The Quantum Experiment that Broke Reality | Space Time | PBS Digital Studios

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 29 січ 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ •

  • @JerseyMiller
    @JerseyMiller 5 років тому +3787

    One of the best explanations of the double slit experiment I've seen. I almost understood it.

    • @milllosh
      @milllosh 5 років тому +103

      It's not as hard as it seems, words and expressions used are what causes the confusion, i/e collapse of wave function, observation = measurement, probability etc. Knowing what those actually mean provides a greater chance of understanding the experiment.

    • @milllosh
      @milllosh 5 років тому +51

      @@ronaldoquintos1675 Why are you insisting on YOUR definitions, in this case understanding? You either get it or don't. Besides, QM doesn't say much about being in more than one place at the same time, it's a rather poor attempt to explain a simple distribution. I/e photons behave in wave pattern and the equations give us probabilities where they will appear in the wave pattern, since we can't measure the path of an individual photon due to quantum interference of the act of measuring itself.
      On the other hand, if you'd think of an electron, imagine a stone of known weight tied to a piece of rope and you spin it. For the same amount of invested energy, if you shorten the rope, the stone will spin faster in terms of revolutions, and vise versa. If you'd observe that stone, as you gradually shorten the rope, it'll go faster and faster eventually looking like a ring of blur around you. Go down to the atomic level, and you can now imagine what an electron would do spinning around the core (having no mass) at the speed of light on an extremely tight radius "rope". It'll look like a bubble of fog.
      Now, if you'd imagine a car passing at normal traffic speed, and you shoot at it, the bullet would pierce the car's door and create a hole, and you can measure and pinpoint that hole's position. If you'd do the same but the car was passing at i/e 10k mph, as the tip of the bullet hits the door it creates a hole, but the car is moving so fast that it moves faster than the bullet can penetrate the thin steel, so as the bullet goes deeper it tears the hole to the shape of an ellipse. Faster the car goes, longer the ellipse would be, eventually becoming a line all across the car, at certain speeds. Now, if you'd a well timed shot towards the road where the car is going at the speed of light (in theory, since cars can't go at the speed of light), you'd hit the car no matter where you shoot cause it goes so fast that it APPEARS to be elongated to infinity, which is nothing more but that line effect I described formerly, basically, that line of tear becomes "infinitely" long from the shooter's perspective.
      No math used.
      "It is impossible to understand quantum mechanics." - Well, I refuse this statement to be imposed on me or anyone else due to your own or someone else's lack of understanding and/or imagination.

    • @milllosh
      @milllosh 5 років тому +22

      @@ronaldoquintos1675 Ehhh... This'll bee a LONG one. I wasn't trying to be hostile, wasn't really even angry (not at you at least), my words may have seemed like that, and after reading what I wrote, you have a point about that, however that wasn't my intention so I apologize. My intention was to point out that people have different levels and ways of understanding, and just cause some don't understand some things doesn't mean that no one can't even some famous scientists claim so. I DO understand quantum mechanics and physics (up to a point but deep enough), and you probably do too (it's not really THAT hard), it's just that there are terms that are confusing (as formerly stated) so substitute them with your own. I never saw anything as small as a photon or electron or even atom size, however, I am aware of the fact that just cause you can't see something that doesn't mean it doesn't exist, there are other methods. I/e we can't see gravity but you feel it's effect, you can measure it, determine it's properties etc. That was the point. The attitude "if I can't see it with my own eyes or recorded on camera..." won't get you anywhere.
      Now, if you are aware of properties of the speed of light, works of Maxwell, Bohr, Einstein etc, you start to get the time-space, and the fact that from the perspective of a photon everything happens instantly, then repeat the 2 slit experiments in two ways: by firing a single photon and by firing a concentrated short stream of photons, you get to see the ERRORS which are NOT data errors but errors of failure to explain the events using proper terms. There's no "universe decided", there's no "uncertainty', those are just failures to define things properly, we simply have no way of measuring the exact position of a photon on it's path from the source to the real wall in the double slit experiment cause it happens INSTANTLY, cause photons move at the speed of light, it's as simple as that. Also, if we'd try to measure which slit was the one photon passed through, we create quantum interference with our measuring devices, thus we can't determine the result. If you use logic and say, ok, it's a wave, obviously it'll pass through both slits and had self-interference, however, that wave carries energy in the form of light, which will be released only "on impact", we can then cover one slit and see that sometimes the light will appear on the cover, sometimes it'll pass through the other slit and hit the wall behind, meaning, there's no "observation" involved, which is another confusing term that suggests that if we'd LOOK, we'd get one result and if we'd turn our head around, we'd get a different result (wave or particle), which is WRONG. Measuring devices are what's meant by observation. There's no collapse of the wave function, (I will speak in pain words even it's NOT a correct way to explain) wave exists, but the energy carried is released in a single spot, you can imagine it as a surfer on a wave. The duality of photons, electrons and other particles is the property that seems confusing, however, if you'd read about packages of energy (there's a great video on how the Sun releases it's energy) you begin to realize that things are actually far simpler than presented.
      Scientists aren't really good at explaining things outside math, which is the biggest problem one may have, given that one has some basic math knowledge and understanding of the concept of imaginary numbers (mainly sqrt(i)=-1). Multidimensional objects aren't that hard to understand either, once you get past 5th dimension, the number of dimensions doesn't matter anymore (just pay attention on objects that have radius i/e circle, ball etc), it's the same principle just repeated more times, however, going back from 248th dimension to 8th and gauge symmetry is REALLY intense, so I would suggest a pack of headache pills, God knows I needed them (had a headache for 3 days after understanding light speed and time, roughly a week after gauge symmetry studies).
      I hope we are now clear on my intentions, it's not my goal to pick a fight but to show that ppl need to clear the definitions first, what is EXACTLY meant by them, and eliminate what's NOT first, then concentrate on what IS. IMO any 3 digit IQ person shouldn't have huge problems with basics of QF and QM, only with words used to explain them.

    • @milllosh
      @milllosh 5 років тому +4

      @@ronaldoquintos1675 I mentioned in the long comment: repeat the experiment yourself. You actually can, if you care, there are kits sold for $200-$400, and you may even ask to be present in a college class when such experiments are performed and not spend money.

    • @milllosh
      @milllosh 5 років тому +14

      @@ronaldoquintos1675 I wasn't debating you, I was trying to tell you that QM and QF aren't exclusive to scientists when it comes to a higher level of understanding, and that if you want, you can learn more without some big scare. There are companies that build quantum computers and enthusiasts who follow that development, so, they certainly understand a lot. Don't let anyone tell you what you can or can't understand or learn about. Try and see for yourself, that's all I'm saying (with some pointers), and that's not QM and QF exclusive, applies to everything. TY for your time and patience.

  • @fallinginthed33p
    @fallinginthed33p 4 роки тому +1100

    My brain is in a superposition of understanding and being completely baffled by this.

    • @Psalm-yg6yi
      @Psalm-yg6yi 3 роки тому +44

      If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullsh@t- W.C. Fields
      That's why

    • @diegongbayong
      @diegongbayong 3 роки тому +8

      @@Psalm-yg6yi HAHAHA

    • @grzegorzg3929
      @grzegorzg3929 3 роки тому +13

      My teory :) : That explain that whole universe is alive. You cannot predict where is particle until you check, the wave is information. You can predict where is some person if you know that person, like work, home or whatever forest at some time of day. But sometimes they are sick or stuck in traffic so there are not there. You know when you check or you have just information :D

    • @spencerhayward4803
      @spencerhayward4803 3 роки тому

      Think of the light paths as conductors of electricity but in waves

    • @PaulMarostica
      @PaulMarostica 3 роки тому

      Quantum superpositions don't exist. I have 8 videos on UA-cam. 2 of them contradict the assumptions of quantum mechanics, including quantum superpositions. Search keywords: matter theory marostica.

  • @Peusterokos1
    @Peusterokos1 8 років тому +3707

    The types of people watching this (amazing by the way!) channel:
    The adamant student
    The anxious philosopher
    The disgruntled scribe
    The confused Joe
    The Sims sims (those who truly believe believed ideals to be believable even though they don't know why)
    The intrigued intellectuals
    The PhD sentinels
    The 2: 00 a.m lurker
    and finally
    stoners

    • @ClearTheRubble7
      @ClearTheRubble7 7 років тому +164

      Right on, man! This bearded quantum dude just laid a heavy scene on me. Now I'm gonna head to the store and get me some nachos!

    • @ouroboriccycle538
      @ouroboriccycle538 7 років тому +36

      Peusterokos1 lmao- I'm watching this at 2:08 am-

    • @kadymalloyvoice
      @kadymalloyvoice 7 років тому +33

      Peusterokos1 stoner

    • @cjleon
      @cjleon 7 років тому +52

      Stoner

    • @Mightyno35472
      @Mightyno35472 7 років тому +13

      Peusterokos1 HEY! It's actually 2:15.

  • @youwantmyname9208
    @youwantmyname9208 3 роки тому +851

    "If you understand quantum physics, you don't understand quantum physics."
    -Some smart man

  • @mathius8360
    @mathius8360 3 роки тому +736

    The Double Slit has always been once of the most fascinating experiments to me. I guess they figured this video had enough mind-blowing information since they didn't mention that when sensors are placed at the slits to try and identify which slit the particle chooses, the pattern on the screen disappears and is replaced with just two columns.

    • @branjosnow6244
      @branjosnow6244 3 роки тому +111

      The observer effect.

    • @jamuraisack5503
      @jamuraisack5503 3 роки тому +137

      I was disappointed to ser that they didn't include this part. It's what really makes it special, for me.

    • @redinabloogs8477
      @redinabloogs8477 3 роки тому +18

      Yep ur right..it was the worse description of it I've ever heard

    • @bt-jz7ki
      @bt-jz7ki 3 роки тому +19

      @Christopher Michael the emoticon hearts in this are fckn killing me lmao

    • @LouDeeCruz
      @LouDeeCruz 3 роки тому +1

      That’s another lie from the QT theorists. Because you then use two seperate detectors detecting light from each slit. And qt madmen forget to tell viewers that the light from each slit doesn’t give an interference pattern simply because it didn’t have a chance to interfere with any light from the other slit. !! But these quantum lies get unchallenged because viewers think the qt theorists are reliable. They arent. They lie all the time.

  • @xsjado_anon
    @xsjado_anon 4 роки тому +406

    I'm a programmer, and this 100% sounds like an optimisation in the simulation, reducing processor load and removing the unneeded calculation unless it's needed for the observation of those within said simulation.
    This experiment is the first one that actually gives me pause to believe the theory that we live in a simulation

    • @impact0r
      @impact0r 4 роки тому +13

      Check out Pilot Wave theory. No need to resort to magic (Copenhagen Interpretation), if rational explanations exist.

