I wouldn't say it's weird but rather we just don't understand it yet. Fairly convinced even after we nail down quantum physics there will still be another layer, and then another layer and so on. It has been like this in all our short history and there's no reason to believe it will be any different this time around.
After searching a lot about what an electron is a particle or a wave .... I found this..... really kudos to your efforts ❤... what an amzinggggggggg explanation I still have confusion about what a wavefunction is but at least it's clear to me now that an electron can be anywhere we can't exactly tell where it's located at a particular instant
I have a question: When we say that something exhibits wave behaviour, we usually refer to some sort of oscillatory motion: like plucking a guitar string, air particles creating sound, etc. So, does the electron also "oscillate" in a similar way? And what is the nature of the oscillation? In other words, what would one mean if we said that an electron also oscillates?
Great question. What oscillates, mathematically speaking, is the phase of the wavefunction (i.e. imaginary part of the wavefunction). And what it represents in reality? Well, we don’t know, because wavefunction is something you cannot see / measure. But the point is, its not a property of (just) electron, any particle or quantum object could oscillate in phase. It cant be simply explained what these oscillation represent - there is no physical movement behind it. But when for example two electron interact, the phase of the oscillation does influence how will they interact. In general, trying to understand quantum physics by relating to classical world as we know it, is futile. It is a different world :)
I know this is a year old comment, but maybe you would be interested in reading more about quantum field theory. I'm not an expert at all, but basically it answers your question such that the electron is an oscillation in an electron "field" that is everywhere in space (spacetime). There aren't really any physical particles like we classically think of them, all particles are just a disturbance that oscillate in the corresponding field.
I have questions about the experiment. First did the gun fire one electron at a time or did it fire plenty of electrons at a time. Second what happens to the electron who collide with the detector. Third can we know how much intial electrons we fired vs how many where detected. Fourth is this experiment conducted in a vaccum??
> Electrons are like a spinning airplane propeller blade. Paint a big red dot on its spinning tip & what you see is a fuzzy red blurr shaking in one spot. Just where exactly in a 2D plane is that blade at any moment? We know that it's anchored to a spinning axis so it's somewhere in that radial spin plane. - An electron adds at right angle an additional or 3rd dimention to that spin, anchored rubbery magnetically to a proton, compounding the possible location & so the human desire to know where its at,,, at any given moment in time. - When the electron interacts with something, its like the spinning blurry plane's bade tip hitting something. And hey! We suddenly know where its at!
It's both. When an electron interacts with the Higgs field it is a particle, because the Higgs Field has imparted mass to the electron, but when it is NOT interacting with the Higgs Field it is a wave.
Has anybody found a massless electron? Behaving as wave. So, though electron is having mass It behaves in both way. But time taken between this transition is extremely fast to detect. The size of electron compare to Planck length is Galaxy to us. May be one day we will......
Hi. I always understood the double slit experiment to measure the wave properties of photons. I know that there is a relationship between electrons and photons, but are we literally shooting electrons out of this cannon, or are they transformed into photons in their free-flowing state?
no we are literally shooting electrons out of this cannon as same concept as photoelectric effect and they are not converting into photons in their free flowing state because they both electron and photon has same nature because of nigligable mass
Sorry for (pretty late as well) response. We are literally shooting electrons. In the past, we could only shoot a lot of electron at the same time, but now we can even shoot electrons literally 1 by 1 (it's pretty difficult to do of course but these days it's not a problem - for top notch science labs). So in the double-slit experiment with electrons, you can think of purely electrons only (i.e. no photons involved at all).
@@ExploratorioYT- thanks for the video - excellent. In answer to the question I say that we are firing the non-observable probability of an electron (1 at a time) rather than an actual observable electron itself( 1 at a time). It’s a subtle shift of emphasis into firing a probability rather than a particle and it’s that probability that allows it to pass through both slits. It is not an electron until we collapse it into one somewhere, at which point we lose it’s fuzziness and the chance for it to act like a wave. . I think you captured what I’ve been trying to say in one of the graphics in this video. I then repeat the explanation for a single photon in an experiment- we are firing the probability of light doing something (1 event at a time) rather than an actual particle of light per se. Same concept. Whenever I think of diffraction or interference effects with atoms though my mind is blown because for this to occur it infers the whole atom and all it’s constituents particles must also be transitioned into a probability fuzz in order to act like a wave.- very much like the transporter on Star Trek. When the probability is in motion to allow for eg interference then the atom as an element must be temporarily ‘lost’ or non-local, like a box of jigsaw puzzle pieces thrown in the air (only to land reassembled again.). This then makes me think that ultimately everything in the universe is a collapsed wave of some kind - so it’s all waves. Particle physics is ultimately the study of collapsed waves (or fields). I’d be interested to know if I’ve pushed my interpretation of this excellent video too far?
It’s a wave in multiple dimensions (4D). It collapses as observing requires taking one or more dimensions to locate the wave. The interference is disrupted by the act of observing. This is why it’s confused with duality. It’s a wave but when a harmonic wave interferes it creates the particle effect.
hello im 16 and would like to ask if that means an electron is a wave but its existance is controlled by the 4d harmonic wave which interferes with the electron and creates a particle effect?
electrons move in waves, yet the particles are so fast via the speed of light, us humans do not have the technology to calculate its movements... Yet!!!
