box? Hammer time

    • @trailingupwards
      @trailingupwards 11 місяців тому +53

      Cat's Schrodinger

    • @tomasjenco5609
      @tomasjenco5609 11 місяців тому +3

      @@trailingupwards was going to find or write this comment myself :D

    • @whizzer2944
      @whizzer2944 11 місяців тому +2

      We are talking of possibilities, not impossibilities dohh

  • @cheezeofages
    @cheezeofages 3 роки тому +2773

    A friend of mine that was high at the time mused "If every possibility makes a new reality that means that in a couple of them you're a building because one of your parents became an architect instead of having you."

    • @jakerittlinger440
      @jakerittlinger440 3 роки тому +381

      Wow now that is a pot induced statement and an incredible one.
      So I'll offer another one: If you take your shirt off, turn it inside-out and put it back on, then the whole universe is wearing your shirt except for you.

    • @antonioangeconeb3196
      @antonioangeconeb3196 3 роки тому +60

      You ever take magic mushrooms and think about those things? like why we’re here etc.

    • @moneypleasebeup3324
      @moneypleasebeup3324 3 роки тому +5

      😂

    • @Goldiavolo
      @Goldiavolo 3 роки тому +1

      @@jakerittlinger440 how

    • @whitedragoness23
      @whitedragoness23 3 роки тому +2

      No

  • @MrMuffdaddy4u
    @MrMuffdaddy4u 3 роки тому +3540

    This explains why two socks go in the dryer and one comes out. They are both in there, but once I open the dryer door, the universe splits and I lose one sock.

    • @Wycoolp
      @Wycoolp 3 роки тому +261

      Imagine another you is just trolling you by taking ur socks lol

    • @doaditty123
      @doaditty123 3 роки тому +144

      In a parrallel universe out there,
      Beer thinks about me while im at work....

    • @StephenDelRosario777
      @StephenDelRosario777 3 роки тому +15

      @@doaditty123 *Cool bug facts*

    • @jashandeepsingh2239
      @jashandeepsingh2239 3 роки тому +2

      Lol that's funny

    • @Altiveda
      @Altiveda 3 роки тому +17

      @@doaditty123 I want the world where my beer goes to work for me and comes home and ceases to exist outside of my belly. then i send another beer in again.

  • @dtstar331
    @dtstar331 4 роки тому +36267

    Meanwhile, in a parallel universe:
    "Parallel universes probably don't exist and here's why"

    • @nubslayerex
      @nubslayerex 4 роки тому +659

      DTStar then they find out lol.

    • @michiganjack1337
      @michiganjack1337 4 роки тому +245

      Precisely!

    • @jbrownjetmech-4783
      @jbrownjetmech-4783 4 роки тому +455

      Ummmmm...that's a good one.

    • @neutronenstern.
      @neutronenstern. 4 роки тому +239

      Now in this Universe I will tell you why it probably doesent exist: If this theorem is true every time when someone dies in a lonely room, theres another universe where this person will live longer, and another one where it lives longer,... . Then there should be some people just living for a very long time in this universe, too. And with long I mean very long. (Maybe as old as we humans are) So i think this theorem has to be false!

    • @ShawnPattonC
      @ShawnPattonC 4 роки тому +608

      @@neutronenstern. You don't really understand how Quantum Immortality works. The probability that someone experiences their own indefinite continued existence is guaranteed. The probability that someone notices someone else doing the same is nigh impossible.

  • @BuckScrotumn
    @BuckScrotumn 9 місяців тому +553

    Schrödinger’s equation at 0:24 literally looks like made-up alien satire of an overly complicated equation.

    • @brianm1902
      @brianm1902 7 місяців тому +38

      Partial differential equation. Not alien at all, just beautiful.

    • @nathanielwilding3779
      @nathanielwilding3779 7 місяців тому

      Das ist good

    • @MynameisS_A
      @MynameisS_A 5 місяців тому

      what does that even mean 😭😭

    • @binita4672
      @binita4672 5 місяців тому +14

      ​@@MynameisS_A It is a very shortened version of a longer equation which basically calculates total energy of the particle. Of course my explanation itself is very simplified. There are two mathematical operators used (Hamiltonian and del operator), Psi is your wave function, two variables r and t are position and time. ih is a constant.

    • @MynameisS_A
      @MynameisS_A 5 місяців тому

      @@binita4672 shut

  • @fearlessavocado3254
    @fearlessavocado3254 3 роки тому +8358

    It feels like the more you know, the more you realize how less you know

    • @aurorax2374
      @aurorax2374 3 роки тому +67

      Best comment haha

    • @SantiagoDavel
      @SantiagoDavel 3 роки тому +269

      That was said by Socrates only 'a couple' years ago (:

    • @slendydie1267
      @slendydie1267 3 роки тому +66

      idk who said that but i've heard this quote which i love: "All i know is that i know nothing and you dont even know that"

    • @santino6623
      @santino6623 3 роки тому +45

      I've heard a similar quote that goes like "The surface area of ignorance grows much faster than that of knowledge"

    • @Mma_tips
      @Mma_tips 3 роки тому +1

      TRue af

  • @nattiko8654
    @nattiko8654 4 роки тому +2043

    When you have two socks, neither of them are right or left. However, when you put one sock on your right foot, the other automatically becomes left, wherever it is.

    • @gian9907
      @gian9907 4 роки тому +23

      i love it :D

    • @gingerelvira6587
      @gingerelvira6587 4 роки тому +85

      Only if U observe the sock on a foot

    • @neetisaini2378
      @neetisaini2378 4 роки тому +68

      Hahaha...you completely understood the topic it seems...

    • @michaelesgro9506
      @michaelesgro9506 4 роки тому +123

      So, if I follow what you're saying, if I wash both socks but then accidentally put the right one on my left foot and the left on my right, the next time I wash them this explains why ONLY ONE one of them comes out of the dryer and I will never find the other one no matter how hard I try..because it is no longer that sock?...a split occurred and the sock is now in a parallel universe posing as my sock...OK, I think you need to win the Nobel in Physics for this and I need to lay down.
      EDIT: Schroedinger's Cat is being replaced by Natiko's Sock...no one open their dryers if you want the socks to still be "here"

    • @bjhansknecht3566
      @bjhansknecht3566 4 роки тому +45

      @@michaelesgro9506 No, here's the secret truth about lost drier socks: One of them explodes in the drier... that's where lint comes from.

  • @RRM_Personal
    @RRM_Personal 4 роки тому +2294

    I feel like I'm in a quantum state of knowing what he's talking about and following along and also being completely and utterly lost.

    • @TheMuratJohn
      @TheMuratJohn 4 роки тому +22

      lol, this.

    • @reethareid4068
      @reethareid4068 4 роки тому +2

      Same.. same..🤔

    • @yt-sh
      @yt-sh 4 роки тому

      xD

    • @protection_fire
      @protection_fire 4 роки тому

      This.

    • @zeken4094
      @zeken4094 4 роки тому +15

      well if you know what his talking and add that to what you think he is talking about and square that the probability is that you are lost...........................simpilz

  • @zinzinnatiohio
    @zinzinnatiohio 7 місяців тому +56

    13:43 This is like the ‘life is a computer simulation’ idea. A computer doesn’t have to simulate the entire universe. It only has to simulate what is being perceived. Many worlds doesn’t violate conservation of energy because it only has to account for observable energy.

    • @MistaOppritunity
      @MistaOppritunity 25 днів тому +1

      So that's why wave functions exist at all and why the collapse when they are observed. They are, "loading in for the first time."

    • @funfun5656
      @funfun5656 4 дні тому

      @@MistaOppritunity I'll bet there's also something to how everything is sort of nested. Like there's only a need to simulate the differences with the previous moment being the substrate rather than entire universes being created. Like paravirtualization.

  • @thenextgengamer4109
    @thenextgengamer4109 4 роки тому +1960

    Me watching this instead of doing my HW*
    Me to my teacher- I did my HW but I did not do my HW, it is in superposition, don't check it, it would be wrong measurement

    • @rafaldakowicz1901
      @rafaldakowicz1901 4 роки тому +54

      Great answer, you would definately make him/her day :D

    • @adamblackwelder9202
      @adamblackwelder9202 4 роки тому +133

      As a high school physics teacher, this would make my day

    • @somedragontoslay2579
      @somedragontoslay2579 4 роки тому +99

      Then I would answer that your score is now also entangled and you will measure it until the end of the semester. Now you'll have all the suspense a whole semester. You're welcome.

    • @ChristmasEve777
      @ChristmasEve777 4 роки тому +23

      If the class you skipped your homework on is quantum theory, then you may just place out of the class for saying that!

    • @prachetasnayse9709
      @prachetasnayse9709 4 роки тому +2

      You need more likes.

  • @CrossSM
    @CrossSM 3 роки тому +1704

    This gives the term "be the best version of yourself" a totally new and deeper meaning.

    • @perrowaton801
      @perrowaton801 3 роки тому +5

      si

    • @ginalinetti8975
      @ginalinetti8975 3 роки тому +16

      Something that's probably true but also infinitely impossible

    • @Merilirem
      @Merilirem 3 роки тому +19

      @@ginalinetti8975 One of those versions has to be the "best". So its not impossible.

    • @Merilirem
      @Merilirem 3 роки тому

      Highlander rules, there can only be one!

    • @supercvnt
      @supercvnt 3 роки тому

      F in the chat

  • @markmiller6402
    @markmiller6402 3 роки тому +2071

    I have nothing but respect for people that understand this stuff fully………. In this universe.

    • @nostalji93
      @nostalji93 3 роки тому +42

      I think you cannot. There are questions where we can only make educated guesses with mathematical predictions. It helps to get a better understanding of what we precieve, but it doesn't prove anything. The prof there gets pretty far with rational logical thinking. But when it comes to quantum physics we meet the limits of our perception (even enhanced with sensitive tools). We don't even fully understand how our own brains processes this input. But still Props well deserved.