    • @jorgepeterbarton
      @jorgepeterbarton 4 роки тому +22

      Until you find out quantum coherence is hard to maintain. Again, the correction: it doesn't have to be an actual 'conscious' observer...
      I don't know a lot about programming, but for example the rendering of parts of a game only when within that area, is not it is it?
      Is also that a whole wave function is calculated if there is only one particle? Is that not MORE calculation? These particles have the inverse: you observe them and there is less complex information going on after the wave collapse... then they lose the wave function calculation and act classical therabouts.
      So instead of the game character wandering around as we expect in a program.... instead the whole game is rendered but the character removes the area they are in into a blank void...except there are difficult situations to arise at that point

    • @jorgepeterbarton
      @jorgepeterbarton 4 роки тому +2

      @@impact0r maybe. It seems it went out of favour, but it would seem the simplest.
      Copenhagen isn't that magical...just random? (that is the one that does NOT use magic to explain the randomness.)
      Many worlds and simulations are.

    • @impact0r
      @impact0r 4 роки тому +18

      ​@@jorgepeterbarton Random = no causality = magic.
      Copenhagen Interpretation is build upon a logical fallacy called Argumentum ad Ignorantiam: "We do not know the cause for the phenomenon, therefore we know there is no cause for the phenomenon (ie. it is truly random).
      It does not make sense to me how prominent physicists can be OK with a "theory" which is indistinguishable from a basic logical fallacy.

    • @richardrogers7782
      @richardrogers7782 4 роки тому +3

      That's exactly what I was thinking....less processing power.

  • @GerryMATW
    @GerryMATW 5 років тому +383

    This stuff fascinates me but what astounds me even more is the engineering aspect of these experiments, an aspect which I never see anybody explaining. For example, how the heck do you build a machine which will fire a single photon? How do you test that it's working?

    • @jumpingeezus5080
      @jumpingeezus5080 5 років тому +49

      GerryMATW
      Don't look behind the curtain!
      Seriously though, good question. I also ponder these things ;)

    • @GerryMATW
      @GerryMATW 5 років тому +7

      It's weird, isn't it? lol

    • @deathstarresident
      @deathstarresident 4 роки тому +112

      We only give enough energy to cause single photon excitement by using Max Plank’s equation e=hv where v (nue) is frequency of the EM wave. For photons we usually use ruby lasers

    • @DasAntiNaziBroetchen
      @DasAntiNaziBroetchen 4 роки тому +2

      Absolutely agree.

    • @jamieg2427
      @jamieg2427 4 роки тому +33

      I'm a math and physics student interested in those types of questions too! What are the details of these experiments and how can they be explained in an understandable way. I'll probably start a UA-cam channel on the subject. I'll try to remember to let you know. It'll likely be a few years.

  • @nategoodness
    @nategoodness 2 роки тому +3

    I had to pause at 4:48…..that almost broke my understanding of the standing of things. I need 5 minutes before I let yo continue

  • @TheJuan2000164
    @TheJuan2000164 5 років тому +132

    I was in special ed throughout school I’m dyslexic and I always struggled to read and write but I’ve been extremely good at math my whole life the way this man explains things of science I completely understand and I’m so thankful for his PBS show. I watch every show I can. and I have blossomed A love for science!!

    • @Urza26
      @Urza26 5 років тому +4

      @CALM KITTY Think of math as a language. I greatly improved at it by doing this. It's ultimately just a way of communicating and writing down your thoughts.

    • @cameronwilliams5430
      @cameronwilliams5430 5 років тому +2

      Bruh.. If you want to actualy get somewhere read the Bible and be fascinated in that..
      This is all bullshit mate. None of this actualy matters and nothing will ever come from it
      There's been people studdying this shit for thousands of years and all of which has gotten nowhere astrology could be the next best thing maybe at least it's real

    • @ridgerunner106
      @ridgerunner106 5 років тому

      My dad is that way. I'm 50. I think he stopped school in seventh grade. is successful, but can do any type math you give him.

    • @enzonazzaro2156
      @enzonazzaro2156 5 років тому +12

      @@cameronwilliams5430 wow you have no idea how revolutionary the dual slit experiment was it allowed us to understand wave partital duality of quantum particles. This allows us to manage the flow of electrons through transistors and allows for the pin point accuracy of gps. in total scientific discoveries lead to vast advances in our technology while the Bible can't even get the age of the earth right.

    • @tiny_toilet
      @tiny_toilet 5 років тому

      !og ot yaW

  • @markgohl2660
    @markgohl2660 8 років тому +111

    Its a fascinating experiment. So fascinating that I decided to have a go at doing it myself a few years ago. I managed to get hold of a photomultiplier tube from a surplus store. Build the required special power supply and a water cooled pelter based cooler to take the tube down to -25C which reduces the dark current to the point where single photon detection becomes possible. Using a slice of CD as the diffraction surface with a synchronous motor to rotate it and and led in a box with a pinhole as the light source.
    It actually worked by passing the anode current directly though a pair of headphones, it sounded like the patter of rain. Turning the led current down you could hear the individual click of photons been detected. The way the volume went up and down clearly showed the diffraction patten.

    • @CockatooDude
      @CockatooDude 8 років тому

      That is insanely cool that you were able to do that, and where was this surplus store that had a photomultiplier laying around?

    • @markgohl2660
      @markgohl2660 8 років тому +1

      +CookatooDude It was a place called Bull electronics many many years ago. I got the last one. But If you look at eBay they have quite a few listed at the moment.

    • @CockatooDude
      @CockatooDude 8 років тому

      Mark Gohl Yeah ebay has some really cool stuff, I found some pretty neat electron microscopes a little bit ago.

    • @markgohl2660
      @markgohl2660 8 років тому

      +CockatooDude Not a common item. Last ones I saw where on pallets and wrapped in plastic. Looked quite a job to put it together. Kind of interesting but outside of my price bracket. If you are interested in the photomultiplier I suggest you get the data sheets via Google. There are many types differing in the spectral response and sensitivity. It will mention photon counting on the data sheet if a particular tube has that ability.
      A smaller cathode and low dark count are highly desirable. One tip NEVER power one up anywhere that is brighter than a darkroom. It will be instantly destroyed. If they have been in the light they need several hours in the dark before the tube will settle down.

    • @CockatooDude
      @CockatooDude 8 років тому

      Mark Gohl Well I much appreciate the information and will try to remember as much as possible. But I am afraid my interests lie in different places, which I find fascinating, but which may appear more mundane to others. The most complicated thing I need for my current project is a turbocharger bearing from a truck motor, and a hobby jet engine ignition system, because I don't feel like making my own. Sorry if this makes it seem like I wasn't interested, because I was, but an experiment like this isn't something I feel that I could repeat reliably. But I digress, sorry for the ramble.

  • @yhp99
    @yhp99 2 роки тому +179

    When i first found out about this experiment and its implications it felt like i was dreaming. Its literally as if a pseudoscience from a scifi movie becomes real life. Very cool and amazing

    • @macehilmatecilof4140
      @macehilmatecilof4140 Рік тому +1

      like real magic

    • @stacis.5854
      @stacis.5854 Рік тому +2

      It’s so cool I’m so amazed by this and a bit scared

    • @Milohenry13
      @Milohenry13 Рік тому

      all science is low-key pseudo.

    • @bluesky45299
      @bluesky45299 Рік тому +2

      Quran says: “Allah:there is not God except he”:The Neccessary life/consciousness,sustainer of life/consciousness.”
      Wire like neuronal structures that conduct electricity via ions/neurotransmitters in the CNS/PNS possess no attribute of thinking/life and yet that has “randomly” led to life. Consciousness/thinking is an innate idea(“Fitra”)that is distinct from carbon skeleton and yet the materialist scientist believes that chemistry turned into biology via “god of randomness”/”Emergent property”/”law of nature”. Consciousness can only stem from Necessary Consciousness (Allah-one/indivisible/loving/self-sufficient perfection

    • @ianharding4569
      @ianharding4569 Рік тому +2

      I think about this experiment almost daily. At least weekly. I dont know how people don't. 😂

  • @lydiakhai9977
    @lydiakhai9977 3 роки тому +109

    Kind of makes me think of those moments when you feel like you've transcended that moment, feel like you've caught a brief glimpse of infinite possibilities, before you make a decision which solidifies your trajectory to the next moment. Or maybe I should just call it a night and go to sleep 😂

    • @EaglePicking
      @EaglePicking 3 роки тому +4

      No, that's called psychosis ;)

    • @darrylkassle361
      @darrylkassle361 2 роки тому +1

      Man where are you getting your LSD I will shout youvavtwb if you intro me to your supplier

    • @apove1814
      @apove1814 2 роки тому +3

      I said same thing when the noble prize was announced this past week! It proves those moments you feel something and you learn you connected w someone far from you , at a bc later time.
      That sense of “uncanny”. 😊

    • @ShishakliAus
      @ShishakliAus 2 роки тому +1

      You just explained the plot of dune

    • @roundedges2
      @roundedges2 2 роки тому +1

      I'm with you, man--but first a trip to the fridge for a snack!

  • @ebeegeebeefofeebee3181
    @ebeegeebeefofeebee3181 4 роки тому +75

    I finally got it ! I was so excited I went to the grocery store and told the store owner. He was absolutely astounded. But I still had to pay for my groceries. Go figure.

  • @user-ss6ep9rv9l
    @user-ss6ep9rv9l 8 років тому +3736

    this will be patched in the next update

    • @madcoda
      @madcoda 7 років тому +98

      You mean next big bang cycle

    • @sparta117corza
      @sparta117corza 7 років тому +36

      frosty bites patched... how why would they patch a working system. noob 1v1 me.

    • @digitalanon5437
      @digitalanon5437 7 років тому +6

      lol

    • @MagnumDB
      @MagnumDB 7 років тому +6

      AMAZING COMMENT! Hahaha!

    • @THETRIVIALTHINGS
      @THETRIVIALTHINGS 7 років тому +41

      This would so be applicable in the simulation theory lol

  • @jillianleda6732
    @jillianleda6732 4 роки тому +406

    I swear this reality is the strangest I've ever experienced

    • @MandyJean13
      @MandyJean13 3 роки тому +22

      I’ve had better myself

    • @luxaley
      @luxaley 3 роки тому +16

      Which reality was your favorite?

    • @EricLatios
      @EricLatios 3 роки тому +13

      _Reality can be anything you want_

    • @fallinginthed33p
      @fallinginthed33p 3 роки тому +5

      It would be nice if 2020 never happened.

    • @influentia1patterns
      @influentia1patterns 3 роки тому +5

      @@luxaley I liked 1999 before the Y2K update to the simulation. This Covid update has been really weird.

  • @willbrink
    @willbrink Рік тому +24

    What messed me up here was finding out a bucky ball did that. I'd thought it was only known to happen at the quantum level, so I'm even more confused now!