This can be explained as waves over a period of time with a probabilistic future unfolding with particle characteristics relative to the atoms of the periodic table!
Haha glad it worked! Yes exactly. You could do this experiment with any electrically charged particle and you would observe the same properties. Even non-fundamental particles, but charged atoms (ions) would behave the same.
Could light and matter in the form of electrons be wave over a ‘period of time’ and have particle characteristics relative to the atoms of the Periodic Table when we have the absorption and emission of light? Is the exchange of light photon ∆E=hf energy continuously transforming potential energy into the kinetic Eₖ=½mv² energy of matter, in the form of electrons, as an uncertain ∆×∆pᵪ≥h/4π probabilistic future unfolds?
Good summary of the wave function thank you. My question is how this relates to macro reality. Is sight a form of observation which is collapsing the wave function into the definite world we see around us? And is a wave in QM the same as Fields?
Its great question, however science does not have a good answer, yet. Wavefunction does not really relate to anything in macro reality. If we look at bigger and bigger objects, they start to behave more in a “classical way” rather than “quantum way”. Scientists are trying to figure out where is the boundary - could a virus still behave quantum mechanically? (probably no). I might do a video about this, interesting topic
Can you please make a video on how particles actually propagate in the form of waves. Concept like simple harmonic motion , nodes , antinodes, sound waves etc. I'm having a really tough time visualizing how a particle can simply oscillate about its mean position while moving in a wave. Please answer.
So in those probability cloud, the places with higher probabilities of having electrons are subshells and places with lower probability of having electrons are the nodal planes? I've only recently started learning this stuff, so the question might be stupid but, oh well.
When the light splits does it produce the same energy as the start point or is it broken up evenly from the start point? basically does it produce more or less or same energy..after becoming a wave.
Doubts: Using the debroglie relation for wavelength of a particle and it’s momentum can we find the wave nature of an electron and will it be same as the probability distribution wave mentioned in the video What does the actual physical motion of an electron look like? We know that they have a spin but is it possible for them to have a fixed path at all? Larger objects are said to have a wavelength as well according to the same debroglie relation mentioned before. So does that mean that a chair or a table actually vibrates in a very small wavelength and that our eyes are just not able to comprehend such small oscillations?
nobody replies these types of comments,but bro please please can u tell me whch sofrware are u using for these simple animations?Please reply!!!And Thanks
Since every wave has frequency, why don't you measure the frequency? In my opinion the wave could come from the electron genenarator and electron guider.
What is an electron? It is something we can measure. What if we are only able to measure the nucleus of the electron but actually, from release, it breaks apart forming wave behaviour that bounces off the insides of the other slit and those tiny, unmeasurable particles, reflect back towards the nucleus and cause a wave like pattern?
2:55 o damnn...dude yu scared me with the music behind🥺🥺🥺and it's late night ( ok wait, early morning I guess😂😜) but heya this was awsmmm....we want more such amazing animations from yu, bcaz can't wait to subscribe if u are posting more of such stuff for students.. Next_ Modern Quantum Model of an Atom....plz a video on this🥺💯
wouldn't it be a technological problem? that is, that we still can't determine exactly what an electron looks like or even what a proton or neutron looks like simply because we don't yet have the technology that allows us to observe these elementary particles in their natural state exactly as they are?
Sorry for (pretty late) response. Yeah that's a good point. However, the issue is not as much technological anymore. It is more about the fact that we cannot know anything about a particle without influencing in one way or other. In our world we can just look at a thing and it doesn't change anything. But for these tiny bastards, you can't measure where they are without influencing them. So to measure where an electron is we need an electro-magnetic field to "sense it", but at the same time this field we bring to the party will influence the electron itself.
The electron must be something material, continuous, that surrounds and exists around the nucleus, that is moving (vibrating) and or resonating in waves -emitting resonance, vibration further from the nucleus into the medium between atoms-.
Just stumbling on this video and I have a question. Doesn't the fact that the electrons position changes between our measurements just mean that it is in constant motion, and not literally in two or more places at once? In my mind, it's a bit like the tree in the forest with no one around to hear it. It makes a sound even though there is nothing there to measure the sound. It seems like electrons are similar, just flying around doing their thing, but not being everywhere at once. Am I off on this?
How far apart are the slits ? How accurate can the electron accelerator be at hitting a target. For example shooting an arrow at a slit in the wall? If there are 2 slits and I aim only at one slit. I will get most of my arrows going through one slit. Or what am I missing here. How close are the slits together how big are the slits compared to the slits the arrow is shot through. Where do I find these answers.
However, if there are only two holes and the first layer acts as a barrier (with the hope that it prevents electrons from passing through), where does the additional electron come from? I mean, why did it also move in the opposite direction instead of creating two lines of electrons at the back? Can electrons only be emitted from the space left in the center, or can they pass through the first barrier? Also, I'm not sure if my question sounds silly, but if we fire, let's say, 1000 electrons, will the resulting wave also consist of 1000 electrons, and not more, since nothing can be created or destroyed? i mean i just didnot gete how the heck electron shooted straight created a wave like pattern
@@so-nali The answer is that it depends. At low energy the number of electrons will stay the same. At high energy we can create all kinds of stuff, including new electrons. That's just one of the reasons why the double slit is a silly experiment that doesn't tell us anything about quantum mechanics.