    • @tolentarpay5464
      @tolentarpay5464 3 роки тому +8

      And, of course, there's still the bizarre phenomenon of "Dark-Respect", that strange riddle dealing with all the missing Courtesy & Politeness in the Universe...& don't even get me started on the conundrum of "Anti-respect"; for instance, did you know that when Respect & Anti-respect collide, what occurs is sweet F.A.? Now surely, that can't be right!
      Unless you believe in the Nielson Conjecture: "Don't call me Shirley"...

    • @markmiller6402
      @markmiller6402 3 роки тому

      @@tolentarpay5464 . Mind blown

    • @MrTalkingzero
      @MrTalkingzero 3 роки тому +45

      @@tolentarpay5464 A quantum physicist walks into a bar and orders two drinks. The barktender asks - why two? The physicist replies, there's is a very very tiny chance that a beautiful woman will emerge from a parallel Universe right into this planet, into this city, into this bar right next to me and then she already will have a drink from me and maybe she will want to have a conversation. The Bartender says, look, professor, there's a beautiful woman already sitting at the other end of the bar. Why don't you bring this drink to her and maybe she will talk to you. The quantum physicist laughs and says, yeah, right... What are the odds of THAT HAPPENING?

    • @planktonfun1
      @planktonfun1 3 роки тому +2

      Maybe in another universe 1+1=4

  • @MahendraVikramGaurme23d010
    @MahendraVikramGaurme23d010 7 місяців тому +37

    Great work. We need educators like you

  • @JunkyardDigs
    @JunkyardDigs 3 роки тому +3234

    I knew some of those words! Not the big ones tho

    • @plica06
      @plica06 3 роки тому +78

      My problem is I knew the words... I mean, I knew they were speaking English. That's about all.

    • @sicapanjesis3987
      @sicapanjesis3987 3 роки тому +8

      @@plica06 actually u understand the whole video, it's just that, pilca, who is typing this comment isn't that one...

    • @sicktory6334
      @sicktory6334 3 роки тому +4

      Same 😂

    • @d00mzDai
      @d00mzDai 3 роки тому +1

      You mean Norton 360?

    • @hhhbkid
      @hhhbkid 3 роки тому +10

      I feel like I'm watching Star Trek but there's no helpful analogy with someone going, "Like putting too much air in a balloon!"

  • @AArrad
    @AArrad 4 роки тому +1803

    A whole new meaning of “be the best version of yourself”.

    • @Dave96939
      @Dave96939 4 роки тому +40

      i asked God about it, received an answer in a dream.
      There is not multiple worlds that exists, it is multiple POSSIBILITIES that exists. Once the timeline is changed, the old timeline no longer exists except as a known possibility.
      Strangely though, time is like a river and 'residues' from the old timeline can carry over to the new. Also prayers of the previous timelines still carries over to the new timeline even if that prayer no longer gets prayed. figure that

    • @stargazer6814
      @stargazer6814 4 роки тому +20

      I agree with both of you! Remember, whatever the conscious mind affirms, visualizes, and suggests, the unconscious mind will start building into your life.

    • @fairyofshampoo4109
      @fairyofshampoo4109 4 роки тому +4

      @@Dave96939 wowoow i never knew that :0

    • @prcr364
      @prcr364 4 роки тому +9

      @fairyofshampoo Please confirm sarcasm

    • @fenrir9398
      @fenrir9398 4 роки тому +2

      Hard when all the other "me" are thinking the same.

  • @Allanfallan
    @Allanfallan 4 роки тому +659

    "You have to remember that the whole idea of branching, is just a human convenience." I think this statement is an important thing to communicate for people to even begin to understand concepts like this. We as humans have to use our limited experience of the universe to apply reason to stuff that is outside our area of comprehension. We can't comprehend scale without a frame of reference for example. You can say the sun is 93 million miles away, but if you don't scale that down to something small enough to understand (like the distance from Chicago to New York), you might as well make up a number because it's impossible to picture that. What we describe as "multiple worlds" with near infinite possibilities where everything we could have done has has happened, is really just us creating a frame of reference to understand it. It isn't the reality of how it works, it's just a way to comprehend it.

    • @michaelking8391
      @michaelking8391 4 роки тому +4

      You sound really clever, like you understand very well the subject you are talking about. Even if that subject is fictional

    • @circuit10
      @circuit10 4 роки тому +33

      @@michaelking8391 It's not fictional

    • @MeatBunFul
      @MeatBunFul 4 роки тому +8

      My head hurts

    • @ForwardSynthesis
      @ForwardSynthesis 4 роки тому +27

      I think when you describe something as multiple worlds or universes that just leads to more confusion among laymen. The pop science imagination will always interpret this as meaning there is a literal extra space containing infinite copies of the same stuff only slightly different that we can "science" our way into by opening some exotic technobabble door in reality.

    • @grayish9150
      @grayish9150 4 роки тому

      ua-cam.com/video/5MNI4C1cR7w/v-deo.html

  • @gatortech2002
    @gatortech2002 Рік тому +66

    This is the most profound description of our reality that I have found. The lights you shine are powerful Dr. Muller. Thank you.

    • @jamesbuchanan3145
      @jamesbuchanan3145 4 місяці тому

      Aw....you're in love! ❤

    • @quantumblurrr
      @quantumblurrr Місяць тому

      Lol he isn't trying to describe reality. He's describing the framework for working out theoretical realities

  • @illfreakynana
    @illfreakynana 4 роки тому +1481

    Is there a part 1 to this? I feel like I just walked into class 30 mins late.

    • @Rohit-jv7nl
      @Rohit-jv7nl 3 роки тому +10

      same

    • @EasyElectronics2412
      @EasyElectronics2412 3 роки тому +7

      😂😂😂💯

    • @sumaiyaali7952
      @sumaiyaali7952 3 роки тому +37

      Try watching a simpler video about Quantum mechanics to get an idea about the basics then watch this video

    • @JanneWolterbeek
      @JanneWolterbeek 3 роки тому

      same here, lol. The video wasn't too accessible is my critique.

    • @ko7302
      @ko7302 3 роки тому +1

      Haha he is talking about more advanced quantum theory.

  • @elcharrua1063
    @elcharrua1063 4 роки тому +8479

    This means there are versions of us that aren’t failures

    • @dannywest8843
      @dannywest8843 4 роки тому +458

      They're not us though. Fuckin' failures.

    • @c0smo709
      @c0smo709 4 роки тому +20

      Wrong

    • @damnfez
      @damnfez 4 роки тому +492

      Not for you. Schrodinger's equation doesn't account for things that are impossible.

    • @eddo2948
      @eddo2948 4 роки тому +60

      certainly, but the probabilities are very low

    • @rebeccax1431
      @rebeccax1431 4 роки тому +8

      Impossible

  • @ericolson2344
    @ericolson2344 4 роки тому +5442

    It's nice to know that in all those worlds, the earth is still round.

    • @greenetomphson6164
      @greenetomphson6164 4 роки тому +811

      or at the very least, in at least one of those worlds, everyone agrees the Earth is round.

    • @N01Meow
      @N01Meow 4 роки тому +27

      ikr

    • @thesigmaenigma9102
      @thesigmaenigma9102 4 роки тому +87

      Red sus

    • @ExacoMvm
      @ExacoMvm 4 роки тому +219

      Pretty sure in half of these "worlds" there's no Earth anymore :D

    • @aadiMjoahi
      @aadiMjoahi 4 роки тому +105

      the earth isnt round in this world either, it looks more like a badly made model out of clay

  • @natecw4164
    @natecw4164 19 днів тому +5

    4:25 My cat tried that on me the other day. Apparently he HAD and HADN'T pooped on the floor until I opened the door. He said his turd was in a superposition. I thought he said pooper position.

  • @boost808
    @boost808 3 роки тому +2960

    He broke it down and explained everything in detail and I’m still lost lol

  • @goodstuff7375
    @goodstuff7375 4 роки тому +10573

    Meanwhile, in a parallel universe:
    “Wow, 2020 has been a great year!”

    • @АнтонСолнцев-о4ф
      @АнтонСолнцев-о4ф 4 роки тому +654

      Finally released those flying cars we've been dreaming about.

    • @yooseul__
      @yooseul__ 4 роки тому +245

      Антон Солнцев
      all our problems were solved like global warming or racism

    • @LawNeu
      @LawNeu 4 роки тому +60

      JAUNE OSVIR NAVARRO so doing nothing and down playing a pandemic is “The best president ever” I think not.

    • @tammychapman3395
      @tammychapman3395 4 роки тому +59

      Or many eons in the future someone from somewhere else will say: "Well according to all our data, humans went extinct in 2020! If they had handled it properly they would still exist. Were humans really that stupid? Those idiots."

    • @yooseul__
      @yooseul__ 4 роки тому +44

      LJ Neuenfeldt
      i think you took their comment the wrong way i think they meant instead of trump not doing anything he was actually a good president

  • @georgeraev9846
    @georgeraev9846 4 роки тому +1444

    There is also another version of professor Carroll in a parallel branch where he strongly disagrees with this theory and even wrote a book about the insanity of such a possibility

    • @dannywest8843
      @dannywest8843 4 роки тому +57

      Depends. It may not have any probability of happening. It's not every "imaginable" scenario, just a whole bunch of them.

    • @BugRib
      @BugRib 4 роки тому +50

      Danny West - Given the trillions (at the very least) of copies of himself that branch off every second, the range of possibilities-for everyone, not just Carrol-is extreme!
      If Many Worlds is true (and I don’t think it is), I’d say there’s a 99.99999999% chance that there’s a Sean Carrol who ate his own mother, live on national television, but only had to serve one week in prison. He then went on to cure cancer, build an interstellar spaceship in his backyard out of popsicle sticks and dog feces, then became President of the USA, before finally eating his father on national television and then giving himself a Presidential pardon.
      Also, this version of Sean has three eyes (all different colors), and hair growing out of his tongue.
      And their are literally trillions of similar Seans “out there”.
      The end.
      Oh, and he’s married to Michael Jackson, who’s still alive (and an admitted child molester) in this (series of) branch(es).
      The actual end.