    • @dstovell
      @dstovell Рік тому

      If you're interested, you should check out Matter waves and the de Broglie wavelength. Really cools stuff!
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_wave

    • @AYVYN
      @AYVYN Рік тому

      You can do it with people. Just have enough of a pressure difference on the other side of the slits hehe

  • @mishie618
    @mishie618 5 років тому +354

    It's amazing that there are videos like this, that explain quantum physics in a way that people like me, who aren't scholarly or fully educated in physics, that we can begin to understand how this incredible aspect of reality, well, our perceptions of reality, work on such scales. I love learning about this. Thank you, PBS for always being part of my learning life, since i was a very small child. Now that's amazing. ❤😘🌹

  • @stevenpilling3773
    @stevenpilling3773 5 років тому +57

    Wave/particle interference holds a fundamental secret into the workings of the universe. When it is finally solved, it will not only cause a revolution in physics, but likely in our lives and outlook.

  • @Litepaw
    @Litepaw 8 років тому +116

    This video absolutely blew my mind. I started to study more into quantum physics, sound frequencies and resonance, cymatics and geometry. I'm just absolutely blown away..
    We're on a hell of a ride -- together. There's unfortunately a lot of misinformation out there.

    • @arnabbiswasalsodeep
      @arnabbiswasalsodeep 8 років тому +20

      When you say a lot of misinformation is out there I laugh thinking about people who support flat earth theory and believe global warming isn't real

    • @BadKnightLv01
      @BadKnightLv01 8 років тому +1

      I remember when I first jumped into the world of quantum mechanics about four years ago, have fun.
      Unfortunately I don't have the advanced mathematical background to really understand things at a deeper level.

    • @Litepaw
      @Litepaw 8 років тому +2

      +Arnab Biswas Exactly

    • @Litepaw
      @Litepaw 8 років тому +14

      +BadKnightLv01 I got accepted to study chemistry :) I'm starting my studies next month. And to think last year i was burnt out and unemployed, heading nowhere and taking prescription meds. It's simply amazing what a little confidence can do in your life.

    • @arnabbiswasalsodeep
      @arnabbiswasalsodeep 8 років тому

      BadKnightLv01 Same here man, 4-5 years ago

  • @matheusfernandesgoncalves2311
    @matheusfernandesgoncalves2311 Рік тому +2

    This is the best explanation of the wave-particle duality I've ever seen, which really simplifies the concept of the wave function and its collapse. Outstanding job.

  • @Luumiie
    @Luumiie 5 років тому +291

    How did I get from Kitchen Nightmares and Gordon Ramsay making burgers to reality being shattered by quantum mechanics

    • @woodsstocks9178
      @woodsstocks9178 4 роки тому +11

      Its called Youtoueroium Quanturium Theory

    • @denniskean183
      @denniskean183 4 роки тому +2

      Reality is not shattered by this, Cirsie. It is a simple mistake from the start. It comes from the wrong categorization of quarks and other particles, which, if properly categorized, should have solved this problem in the 1980s. The problem is that we do not have Maxwells and Newtons today.

    • @erikt3162
      @erikt3162 4 роки тому +1

      It’s called culture.

    • @gianni3611
      @gianni3611 4 роки тому +2

      Literally where I came from

    • @DoktrDub
      @DoktrDub 4 роки тому +3

      Because rumour has it that Ramsay can manipulate the space time continuum

  • @slik4100
    @slik4100 8 років тому +525

    thank you for the science eyebrow man

    • @hosebeefstick
      @hosebeefstick 8 років тому +65

      slik4100 So disrespectful; he prefers eyes browman.

    • @ardiawanbagusharisa7040
      @ardiawanbagusharisa7040 7 років тому +2

      rowan atkinson jr.?

    • @temgomi
      @temgomi 7 років тому +3

      The presenter's verbal content, tone and pace are good (pace at time a tad bit fast). The presenter's visual content (presentation) on the other hand are interesting in their own right. The Soviet era style "Breshnev Brows" lose it for me......

    • @uservemewell
      @uservemewell 7 років тому +12

      I only get my science from eyebrow men.

    • @lenguamuerto
      @lenguamuerto 7 років тому +3

      Eyebrows like that don't play, don't mess around and make him raise an eyebrow

  • @alexsere3061
    @alexsere3061 8 років тому +1397

    your music and visual artists are awsome but I believe they get too little feedback for their amazing work, and every unseen contributor to the quality of your videos

    • @recklessroges
      @recklessroges 8 років тому +30

      I noticed the music in this episode and hoped that there would be a soundcloud link in the description. It still amazes me how much is added by well crafted music.

    • @recklessroges
      @recklessroges 8 років тому +3

      I noticed the music in this episode and hoped that there would be a soundcloud link in the description. It still amazes me how much is added by well crafted music.

    • @n8iveidiot13
      @n8iveidiot13 8 років тому +15

      I noticed the music in this episode and hoped that there would be a soundcloud link in the description. It still amazes me how much is added by well crafted music.

    • @n8iveidiot13
      @n8iveidiot13 8 років тому +11

      I noticed the music in this episode and hoped that there would be a soundcloud link in the description. It still amazes me how much is added by well crafted music.

    • @lightbringer6650
      @lightbringer6650 8 років тому +1

      the music threw me off. I thought a mobile was ringing or my alarm went off...

  • @jonmcintosh8653
    @jonmcintosh8653 3 роки тому +130

    I've felt like we've been in a different reality for six or so years now. The world just seems incredibly mental.

    • @Mikss-qu9lh
      @Mikss-qu9lh 3 роки тому

      quantum immortality

    • @bakerxlove7893
      @bakerxlove7893 3 роки тому +17

      I know it sounds crazy, but I've had that feeling ever since the world was supposed to end in 2012. Lol maybe I am just crazy though. 🤷‍♀️

    • @jonmcintosh8653
      @jonmcintosh8653 3 роки тому +18

      @@bakerxlove7893 you're not the only person I've seen say that! Maybe we did shift reality at that time, who knows. All I know is with the rise of all these crazy social justic groups, all the political turmoil going on, covid etc. Something isn't right and hasn't been for a long time now.

    • @kingkoi6542
      @kingkoi6542 3 роки тому +9

      Cern is linked to the Mandela Effect

    • @markdost1476
      @markdost1476 3 роки тому +21

      @@jonmcintosh8653 it’s called flow of history; I bet the people around during 1945 were thinking the same thing

  • @janjankovicjahoda
    @janjankovicjahoda 5 років тому +691

    Let's say we live in simulation. The particles would be simulated only when observed. When not observed they appear as waves to save CPU power :-)

    • @janjankovicjahoda
      @janjankovicjahoda 5 років тому +22

      @Kargadan Yes I see. But if the universe is infinite you need infinite cpu power but every coder will implement a failsafe. And the best failsafe would be infinite -1 (low resolution texture ergo wave function of particle)

    • @AR-fw5bn
      @AR-fw5bn 5 років тому

      @Kargadan omg

    • @cmdr.shepard
      @cmdr.shepard 5 років тому +24

      Or maybe if the universe was simulated they could make such a universe that when a civilization becomes advanced enough to observe things smaller than a certain scale our tools would not work. It would take significantly less processing power to do so. Why would they allow us to observe subatomic particles, for example? We already had accepted at one point that atom was the smallest block of matter everything is made out of. It would take exponentially more power to simulate a quantum mechanical universe compared to one where atom is the smallest block of matter. So maybe this is not a simulation?

    • @thelivingglitch307
      @thelivingglitch307 5 років тому +14

      These matrix jokes are starting to run rampant. Any simulation needs a reality putting it together, the way our supposed reality works it can't sustain a simulation of the very same thing. We can make something of an illusion using hollow 3d objects and draw distance. You can only do so much with 1's and 0's tied to metal conduction. Funny enough an IDE can generate logic that is more versatile than real life logic, much like the human mind. Maybe in a reality outside of our own which is holding ours as a simulation it is all possible through logic that works beyond gates and linear connections.

    • @energytrail315
      @energytrail315 5 років тому +9

      we actually using a PS39 but we used the "forget" option, when u switch to easy mode the "forget" option is disabled and then you come out out of your mother's belly knowing already it's just a game u bought on walmart cloud gaming store

  • @darthdread1
    @darthdread1 5 років тому +85

    ok, where can i find a video to teach me what i need to know for this video to make sense to me?

    • @toddnewport356
      @toddnewport356 5 років тому +6

      ua-cam.com/video/5WV1SMoVYDM/v-deo.html

    • @ddoubleewhome7863
      @ddoubleewhome7863 4 роки тому +2

      Watch the holographic universe 7 part series. ...

    • @Stacz_Dinero
      @Stacz_Dinero 4 роки тому +2

      To put it simple, light is made up of particles called photons. When light travels, it travels in a wave, similar to a ocean wave or if you think of how cell phone signals travel. Basically that experiment proved that Light/group of photons even though it travels as a wave, somehow wave function collapses, and the photons are able to act and communicate with its other photons and it chooses its final path due to probabilities of its path.

    • @cecebarnard4546
      @cecebarnard4546 4 роки тому

      under your stash....he, he, he

    • @wangzisworks
      @wangzisworks 4 роки тому

      @@ddoubleewhome7863 Whew.... the holographic universe. I’m not going to concern myself with holography right now 😭

  • @soccerstrikerful
    @soccerstrikerful 3 роки тому +69

    Why didn’t you add the part about the electron behavior changing back to particle when scientists tried to observe and measure the waves?

    • @theautodan7095
      @theautodan7095 3 роки тому +9

      Exactly..! That part is a big deal...

    • @germanher7528
      @germanher7528 3 роки тому +6

      @@theautodan7095 it only shows how some electrons are really shy

    • @ethereal369
      @ethereal369 3 роки тому +3

      Yes! That's the most fascinating part of the experiment, that observation effects the outcome.

    • @TunezFree
      @TunezFree 3 роки тому +2

      Prolly lsd

    • @bighomiemike5675
      @bighomiemike5675 3 роки тому +2

      Garnet L. i hate when people say this. it’s not the act of us SEEING the particles that changes the experiment. any measurement we take has an effect on the experiment itself. the reason the electrons changed back to particles was because the detectors interfered with the electrons, not because electrons “magically know when they’re being watched” or that typical bullshit most people peddle without knowing anything about quantum mechanics.

  • @edog6770
    @edog6770 3 роки тому +5

    As someone that has studied up through Quantum Mechanics 2 (undergraduate), I would love to see some more technical/in-depth info on topics.
    All in all, great PBS show for peeps that haven't studied physics and not watered down to the point that it would alienate those of us who have studied the material. Keep up the good work!

    • @gatekeeper84
      @gatekeeper84 3 роки тому +1

      Try the huygens optics channel m.ua-cam.com/users/huygensoptics

    • @superlambmilkshake4904
      @superlambmilkshake4904 2 роки тому

      Hey man, what’s your thoughts on the double slit experiment and whether Quantum Field Theory offers a more accurate explanation than the Copenhagen Interpretation?