You said that we don’t know where an electron particle is at one time or if it is a wave. My question would be for the experiment itself then how would you then create an electron gun. We need to back up and explain this first and then we would have the answer.
I believe that the electron going through both slits is an inference on your and others part. It cannot be shown with certainty that it behaves as described and it is kind of silly if you think about it. A spread quantity of something needs energy to get back to a particle (which the screen at the back always detects, either if you detect the electron at the slit or not. At the back it registers as a particle). Where is that energy coming from? We don't even know what an 'observation' constitutes of, is it the photon that collapses the wave function? A human eye? Something else? We don't know for certain. Also the photons going through the double slit behaves entirely different and should be treated as such. No one has seen a collapsed photon, makng the light going through the slits act as a particle. Yeah, it is time to come up with a better explanation, and stop the quantum mumbo jumbo presumptions
@@ExploratorioYT Exactly. Why can’t it be both. Electrons have mass, this can easily be shown and apparently they have spin. Does spin generate a wave of sorts. It’s hard to picture all this happening with subatomic forces. I still can’t get my head around firing individual Photons/electrons in these slit experiments.And what is flowing through wires in electrical circuits. Is it Photons or Electrons. Is a Photon actually a wave generated by the Electron??
How should a particle behave 🤔 if it has momentum how does it relate with kicking electrons off from metal surface what is the connection ( i can't understand the debrougley's equation)😶🥺
What if there is no higgs field, instid of it local concentration of EM field (like two gamma photon) can create time dilation gradient and EM waves localy trapped into this zone - here is electron which creates concentric waves in the EM field. This tiny EM trap travel throught one slit but due to it wave nature can interfered with own influence. The probabilistic nature of the electron comes from the fact that you cannot accurately measure the gradient of the electromagnetic field on a femtometer scale, but only see the result of the interaction of the electron with other particles.
"Quantun physics doesn't tell us what exactly is going to happen." When you don't specify the intial conditions exactly, you can't expect to predict the final condition exactly. When you do specify the initial conditions exactly in quantum physics, you can expect to predict the final condition exactly. The UA-cam is playing a fancy word game, not talking serious physics. The problem is that to specify the initial condition exactly, you need a suitable setup. For that, you usually need something such as a singlet pair, one to identify the initial condition exactly, the other to be left untouched so that you can exactly predict its final condition. Of course, if you interfere with the other electron on its trajectory, you effectuate an unpredictable change in the true 'initial condition', and so make its final condition again unpredictable. An electron is a particle, but an ensemble of electrons moving independently through a diffracting object can create a wave-like diffraction pattern. No one in his right mind would think that showed that the electron was a wave, but, as far as I can see, some people insist on that mistaken interpretation. You don't know right now where I am, but that doesn't mean that I am not in a definite place. It just means that you don't know. The basic purpose of this UA-cam is to mystify the watcher, not to enlighten him.
@@christophergame7977 Also important to remember: if somebody wants to help you with your mental confusion it's important to learn to be grateful rather than snapped in. That's part of the human maturation process. ;-)
Stop thinking that light is something travelling as a wave with a wavelenght .Light does not travel ...Light is not something but a REACTION at a certain distance on licht elsewhere and can be explained very easily .
i here some where that if you want to know about the space than see it in form of energy and wave so i have a question i mass can band the space and mass is energy than if i want to band the space so i needed too much energy but we don't have so i think weight less or like electron only follow the path of wave like up and down or spinning insted going in straight line or in another path
Hey,i have a confusion if anyone can answer please. An atom is 99.9% empty and the electron is a transverse wave which requires medium so where does that medium comes from?
So, in theory, if we directly look at Electron its Particle, but when we stop looking at it, its wave? If we can solve this, we practically solved all the problems Universe has..
it may be totally dumb, but when i think about this, it always come to my mind that maybe it could mean there is not such thing like past present and future existing separetely, maybe they are somewhat always connected and exist all at the same time, that's why the particle is like a cloud, existing in every position it could and when we measure it, we see it in one position, the very right position that correspond for the exact present moment. maybe i'm just to stupid to understand the real thing here, but anyway. thanks for the vid.
No, the particle is always in one position at all times, its like a spec of dust in a wave of water, the measuring of electrons requires us to shoot a photon at the electron which directly changes the properties of the electron changing its state and position, theres factors that determine where the position of the electron will be we just cant identify all of them.
It is not as complex as people say it is, think that particle that spreads out its mass and energy like a wave, it automatically localizes when interacting with another particle, in free space its a wave, when interacting with another particle it localizes.