    • @toasterr4238
      @toasterr4238 4 роки тому +64

      @@BugRib there's some technical misconception there (certain things are just literally impossible) but I admire your creativity.

    • @BugRib
      @BugRib 4 роки тому +20

      Toaster R - None of it violates the laws of physics, and I don’t see why any of it would be inconsistent with the starting conditions at the Big Bang along with quantum “randomness”.
      _EXTREMELY_ unlikely for any given branch, but not unlikely for 10^367 (or whatever) branches per second across the whole universe. It’s ultimately just every different arrangement of particles and atoms that is logically possible, doesn’t violate physics, and is consistent with the starting conditions.
      I suspect that Sean Carrol would have to admit that it’s likely a reality.
      (note: I’m not a physicist, and my understanding of QM is severely lacking.)

    • @ObjectsInMotion
      @ObjectsInMotion 4 роки тому +73

      Ryan Clark
      Everything humans can imagine is much broader than anything that is possible.
      For example, fire was required to discover iron, it is IMPOSSIBLE to have a civilization in the Iron Age that hasn’t discovered fire.
      Likewise, Sean Carrol HAD to have been born in the 20th century, otherwise he wouldn’t have the same parents, wouldn’t look the same, wouldn’t have the same upbringing, etc, so you couldn’t call him Sean Carrol.
      Likewise, curing cancer may one day REQUIRE technologies that currently don’t exist, like iron absolutely needing fire. And because of this, it may be impossible for cancer to be fully cured before the 21st century unless a significant change in history occurred (one which would make the population of people very different).
      In this sense, it may be PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for Sean Carrol to have cured cancer in ANY timeline, and thus no Sean Carrol exists.
      Just because you can’t immediately think of how something violates physics, doesn’t mean it doesn’t. And the more complex the system, the more likely it is.

  • @Flight_of_Icarus
    @Flight_of_Icarus 6 місяців тому +94

    "Despite this being intended as a thought experiment, Schrodinger helpfully notes that the device must be secured from interference by the cat."
    This man knew cats.

  • @kai-_-3003
    @kai-_-3003 3 роки тому +9837

    My curious brain at 3am like “Hell yeah this looks interesting” not understanding any of it

    • @Robystronza
      @Robystronza 3 роки тому +355

      I am the version of u that understood the video

    • @qtackers9043
      @qtackers9043 3 роки тому +48

      I understand it all and watch theise videos and watch them faithfully

    • @jasperjude7682
      @jasperjude7682 3 роки тому +8

      Fr

    • @alienprepper5918
      @alienprepper5918 3 роки тому +88

      Try some LSD and watch them.Just need to open your mind.

    • @ORaion.27
      @ORaion.27 3 роки тому +5

      Yeah

  • @michaellovely_7265
    @michaellovely_7265 3 роки тому +1662

    Wow this really made me lmao. i remember steven hawking talking about this before and the guy asked him if there's a parallel universe where hes smarter than him and hawking response was "yes. Theres also one where youre funny"

    • @orphenocou4742
      @orphenocou4742 3 роки тому +21

      Lol, I do wonder about him saying 100% of outcomes exist in the multiverse. I don’t see how that’s possible. If it were true that means anything you could think of is possible, including one where every planet is inhabited by humans, and those humans suddenly and spontaneously sprout 5 heads that shoot to the end of the visible universe and that just wouldn’t be...*head shoots to the end of the universe*
      J/k the other guy explains it to him at 15 mins

    • @KhushiSharma-ci2kf
      @KhushiSharma-ci2kf 3 роки тому +57

      @@orphenocou4742 maybe its 100% outcomes following the laws of the universe?

    • @orphenocou4742
      @orphenocou4742 3 роки тому +5

      @@KhushiSharma-ci2kf yeah, his comment was a bit more vague than that. Like I said at the end of my comment the other guy explains it to him at 15 minutes basically in the way that you’re saying. He was saying infinite possibilities and infinite possibilities isn’t possible. Although some of them don’t have to follow the same rules of our universe if different rules apply for theirs

    • @user-ss6gp2gu6r
      @user-ss6gp2gu6r 3 роки тому +6

      @@KhushiSharma-ci2kf but what if the laws of physics can change between universes? Like some are in hyperbolic space

    • @lugaidster
      @lugaidster 3 роки тому +20

      @@orphenocou4742 There's no multiple universes following different rules. there's one universe with its set of rules and multiple possibilities that obey those rules.

  • @mopore
    @mopore 4 роки тому +479

    Am I supposed to feel smarter or completely lost after watching this?
    Superposition!

    • @Rafaelrgm
      @Rafaelrgm 4 роки тому +15

      I think both is the best answer.

    • @quonomonna8126
      @quonomonna8126 4 роки тому +3

      after you listen to people talk about this subject long enough, it will all start to come together, just keep exploring and one day you'll rewatch this video and understand it in new ways

    • @kreynolds1123
      @kreynolds1123 4 роки тому +2

      The best of scientists say.... those that say they understand quantum dynamics, probably don't. Either way, we currently have no way to say or even an experiment that in theory may determin if the universe is one or the other, and only have arbitrary preferences to promote one above the other.

  • @Mrwaddddles
    @Mrwaddddles 3 дні тому +2

    You forgot to mention one of the most important parts of the double slit experiment, when there was a detector watching the particles the experiment changed…

  • @sirreil3089
    @sirreil3089 3 роки тому +664

    One of the only media representations I've seen on this that seemed to understand that Schrodinger was NOT trying to prove the cat was both dead and alive, but rather trying to demonstrate a problem with quantum theory.

    • @phaseloli6668
      @phaseloli6668 3 роки тому +59

      Yes, it was designed to show how the laws of Quantum Mechanics don't mesh with the real world as the cat isn't dead or alive at the same time

    • @thewanderingmistnull2451
      @thewanderingmistnull2451 3 роки тому +18

      Right, he was trying to show how ridiculous that assumption was, despite the fact that the assumption had to be true for the double-slit experiment to work.

    • @PaLaS0
      @PaLaS0 3 роки тому

      yall ever just break the quantum theory by manipulating tickbase? I actually call double-slit - double tap, you just shift ticks or break sequence while doing swap and it breaks perception of time which causes whole issue with relativity and quantum physics

    • @hContentOftheInternet
      @hContentOftheInternet 3 роки тому

      I wouldn’t be surprised if someday we find out that the universe is infinitely big or ever expanding in all dimensions, not just in distance or time. Maybe all we are is some sort of energy that simply exists, and everything that happens(including its existence) can be described as entropy. That way it makes sense how the Big Bang happened without anything “prior”, since we all are just waves of energy and it simply transcends states infinitely. So maybe everything is infinite in infinite ways that it could be infinite(like the multiverse theory). Then perhaps physics could be treated as math

  • @nickjohnson3619
    @nickjohnson3619 3 роки тому +3002

    Let me tell ya, screen writers have gotten more use out of this theory than any physicist

    • @hardyquinn9442
      @hardyquinn9442 3 роки тому +27

      Haha underated comment right here!

    • @hydrocomet
      @hydrocomet 3 роки тому +16

      We’re all watching this now lol

    • @grandrapids57
      @grandrapids57 3 роки тому +35

      NO KIDDING- this completely ridiculous "theory" is fodder for college freshman who are tying to show themselves as deep thinkers.

    • @thejoeman4162
      @thejoeman4162 3 роки тому +22

      Marvels what if

    • @JohnWickkkk
      @JohnWickkkk 3 роки тому +2

      I’m 420 like 😎🌬

  • @paulclarke6435
    @paulclarke6435 4 роки тому +2834

    I feel like i just learned so much, yet nothing at all.

    • @janagriffis3693
      @janagriffis3693 4 роки тому +50

      you could've probably learned more if there was more explanation given to the core concepts

    • @aarondegagne3405
      @aarondegagne3405 4 роки тому +19

      @@janagriffis3693 Highly recommend Idiots Guide to Quantum Physics (Humphrey,Pancella,Berrah.). The book explains the core concepts well without diving too deep.

    • @that_guitar_guy7032
      @that_guitar_guy7032 4 роки тому +78

      Because you are entangled, YOU are experiencing not learning anything, while another YOU At the same time is experiencing understanding the whole thing

    • @paulclarke6435
      @paulclarke6435 4 роки тому +3

      @@that_guitar_guy7032 ha???.. i just got de javu

    • @SataraMDyse
      @SataraMDyse 4 роки тому +1

      Paul Clarke always

  • @BioAlpha5
    @BioAlpha5 9 місяців тому +52

    7:28 im legit using this to help solve the Zelda Timeline AND Kingdom Hearts lore and the fact it fits PERFECTLY is insane. Metaphysics, quantum mechanics mixed with religoin from MANY cultures. Man i love video games lol

    • @tigrus245
      @tigrus245 7 місяців тому +1

      Care to explain? Sounds interesting

    • @BioAlpha5
      @BioAlpha5 7 місяців тому +1

      @@tigrus245 I have a few videos already on my channel about this but currently working on a few Kingdom Hearts videos too that are yet to be uploaded. I got work so ill leave this open and make another comment when i get home with some more stuff.

    • @gregoryturk1275
      @gregoryturk1275 7 місяців тому +1

      @@BioAlpha5cool

    • @eyesack6845
      @eyesack6845 5 місяців тому +1

      I'm legit using it to help me solve the magic system in the Elder Scrolls series (Skyrim)
      Okay, I'm actually using the entropy video, but you know what I mean.