    • @ahpstudiostamil
      @ahpstudiostamil Рік тому

      Dear brothers and sisters,
      I have solved the problem of particle to behave like particle and wave, when observed and unobserved respectively in double slit experiment.
      "Particle physics based on real dimensions of space-time" [Volume 09; issue 10; 2022] - arcjournals - International journal of advanced research in physical science - Open access for free download.
      To think, how the electrons entering the slit knows whether an observation is made on it or the detector is switched ON/OFF and change its results (pattern on the screen) accordingly, is the confusion. This even led the scientist to wonder if quantum mechanics is a future deciding factor of human life. The answer is simple, the experimentation has to include the observer such that observer is equal to observing object together undergoing one of two results at a time. One may think, it is like surrendering oneself and cease to think anymore. No, it is not so.
      I have published a series of papers (totally 9 nos.) on "Theory of Singularity". Hope this new proposed study serves one fundamental for general relativity and quantum mechanics by solving incompatibility between them.
      [Volume 10; issue 03,04; 2023] - arcjournals....thank you

    • @spacecatmowgli4723
      @spacecatmowgli4723 11 місяців тому

      It doesn't know, it's just because any time of measuring involves physically altering the environment of the particle. It doesn't know inherently, it's just because you change the conditions.
      The statement "particles behave like particles when observed and as a wave when not observed" might lead to a common misconception. The behavior of particles in quantum mechanics is more accurately described by the concept of wave-particle duality, which means particles can exhibit both wave-like and particle-like properties under different conditions.
      The term "observation" can be misleading because it implies a human-centric perspective, but in quantum mechanics, it's better to think of interactions with the environment or measurement processes. Even in the absence of a conscious observer, the interaction with the environment causes the transition from a wave-like superposition to a definite state, often referred to as the collapse of the wave function.
      So, the behavior of particles is not solely dependent on conscious observation but on the nature of the experimental setup and the interactions involved.

  • @christophersharp1884
    @christophersharp1884 6 років тому +412

    my sense of reality was radically changed by just one slit. I could have only imagined two at the same time.

    • @dominicanfrankster
      @dominicanfrankster 6 років тому +23

      Clap ... clap. Underrated comment.

    • @ZimZam131
      @ZimZam131 6 років тому +14

      Best comment of all time, haha

    • @biggawinnacrapsa3870
      @biggawinnacrapsa3870 6 років тому +11

      Two sets of identical twins in my neighborhood, growing up; all four gorgeous - all four curious - all four satisfied. Own the video TODAY!! $49.95

    • @joshuasole3316
      @joshuasole3316 6 років тому +1

      very good. very good.

    • @dogfiffer8467
      @dogfiffer8467 6 років тому +17

      The reality is that we are all made from a spectrum of frequencies. You cannot see all spectrum of frequencies but you can see the spectrum of light and year the spectrum of sound frequencies. We have thoughts because thoughts is a form of frequency which gives you the ability to imagine. The location of your imagination has limitless speed and far beyond the speed of light. When you close your eyes, your thoughts are linked to the entire spectrum of frequencies which allows you to visualize in your brain which are all linked to all existence instantaneously. Anything you can think of exist in the universe, another dimensions & nature. The universe & nature is a huge place far bigger than our thoughts. Therefore, if you can imagine of something, it exists.
      Yes, we are interconnected with the entire universe and beyond because everything breakdown to frequency itself. The resonance increases to form a higher level of frequency and it keeps on doing that indefinitely. The only force that brought everything together is "gravity". If a person is born blind, deaf and paralyzed, then the only thing the person can utilized to communicate is through thoughts. Which is a spectrum of frequency that our brain could recognize/detect and that we are still trying to understand it. That person will have no clue what existence is but in that person's mind, he/she could still imagine. It's a pure form of imagination because the person's mind was never bombarded with the outside world.

  • @kleenexwarrior6061
    @kleenexwarrior6061 5 років тому +601

    Not gonna lie my brain has just been deep fried and then seasoned with mindfuckery

    • @jbeansprout
      @jbeansprout 5 років тому +12

      This statement is true.

    • @kiilwiil3780
      @kiilwiil3780 5 років тому +30

      Fr this shit so deep i dont see why everyone isnt interested in this stuff

    • @stephaniemartin7923
      @stephaniemartin7923 5 років тому +2

      Same.

    • @kleenexwarrior6061
      @kleenexwarrior6061 5 років тому +6

      William Wilson cause for most people this gives them a headache

    • @kato1kalin
      @kato1kalin 5 років тому +9

      @@kiilwiil3780 watch the quantum eraser double slit experiment video. It's ever freakier than this video. That particles can retroactively collapse the wave function. I'm sure I'm butchering it but that's the message that stuck with me.

  • @davonteaustin8181
    @davonteaustin8181 5 років тому +279

    Brain: alright let’s get some sleep it’s late
    UA-cam recommendations: Wyd

    • @chillboy8116
      @chillboy8116 5 років тому +1

      @@stijnsherlock do you know time and space

    • @ryp1562
      @ryp1562 5 років тому

      Stijn Serruys On a space video but think the world has one time zone lol.

    • @tiny_toilet
      @tiny_toilet 5 років тому +3

      That's so funny. I've never seen this exact same comment verbatim on dozens of other videos. How clever. How fresh.

    • @doxdiggla8792
      @doxdiggla8792 5 років тому +2

      Exactly 😂😂😂

    • @MandyJean13
      @MandyJean13 3 роки тому

      Fr tho

  • @someaccount3438
    @someaccount3438 2 роки тому +13

    So here's what's actually happening: we're living in a simulation and whoever coded it didn't use exact formulas, but instead used approximations. They never expected anything to evolve so much in their simulation that they actually look into their sloppy work and try to make sense of it.

    • @Iwitrag
      @Iwitrag Рік тому

      The exact properties are determined when observed. This is basically saving simulation resources.

    • @davidnemewe9192
      @davidnemewe9192 Рік тому

      no bro if you not have eye u wont believe how seeing is gonna be. We just not correcting the truthness yet

  • @jojojorisjhjosef
    @jojojorisjhjosef 8 років тому +221

    This is the best channel ever btw

    • @Fematika
      @Fematika 8 років тому

      I know. +

    • @KijanaMBrajon
      @KijanaMBrajon 8 років тому +5

      yeah but don't tell them. im afraid they'll sell out.

    • @Taricus
      @Taricus 8 років тому +18

      Yeah, they're really the only science channel that isn't very pop science. You can tell this is their actual field of study. Even when they just do something for fun, they still make it have substance to it. My biggest problem is that my recommended videos get full of either pop science that isn't very good or also LOL! I'll get a bunch of conspiracy theory videos and things about lizard people from space LOL! But when I see PBS spacetime and it's a new video that I haven't seen, I always like to click on them. They're always really well done.

    • @MrTripcore
      @MrTripcore 8 років тому +3

      You can't say such a thing unless you've watched every single channel on youtube

    • @fmaz1952
      @fmaz1952 8 років тому +2

      +Tripcore *probably* the only channel where your comment is interpreted as a funny joke and not a provocative troll, haha!

  • @Snairster
    @Snairster 5 років тому +219

    Me:
    UA-cam at 3 A.M: Wanna watch Tyrion Lannister talk about space.

    • @TheSuperCoolMan122
      @TheSuperCoolMan122 5 років тому +12

      it's not even about space u donkey

    • @Snairster
      @Snairster 5 років тому +11

      @@TheSuperCoolMan122 It was a joke.

    • @NockaMama
      @NockaMama 5 років тому +1

      🤣😂

    • @achildofgods8821
      @achildofgods8821 5 років тому

      Everything comes through the power and wisdom of Christ Jesus.

    • @canalettov
      @canalettov 4 роки тому +1

      Lmaao you killed me right there

  • @jdal9324
    @jdal9324 5 років тому +341

    First time I saw two slits simultaneously my reality changed as well

    • @richardbonnette490
      @richardbonnette490 5 років тому +29

      This is an experiment you can do yourself! Take a piece of paper and make two very thin slits through the paper (the small, the better the interference patterns you get), and, in a dark room, flash a light at the two slits (the two slits should be less than 800 nm apart for best effect). You should get an interference pattern. If the slits are small enough (and you use sun in a dark box with slits, INSTEAD of a flashlight, you get a rainbow interference pattern!
      You can also just bob two rubber balls over a smooth surface of water (like a lake) to make the interference waves, but light is so much more fun!

    • @flipnap2112
      @flipnap2112 5 років тому +133

      @@richardbonnette490 i dont think you got it

    • @tonwu5055
      @tonwu5055 5 років тому +8

      Ur a god 😂

    • @GamerMinecraftivity
      @GamerMinecraftivity 5 років тому +21

      @@richardbonnette490 r/woosh

    • @richardbonnette490
      @richardbonnette490 5 років тому +19

      @@GamerMinecraftivity So? I like science experiments. And I would prefer to keep this chat science- oriented anyways.

  • @EeeEee-bm5gx
    @EeeEee-bm5gx Рік тому +2

    I'll always remember how my rotund general chemistry professor illustrated particle-wave duality by bobbing up and down and walking to and fro for an auditorium of hundred and fifty students

  • @jakef1519
    @jakef1519 7 років тому +16

    Also it's interesting to note that if you monitor one of the paths, that is you actively observe which path the photon takes before colliding with the detector screen, the interference pattern does not appear.

    • @jdwhitewolf
      @jdwhitewolf 7 років тому +5

      Rick Sanchez ... the monitoring you're referring to involves interfering with the particle, which makes its path change which destroys the apparent pattern.

    • @cezarcatalin1406
      @cezarcatalin1406 7 років тому

      jdwhitewolf but there is as allways a loophole in the matrix and you can use polarization filters to determine with a high degree of probability what slit was used without destroying the pattern... but there is a catch: you lose three quarters of all photons because you filter the unwanted disturbance in the pattern and you need a beam splitter+merger...

    • @cnelsonlv999
      @cnelsonlv999 6 років тому

      Yea they glossed over this... which is an essential part of the puzzle to understanding the phenomenon as a whole.

  • @paradoxworld6798
    @paradoxworld6798 3 роки тому +17

    I have seen many videos "trying" to explain the wavefunction and CopenHagen interpretation. This one simply stands out by it's simplicity and beauty. Keep making more videos !
    You are doing a great job !

  • @ingeniouswild
    @ingeniouswild 4 роки тому +21

    The dual-slit experiment is my favorite of all time. Updating the record mentioned in this video (the 60-atom buckyball), there have been lots of progress since, in 2019 Fein et. al. in "Quantum superposition of molecules beyond 25 kDa" observed the interference effects of 2000-atom organic molecules :)

  • @RensKieviet
    @RensKieviet Рік тому +1

    Can this video be added to the PBS spacetime playlist? Right before the next video about the double slit experiment. I love to watch Spacetime in order!

  • @TyMooz15
    @TyMooz15 6 років тому +649

    This guy looks like a normal sized Tyrion Lannister from game of thrones

  • @James-mb6jt
    @James-mb6jt 5 років тому +171

    We are waves of light hallucinating a particle reality as we travel through spacetime

    • @makyahmiles4158
      @makyahmiles4158 5 років тому +5

      Woah lmao

    • @justlivinglife2468
      @justlivinglife2468 5 років тому +21

      How dare you put an idea like that into my head

    • @lhnathanson9002
      @lhnathanson9002 5 років тому +4

      Luckily I totally understood that and find it quite interesting.