I have a question because i think im wrong. I think that electron has a partucle nature and a mass . When it has the wave nature , the mass energy (E=mc²) is given to a form of an electron wave . That's ehy in the double slit experiment the electron wave goes at two slits at the same time . Because in this case there is no particle . Just a wave with the electrons mass energy . Another example is the two gamma rays colission. Energy stored is those rays turns into matter with mass . Please if anyone knows to explain this to me i will be thankful , because i think that im wrong
mass and energy are interchangeable. don't think of mass and energy as seperate they are different form of the same thing. it's called mass-energy imagine a non newtonian liquid like starchy custard. it's a liquid but then when u impact it its hard like a solid... solid and liquid are just different forms of the same custard. when we observe an electron we interact with the system and so it behaves like a particle when we don't it does like a wave. we're seeing the same energy in different forms
@@vkdeen7570 despite the wave electron has mass energy, it's orbital in an atom doesn't have to do with mass energy, it has to do with potential and kinetic energy right?
@user-tn2mp9qr6q yes kinetic energy for the orbital. but it's important to remember it's not orbiting like a planet orbits a star. It's more like a standing wave in a probability cloud. it's the electron magnetic force which governs the "orbit"
Is electron round? Get quick answer to more such fundamental questions in science on MinuteChemistry : ua-cam.com/video/KTUcj3aamnA/v-deo.htmlsi=OFxRFGdBUq5Z7C3g
People even youtubers dont understand why electron is represented by a cloud of probability . Not because they are waves, but because they are moving very fast, at the speed of light. They instatntly pop in and out in every point in their allowed space.
Electrons are neither waves nor particles. To say they're understood at all is to utter a falsehood. Protons aren't understood either. No one knows what's inside a proton. The dogma used to be that it's two up and one down quark, but that model has recently been shot down in flames.
The electron have probability to be in many position, but it must be in a single position, then why the experiment result is shown like it is present in many positions
Has there ever been a time where someone has measured the same electron at the same time but got the measurement on all possible outcomes for that instance? My theory is that the hole world could be made ou of waves and if so then when these waves colide or have a certian value when they are measured would then apear to be in this there form. For example we only measure the strength of an electron at 5 but anything lower than that wouldn't be measured as an electron, or even have deffernt properties. Each wave could maybe even colide with a completely different type of wave and those interactions would be seen irl. Like electron wave colliding with a proton wave at a certian strength would resalt in a radical fenammena. This is just a thought don't take me a some lunitic like you would see in hystory books. But you never know i could be wright, since the only way to prove it is if we could prove that every partile is actually a wave. In my opinion the universe is made of waves is actually seemingly possible, it just would mean we can't measure it yet but with this video it proves that while it isn't a fact, it proves that we can measure at least some part of it, even if its just yhe cerface level of it
I know i am dumb 😂but how exactly they shot Electron 😁if they dont know were is 🤗they put to gun only posibility of location?... So cloud with unknown is bullet🤭
This so called boss is just how it works. Like a machine can only do what it is built to do. Or a computer program runs only what it is programed to run. And gravity is what gravity is because of mass(pretty much, untill we find out what actually gives a particle its mass) and does what gravity does thats how it works in this univeres laws. Like a math problem always it is only a matter if time to find out what that missing function value is, then we might know what causes these wierd physics. But then we'll start questioning why does it happen again and we just go on this loop untill its literally impossible to know the origin of everything.
if they didnt us so many filters and taint there own test. u gave the light multiple points to reflect from or another photon by atumism. you can't make it shot one photon or electron. there both field perturbations a disturbance in a medium thats everywhere. dark energy... the aether dark matter.... electromagnetism and its tied to magnetism and electricity as they are all apart of the same thing the aether. ice. steam. H2O at room temp. hard water... doesn't matter what form u c still water.
I like how you said "quantum physics is weird". Couldn't have said it better :)
I wouldn't say it's weird but rather we just don't understand it yet. Fairly convinced even after we nail down quantum physics there will still be another layer, and then another layer and so on. It has been like this in all our short history and there's no reason to believe it will be any different this time around.
When that basketball subscribed I flipped🤣🤣 subbed👌🏼💯🙌🏼
A very good video, a shame that you have few subscribers, don't give up bro, you will make it one day, I'm sure of that
Thanks, I have a break now but will come back to this hobby later for sure :) (when I have more time)
What's your job
After searching a lot about what an electron is a particle or a wave .... I found this..... really kudos to your efforts ❤... what an amzinggggggggg explanation I still have confusion about what a wavefunction is but at least it's clear to me now that an electron can be anywhere we can't exactly tell where it's located at a particular instant
a wave function is just visualising the ranges of where an electron may be located using probability statistics on a graph
I have a question:
When we say that something exhibits wave behaviour, we usually refer to some sort of oscillatory motion: like plucking a guitar string, air particles creating sound, etc.
So, does the electron also "oscillate" in a similar way? And what is the nature of the oscillation? In other words, what would one mean if we said that an electron also oscillates?
Great question. What oscillates, mathematically speaking, is the phase of the wavefunction (i.e. imaginary part of the wavefunction). And what it represents in reality? Well, we don’t know, because wavefunction is something you cannot see / measure. But the point is, its not a property of (just) electron, any particle or quantum object could oscillate in phase. It cant be simply explained what these oscillation represent - there is no physical movement behind it. But when for example two electron interact, the phase of the oscillation does influence how will they interact. In general, trying to understand quantum physics by relating to classical world as we know it, is futile. It is a different world :)
If electron oscillate, another particle will create and that is plasmon. Just like EM oscillation, particle is photon. I guess
I know this is a year old comment, but maybe you would be interested in reading more about quantum field theory. I'm not an expert at all, but basically it answers your question such that the electron is an oscillation in an electron "field" that is everywhere in space (spacetime). There aren't really any physical particles like we classically think of them, all particles are just a disturbance that oscillate in the corresponding field.