    • @BioAlpha5
      @BioAlpha5 5 місяців тому +2

      @@eyesack6845 Its in so much its unreal.
      Persona
      Final Fantasy (pretty much all of em if not most)
      Castlevania (as a friend now sees and showed me)
      Zelda Franchise(how this rabbit hole all started, Timeline and alchemy is the magic system in the series )
      Even DeathStranding, and some of Metal Gear Solid too.
      Same with pokemon and Mario too. Moreso pokemon with yokais, light, dark and time and space influences than mario.

  • @benzone-bysarthakrana8560
    @benzone-bysarthakrana8560 3 роки тому +2020

    Imagine making content so cool that everyone watches, even if they understand nothing.

    • @weichen219
      @weichen219 3 роки тому +4

      For that sake, even it is entirely wrong!

    • @AhirZamanSairi
      @AhirZamanSairi 3 роки тому +2

      @@weichen219 even _"if,"_ but yeah, totally

    • @AhirZamanSairi
      @AhirZamanSairi 3 роки тому +3

      @@weichen219 I saw it from the notifications but they deleted it for some reason, you can tell me the name another way maybe, I wasn't sarcastic btw, I really agree with you, all this many worlds stuff is nothing but a comedy to me, the "many worldness" exists only because of "few brainedness."

    • @weichen219
      @weichen219 3 роки тому

      Ahir zaman sairi, understand. Just interested in the discussion.

    • @weichen219
      @weichen219 3 роки тому

      @@AhirZamanSairi I was referring to the recent paper "heat transfer at speed of sound" on International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, October, 2021

  • @mr.kakarot5937
    @mr.kakarot5937 3 роки тому +2831

    In a Parallel world Cat is experimenting on Schrödinger inside a box.

    • @cianvincentmaduay2599
      @cianvincentmaduay2599 3 роки тому +77

      Human sized cats, cat sized humans

    • @TheFaro2011
      @TheFaro2011 3 роки тому +15

      You definitely didn't get the concept

    • @magicmanhs7718
      @magicmanhs7718 3 роки тому +7

      @@cianvincentmaduay2599 so then humans and cats would be the same height?

    • @mr.kakarot5937
      @mr.kakarot5937 3 роки тому +76

      @@TheFaro2011 You definitely didn't get the humour

    • @XxxTheDawgPoundxxX
      @XxxTheDawgPoundxxX 3 роки тому +14

      So you have found out.

  • @sirpasta4927
    @sirpasta4927 4 роки тому +3119

    "Does that mean that there's a universe where I'm smarter than you?"
    "Yes, and there's also a universe where you're funny" -Stephen Hawking

    • @al-hn7fc
      @al-hn7fc 4 роки тому +131

      Rest in peace Stephen. He left us to early.

    • @かれぶ-b3e
      @かれぶ-b3e 4 роки тому +91

      @@al-hn7fc could there be a universe where Hawking is still alive??

    • @Golgo2047
      @Golgo2047 4 роки тому +24

      Taken literally, I like to think how he could have left to earlier. (Don't you hate how everyone typos 'to' with "too" many o's? Too; lol. ~drips sarcasm~ :)

    • @darthnihilus511
      @darthnihilus511 4 роки тому +6

      Bro your profile pic is amazing

    • @AmberAmber
      @AmberAmber 4 роки тому +4

      @@Golgo2047 Not a spelling test, mate. XO

  • @TK-zy6ib
    @TK-zy6ib 2 дні тому

    He has a talent to take a complicated topic and make it even more complicated with a simplistic tone.

  • @GuitarLessonsBobbyCrispy
    @GuitarLessonsBobbyCrispy 4 роки тому +18358

    A parallel world; that's where my guitar picks go whenever I drop them on the floor and can't find them.

    • @TedWade73
      @TedWade73 4 роки тому +507

      Same parallel universe where lost socks go, do the picks and socks go in different universes, or does each individual item get its own universe?

    • @69k_gold
      @69k_gold 4 роки тому +109

      Sean's description of parallel universes as air particles is accurate. You see, two air molecules never occur in the same position in space, in a similar way, it's impossible for us human beings or even any other particle made out of quantum particles in our universe to interact with the other versions of themselves cuz it'll break the reality. If we actually create a portal into a parallel world, it just shows that all the particles that are interacting in both versions exist in superposition while observing, which is not possible according to Schrodinger's equation.
      So yeah, it's unlikely that your lost socks or guitar picks went into a parallel universe.

    • @jessewoo3946
      @jessewoo3946 4 роки тому +201

      Meanwhile, in a parallel universe:
      “Wow, 2020 has been a great year!”

    • @daphneraven9439
      @daphneraven9439 4 роки тому +27

      That’s where the black hole at the rear of the laundry machine leads-you know, the one that exacts a sacrifice of one of the left socks (I wear toe socks) and gloves per load, along with favourite guitar picks, and the odd pair of comfiest undies...
      That parallel universe is, to some, where they, themselves, expect to go at the end of this life’s journey, at which time those same souls will be reunited with each and every item that they lost down that hole.

    • @aminishnamedvaati
      @aminishnamedvaati 4 роки тому +33

      the parallel universe is just socks and guitar picks

  • @rohittiwari1610
    @rohittiwari1610 3 роки тому +7756

    Schrodinger: we don't know whether cat is alive or dead inside the box, until we open it.
    Cat inside the closed box: Meeoowww.....
    Schrodinger: Shut up

    • @LyrelGaming
      @LyrelGaming 3 роки тому +155

      Underrated

    • @gaminghardx
      @gaminghardx 3 роки тому +27

      😆

    • @joshs5577
      @joshs5577 3 роки тому +75

      @Andrew Onymous You might want to finish the video

    • @surelb
      @surelb 3 роки тому +42

      the real question is how much catnip does that cat need!

    • @Ownxer
      @Ownxer 3 роки тому +11

      @@surelb a whole lot

  • @updated_autopsy_report
    @updated_autopsy_report 3 роки тому +2332

    I tried understanding this, and I’ll come back in a year to see how much more I can understand.

    • @anthonymarx9643
      @anthonymarx9643 3 роки тому +88

      i’m you 1 year in the future, no it didn’t work.

    • @moonmoon-dc8lu
      @moonmoon-dc8lu 3 роки тому +2

      @@anthonymarx9643 it hasnt been amyear

    • @moonmoon-dc8lu
      @moonmoon-dc8lu 3 роки тому +3

      ok

    • @Sionainnsucks
      @Sionainnsucks 3 роки тому +1

      See you then!

    • @Sad_King_Billy
      @Sad_King_Billy 3 роки тому +7

      I bought the book mentioned at the end of the video. 'Something Deeply Hidden' is fantastic!

  • @raisins7976
    @raisins7976 4 роки тому +3864

    Meanwhile in another universe:
    Parallel worlds probably doesn't exist: here's why
    And the me in another universe, typed *don't* instead of *doesnt*

    • @timezone5259
      @timezone5259 4 роки тому +35

      Underrated

    • @Nadindel
      @Nadindel 4 роки тому +265

      @@Auziuwu actually there is a world where doesn't is the proper way to say that

    • @spriksie
      @spriksie 4 роки тому +39

      @@Nadindel I'm slain.

    • @theknightwhosayn1
      @theknightwhosayn1 4 роки тому +4

      Hello there brother

    • @junerye
      @junerye 4 роки тому +23

      Meanwhile in a parallel universe there's a comment that says there are parallel universes

  • @OriginalHuchang
    @OriginalHuchang 3 роки тому +1084

    Nice, this means no matter how much I make mistakes there’s a version of me out there making all of the correct choices. This is great but also problematic. It’s great because I’m theoretically never wrong, but this means my wife is correct when she says “You’re never wrong” and “You’re always right” during our marital disagreements. I’m truly torn about the matter.

    • @ogrekrause
      @ogrekrause 3 роки тому +5

      It would be more likely with a infinite amount of you that one choice at a time is changed. People normally win the power ball once for $500m. But lightning does strike the same spot more than once but the path is different every time

    • @muchvideoswow3579
      @muchvideoswow3579 3 роки тому +25

      well you aren't torn about the matter in another universe so its okay bro

    • @bobbyliu593
      @bobbyliu593 3 роки тому +3

      To Buddhists in countries like China they believe evolution when a person upon his death his soul will at that moment move to another place and where he/she eventually goes or does depends on a ruling by the god or haven, this person could be reborn to a person or an animal, upon the Haven court’s ruling largely depends on the dead person’s past life. Also, all died are to cross a bridge under it is a river called ‘memory-erasing water’ and once a person walks across this bridge he/she will immediately forget whatever did in the past life, good or bad, like shuffling a deck of cards. It’s teaching emphasizing people
      to do more goods on this life then you will be rewarded in due respect, or facing likely penalty including going down the hell where one could be thrown to
      a boiling oil pot or to the devil fire. This is all from the teaching since none of us have any memory or experience.

    • @anavan7
      @anavan7 3 роки тому +1

      Nice, this means no matter how much I make mistakes there’s a version of me out there making all of the correct choices and another version making even worse incorrect choices. My thought goes beyond a possible 'look alike version' or even lets say just another person of a different sex. I'm looking at energy entangled with energy. If this is true then would I consider a versions of myself spliced into an infinite particles of what makes the universe separated from say another Earth with another being of me? I guess it comes down to what is entangled exactly? I mean I could be an Alligator a tree, or a bus split into a multitude of parts like minerals strewn about on this alternate Earth that has been shuffled though the ages with different people and in essence I am entirely another being or inanimate object. I think this is how people consider checking in to the psyche ward.

    • @AlxzAlec
      @AlxzAlec 3 роки тому

      Are you like 78?

  • @vaibhavbhootra9210
    @vaibhavbhootra9210 4 роки тому +742

    In some parallel world, I understood everything in the video.
    A version of me, technically. But yeah, that makes me happy

    • @PoopVintner
      @PoopVintner 4 роки тому +16

      Vaibhav Bhootra also in a parallel universe, you are not only my mother, but also my dad and me.

    • @Cinn07
      @Cinn07 4 роки тому +7

      Elijah Martin and I’m the president

    • @palasta
      @palasta 4 роки тому

      Highly improbable.