    • @byirds
      @byirds 5 років тому +3

      You right

    • @julienhoule8369
      @julienhoule8369 4 роки тому +12

      sorry but light doesn't experience time due to spacial relativity.

  • @noneofyourbeeswax01
    @noneofyourbeeswax01 6 років тому +532

    Wow, I didn't realise quite how many world-class physicists are hanging about UA-cam watching physics videos for laymen and using their vast knowledge of quantum physics to enlighten us as to why the people in the video don't know what they're talking about and scientific consensus is meaningless. I look forward to reading more of their insights in the peer-reviewed journals which must surely be queuing up to commission papers from these secret Interweb geniuses.

    • @danopticon
      @danopticon 6 років тому +41

      NoneOfYour Beeswax - I don’t usually read UA-cam comments, but I found this video tonight and something drew me to these, and, honestly … I don’t know whether I’m having the funnest night of my life in a long time or whether I’m just laughing to keep the yawning abyss of despair from swallowing me up whole. I can halfway tolerate the “Y’all nerds has got it all wrong, as per usual, me an’ my buddy Hydroseefuss was talkin’ down by the shittin’ shed and light is a solid ‘cause birds swim through it but the darkness pushing it out at night is heavier what to keep these giant face-fucking vampire bats afloat, I tell you what, ol’ ‘seefuss got attacked by one t’other night, ‘tain’t no laffin’ matter!” crowd, they’ve been around forever and, Jeebus bless ‘em, they’re lucky to make it through each day in one piece without oven mitts taped over their hands, but it’s the saucer-eyed “The universe manifests its intelligence to us only in the doses we can handle and conscious photons are its angels!” crowd that has really got me down, they’re the ones telling exurban housewives over hot yoga that the solution to the world’s problems is to manifest positive energy down one’s omphalos with one’s head up one’s fundament. 😕

    • @darciford
      @darciford 6 років тому +8

      Quantum scores 4/100. That's a radical fail in any test. I might stop calling bullshit when they can explain the 96 percent of mass missing from their 'equations'. You should too.

    • @darciford
      @darciford 6 років тому +1

      We will change the world. ,Not the ' Quantards.

    • @SMC01ful
      @SMC01ful 6 років тому +5

      Brilliant mate. Had me pissing myself.

    • @jeffreybonanno8982
      @jeffreybonanno8982 6 років тому +8

      Well you must've had some idea or you wouldn't be here doing such an accurate impression of a lonely hypocrite, with all of the confidence of an acne scar and as much self awareness as a blind amnesiac. Okay, your turn. Let's see whatcha got when your not taking anonymous potshots at people who don't know it, ya genius, you.

  • @DownhillAllTheWay
    @DownhillAllTheWay 11 місяців тому +1

    What happens when we simulate the wave model in a water tank, if we make a very brief disturbance of the water at the wave source, so a wave of a single peak and trough travels towards the double slit? on the other side of the double slit, is there any way of simulating a single particle arriving at the target, while still based on a wave? In other words, only a single peak arrives.

  • @peterpanino2436
    @peterpanino2436 3 роки тому +27

    That's because Photons are "entangled" through time: Photon A "knows" what Photon B will do in the future, and vice-versa. In the Quantum world, time and space MERGE.

  • @weisswurster
    @weisswurster 6 років тому +241

    Double slit experiment: "I broke reality"
    Quantum eraser experiment: "hold my beer"

    • @greatwallofno3533
      @greatwallofno3533 5 років тому +10

      Wigner's Friend Experiment: You two are adorable.

    • @russellwright3818
      @russellwright3818 5 років тому

      Funny lolol

    • @reina4969
      @reina4969 5 років тому

      I am still waiting for pilot wave theory to way in on the quantum eraser experiment.

    • @1SpudderR
      @1SpudderR 5 років тому +4

      96%.....Instead Of sticking for approximately 100 years with hundreds of thousands of unproductive “paid scientists”- concentrate more on the 96% Of The Universe, Which remains unknown...Oh well I suppose that you know that anyway. Strive, more efficiently to find the next Einstein from the millions of starving humanity, that truly is a more worthy cause, than Thousands of Scientists just keep telling us the same story, when the answer is starving to tell us!? RDR

    • @BWCheese
      @BWCheese 5 років тому +3

      Delayed-choice quantum eraser experiment: "Hold my tequila."

  • @dimman77
    @dimman77 5 років тому +26

    This reminds me of old 'bullet hits' in games like Doom. There's a start and a semi-random end. But nothing actually travels between them.

    • @pilotavery
      @pilotavery 4 роки тому +8

      This is how it works. It is a "cone" and when you pull the trigger it immediately chooses a ray at random and then waits 2 frames for bullet travel, then if the same object is still there, it hits it, if it's not there after 2 frames it recalculated what's behind it and does it again, usually a wall.
      But that's very much like how our universe works.

  • @greg5326
    @greg5326 3 роки тому +33

    I like your "hey this is crazy" strategy. I wouldn't mind more on the actual experiments as it felt they were lightly covered. This particular double-slit variation was done about a century ago, but more recently an experiment called the "quantum eraser" was done (about 2010) where the information about which slit a photon passed through was then erased and a copy was made using a beam splitter and the same result was found. Photons can best be described as information, not matter. That is how it behaves. When an intelligence observes it, that is when it is defined, until then, it is undefined, like a new word in a dictionary without a definition.

    • @darrylkassle361
      @darrylkassle361 2 роки тому +1

      Very good explanation. That's right it is information. Gee I feel like a self aware AI entity more and more as each day passes.

    • @avinashreji60
      @avinashreji60 2 роки тому +3

      Don't say an "intelligence" observes it, it's when the system is interacted with

    • @greg5326
      @greg5326 2 роки тому

      @@avinashreji60 I know it is hard to accept, but there is no "system" interacting with anything. There is a consciousness or intelligent being observing it. Look it up.

    • @avinashreji60
      @avinashreji60 2 роки тому +1

      @@greg5326 Not true dude

    • @greg5326
      @greg5326 2 роки тому

      @@avinashreji60 Welp. You believe what you want to believe. It is, after all, the concept that stumped Einstein.

  • @jerrypolverino6025
    @jerrypolverino6025 4 роки тому +7

    From the first time I learned of this as a teen it has made my head dizzy. I have been dizzy ever since. Oh, I accept the results all right and I could do the the math when I took physics, but I’m still dizzy at 74 years old. I will most likely go to my grave spinning.

    • @karebuu1383
      @karebuu1383 4 роки тому

      What is spin tho

    • @jerrypolverino6025
      @jerrypolverino6025 4 роки тому

      Karebuu Gaming Angular momentum

    • @karebuu1383
      @karebuu1383 4 роки тому

      Well is it really

    • @jerrypolverino6025
      @jerrypolverino6025 2 роки тому

      Haaaa. I am 76 with a life long love of physics. My head has been spinning since the first time I learned of it. Like you, I can do the math and got my degree, but, but, but, I’m still dizzy. Welcome to the club youngster.

    • @jerrypolverino6025
      @jerrypolverino6025 2 роки тому

      @@karebuu1383 Some good explantations of spin online.

  • @alfred0621
    @alfred0621 5 років тому +166

    For fuck’s sake, I was going to bed before this.

    • @kaiyabou
      @kaiyabou 5 років тому +1

      Honestly same mate. I have no idea why this popped up in my recommended lol.

    • @robertpomphrey506
      @robertpomphrey506 5 років тому

      Yeah I totally agree , Going to bed and then I start watching . Initially I thought it was gonna be a boring ..now I’m just completely brain fukd right now at 6 AM

    • @sharonallison9922
      @sharonallison9922 5 років тому +1

      YOU'RE TTTTOOOOOO FUNNY ALFORD.........😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

    • @tiny_toilet
      @tiny_toilet 5 років тому

      Another played fucking comment. Look, it wasn't even clever the first time we saw it in 2006.

    • @TonyEnglandUK
      @TonyEnglandUK 5 років тому +1

      @@tiny_toilet You've been seeing that comment for 13 years and it's still triggering you?

  • @l34052
    @l34052 6 років тому +29

    I don't know why but quantum physics gives an excitable warm fuzzy feeling.
    I love it's weirdness and seemingly complete illogical-ness but it does seem that's really how everything works which to me is about the most interesting thing there is.
    I'd dearly love to understand it all.

    • @hammer_ttk
      @hammer_ttk 6 років тому +1

      "There was a time newspapers wrote that only 12 people understand the theory of relativity. I dont think there ever was such a time. On the contrary, I think it's save to say no one understands quantum physics." - Richard Feynmann, The Character of Physical Law 1967

    • @edjames1664
      @edjames1664 6 років тому

      I34052 - Quantum Physics? Aren't you talking about the slits?

  • @selimmidillic1967
    @selimmidillic1967 3 роки тому +2

    1/137 oranı ile formüle edilen İnce Yapı Sabitinin bir alan sınırı belirlenmesi aslında birden fazla Kuantum Alanları olduğunun delilidir

  • @davidharford3873
    @davidharford3873 8 років тому +32

    Maybe the photons do have an idea where the previous photon has gone. Perhaps they leave some "Impression" in the air (space/time) and this influences where the next photon goes.
    Has the experiment been done:
    - Waiting a large amount of time between firing photons.
    or
    - Have the platform moving so that any "Imprint" in the air is not effective.

    • @happmacdonald
      @happmacdonald 8 років тому +12

      Well, the experiment is often conducted in a vacuum, so I would rule "air" out of the equation at least. :3

    • @adolfodef
      @adolfodef 8 років тому +13

      There is no air (but even perfect vaccuum is full of fields and virtual particles).
      You should not move the wall were the results are "printed", as otherwise the accumulative efect will be just smooth random dots.
      You could in theory change the wall for another new wall per each photon (not easy to do in a vaccuum, and it will be expensive as shit); then adding each position per wall into a computer to graph the results. [It will be the same].
      It is easier to think on this by adding aditional dimensions outside time [were the ghost/shadows of each wavefunction can meet and interact with all others that passed that localized region of space through the entire history [past and future] of the universe (almost all of those will be too weak to be relevant).

    • @Reydriel
      @Reydriel 8 років тому +6

      +Ali Raheem
      And we have no idea how or why it works :D

    • @geoffbrom7844
      @geoffbrom7844 8 років тому +12

      It can't be imprints on space time because the earth moves constantly through it extremely quickly
      We would move away from any 'photon path' at thousands of kilometres per second

    • @davidharford3873
      @davidharford3873 8 років тому +3

      Geoff Brom Wouldn't it inherit the momentum of the Earth?

  • @krzyszwojciech
    @krzyszwojciech 8 років тому +31

    Pilot-wave theory for the win! ;)

    • @ogtoop3645
      @ogtoop3645 8 років тому +3

      Pilot-wave doesn't get enough love, and it has a pretty tight explanation of double slit!