Then how come electrons create interference pattern in double slit experiment?
Yes quantum world cannot be understand by classic mind, it's quite -quite different
What a great sounding voice! Thank you 🙏
Awesome, thanks!
I have questions about the experiment. First did the gun fire one electron at a time or did it fire plenty of electrons at a time. Second what happens to the electron who collide with the detector. Third can we know how much intial electrons we fired vs how many where detected. Fourth is this experiment conducted in a vaccum??
Explained very well, thank you 🙏🏼
> Electrons are like a spinning airplane propeller blade. Paint a big red dot on its spinning tip & what you see is a fuzzy red blurr shaking in one spot. Just where exactly in a 2D plane is that blade at any moment? We know that it's anchored to a spinning axis so it's somewhere in that radial spin plane.
- An electron adds at right angle an additional or 3rd dimention to that spin, anchored rubbery magnetically to a proton, compounding the possible location & so the human desire to know where its at,,, at any given moment in time.
- When the electron interacts with something, its like the spinning blurry plane's bade tip hitting something. And hey!
We suddenly know where its at!
It's both. When an electron interacts with the Higgs field it is a particle, because the Higgs Field has imparted mass to the electron, but when it is NOT interacting with the Higgs Field it is a wave.
I agree. and because of this I've always considered light to be a "wavicle".
Has anybody found a massless electron? Behaving as wave.
So, though electron is having mass
It behaves in both way. But time taken between this transition is extremely fast to detect. The size of electron compare to Planck length is
Galaxy to us.
May be one day we will......
To be an electron is because it has already interact with higgs field, to be an electron is because it has mass, so it has not sense what you say
Hi. I always understood the double slit experiment to measure the wave properties of photons. I know that there is a relationship between electrons and photons, but are we literally shooting electrons out of this cannon, or are they transformed into photons in their free-flowing state?
If exploratorio is reading this reply then please answer this comment
no we are literally shooting electrons out of this cannon as same concept as photoelectric effect and they are not converting into photons in their free flowing state because they both electron and photon has same nature because of nigligable mass
Sorry for (pretty late as well) response.
We are literally shooting electrons. In the past, we could only shoot a lot of electron at the same time, but now we can even shoot electrons literally 1 by 1 (it's pretty difficult to do of course but these days it's not a problem - for top notch science labs).
So in the double-slit experiment with electrons, you can think of purely electrons only (i.e. no photons involved at all).
@@ExploratorioYT- thanks for the video - excellent. In answer to the question I say that we are firing the non-observable probability of an electron (1 at a time) rather than an actual observable electron itself( 1 at a time). It’s a subtle shift of emphasis into firing a probability rather than a particle and it’s that probability that allows it to pass through both slits. It is not an electron until we collapse it into one somewhere, at which point we lose it’s fuzziness and the chance for it to act like a wave. . I think you captured what I’ve been trying to say in one of the graphics in this video. I then repeat the explanation for a single photon in an experiment- we are firing the probability of light doing something (1 event at a time) rather than an actual particle of light per se. Same concept. Whenever I think of diffraction or interference effects with atoms though my mind is blown because for this to occur it infers the whole atom and all it’s constituents particles must also be transitioned into a probability fuzz in order to act like a wave.- very much like the transporter on Star Trek. When the probability is in motion to allow for eg interference then the atom as an element must be temporarily ‘lost’ or non-local, like a box of jigsaw puzzle pieces thrown in the air (only to land reassembled again.). This then makes me think that ultimately everything in the universe is a collapsed wave of some kind - so it’s all waves. Particle physics is ultimately the study of collapsed waves (or fields). I’d be interested to know if I’ve pushed my interpretation of this excellent video too far?
It’s a wave in multiple dimensions (4D). It collapses as observing requires taking one or more dimensions to locate the wave. The interference is disrupted by the act of observing. This is why it’s confused with duality. It’s a wave but when a harmonic wave interferes it creates the particle effect.
hello im 16 and would like to ask if that means an electron is a wave but its existance is controlled by the 4d harmonic wave which interferes with the electron and creates a particle effect?
sorry i came here trying to figure out what exactly is an electron
electrons move in waves, yet the particles are so fast via the speed of light, us humans do not have the technology to calculate its movements... Yet!!!
Nope. ;-)
Really good video, thank you for your time and effort
Great video brother , can you please make a video on atomic orbital
This can be explained as waves over a period of time with a probabilistic future unfolding with particle characteristics relative to the atoms of the periodic table!
I subscribed immediately after the basketball ball😅
Well, so does the electron have dual nature like light?
Haha glad it worked!
Yes exactly. You could do this experiment with any electrically charged particle and you would observe the same properties. Even non-fundamental particles, but charged atoms (ions) would behave the same.
@@ExploratorioYT thank you!
Great video, keep up the good work!