    • @mrlaird
      @mrlaird 4 роки тому +4

      At least you're not the version who bought Norton AV?

    • @meisterunner
      @meisterunner 4 роки тому +7

      YOU only exist in one universe.

  • @MrWhite-yg6yk
    @MrWhite-yg6yk 10 місяців тому +6

    I sleep well knowing that a version of me is having a great life.

  • @omniarch8078
    @omniarch8078 2 роки тому +1579

    This man really said “y’all not gonna clown me I got a source” I respect it so much

    • @shucklesors
      @shucklesors 2 роки тому +30

      🤣🤣 if he only knew that people 10 times smarter than you (or me) would still not know enough to begin to have a conversation at that level let alone "clown" him

    • @billpugh58
      @billpugh58 Рік тому +5

      I love the “probably”:) thats “real” science:) probably!

    • @Escxpe_21
      @Escxpe_21 Рік тому +5

      ​​@@billpugh58 almost everything we know is a "probably". Theres nothing concrete to prove any theory still science has discorvered things about the universe our ancestors could only wish for

    • @truthisaquestion
      @truthisaquestion Рік тому +2

      @@Escxpe_21 ... dont you mean "probably discovered"? We can't be sure that our "discoveries" are true. Logical postivists failed miserably to establish foundations.

    • @nameq
      @nameq Рік тому

      By finding someone who made it his identity?

  • @PowerScissor
    @PowerScissor 4 роки тому +451

    Most unbelievable part of this video:
    You're using Norton360 and loving it. The probability of that is way beyond the scope of my comprehension.

    • @arindam588
      @arindam588 4 роки тому +3

      underrated comment LMAO !

    • @LabGecko
      @LabGecko 4 роки тому +4

      Exactly what I thought there at the end! Such genius, capped by this expectation that we would be so gullible as to install anything related to Norton software!

    • @hassaanrauf4349
      @hassaanrauf4349 4 роки тому

      It's sponsored

    • @PowerScissor
      @PowerScissor 4 роки тому +10

      @@hassaanrauf4349 Genius, you've solved the mystery!

    • @jejshmemeken500
      @jejshmemeken500 4 роки тому +1

      PowerScissor what’s so bad about Norton

  • @nova_vista
    @nova_vista 4 роки тому +1626

    I'm not lazy, my energy is just stored in a different world.

  • @mdp720
    @mdp720 2 місяці тому +3

    The problem with using a cat in Schrodinger's experiment is that we say it's unknown whether the cat is alive or dead unless observed, so it's "both". But the cat is a live subject, so it has an inside perspective of being alive (or the process of dying). It might not know why we put it in there, but it's still observing its surroundings. A less sentient being might be a better example.

    • @greenguard07
      @greenguard07 24 дні тому

      I don't see how it's a problem considering it's a theoretical concept in the first place. Those variables you mentioned have nothing to do with the underlying principle as far as I can see

    • @henosatne2288
      @henosatne2288 2 дні тому

      Who ordered a yappachino

  • @sanatjain4670
    @sanatjain4670 3 роки тому +4065

    In a parallel world the cat puts Shrödinger in the box.

    • @krinka1458
      @krinka1458 3 роки тому +265

      "the cat's Schrodinger"

    • @robertabarnhart6240
      @robertabarnhart6240 3 роки тому +64

      I'd like to put Schrodinger in that box! Dude, why you hate cats???

    • @nguyenminhquang9393
      @nguyenminhquang9393 3 роки тому +31

      @@robertabarnhart6240 gay

    • @xalat6277
      @xalat6277 3 роки тому +7

      Lmaooo

    • @BillAnt
      @BillAnt 3 роки тому +68

      I'd put both the cat and Shrödinger in the box and flatten it with a bulldozer. Guarantee both are dead without even having to look.... paradox solved! lol

  • @gavinhatmaker8117
    @gavinhatmaker8117 4 роки тому +1652

    Veritasium: "Now, this may seem obvious."
    Me on the couch eating chips: "Ya of course."

  • @aestheticallymercury6903
    @aestheticallymercury6903 3 роки тому +4172

    Meanwhile in parallel universes: Parallel universe doesn’t exist and here’s why

    • @juaquiqui-kun4333
      @juaquiqui-kun4333 3 роки тому +283

      Another parallel universe: you can travel to parallel universes and here’s why

    • @FadedLion77
      @FadedLion77 3 роки тому +136

      @@gyrotheweeb another parallel universe: you can be on all parallel universes and here's why

    • @dandhi4688
      @dandhi4688 3 роки тому +107

      @@FadedLion77 another parallel universe: you can't be on all parallel universes and here's why

    • @xooox_1777
      @xooox_1777 3 роки тому +97

      Another parallel universe : we don't exist, we're just a dream of some random kid

    • @funynonsence
      @funynonsence 3 роки тому +71

      @@xooox_1777 another parallel universe: we don’t exist, we’re just a dream of some random adult and here’s why

  • @vvvoda
    @vvvoda 2 місяці тому +4

    The title should be ”we don t know, but it s cool thinking about these things”

  • @spider-nibba7866
    @spider-nibba7866 3 роки тому +264

    It’s nice to learn something when your not forced to

    • @fareshajjar1208
      @fareshajjar1208 3 роки тому +7

      That would be called life...

    • @wefinishthisnow3883
      @wefinishthisnow3883 2 роки тому +1

      @@fareshajjar1208 If I understand the OP correctly, I believe they were talking about how almost every education system in the world forces you to learn x or y subjects and then forces you to submit assignments and take an exam on their time (ie being forced). It's nice to just learn something for the pure enjoyment of learning and satisfying an innate curiosity.

  • @sweetwillow028_
    @sweetwillow028_ 3 роки тому +323

    I have always thought about parallel worlds and there would be another “me” there or in all parallel worlds… we might be doing the same things same time and the only time we meet/cross each other’s mind is when one of “us” questions the existence of the other “self.”

  • @xynergy7
    @xynergy7 2 роки тому +2888

    I often wonder if my realities were split into two after escaping near death experiences and I’m living in the one where I survived.

    • @andthorn3145
      @andthorn3145 2 роки тому +229

      That moment when its like 4 am, see this video, and decide to scroll down to the comments section before going to sleep. And now you cant. Because this comment is still sinking in. Slowly. And because, it seems, its entirely possible.

    • @lennart7002
      @lennart7002 2 роки тому +118

      I've been wondering the same. Maybe at some point I will get chronically ill and keep surviving against all odds, making the news for still being alive. At that point I know I'm in a very low amplitude branch of the wave function.

    • @vibovitold
      @vibovitold 2 роки тому +92

      if realities are split, they're split after every possible discrepancy, the universe doesn't know the difference between serious ones (for us) and trivial ones

    • @supersucks
      @supersucks 2 роки тому +84

      this is the summary of the Quantum Immortality Theory

    • @adio1679
      @adio1679 2 роки тому +18

      For sure. You happen to be experiencing the branch where you live.
      Otherwise your particles go on with out you as your decaying body collapses more wave functions

  • @liaobrenden
    @liaobrenden 7 місяців тому +1

    I just stumbled upon this video and I was instantly reminded about long ago when I used to dream about an alternate world where my childhood crush liked me back. Thank you for this video, it is an inspiration.

  • @quotes9701
    @quotes9701 4 роки тому +1760

    So today i know why i failed in life. I was full of endless possibilities, but ppl observed me and i became limited.

  • @daimsaeed
    @daimsaeed 4 роки тому +4032

    Elsewhere in a parallel universe:
    Hey Michael, Veritasium here

    • @StGroovy
      @StGroovy 4 роки тому +64

      Worlds colliding!

    • @James42_
      @James42_ 4 роки тому +222

      Or am I?
      Veritasium music plays

    • @mowhmo
      @mowhmo 4 роки тому +8

      I think I really was is.

    • @charl2182
      @charl2182 4 роки тому +61

      So he called his UA-cam channel "Michael"?

    • @spacegrass6632
      @spacegrass6632 4 роки тому +25

      @@charl2182 yeah obviously who wouldn't

  • @malcolmchristopher3110
    @malcolmchristopher3110 3 роки тому +1954

    My boss thinks I'm a quantum particle, he's always asking me to be in two places at the same time

    • @zch3349
      @zch3349 3 роки тому +76

      You can just be in one place. And later tell him that you have been in both places. Another quantum particle of you did go to another place for sure.

    • @mishellnamjoon2787
      @mishellnamjoon2787 3 роки тому +6

      @@zch3349 true 🤓🤳

    • @danielserrano5462
      @danielserrano5462 3 роки тому

      aye

    • @hassang4886
      @hassang4886 3 роки тому +14

      Tell your boss there is a version of you in both places and there is a version of you who is the boss of your boss. If it dosen't make sense tell him there is a version of your boss who knows what you are talking about hahah

    • @UnblockMind
      @UnblockMind 3 роки тому

      And here I thought you could never get out of the middle....Malcolm

  • @gautamdoshi9168
    @gautamdoshi9168 Місяць тому +2

    9:38 this is the part where i understood what he was talking abt for those 9 mins

  • @sunkensplashgaming1884
    @sunkensplashgaming1884 4 роки тому +496

    Me before: Oh that's a cool thumbnail
    Me after: Ah yes, the superposition of the atomic particles due to Schrödinger's equation and the wave function cause the splitting of the universe

    • @Keno_jm
      @Keno_jm 4 роки тому +22

      5Head :wine_glass: AH YES

    • @rvrwest
      @rvrwest 4 роки тому +1

      Ying and Yang

    • @Mau365PP
      @Mau365PP 4 роки тому +1

      AHHHHHH 🤤🤤🤤🤤🤤 YAAAAASSSSSS 🧠💪👌💯💯💯🤓😺

    • @deathrex007
      @deathrex007 4 роки тому

      @@Keno_jm *enslaved wave function*

  • @bluetowel-reko
    @bluetowel-reko 3 роки тому +7678

    Its good to know that im having a great life in a parallel universe.