    • @maulcs
      @maulcs 8 років тому

      Exactly, pilot waves yo

    • @Sam_on_YouTube
      @Sam_on_YouTube 8 років тому +3

      I'm a little rough on it, but doesn't pilot wave theory fall to Kochen-Specker? It stands uo to Bell's theorem, but didn't Bell prove later that to make it work relativistically you'd have to alter it to give up the deterministic nature that made it so attractive?
      I'm hoping he gets into those topics later. There are far too few places online to find a reasonable explanation of the stuff beyond Bell's Theorem.

    • @cosmicatrophy4648
      @cosmicatrophy4648 8 років тому +2

      Pilot wave is like printing off more money to fix the debt. It creates more problems than it fixes

    • @morningmadera
      @morningmadera 8 років тому

      Cosmic Atrophy
      and why is that?

  • @JarOfRats
    @JarOfRats 5 років тому +42

    "We now have a winner in the Quantum Race"
    Hey! You changed the results by observing them!

    • @sergior8667
      @sergior8667 5 років тому

      JarOfRats really?

    • @nox_chan
      @nox_chan 5 років тому

      Farnsworth!!

    • @ashmita002
      @ashmita002 5 років тому

      Actually thats not accurate according to quantum physics. The results did not exist until we observed them. Change would mean that we knew the results before observation, but that in itself cant be true because knowing is a form of observation.

  • @indylawi5021
    @indylawi5021 6 місяців тому

    Simply the best explanation of the classic double slit experiment in quantum physics for the layman and any student of science. Thank you for putting together such a great material and presentation.

  • @dalecollins477
    @dalecollins477 5 років тому +13

    Imho a wave needs a medium through which it can 'travel'. That medium is the fabric making the space-time continuum. Waves cannot travel through nothing which means the fabric of the space-time continuum is everywhere. That understood, this single photon is not travelling per say. It is pulsing the fabric in the same way as if you shook a rope; I.e no part of the rope travels forward, just the pulse from one part along it. Now, waves spread out because not all the energy of the pulse is in the forward direction. So it seems perfectly possible that the fabric is pulsing through both slits and hence can interfere on the other side with its self. Put a pole in a pool then drop a singe stone behind it. You will see an interference pattern the other side of the pole. Simple really, and this slit experiment backs up that theory. :-)

    • @zheerkejlbergal-mashhadi7551
      @zheerkejlbergal-mashhadi7551 5 років тому +10

      1) "That medium is the fabric making the space-time continuum" and "this single photon [...] is pulsing the fabric ...": Actually, what you're describing is not light, you're describing gravitational waves - ripples in the fabric of spacetime itself. Photons are waves in the elctromagnetic field, a scalar field which is embedded within or superposed onto spacetime
      2) "the fabric of the space-time continuum is everywhere": You are absolutely right, at every point in spacetime, there is spacetime.
      3) "Now, waves spread out because not all the energy of the pulse is in the forward direction": Sure, this makes sense for classical waves - they spread out and dissipate over an area. A photon, however, is the smallest excitation of the EM field. It cannob be split, it cannot spread out - smaller waves don't exist. It can only be at ONE point whenever measured. That's why it ends up at a well-defined spot.
      So how can something that only exists at one spot at any given point in time go through two slits and interact with itself on the other side?
      The Copenhagen Interpretation says that it doesn't physically do that - the wavefunction is a wave of probabilities, not the particle itself.
      De Broglie-Bohm theory suggests that the wave and the particle are two separate things - both in existence the whole time, the particle riding the wave.
      And there are many, many more interesting theories to be read: many worlds, many minds, ensemble interpretation, stochastic QM, just to name a few favorites.

  • @FromBehindTheBoard
    @FromBehindTheBoard 8 років тому +24

    Please do an episode on the Pilot Wave interpretation! :)

    • @SwordOfApollo
      @SwordOfApollo 8 років тому +2

      Agreed. I'd like to see a presentation of Bohmian Mechanics that includes mention of the oil droplet analog.

    • @bilthon
      @bilthon 8 років тому +2

      Was just about to ask the same

    • @Perturbance
      @Perturbance 8 років тому +1

      +

  • @MrMakae90
    @MrMakae90 8 років тому +1518

    Do not try and bend the spoon. That's impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth. *There is no spoon.*

    • @AmeshaSpentaArmaiti
      @AmeshaSpentaArmaiti 8 років тому +159

      is that why my soup's all over my lap? i just thought it was a glitch in the system...

    • @TheSliderBy
      @TheSliderBy 8 років тому +51

      Bruh

    • @TheSliderBy
      @TheSliderBy 8 років тому +48

      Bruh

    • @TheSliderBy
      @TheSliderBy 8 років тому +53

      Bruh

    • @g.f.w.parker5485
      @g.f.w.parker5485 8 років тому +79

      There is no spoon, but everything is also a spoon. You are a spoon. I am a spoon. Spoon Universe exists.

  • @Whereisshellymiscavige
    @Whereisshellymiscavige 2 роки тому +9

    I wonder if the wave pattern is time dependent? Does the pattern only emerge if single photons are fired off in quick succession? Similarly, if you allow a big time gap or varying gaps between photons, do they still form a wave pattern?

    • @spacecatmowgli4723
      @spacecatmowgli4723 11 місяців тому

      Yes, it does affect them if you shoot them intermittently or with extended time gaps. But over time, as they accumulate, you'll end up seeing the wave like characteristics but the pattern appears much less clear than if they were all shot in quick succession. It's a good question, and the answer showcases even more how extremely sensitive the double slit experiment is to experimental conditions.

  • @garethdean6382
    @garethdean6382 8 років тому +375

    Did it really break reality, or only our preconceived ideas?

    • @happmacdonald
      @happmacdonald 8 років тому +60

      The second one. Unfortunate title is moderately click-baity. :

    • @arnabbiswasalsodeep
      @arnabbiswasalsodeep 8 років тому +12

      Well, more like broke the understanding of reality. If anything breaks reality and has support of theory then it becomes the new reality instead, our understanding of reality that is anyways

    • @GloveSlapnz
      @GloveSlapnz 8 років тому +2

      +Arnab Biswas if I didn't know about this experiment, did it break my reality?

    • @mikip3242
      @mikip3242 8 років тому +3

      Well, maybe not only that. Reality is the set of real things. This wave of possibilities act "beyond reality" because things are not only non-existent or existent but have a range of posible states in different intensities. I wouldn't say break reality but break existence. But yes. Maybe is just a semantic issue. Sorry for my english (I've sounded like a new age moron)

    • @yeetspageet5679
      @yeetspageet5679 8 років тому

      +GloveSlapnz I think when were talking about a scientific video, you can assume "broke reality" means it broke the current understanding scientists had. I hate clickbait, this video isn't clickbait. It literally broke the understanding of reality

  • @SangoProductions213
    @SangoProductions213 8 років тому +20

    To put it in layman's terms (in neat, discrete, little points, but in no particular order):
    1) The experiment involved creating light at one point (one photon at a time), and having it hit the other end, which recorded where it landed. Between these two points is a wall with 2 slits between them.
    2) When shot, each individual photon ends up at the other end as a single, distinct point of light.
    3) Over the course of many, many test, the pattern of interference waves shows up.
    ----------
    Elaboration: This is like all other patterns of probability.
    You roll a 20-sided die once, you get one single, distinct result. But, you roll it a million times, you get a pattern of getting all 20 sides roughly the same number of times (assuming it's balanced). This is called a "flat curve".
    Meanwhile, if you roll 3 6-sided dice and added the results, you again get a single, distinct result, but if you roll a million times, you get a bell curve. (The highest and lowest numbers appear less often than the median numbers.) This is because there are more combinations for getting the median numbers than the outlier numbers, thus a higher probability of those showing up.
    And if you rolled the 20 sided die, and replaced the numbers 9,10,11,12 with 1,2 and 19,20 then you would get a reverse bell curve (where the highest and lowest results appear more often than median numbers). And you can continue on with the variations.
    -------------
    4) The proposed reason for this interference wave pattern is that...well, everything devolves in to a probability wave until it's observed...and this wave acts just like water waves, which has interference patterns. So, the high points (where the split waves' high points meet) have the greatest probability of happening, and the low points have the lowest probability of happening.
    -----------
    Elaboration: This is literally a wave made of probability. Don't think about it too much.
    ----------
    5) We can expect that, much like dice rolls, over a million "rolls" we will see a pattern that displays the probability of where each result should have landed, if we worked backwards.
    -----------
    Elaboration: If we saw a completely "flat curve", then we could assume it could appear anywhere with equal chance. If the overall pattern is something else, then we can figure out the probabilities. (say a photon was detected at point "A" once every million shots, but appeared at point "B" once in every 500 shots. We would know that the chance of point B is around one in 500, or .2% chance, and that Point "A" is incredibly unlikely.)
    -----------
    6) And finally! From this, we can infer what is going on. The pattern shows an interference wave pattern. Thus, the logical conclusion is that somewhere, this photon is acting like a wave between the point it's created, and the point that it's detected.

    • @tahmidt
      @tahmidt 8 років тому +3

      A good summary. However you can get away with a lot of other things as well if you "Don't think about it too much."

    • @SangoProductions213
      @SangoProductions213 8 років тому +5

      Tahmid Islam lol, yeah, but this is awesome and kinda fundamental, so you kinda have to think about a good bit of it.
      But for other bits, you can just say "screw it, a wizard did it!"

    • @Reydriel
      @Reydriel 8 років тому +1

      +SangoProductions213
      Describing why a physical phenomena happens with "because reasons" is only possible in Quantum Mechanics XD

    • @Hecatonicosachoron
      @Hecatonicosachoron 8 років тому

      "This is like all other patterns of probability"
      Strictly speaking that is not true. This becomes evident when considering entanglement. That much is shown by Bell tests (i.e. experiments testing Bell's inequality).
      In classical probability if you want to calculate the probability of two outcomes (A or B) you you simply add the *probabilities*. In QM you do not add the probabilities but instead you add the complex probability amplitudes - from which you calculate the probability by taking the mod squared of the amplitudes. That's fundamentally different to how bog-standard, classical probability works.

    • @SangoProductions213
      @SangoProductions213 8 років тому

      Yes, yes, technically. But this is in layman's terms.

  • @continuum288
    @continuum288 3 роки тому +8

    Extremely informative. Thank you. I have wondered more in depth about this very issue regarding the wave functions and how the double slit experiment is a microcosmic analogy pertaining to the macroscopic world that we live in. Essentially showing is that from the source, our energy has limitless possibilities until a defined path of intention directs manifestation into our reality.

  • @potita24
    @potita24 3 роки тому +10

    Maybe the reason we cant walk through walls, or be in two places at the same time even though we are made of electrons and protons is that when particles bind together to form atoms and molecules they lose those properties as if the nuclear forces that bind them also keeps them in one place. Sounds like real magic!