Could light and matter in the form of electrons be wave over a ‘period of time’ and have particle characteristics relative to the atoms of the Periodic Table when we have the absorption and emission of light?
Is the exchange of light photon ∆E=hf energy continuously transforming potential energy into the kinetic Eₖ=½mv² energy of matter, in the form of electrons, as an uncertain ∆×∆pᵪ≥h/4π probabilistic future unfolds?
Good summary of the wave function thank you. My question is how this relates to macro reality. Is sight a form of observation which is collapsing the wave function into the definite world we see around us? And is a wave in QM the same as Fields?
Its great question, however science does not have a good answer, yet. Wavefunction does not really relate to anything in macro reality. If we look at bigger and bigger objects, they start to behave more in a “classical way” rather than “quantum way”. Scientists are trying to figure out where is the boundary - could a virus still behave quantum mechanically? (probably no). I might do a video about this, interesting topic
Can you please make a video on how particles actually propagate in the form of waves. Concept like simple harmonic motion , nodes , antinodes, sound waves etc.
I'm having a really tough time visualizing how a particle can simply oscillate about its mean position while moving in a wave.
Please answer.
I also want to know this very curiously. But l have not received any satisfaction.
Thanks commenter for being remarkable
Yeah that is not easy to understand. I will put this into my list (altough I do have a break currently from video creation)
Waiting
Literally the best subscribe transition I have ever seen
Good video... Subscribed ;)
ive watched a couple of videos regarding this subject matter including this one and i think my brain is about to explode !!!
So in those probability cloud, the places with higher probabilities of having electrons are subshells and places with lower probability of having electrons are the nodal planes? I've only recently started learning this stuff, so the question might be stupid but, oh well.
Thankyou so much for this beautiful video 🙏🙏🙏🙏
Lots of love from India🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳
When the light splits does it produce the same energy as the start point or is it broken up evenly from the start point? basically does it produce more or less or same energy..after becoming a wave.
Thanks guys, about atomic roof wave lol
You have a talent for explaining.
Doubts:
Using the debroglie relation for wavelength of a particle and it’s momentum can we find the wave nature of an electron and will it be same as the probability distribution wave mentioned in the video
What does the actual physical motion of an electron look like? We know that they have a spin but is it possible for them to have a fixed path at all?
Larger objects are said to have a wavelength as well according to the same debroglie relation mentioned before. So does that mean that a chair or a table actually vibrates in a very small wavelength and that our eyes are just not able to comprehend such small oscillations?
Same question here
So particles are what happens while different waves are interacting in certain ways. What are those ways? Some kind of harmonic resonance?
nobody replies these types of comments,but bro please please can u tell me whch sofrware are u using for these simple animations?Please reply!!!And Thanks
Adobe After Effects for basically everything :)
@@ExploratorioYT tysm
Bro do u know what presh talkwakar mind your decision is using?can u please check one video and tell..please
Since every wave has frequency, why don't you measure the frequency? In my opinion the wave could come from the electron genenarator and electron guider.
Thanks it was helpful
Good to know, thanks!
What is an electron? It is something we can measure. What if we are only able to measure the nucleus of the electron but actually, from release, it breaks apart forming wave behaviour that bounces off the insides of the other slit and those tiny, unmeasurable particles, reflect back towards the nucleus and cause a wave like pattern?
2:55 o damnn...dude yu scared me with the music behind🥺🥺🥺and it's late night ( ok wait, early morning I guess😂😜) but heya this was awsmmm....we want more such amazing animations from yu, bcaz can't wait to subscribe if u are posting more of such stuff for students..
Next_ Modern Quantum Model of an Atom....plz a video on this🥺💯
ua-cam.com/video/JgUX0txK1aM/v-deo.html
Wait You should try this one
Great video mate, greetings from Serbia! 🔥🔥👌👏💓
wouldn't it be a technological problem? that is, that we still can't determine exactly what an electron looks like or even what a proton or neutron looks like simply because we don't yet have the technology that allows us to observe these elementary particles in their natural state exactly as they are?
Sorry for (pretty late) response. Yeah that's a good point. However, the issue is not as much technological anymore. It is more about the fact that we cannot know anything about a particle without influencing in one way or other. In our world we can just look at a thing and it doesn't change anything. But for these tiny bastards, you can't measure where they are without influencing them. So to measure where an electron is we need an electro-magnetic field to "sense it", but at the same time this field we bring to the party will influence the electron itself.
The electron must be something material, continuous, that surrounds and exists around the nucleus, that is moving (vibrating) and or resonating in waves -emitting resonance, vibration further from the nucleus into the medium between atoms-.
Just stumbling on this video and I have a question. Doesn't the fact that the electrons position changes between our measurements just mean that it is in constant motion, and not literally in two or more places at once? In my mind, it's a bit like the tree in the forest with no one around to hear it. It makes a sound even though there is nothing there to measure the sound. It seems like electrons are similar, just flying around doing their thing, but not being everywhere at once. Am I off on this?
Electrons are quanta of energy. Energy doesn't have a position. So, yes, you are absolutely and completely off on all of this. ;-)
How far apart are the slits ? How accurate can the electron accelerator be at hitting a target. For example shooting an arrow at a slit in the wall? If there are 2 slits and I aim only at one slit. I will get most of my arrows going through one slit. Or what am I missing here. How close are the slits together how big are the slits compared to the slits the arrow is shot through. Where do I find these answers.