    • @Arunkumar-xw7oq
      @Arunkumar-xw7oq 3 роки тому +357

      Yeah dude, our other versions are way more happier and successful.

    • @wezz-t812
      @wezz-t812 3 роки тому +175

      you can still change your life, you know

    • @newtfigton8795
      @newtfigton8795 3 роки тому +431

      @@Arunkumar-xw7oq
      Don’t forget that there would be just as many universes where you have a much worse life too.

    • @legoboy7107
      @legoboy7107 3 роки тому +81

      You can have a great life yourself you know. You just need the right Syncing Speed so you can travel the adequate number of qPUs to arrive at the parallel universe where you're having a great life.

    • @isabellav3232
      @isabellav3232 3 роки тому +10

      parent trap 😳

  • @phillydcinematics2543
    @phillydcinematics2543 4 роки тому +2617

    quantum physics in one word: Yesn't

    • @jezonesjezz7179
      @jezonesjezz7179 3 роки тому +106

      @@mukunth_a_xi_science786 It is because you're in a state of superposition

    • @ko7302
      @ko7302 3 роки тому +14

      I just saw your name as quantum creeper. Now that is hilarious 🤣

    • @phillydcinematics2543
      @phillydcinematics2543 3 роки тому +12

      @@ko7302 "Creeper'nt"

    • @yackman4368
      @yackman4368 3 роки тому +16

      Reality itself really is yesn’t

    • @vanderslagmulders
      @vanderslagmulders 3 роки тому +3

      @@yackman4368 no, it is.

  • @Railrat420
    @Railrat420 7 місяців тому

    The last 4 minutes blew my mind. Everything just is, and we’re grasping at the straws on the floor trying to describe what is, or could be, when it’s all just actually happening.

  • @AWSVids
    @AWSVids 3 роки тому +851

    It’s funny I never thought about the fact that it didn’t have to be a cat being killed in Schrodinger’s example. He just as easily could have had the hammer fall and crack a walnut or something, and the walnut is both crushed and uncrushed until you open the box... but he chose it to be poison killing a cat. He must have been a dog person.

    • @dominicdeluca6378
      @dominicdeluca6378 3 роки тому +24

      He may have been taking the sentience of the cat into consideration

    • @sebastianrobleto2181
      @sebastianrobleto2181 3 роки тому +188

      Scrodinger’s nuts? Smh

    • @daniels.5631
      @daniels.5631 3 роки тому +13

      @@sebastianrobleto2181 best comment xD

    • @vixxcelacea2778
      @vixxcelacea2778 3 роки тому +24

      Actually the reason for the experiment was to prove that things like this do not matter on our macro-scale. The cat being alive or not is irrelevant to us because we have no control of knowing. The cat is either alive or dead whether we observe or not. Us not knowing doesn't change reality itself, only our knowledge of it.
      It's the same with the still brought up double split experiment. The reason that the it changed from waves and particles is not because of our observation, but that we need light to observe. Our observation was and is irrelevant.
      Schrodinger's cat thought experiments set to prove the same thing. On our macro scale, it doesn't matter, we don't affect the universe's laws of physics and our knowing doesn't change reality.

    • @winstonsmith11
      @winstonsmith11 3 роки тому +7

      @@vixxcelacea2778 So basically we can't know, because our way of "knowing" is a construct of human consciuosness that can't accurately conceive or perceive objective reality? Maybe? Here I am trying to understand, which is probably, by definition, impossible.

  • @kamisama9715
    @kamisama9715 3 роки тому +2094

    "The cat is both alive and dead now"
    Cat: *Meow*
    Schrödinger: I don't hear anything

    • @Tan3l6
      @Tan3l6 3 роки тому +71

      In Soviet Russia Cat observes you.

    • @michaelsmusic3532
      @michaelsmusic3532 3 роки тому +4

      That's funny !
      I love cats BTW

    • @Jenny-tm3cm
      @Jenny-tm3cm 3 роки тому +9

      Fry: alive or dead? ALIVE OR DEAD?!!?!

    • @LightAmVibed12317
      @LightAmVibed12317 3 роки тому +15

      In a parallel world:
      Cat: ...
      Schrödinger: Wake up!

    • @MagyarGaben
      @MagyarGaben 3 роки тому +7

      @@LightAmVibed12317 Schrödinger: "Hey, you, you're finally awake..."

  • @bogbogg
    @bogbogg 4 роки тому +513

    you know when they start saying "according to quantum mechanics" that's when you're lost

  • @moniquita720
    @moniquita720 7 місяців тому

    I think this is the most convicing argument for multiple universes I've heard so far.

  • @Aledharris
    @Aledharris 4 роки тому +348

    So “now” is a split nano-second after there was an incredible number of possibilities. And “now” there are still incredible numbers of possibilities.

    • @nin2494
      @nin2494 4 роки тому +15

      Wouldn't now be smaller than an attosecond? Which is a billionth of a nanosecond? Hell, look at the orders of magnitude:
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_(time)
      Even a single Planck time (10^−20 years) is described as only the shortest theoretically *measurable* time interval, not the smallest time increment. Which would mean that entanglement would instantiate at a much, much higher rate than humanly imaginable; if imagination only meant to attempt a perfect understanding surrounding every aspect of a variable rather than what is necessarily useful like relative positions in comparison to other objects of note, temperature, frequency etc. (sorry for that last tangent, just needed to clarify the semantics to myself.)

    • @williamdhersigny
      @williamdhersigny 4 роки тому +8

      @@nin2494 you are on the track. But also not.
      Very confusing. But also not confusing

    • @DekarNL
      @DekarNL 4 роки тому +2

      Anything smaller than a planck length or time is irrelevant

    • @gabrielsandstedt
      @gabrielsandstedt 4 роки тому +7

      Infinite amount of possibilities created at the smallest component of possible change of time, this might as well be infinite.

    • @debarghyachattopadhyay2614
      @debarghyachattopadhyay2614 4 роки тому +1

      Yes even smaller than nanosecond , imagine nanosecond is as big as a light year and you are trying to find a nano second , and do it for an infinity

  • @RajKeyMari
    @RajKeyMari 3 роки тому +223

    that professor deserves huge props for how elegantly he described the many worlds theory

    • @MatiBiotico
      @MatiBiotico 3 роки тому +6

      Yes. He did a super duper elegant description

    • @Kafiristanica
      @Kafiristanica 3 роки тому +3

      Sean carroll is great, he has many youtube videos about physics and a podcast, check him out

    • @zach3360
      @zach3360 3 роки тому +2

      I could listen to this guy talk for hours he reminds me of better call Saul if he were normal

    • @jeffreypowell7374
      @jeffreypowell7374 3 роки тому

      @@zach3360 with a hint of John Mulaney.

    • @gnarmvir
      @gnarmvir 3 роки тому +1

      Nice profile picture

  • @captainwilson1582
    @captainwilson1582 3 роки тому +694

    The most fascinating thing about all of these is that should a multiverse exist, would it be infinite, and if it was infinite the fact that there’s an infinite amount of the same universe that just repeats itself over and over because that’s a possibility within itself

    • @paulmichaelfreedman8334
      @paulmichaelfreedman8334 3 роки тому +12

      Correct, there are a number of theories out there that go way deep into this subject.

    • @icefyre8331
      @icefyre8331 3 роки тому +10

      The multiverse would expand exponentially, just like how our universe does in the big bang theory.

    • @mahmedtelenor
      @mahmedtelenor 3 роки тому +4

      Qur'an says there is

    • @BoSaGuy
      @BoSaGuy 3 роки тому +21

      @@mahmedtelenordoesn’t matter if it does. Science prevails.

    • @kilted777
      @kilted777 3 роки тому +8

      @@mahmedtelenor Where? Post the original quote.

  • @keoponp8121
    @keoponp8121 8 місяців тому +2

    Might be crazy… but this always makes me think of video game optimization. “If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it does it make a sound. In a video game if no one is around if will just load what was supposed to happen when we go check. Like in skyblock if you are farming potatoes it grows a certain amount in a day but if you leave the game runs a calculation for how many SHOULD be there. Waves functions and the tree noise problem sounds just like video game rules to me.

    • @ImDemonAlchemist
      @ImDemonAlchemist 4 місяці тому +1

      In a server, but if you're in a singleplayer world, then it's state just freezes until you open the world again. Unless that's changed recently.

  • @abhishekguitarist
    @abhishekguitarist 3 роки тому +416

    As soon as he mentioned about an infinite no of myself co-existing, I immediately closed the video, realizing that some of the many other versions of me are anyways gonna watch it.

    • @wienergaming
      @wienergaming 3 роки тому +1

      Smart

    • @Yun_er
      @Yun_er 3 роки тому +1

      🤣🤣🤣🤣

    • @therealturets
      @therealturets 3 роки тому +7

      What if they tought the same thing as you?

    • @Shunnk63
      @Shunnk63 3 роки тому

      🤣🤣🤣

    • @chaseGamez
      @chaseGamez 3 роки тому

      @@therealturets good ass point

  • @calculator91
    @calculator91 3 роки тому +394

    To make it clear. Humans observing something does NOT collapse a wave function specifically. The "measurement" and "entanglement" aspects to quantum wave function collapse are the same. The act of us "observing" something requires us to interact with it in some way, even up to and including bouncing a simple photon off a particle so we can detect it, thus entangling it.

    • @everysubonepushup
      @everysubonepushup 3 роки тому +5

      Techno be like NERD

    • @S.SortaLiving
      @S.SortaLiving 3 роки тому +2

      But what if that theory were to occur within the matrix system, if there is a reality in which one exists? Sorry if it’s a dumb question I’m still working on comprehending it😅

    • @everysubonepushup
      @everysubonepushup 3 роки тому

      @@S.SortaLiving huh I no understand NERD

    • @kohlrak
      @kohlrak 3 роки тому +6

      Glad we've cleared up this hubris, but one has to really question superpositions to begin with. It smells less like a true phenomenon and more like electrons could have the wave-particle duality.