    • @OlgasBritishFells
      @OlgasBritishFells 2 роки тому +3

      If we could move fast enough to turn into waves, we would be able to walk through walls and be in different places at the same time.

    • @PerfectSense77
      @PerfectSense77 Рік тому +2

      He says in the video that atoms and even larger atom based structures also can show the interference pattern.

  • @Rakshasa1986
    @Rakshasa1986 8 років тому +11

    I finally have a use for my buckyball trebuchet.

  • @TimmacTR
    @TimmacTR 8 років тому +4

    You didn't mention the part about when they tried to observe the slits to see which slit the particle took it also produced a different result in the resulting pattern on the wall..

  • @CobaltSthenia
    @CobaltSthenia 8 років тому +60

    The last time I came this early, electromagnetism wasn't even its own fundamental force.

    • @Electroblud
      @Electroblud 8 років тому +16

      ....And this is what happens when you mix youtube running gags with physics nerds. :D

    • @larchpine9802
      @larchpine9802 8 років тому

      ho hum

    • @TheJackawock
      @TheJackawock 8 років тому +2

      Your comment genuinely made me laugh.

    • @aforsy
      @aforsy 8 років тому

      +Morning Madera easy, killer

    • @joedigger9919
      @joedigger9919 8 років тому +1

      Last time I came this early Schrödinger's cat was still alive, I mean dead, I mean alive, I mean dea...........

  • @Milk.moustache
    @Milk.moustache Рік тому

    This guy takes the time to respond to comments at the end of the video! Subscribed!

  • @nicolaiveliki1409
    @nicolaiveliki1409 8 років тому +53

    maybe there's a fundamental buckyball field?

    • @APaleDot
      @APaleDot 8 років тому +12

      Nailed it. Give this man a Nobel Prize!

    • @garethdean6382
      @garethdean6382 8 років тому +3

      In QFT there's a buckyball field, but it's not fundamental, it's composed of actual fundamental fields like the photon field.

    • @nicolaiveliki1409
      @nicolaiveliki1409 8 років тому +1

      +gareth dean so basically that means there are all kinds of composite fields, which is just another way of describing pretty much anything non-fundamental, including matter

    • @azureorbit
      @azureorbit 8 років тому

      i hope you're not taking that from the 'fundamental' platonic solids where the dodecahedron was the cosmos. Its just that the smaller something is, the more likely that the current model of the quantum ever-permeating field will oscillate in such a way as to affect it. aka: small things are waves and probability functions until we force nature to choose one position (ie we make a measurement)

    • @garethdean6382
      @garethdean6382 8 років тому +1

      *****
      Would that mean that consciousness created the universe? That it was here before what we call reality?

  • @tashakazulu8737
    @tashakazulu8737 5 років тому +4

    the PBS Space Time Paradox: it takes me 40 mins to watch 2 clips that are 15 mins long and when i start the 3rd one i cant focus at all.

  • @thetayz72
    @thetayz72 8 років тому +20

    Intriguing stuff. It sort of reminds me of the "we live in a computer simulation universe" idea. Maybe the reason one of the potential realities is chosen when a particle is observed is because the universe's code calls the DecideParticlePosition(); function. : p

    • @thetayz72
      @thetayz72 8 років тому +2

      Or what if the strange phenomena of quantum mechanics, such as the double-slit wave effects, are bugs, or at least, unintended side effects of the simulation's programming.

    • @Fenriswaffle
      @Fenriswaffle 8 років тому +4

      The computer simulation/matrix thing is kind of a logical pit from which there is really no reasonable resolution so its almost not worth discussing at length or debating.
      Also you mention QM being bugs, but QM's little quirks seem to have allowed for the universe to exist as it is both in its macroscopic structure and in the specifics of star formation. The little random movements/positions of particles allowed for what should have been a perfect dispersion of particles that were all perfectly spaced and as such could not coalesce in to things like atoms stars and planets, to do so. Also little tendencies for particles to tunnel allow stars to initiate stable fusion without necessarily being at the pressure and temperature to do so otherwise.
      So bugs? Nah, more like a feature!

    • @andorexurix2491
      @andorexurix2491 8 років тому +2

      for (Particle p : Universe.getParticles()) {
      Position pos = p.determinePosition();
      p.moveTo(pos);
      }
      Problem solved.

    • @-morrow
      @-morrow 8 років тому +1

      Why should it always happen if it once happens?

    • @joeysipos
      @joeysipos 8 років тому +1

      That would imply that we are the Universal Code ;) Which is intreging!

  • @HansBaier
    @HansBaier 3 роки тому +4

    The particle does not gain reality on hitting the screen. That's just where it interacts with the world we can perceive/measure.

  • @jagexgamer20000
    @jagexgamer20000 3 роки тому +13

    The ruleset of quantum physics only make me fundamentally believe we are in a simulation.

  • @ASLUHLUHC3
    @ASLUHLUHC3 4 роки тому +6

    Matt, you truly are the Feynman of our time

  • @navigator100group2
    @navigator100group2 7 років тому +188

    He has skipped the weirdest bit! That is the effect of the observer on the experiment. Search for Quantium Eraser Experiment

    • @eIicit
      @eIicit 7 років тому +17

      Ork Eng Exactly. He totally missed that.

    • @giorgigiorgitko248
      @giorgigiorgitko248 7 років тому +24

      duuude,i am happy im not the only one,i was freaked when the damn video ended without mentioned it

    • @etsets8598
      @etsets8598 7 років тому +13

      there are another video discussing Quantium Eraser.

    • @diaryofhermind
      @diaryofhermind 6 років тому

      Ork Eng ☻ I thought the same thing...lol

    • @memefarmer5255
      @memefarmer5255 6 років тому

      Ork Eng h

  • @brutalityness
    @brutalityness 2 роки тому +4

    Omg I love this series. It helps me build on my work SO exponentially. Thank you 🙏

  • @scott-hr3hd
    @scott-hr3hd 5 років тому +55

    I think your missing a big part about that experiment. The fact that when we try to observe what is happening the wave function collapses and the experiment then reacts like single particles. That’s a weird one. Predictable but not really understood.

    • @adamnichols476
      @adamnichols476 4 роки тому +5

      ahhh the good old resource saver from deus ex machina. Turn off the parts of the simulation that arent being used lol.

    • @bowtangey6830
      @bowtangey6830 4 роки тому +1

      I agree. THAT is another level of mindblowing.

    • @the_juug_god4100
      @the_juug_god4100 4 роки тому

      4D, its like asking a germ to look up

    • @arpitthakur45
      @arpitthakur45 4 роки тому +1

      i think it has something to do with consciousness,i dont know....its like you know how sometimes you are sitting somehwere sometimes and your body is there but mind is not...till you loose the thought and come back to senses and or someone makes you aware and you are back to your senses or conscious or idk...i dont believe in probabilities...because i feel its not my choice whether i choose to exist or not and at what time in what city...it was my parents and there was there parents...and i feel same with universe...perceptions so often make reality...and no one chooses there genes and stuff...idk...just from a neuroscience perspective it doesn't make sense,the idea of probability...but it does because of consciousness

    • @scott-hr3hd
      @scott-hr3hd 4 роки тому +1

      @@arpitthakur45 no literally particles like photons, electrons and some atoms when shot one at a time through 2 slots produce interference wave patterns as if they were pure waves but when you attempt to observe them they change back to solid. Because of this odd behavior it has spawned all sorts of science including superposition, Schroeder’s cat, entanglement. The best analogy someone ever made to it is similar to losing change in a couch. You know it falls out of your pocket but when you go to grab the change it just slips further into the couch. That was Neal deGrasse Tyson.

  • @tiltedtesseract8210
    @tiltedtesseract8210 8 років тому +149

    Plot twist: reality is a simulation and this is actually the result of a coding error.

    • @vink6163
      @vink6163 8 років тому +38

      Actually in the world of coding this is called "lazy evaluation" where you don't bother to find the exact answer until just before you need it. That way you don't waste time calculating answers you never end up using. If ever there was an argument that we are living in a simulation, this is it. I know if I was writing a simulation I'd be using lazy evaluation as it would significantly reduce the CPU time required to run it!

    • @Chloroxite
      @Chloroxite 8 років тому +1

      +Vink But at the end of the day, does it really matter whether this is a sim or not? No, merely existing is all that matters.

    • @madscientistshusta
      @madscientistshusta 8 років тому +2

      scientists have already proved were not in a simulation by bouncing particles around and doing a few calculation, no I have no idea what or how I just read it on Wikipedia a long ass time ago

    • @ShadedWolf96
      @ShadedWolf96 8 років тому +7

      +madscientistshusta Because Wikipedia is a totally reliable source... o.O

    • @dandman8777
      @dandman8777 8 років тому +1

      +Vink That's fascinating, thanks!

  • @marius4iasi
    @marius4iasi 8 років тому +7

    The stranger part of this experiment is that if you put detectors on each slit, so you observe which slit the photon goes through, you don't get the interference pattern anymore, but an intuitive two zones directly in the directions of the slits. That is just weird.

    • @Tokeyo107
      @Tokeyo107 8 років тому +5

      this isn't that strange at all considering that for the detector to work it needs to interact with the photon and by this happening the possibility space of the photon is forced to collapse into one of the two possible spaces (the two slits) which makes the photon become "real" and therefore behaves as such

    • @aaroncurtis8545
      @aaroncurtis8545 6 років тому

      @@Tokeyo107 but since we know from experiment that collapse is not caused by physical interaction, it is still weird.

  • @mysmirandam.6618
    @mysmirandam.6618 Рік тому +1

    I love how you mentioned vertasium i love that channel

  • @dauntless64
    @dauntless64 4 роки тому +8

    I actually used this to measure the width of my own hair (from my head) in my Grade 12 using a laser. And it was super cool.

  • @skywatcher5978
    @skywatcher5978 5 років тому +6

    Infinite knowledge, potentiality mixed by free will equals reality concieved. Love is the cause and effect of all reality. Elementary dear Watson.

    • @deant3980
      @deant3980 5 років тому

      Free will doesnt exist. Its an illusion called choice. Theres no choice not to play.

    • @skywatcher5978
      @skywatcher5978 5 років тому

      Free will is choice, the divine right to choose by belief within, it is a gift graced by Father at conception of life. Free Will can not be manipulated by outside influences

  • @dylanhibbert3811
    @dylanhibbert3811 4 роки тому +9

    Question.... had the target been moved forward or backword would the point of impact been in the same point of the wave pattern? If not would it be the space-time change that accounts for the change in position or a probability issue?

  • @PA-gc6qj
    @PA-gc6qj Рік тому

    I can explain why light and matter can satisfy the seemingly-incongruous classical definitions for both waves and particles in double-slit experiment.
    Light is an electromagnetic radiation with magnetic field. When it spreads out in particle with magnetic field as wave, it forms several bands on screen.
    However, the magnetic field is affected and disappeared with an observer aside so that only two bands are shown.