Yep... absolutely none of that matters. ;-)
It's a Particle but travel in Wave.
However, if there are only two holes and the first layer acts as a barrier (with the hope that it prevents electrons from passing through), where does the additional electron come from? I mean, why did it also move in the opposite direction instead of creating two lines of electrons at the back? Can electrons only be emitted from the space left in the center, or can they pass through the first barrier? Also, I'm not sure if my question sounds silly, but if we fire, let's say, 1000 electrons, will the resulting wave also consist of 1000 electrons, and not more, since nothing can be created or destroyed? i mean i just didnot gete how the heck electron shooted straight created a wave like pattern
Yes, you do sound silly. ;-)
@@schmetterling4477 I guessed same, so do you know the answer?
@@so-nali Yes, I know the answer. ;-)
@@schmetterling4477 okay, then explain please
@@so-nali The answer is that it depends. At low energy the number of electrons will stay the same. At high energy we can create all kinds of stuff, including new electrons. That's just one of the reasons why the double slit is a silly experiment that doesn't tell us anything about quantum mechanics.
I'm just starting to learn about quantum physics at school, it makes no sense to me.. I don't know where to begin. Please help...
Really makes you think about the phrase: If a tree falls in the woods. does it make a sound?
Yes, it does make an acoustic wave. Do you want me to do the chicken and egg for you, too? ;-)
Nice video!
You said that we don’t know where an electron particle is at one time or if it is a wave. My question would be for the experiment itself then how would you then create an electron gun. We need to back up and explain this first and then we would have the answer.
excellent.... thanks.
I believe that the electron going through both slits is an inference on your and others part. It cannot be shown with certainty that it behaves as described and it is kind of silly if you think about it. A spread quantity of something needs energy to get back to a particle (which the screen at the back always detects, either if you detect the electron at the slit or not. At the back it registers as a particle). Where is that energy coming from? We don't even know what an 'observation' constitutes of, is it the photon that collapses the wave function? A human eye? Something else? We don't know for certain. Also the photons going through the double slit behaves entirely different and should be treated as such. No one has seen a collapsed photon, makng the light going through the slits act as a particle. Yeah, it is time to come up with a better explanation, and stop the quantum mumbo jumbo presumptions
It’s a Particle surfing a wave.
That is a pretty good analogy
@@ExploratorioYT Exactly. Why can’t it be both. Electrons have mass, this can easily be shown and apparently they have spin. Does spin generate a wave of sorts. It’s hard to picture all this happening with subatomic forces. I still can’t get my head around firing individual Photons/electrons in these slit experiments.And what is flowing through wires in electrical circuits. Is it Photons or Electrons. Is a Photon actually a wave generated by the Electron??
If electron is negatively charged and doesn't follow the nucleus in an orbit, then how is it stable there
why electron behave classically (shows particle nature) in double slit experiment when we observe them ?
Is there an actual wave or is the wave a wave on an oscilloscope.
Its not actual wave, there is no way you can directly observe the wave (unlike a water wave). Its a wave in purely mathematical, abstract sense
It's a Particle but travel in Wave.
Why we are studying it?
How should a particle behave 🤔 if it has momentum how does it relate with kicking electrons off from metal surface what is the connection ( i can't understand the debrougley's equation)😶🥺
What a way for asking to subscribe😱😱😱
great video thank u
You forgot the word IS in your title
Can an electron as a particle do a wave motion??
Electromagnetism of a fast moving electron can stage others. Just like a magnet can effect more than one electron in a coil.
Why we are studying it?
At what scale the quantum phenomenon starts becoming apparent?
Explained good
What if there is no higgs field, instid of it local concentration of EM field (like two gamma photon) can create time dilation gradient and EM waves localy trapped into this zone - here is electron which creates concentric waves in the EM field. This tiny EM trap travel throught one slit but due to it wave nature can interfered with own influence. The probabilistic nature of the electron comes from the fact that you cannot accurately measure the gradient of the electromagnetic field on a femtometer scale, but only see the result of the interaction of the electron with other particles.
In that case somebody is bullshitting on the internet. ;-)
"Quantun physics doesn't tell us what exactly is going to happen." When you don't specify the intial conditions exactly, you can't expect to predict the final condition exactly. When you do specify the initial conditions exactly in quantum physics, you can expect to predict the final condition exactly. The UA-cam is playing a fancy word game, not talking serious physics. The problem is that to specify the initial condition exactly, you need a suitable setup. For that, you usually need something such as a singlet pair, one to identify the initial condition exactly, the other to be left untouched so that you can exactly predict its final condition. Of course, if you interfere with the other electron on its trajectory, you effectuate an unpredictable change in the true 'initial condition', and so make its final condition again unpredictable. An electron is a particle, but an ensemble of electrons moving independently through a diffracting object can create a wave-like diffraction pattern. No one in his right mind would think that showed that the electron was a wave, but, as far as I can see, some people insist on that mistaken interpretation. You don't know right now where I am, but that doesn't mean that I am not in a definite place. It just means that you don't know. The basic purpose of this UA-cam is to mystify the watcher, not to enlighten him.