    • @CronyneWARE
      @CronyneWARE 3 роки тому +3

      Fuckin' thank you to be honest. Googling this specific question is a pain in the ass that got me nowhere.

  • @rubeneckersley
    @rubeneckersley 4 роки тому +1454

    “Me nodding my head up and down acting like I know what he’s talking about”

    • @rubeneckersley
      @rubeneckersley 4 роки тому +39

      @Smoov Cat I have no idea what you're on about, but I totally agree

    • @joewalker5741
      @joewalker5741 4 роки тому +10

      Every time there are options, every option or path is taken.
      Example:
      You are at a cross roads, you can walk 1 of 3 ways and in actual fact you will walk every way, but to do that 3 realities are made and they are made at the moment you take action.

    • @gangoffour6690
      @gangoffour6690 4 роки тому +4

      😂😂😂. My neck is hurting also !

    • @karlcorrz
      @karlcorrz 4 роки тому

      @Smoov Cat Consciousness is transcendnt and is fundamentally indescribable in chemical terms

    • @kestrels_xp9338
      @kestrels_xp9338 4 роки тому

      Joe Walker Yeah but those options are also every single alternation/superposition that exists

  • @DustinPlatt
    @DustinPlatt 10 місяців тому +2

    It's 3am and I'm just sitting here in bed and watching this video after UA-cam recommends it to me and now my brain hurts so badly I'm quantumly entangled with my life choices.

  • @sugarcube1376
    @sugarcube1376 3 роки тому +2291

    “I think it’s embarrassing we have no idea”
    Me who knows nothing about quantum mechanics: wow, losers.

    • @pillow1557
      @pillow1557 3 роки тому +152

      Meanwhile you in another universe who knows about quantum mechanics: *Wow true*

    • @Ryan-li1ro
      @Ryan-li1ro 3 роки тому +26

      @@pillow1557 this is underrated

    • @birbman1169
      @birbman1169 3 роки тому +43

      @@Ryan-li1ro Meanwhile you in another universe : this is overrated

    • @michaeldavis8250
      @michaeldavis8250 3 роки тому +6

      @@Ryan-li1ro +1q
      Edit: i have no idea what i meant by this comment. Does it make any sense to you guys? I think i was drunk when i wrote it.

    • @xaigoart
      @xaigoart 3 роки тому +6

      @@pillow1557 "Wow true. Losers."

  • @danielschaeffer1294
    @danielschaeffer1294 4 роки тому +2922

    No matter how boring my life is, I’m glad to know that there’s a universe where I really AM James Bond.

    • @painovoimaton
      @painovoimaton 4 роки тому +201

      What about the universe in which there is a version of you permanently under the most hellish torment imaginable?

    • @tigerkralle
      @tigerkralle 4 роки тому +100

      @@painovoimaton bruh...

    • @Dythcr
      @Dythcr 4 роки тому +20

      @@painovoimaton bruh

    • @kamronpowell5784
      @kamronpowell5784 4 роки тому +3

      Daniel Schaeffer 😂😂

    • @mahadplayz6040
      @mahadplayz6040 4 роки тому +11

      Runagate bruh

  • @chidori__
    @chidori__ 3 роки тому +800

    need that universe where i understand everything in school

    • @jkst6864
      @jkst6864 3 роки тому +1

      😟😟

    • @ashrise
      @ashrise 3 роки тому

      Same..

    • @bruhemoth5599
      @bruhemoth5599 3 роки тому +2

      Sorry bro, even though there are thwparellel in NJ vierdses,yous wikk aitll fusial.

    • @vitobans2299
      @vitobans2299 3 роки тому +11

      @@bruhemoth5599 r/ihadastroke

    • @incognito7705
      @incognito7705 3 роки тому +13

      @@vitobans2299 Bro he just went to the other universe mid sentence where people talk enchantment table.

  • @nicholaas13
    @nicholaas13 3 місяці тому +2

    The cat is also an observer is schrodingers box thought experiment

  • @willheron7254
    @willheron7254 3 роки тому +412

    I’ve never been so confused and yet so interested in something

    • @Jorendo
      @Jorendo 3 роки тому +7

      That is because you aren't thinking in the 4th dimension!

    • @rihannasahib06
      @rihannasahib06 3 роки тому +1

      Same 😭

  • @alphared8028
    @alphared8028 4 роки тому +434

    "I think it's embarrassing we have no idea." Dude, I'm having trouble just following this video.

    • @betssytejada6553
      @betssytejada6553 4 роки тому +2

      How embarrassing lol same I pretty much left the same way I came in

    • @DioBrando-yk5up
      @DioBrando-yk5up 4 роки тому +1

      Sorry that's a few decisions back

    • @masoudppr2
      @masoudppr2 4 роки тому

      @@betssytejada6553 even the greatest scientists doesnt understand things in one go, and same for you, its not important how many times it takes for you to understand one thing, its how you can process the data that u understood and get new result of the same data!

  • @lezhilo772
    @lezhilo772 4 роки тому +268

    Here's the thing I'm still not comfortable with: I take it that the splitting of outcomes (decoherence) is described by the transition from a mathematical pure state(one wavefunction) to a mathematical mixed state(branched wavefunctions in terms of the states you get after doing a Schimdt decomposition of the density operator) under some kind of Lindblad type equation of motion. The many-worlds approach is interpreting the mathematical branching of the mixed state as an actual ensemble of realities.
    But there are other ways to interpret this branching. If we don't take the branches in the mixed state as branches in reality, but rather as a statistical ensemble, then decoherence doesn't have to support many-worlds. You can say that it supports that there are other things going on that we are not aware of. After all, we partial traced away the environment, the detector, our brains, our consciousness(whatever that is) when we wrote down a density operator evolving under a Lindblad type equation. In other words, instead of branching realities, the branching in decoherence can mean that we don't know which outcome it's going to be, just that which is more likely.
    So the thing that I'm not sure about is this: I can't see why many-worlds is favoured over a statistical ensemble interpretation. Statistical ensemble happens all the time in physics: you can derive PV=NkT by considering the statistical ensemble of all the particles in your room, but you don't talk about realities becoming branched when two partitioned gases reach thermal equilibria with God knows how many microstates. You instead say "microstates don't matter and this distribution, which is what most accessible microstates give and hence most likely, is what we see in experiments."
    We don't talk about many-worlds when we think about classical statistical mechanics, why talk about many-worlds when we think about decoherence, which leads you to something that can also be interpreted as a statistical ensemble?
    Edits: kudos to Derek for explaining such a complicated topic while balancing accuracy and accessibility!

    • @whatever9506
      @whatever9506 4 роки тому +38

      Yes

    • @thejacer87
      @thejacer87 4 роки тому +122

      sir, this is a wendy's

    • @zseriusz
      @zseriusz 4 роки тому +34

      Yep, I agree with you completely. While the idea of many worlds is aesthetically pleasing, there are too many things going on before even reaching such a conclusion. More research has to be focused on understanding the interaction between the quantum and the measurement apparatus which is classical.

    • @Melo3359
      @Melo3359 4 роки тому +8

      Is there a way to see Veritasium’s answer to this?

    • @matthewlind3102
      @matthewlind3102 4 роки тому +1

      Replying to bookmark further discussion on this.

  • @markkogzhang1230
    @markkogzhang1230 7 місяців тому +3

    So far, I am convinced with the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. My only concern is that the idea that every quantum measurement creates multiple parallel realities prompts questions about how energy fits in this framework.
    In classical mechanics, the conservation of energy states that the total energy in an isolated system remains constant over time, in that none is created or destroyed, only transformed and redistributed. If applied to the many-worlds interpretation, each multiversal branch, which is representative of a different outcome of a quantum measurement as a result of wave function collapse, would conserve energy within itself. In other words, the total energy across all branches remains constant.
    However, we have to take into account quantum fluctuations, where energy can briefly pop up in a tiny space due to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. These fluctuations are inherent in the quantum nature of reality and can lead to temporary violations against energy conservation within certain constraints dictated by quantum mechanics.
    The way I see it, these temporary violations are observed only in one multiversal branch. With the realization of all possible outcomes of a quantum event into separate branches, each branch will have its own probability amplitude.
    From a statistical perspective, the overall energy distribution across the multiverse would follow probabilities dictated by quantum mechanics ensuring that while multiple scenarios are possible, they occur with appropriate probabilities that maintain energy balance overall, so the conservation principle is preserved.
    Nevertheless, we have to take into account decoherence, one that gravely affects the quantum system as factors like the observer, other particles, and radiation become entangled with it, leading to the apparent wavefunction collapse. Decoherence remains a significant challenge in quantum computing as it introduces errors and loss of quantum information after the collapse occurred.
    From a practical standpoint, the fundamental dilemma still remains: overall many-worlds-system complexity - the discussion of energy sufficiency in the many-worlds interpretation as understood within the framework of quantum reality is bound to intersect with broader debates about the nature of reality, the role of the observers, and the interpretation of quantum probabilities in various quantum interpretations.
    I guess, I'd have to study more of these in quantum field theory (QFT).

    • @fenris7985
      @fenris7985 6 місяців тому +2

      unless... there is an infinite number of worlds, that would mean that the law of energy conservation would not be broken. But it would also interfere the with the probability because it would mean that everything would be (1/infinite). But i find it easier to believe that parallel worlds dont exist and people came up with the idea when trying to understand probability. also im just a random guy knowing nothing so dont believe me if u dont wanna

  • @mikevincent6332
    @mikevincent6332 4 роки тому +666

    "My book is both available and not availabe at fine bookstores everywhere"

  • @beegbraining
    @beegbraining 4 роки тому +268

    My CS professor described quantum entanglement as: you put on a sock on your left foot, at that instant, your other sock becomes your right sock.