  • @hakachukai
    @hakachukai 8 років тому +59

    Very cool video!
    Why didn't you talk about the very strange thing that happens if you try to determine which slit the electron went through?
    I was looking forward to hearing/seeing your explanation of it :-(
    Also, I've always wondered how small the slits have to be for this to happen. How much does the size of the slit effect the result?

    • @akrybion
      @akrybion 8 років тому +10

      I'm not a physicist, but I think I remember, when we had this in school, that the reason electrons don't build this pattern, if you know which slit they took, because when you determine the position of the electron the wave function collapses, because the electron is forced to interact with something in order to be "observed". And since after the electron leaves the slit there is no more reason for the wave to interfere with anything it just travels "straight forward".
      I hope you could understand me and if I'm wrong, please correct me :)

    • @hakachukai
      @hakachukai 8 років тому +1

      You're correct and I understand the basics of it. But I want more than basics. I want to know the fine details of how they measured it and where they measured it. How does measuring it at different places effect the result?

    • @Sam_on_YouTube
      @Sam_on_YouTube 8 років тому +1

      The slits need to be on the same scale as the wavelength. I did the experiment (not single photon, of course) in college with microwaves and the slits we used were about an inch in size and an inch apart. DeBrogle waves, which are the wave-like nature of what had been though of previously as particles, were discovered by scattering electrons off a crystal that functioned as VERY small slits.

    • @Sam_on_YouTube
      @Sam_on_YouTube 8 років тому +4

      I assume quantum eraser will be coming eventually. It isn't usually in the standard progression of topics on wavefunction interpretation but it should be and given the level of this channel I expect it probably will be.

    • @kidkuku
      @kidkuku 8 років тому +3

      +akrybion For that there is a delayed choice double slit experiment. where determination is done after electron crosses the slit. and the the result is the same.... freaky uh?

  • @deathstarresident
    @deathstarresident 4 роки тому +59

    When you really understand the implications of this experiment and wave function itself - that’s more scary and creepy than any horror movie you’ve ever seen or conceived. The idea that physical reality isn’t sheer randomness is scary - and has far reaching implications For example if we consciously make a decision - is it really our free will at work - or is there a predetermined ways the electrons in our way got arranged in our brain that influenced our consciousness- at that point during decision making process to which consequently influence that decision? If consciousness is a manifestation of human brains complex neural networks and brain mostly functions based on electrical signals - our consciousness itself cannot be random, our decisions cannot be random and at least some aspects of our existence should be predetermined.

    • @ryanw1140
      @ryanw1140 4 роки тому +16

      Just to make sure you are wrong i punched myself and said "take that im in control"

    • @TwoBlockAnime
      @TwoBlockAnime 4 роки тому +3

      @@ryanw1140 You didn't understand the person above

    • @holzerisms
      @holzerisms 4 роки тому +6

      A guiding hand makes me feel less lonely

    • @henrikholm1655
      @henrikholm1655 4 роки тому +2

      Not scary. Just Law of Nature

    • @ianruthven8122
      @ianruthven8122 4 роки тому +8

      @@henrikholm1655 If everything is predetermined then you have no choice. Everything you, I or anyone else does is predetermined by all the many interactions that came before it. You have no free will and you may as well just sit back and enjoy the ride. I like to think that all possibilities exist simultaneously until someone or something makes a measurement and records what happened. At that point all the possibilities that were not measured cease to exist. This, I think, allows free will to exist, do you measure it or not? if you measure it, it will forever change the future, if you don't measure it, then all future possibilities still exist.

  • @Safa7409
    @Safa7409 2 роки тому +3

    Brilliantly explained, my Dad taught me this years ago,MOD incredibly clever man, mind blowing stuff.

  • @terrysouth7201
    @terrysouth7201 2 роки тому +3

    for the double slit experiment, the fluorescent screen is essentially a 1D measuring device, and that's why we only see the 'point' of the particle as it passes into/through the screen. What if you made that 'screen' a 3D box or trap...maybe like a cloud chamber, but something more permanent - that could literally show/record the path of the wave/particle as it passes through it? then you should see the full wave like behavior of the photon or whatever as it passes through.

    • @roundedges2
      @roundedges2 2 роки тому +1

      You're thinking like I am

  • @ChildOL
    @ChildOL 7 років тому +4

    It's strange that only recently have I heard of this experiment

  • @DoAsInfiniity
    @DoAsInfiniity 3 роки тому +6

    Does a magnetic fields have any influence on that pattern that emerges?
    Seems too perfect

  • @sjkulzer
    @sjkulzer 6 років тому +6

    Do the particles ever overlap each other when they “land” in the experiment? If they don’t, and find a new unoccupied position, then could it be said that they are “aware” of their position? If they are “aware,” then where exactly does this leave us?

    • @tiny_toilet
      @tiny_toilet 5 років тому +1

      Yes, they can fucking overlap. No, they are not aware. This leaves us in Hell, right where we started.

  • @xxACIDVIRUSxx
    @xxACIDVIRUSxx 2 роки тому

    What! Someone actually said your content was too easy to understand, and now you’re actually going make it harder for me to decipher your videos😩

  • @yat282
    @yat282 8 років тому +64

    Results like this just leave me wondering if the universe actually does exist, or if it just probably exists.

    • @LordLOC
      @LordLOC 8 років тому +4

      Or its just a simulation and this is why things are the way they are.

    • @garethdean6382
      @garethdean6382 8 років тому +6

      Perhaps there is no difference between he two.

    • @Kaboom1212Gaming
      @Kaboom1212Gaming 8 років тому

      I would say that it probably exitsts. But there is a %99.999 chance it doesn't exist.

    • @kadmonzohar2
      @kadmonzohar2 8 років тому

      Maya from the Hindu schools

    • @EvolBob1
      @EvolBob1 8 років тому

      +Gage Baumgard - We have to work out what is the probability of reality first.

  • @nicholasanderson2062
    @nicholasanderson2062 4 роки тому +13

    Remember that time we thought the solar system revolved around us?
    Now remember that time when we thought that everything was completely indeterminable until a human looked at it?

    • @croszdrop1
      @croszdrop1 4 роки тому

      Just a human? Oh man, buddy we are probably the lowest of conscious beings out there

    • @dzikraaksa527
      @dzikraaksa527 4 роки тому

      actually, it was the opposite:
      remember when we thought that everything was completely determinable even thought human did not look at it?

    • @arpitthakur45
      @arpitthakur45 4 роки тому

      ​@@dzikraaksa527 i think that is true...your reality is what you choose it to be or make it to be or think it to be...people believe anything and attach anything to anything and think that oh it worked,so many times...this is more a philosophical way to look at this...but the thing is i dont choose my existence...neither i choose my genes or country...a person in a first world country as compared to a 3rd world country has so many more opportunities...and the person in a smaller country might not even be exposed to different things his mind could do and just leave it that...there are so many talents that just never get exposure to different mindsets or fields...if you come from america you would probably be in basketball...from argentina probably in football...and to have the mindset and the drive to do a certain thing or the talent...not everyone has that...seems like destiny...whatever they choose it to be...but how do they choose to choose when they choose to choose...most times one thing leads to another...and to me most things feel like instincts...the instinct to check something to remember something is an instinct it just comes from inside...or the instinct to even improve the instinct or life or to make a good thing an instinct...objectively i dont think anyone is wrong or right because they come out of this world...this is what it has to offer...

  • @airamlenner4347
    @airamlenner4347 5 років тому +4

    I don't really understand this but these stuffs are really interesting!

  • @aletheia161
    @aletheia161 2 роки тому +2

    Wonderful explanation. I have read somewhere that an alternative explanation would be to consider the particle fuzzy with an possible rather than probable existence, that is, its existence is actually spread over space time. When the single photon passes through the slit part of the fuzzy photon goes though earlier than the rest of it, thus the fuzzy photon interferes with its past space time structure.
    Bob

    • @ahpstudiostamil
      @ahpstudiostamil Рік тому

      Dear brothers and sisters,
      I have solved the problem of particle to behave like particle and wave, when observed and unobserved respectively in double slit experiment.
      "Particle physics based on real dimensions of space-time" [Volume 09; issue 10; 2022] - arcjournals - International journal of advanced research in physical science - Open access for free download.
      To think, how the electrons entering the slit knows whether an observation is made on it or the detector is switched ON/OFF and change its results (pattern on the screen) accordingly, is the confusion. This even led the scientist to wonder if quantum mechanics is a future deciding factor of human life. The answer is simple, the experimentation has to include the observer such that observer is equal to observing object together undergoing one of two results at a time. One may think, it is like surrendering oneself and cease to think anymore. No, it is not so.
      I have published a series of papers (totally 9 nos.) on "Theory of Singularity". Hope this new proposed study serves one fundamental for general relativity and quantum mechanics by solving incompatibility between them.
      [Volume 10; issue 03,04; 2023] - arcjournals....thank you

  • @nashs.4206
    @nashs.4206 8 років тому +19

    How do you fire photons/electrons one at a time?

    • @charliegarcia8521
      @charliegarcia8521 8 років тому +75

      with a tiny tiny cannon.

    • @lightcity8933
      @lightcity8933 8 років тому +1

      magic

    • @casesusa
      @casesusa 8 років тому +66

      ...you call them into the office and tell them that their services are no longer needed.

    • @garethdean6382
      @garethdean6382 8 років тому +10

      It's simply a matter of diluting or powering down your light source. For example certain molecules will emit photons after being energized. (Like those ones in glow in the dark toys.) If dissolved and diluted enough they'll be emitting only one photon at a time. You can do the same, energizing with current, or with a chemical reaction and so on.

    • @BadKnightLv01
      @BadKnightLv01 8 років тому +15

      These comments... I'm dead

  • @callanhutchison1871
    @callanhutchison1871 8 років тому +116

    I've no idea what this episode was about

    • @Invisigoth423
      @Invisigoth423 8 років тому +17

      It was about all particles also exist as waves simultaneously. In the experiment, individual photons were shot through a double slit. The photons produced an interference pattern even though they were fired individually. When they tried to determine which slit the photon went through the photons formed two bands instead of an interference pattern. The act of Observing a photon changed it's behavior.

    • @callanhutchison1871
      @callanhutchison1871 8 років тому +4

      +Invisigoth423 yeah but like whaaaaat 💥

    • @callanhutchison1871
      @callanhutchison1871 8 років тому +1

      +Invisigoth423 mind blown

    • @callanhutchison1871
      @callanhutchison1871 8 років тому +7

      +Benjamin Miles ohhhhhh. See now that's much more clarifying u are a gentleman and a scholar

    • @suzandouglass5241
      @suzandouglass5241 8 років тому +11

      smoke a bowl of chronic. makes total sense.

  • @jakobsternberg1807
    @jakobsternberg1807 7 років тому +19

    delayed erasure is even more mindboggling in my opinion

  • @ritazwanink5069
    @ritazwanink5069 3 роки тому

    You have a great speaking voice. Your expression makes you very watchable.