    • @itsbazyli
      @itsbazyli 4 роки тому +11

      Awesome analogy!

    • @konradk1066
      @konradk1066 4 роки тому +5

      That’s genius!

    • @genderfluidbean2127
      @genderfluidbean2127 4 роки тому +3

      I wear 2-4 socks every day.. I’m wearing 3 right now... so like... ???

    • @gijs1286
      @gijs1286 4 роки тому +11

      how about you put the other sock on the left foot as well

    • @bradleybobbs
      @bradleybobbs 4 роки тому +1

      I'm wondering whether the others replying to this realize that it's a joke!

  • @Matcha-Owen
    @Matcha-Owen 3 роки тому +565

    The TVA should be coming through the door any minute now

    • @captured_moments7
      @captured_moments7 3 роки тому +1

      Lol

    • @emersongoncalves8326
      @emersongoncalves8326 3 роки тому +1

      😂😂🤣

    • @MiguelmgPires
      @MiguelmgPires 3 роки тому +6

      I understood the reference

    • @Angelicdudles
      @Angelicdudles 3 роки тому +3

      @@MiguelmgPires I understood THAT reference

    • @Bravoanim
      @Bravoanim 3 роки тому

      I can imagine a conversation between me and a tva agent: tva agent: seen any Loki variants me: no tva agent says something to other tva agent this is the variant

  • @QandDRecordings
    @QandDRecordings 3 місяці тому +1

    Instead of thinking of it as the universe continually splitting, the way I like to think of it as every possibility already existing. Basically like, the universe exists in a massive superposition of every possible combination of positions of every particle within it, and what we think of as moving through time is just our movement through that possibility space. The quantum wave function then being a description of adjacent points within that superposition, the nearer ones being closer to the center of the wave.

  • @ethanli865
    @ethanli865 3 роки тому +2634

    Meanwhile in a parallel universe:
    “Schrodingers dog”

    • @recepomercan
      @recepomercan 3 роки тому +26

      Yeah it’s a shame we are in the version of a universe where he chose cats.

    • @kennko3
      @kennko3 3 роки тому +38

      Meanwhile in another parallel universe:
      “Schdoginger’s professor

    • @gingersasquatch94
      @gingersasquatch94 3 роки тому +6

      Sylvester's man.

    • @lampposts1790
      @lampposts1790 3 роки тому

      But how can a parallel universe or multiverse be pertaining to our individual selves or earth's happenings?

    • @gingersasquatch94
      @gingersasquatch94 3 роки тому

      @@lampposts1790 It is a parallel version of our selves and earth's happenings? Universes which are "closer" to ours in events and physical laws are the ones we are most likely to talk about, like the idea of the central finite curve of the multiverse in Rick and Morty.

  • @Bea-jl9lt
    @Bea-jl9lt 4 роки тому +514

    Cmon it’s not rocket science, it’s quantum physics!

    • @creeperthecat9120
      @creeperthecat9120 4 роки тому +13

      Actually I was told that rocket science isn't that hard, as you just have to measure the velocity and speed and stuff. The engineering is the hard part. This phrase should just be reversed XD "It's not quantum physics, it's rocket science!"
      Hello fellow redditors. I see you.
      r/woooooosh

    • @КонстантинКругляков-г1у
      @КонстантинКругляков-г1у 4 роки тому +6

      Yep these all quantum mechanics theories sound good and interesting but the maths behind quantum mechanics oh my god! Sorry for my bad English

    • @Zedigan
      @Zedigan 4 роки тому +7

      Quantum physicist: "noooo you can't just base your engineering on what you know about physics and chemistry, you need to understand how every fibre of reality works to gain maximum efficiency, we have the potential of discovering the blueprints of the universe"
      Rocket scientist: "haha rocket fuel make steel funnel go woosh!"

    • @marshallbrooks4982
      @marshallbrooks4982 4 роки тому

      Seth Material explains this better then he does, every thought we have give birth to every decision you make.

    • @pawsitivenooz
      @pawsitivenooz 4 роки тому

      A philosopher: there is no reality

  • @voyager8049
    @voyager8049 3 роки тому +510

    For all of those talking about having a better life in another parallel universe: remember that there are way more parallel universes where you never existed at all. Simply existing in this world for us is a miracle.

    • @Kiy0me
      @Kiy0me 3 роки тому +45

      Finally someone who understands that our chances of existing is lesser than existing in other parellel universe and being happy there

    • @gunner4ever924
      @gunner4ever924 3 роки тому +8

      @@Kiy0me It wouldn't matter if you don't exist though.

    • @drakeofficial6168
      @drakeofficial6168 3 роки тому +32

      using that logic then theres a 100% chance of you existing

    • @xanderlaskey2753
      @xanderlaskey2753 3 роки тому +11

      @@drakeofficial6168 Yep pretty much debunks this only thing lmao

    • @postboy2242
      @postboy2242 3 роки тому +6

      @@Kiy0me nobody knows the chance of existing

  • @theRealPlaidRabbit
    @theRealPlaidRabbit День тому

    Maybe a less confusing way to look at the many-worlds model is not to say that the universe branches at every "decision", but rather, all those extra unverses were/are there the whole time -- they just look identical up until that branch point.
    This doesn't address my own deeper issue with the many-worlds model, but perhaps it does make conservation of energy easier to see.

  • @lightningfirst689
    @lightningfirst689 4 роки тому +101

    16:08 "...light moves at the speed of light."
    I understood that part.

    • @genaroarismendi
      @genaroarismendi 4 роки тому +1

      Lmao! Doesn't sound like something Sean would say but he did

    • @JD_Mortal
      @JD_Mortal 4 роки тому

      They forget to mention that the speed is not constant... as has been proven time and time again.
      I move at the speed of me. Cats move at the speed of cats. Rocks move at the speed of rocks... It's all relative, until it is not. Depends who opened the box and looked inside. Unless no-one opened the box, then there is a live cat in there forever, which is now radioactive.

  • @winstonsmith11
    @winstonsmith11 3 роки тому +471

    Sean Carroll is the kind of guy who you'd want to listen to for hours, but at the same time you don't want to listen to for more than 5 minutes.

    • @madisonbrown8851
      @madisonbrown8851 3 роки тому +9

      bro yessss 😂😂😂 love him tho 🤙🧠💯

    • @pineappleplaguedoc
      @pineappleplaguedoc 3 роки тому +2

      @@madisonbrown8851 what am i reading

    • @winstonsmith11
      @winstonsmith11 3 роки тому +13

      @Solomon Richards Only upon observation can we determine his position at a given moment to be either interesting or tiresome, within the wave function of our attention spans.

    • @jdlives8992
      @jdlives8992 3 роки тому

      Why ? All he does is cry about Trump. It’s kinda weak

    • @ritamch7518
      @ritamch7518 3 роки тому +1

      @Solomon Richards THATS WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY

  • @Aidan303
    @Aidan303 4 роки тому +515

    The computer simulation that we're living in doesn't bother to calculate these things to save performance right up until the point where we measure them. Bet.

    • @drunkshinx
      @drunkshinx 4 роки тому +42

      Culling I think it's called, it's where video games don't render things that aren't able to be seen at the moment

    • @KrzysztofBob
      @KrzysztofBob 4 роки тому +32

      I try to think about it as a fluid simulation in video games. It’s not trying to simulate every molecule, rather it simulates an approximation of the expected outcome. And if you “zoom in” all the way in, all you find is a single, with fixed two dimensional positions and some other properties like colour or brightness pixel, which tells you absolutely nothing about the whole system. It’s just a manifestation in order to make the simulation visually work.

    • @usmanshahid2219
      @usmanshahid2219 4 роки тому +6

      People who taut simulation argument don't spend a ton of time questioning it. In an infinite universe is it likely that everything will happen that can happen? No. Then it is unlikely that simulation exists. The argument fundamentally is if things continue at the rate of improvement of digital simulation; then it is impossible that digital simulation cannot meet or exceed the reality we live in; and thus that we do not exist in base reality but rather a simulated one. However, that argument belies that there is the initial will or desire to create a simulation as vast and accurate as our own. Ergo the initial premise of my argument, if in an infinite universe is it likely that EVERYTHING (i.e. infinity possibilities) that can happen will happen. Mathematically; infinity can't be raised another infinity. Like I said, most people who tout the simulation argument don't think enough about it they regurgitate it.

    • @nnagap72
      @nnagap72 4 роки тому +5

      Maybe they will fix this glitch in the next universe version

    • @yamumhasthebiggay2582
      @yamumhasthebiggay2582 4 роки тому

      Irrational Numbers tho

  • @kevinmcnamee6006
    @kevinmcnamee6006 8 місяців тому +3

    I find it utterly ridiculous that every time an electron has to make a quantum decision the universe splits in two.

  • @Yossus
    @Yossus 4 роки тому +910

    "we have to examine the three essential components of Schrödinger's Cat..."
    Me: Cat, Gas, Detector
    "...Superposition, Entanglement, Measurement"
    Me: oh

    • @bhavyasharma7569
      @bhavyasharma7569 4 роки тому +21

      Surprised Pikachu face*

    • @entspannter_hase
      @entspannter_hase 4 роки тому +13

      Why does the entire internet have to describe everything with surprised Pikachu faces and spongebob lines? Can't we just go back to 2017 and write normal comments? Nothing against you just a general rant haha

    • @123571321
      @123571321 4 роки тому +11

      @@entspannter_hase as in 18:32, it's because it's a convenient description of the reality. Not a good or full one, but it conveys the message desired to be sent.
      Take it as an involuntary but clever way for language to evolve, because it takes to another level the phrase "a picture says more than a thousand words".

    • @entspannter_hase
      @entspannter_hase 4 роки тому +2

      @@123571321 Well the "Oh" in the original comment was enough to make the joke work

    • @123571321
      @123571321 4 роки тому

      @@entspannter_hase potato, tomato...whatever works to each generation, as long as you get it