An electron is a quantum of energy. No need to write an essay. Seven words are enough.
@@schmetterling4477 Thank you for your helpful comment.
@@christophergame7977 Also important to remember: if somebody wants to help you with your mental confusion it's important to learn to be grateful rather than snapped in. That's part of the human maturation process. ;-)
Depends if it’s observed, this one hurts my brain. I had to take days to truly understand it
It's almost like the observer is the wave function...
Stop thinking that light is something travelling as a wave with a wavelenght .Light does not travel ...Light is not something but
a REACTION at a certain distance on licht elsewhere and can be explained very easily .
i here some where that if you want to know about the space than see it in form of energy and wave so i have a question i mass can band the space and mass is energy than if i want to band the space so i needed too much energy but we don't have so i think weight less or like electron only follow the path of wave like up and down or spinning insted going in straight line or in another path
Electron is a particle but when in motion it is associated with a Space wave.
Hey,i have a confusion if anyone can answer please.
An atom is 99.9% empty and the electron is a transverse wave which requires medium so where does that medium comes from?
An atom is not 99.9% empty. They just told you bullshit about the Rutherford experiment. ;-)
So, in theory, if we directly look at Electron its Particle, but when we stop looking at it, its wave? If we can solve this, we practically solved all the problems Universe has..
In CRT, we know where the electrons are. So they make good picture.
What is shape of electron
it may be totally dumb, but when i think about this, it always come to my mind that maybe it could mean there is not such thing like past present and future existing separetely, maybe they are somewhat always connected and exist all at the same time, that's why the particle is like a cloud, existing in every position it could and when we measure it, we see it in one position, the very right position that correspond for the exact present moment. maybe i'm just to stupid to understand the real thing here, but anyway. thanks for the vid.
No, the particle is always in one position at all times, its like a spec of dust in a wave of water, the measuring of electrons requires us to shoot a photon at the electron which directly changes the properties of the electron changing its state and position, theres factors that determine where the position of the electron will be we just cant identify all of them.
It is not as complex as people say it is, think that particle that spreads out its mass and energy like a wave, it automatically localizes when interacting with another particle, in free space its a wave, when interacting with another particle it localizes.
The wave function is very similar to the the human indecisive mind.
Atomic wave for the roof? Try again lol
It is a speed. The answer is damn speed and energy flow. Electron particul is a dense energy and after leave the source it expands
I have a question because i think im wrong. I think that electron has a partucle nature and a mass . When it has the wave nature , the mass energy (E=mc²) is given to a form of an electron wave . That's ehy in the double slit experiment the electron wave goes at two slits at the same time . Because in this case there is no particle . Just a wave with the electrons mass energy . Another example is the two gamma rays colission. Energy stored is those rays turns into matter with mass . Please if anyone knows to explain this to me i will be thankful , because i think that im wrong
mass and energy are interchangeable. don't think of mass and energy as seperate they are different form of the same thing. it's called mass-energy
imagine a non newtonian liquid like starchy custard. it's a liquid but then when u impact it its hard like a solid... solid and liquid are just different forms of the same custard.
when we observe an electron we interact with the system and so it behaves like a particle when we don't it does like a wave. we're seeing the same energy in different forms
@@vkdeen7570 despite the wave electron has mass energy, it's orbital in an atom doesn't have to do with mass energy, it has to do with potential and kinetic energy right?
@user-tn2mp9qr6q yes kinetic energy for the orbital. but it's important to remember it's not orbiting like a planet orbits a star. It's more like a standing wave in a probability cloud. it's the electron magnetic force which governs the "orbit"
@@vkdeen7570 thank you for your time
Is electron round? Get quick answer to more such fundamental questions in science on MinuteChemistry : ua-cam.com/video/KTUcj3aamnA/v-deo.htmlsi=OFxRFGdBUq5Z7C3g
People even youtubers dont understand why electron is represented by a cloud of probability . Not because they are waves, but because they are moving very fast, at the speed of light. They instatntly pop in and out in every point in their allowed space.
It only changes when you observe it
Electrons are neither waves nor particles. To say they're understood at all is to utter a falsehood. Protons aren't understood either. No one knows what's inside a proton. The dogma used to be that it's two up and one down quark, but that model has recently been shot down in flames.
Your first sentence is correct. Electrons are quanta of energy. We teach in high school what a quantum is. Nobody seems to listen.
The electron have probability to be in many position, but it must be in a single position, then why the experiment result is shown like it is present in many positions
The flower of life is the boss. 🌼🔥👀
dont try at home
where would i even get an electron gun if i cant get a normal one
More. It's a toroid presenting a concave face for interaction at 'c'. You say. ☎
Yes
Wave is distortion of field, electron is source of field
It's neither. It's a quantum of energy, momentum, angular momentum and charges. There, solved it for all of you. How hard was that? ;-)
Has there ever been a time where someone has measured the same electron at the same time but got the measurement on all possible outcomes for that instance?
My theory is that the hole world could be made ou of waves and if so then when these waves colide or have a certian value when they are measured would then apear to be in this there form. For example we only measure the strength of an electron at 5 but anything lower than that wouldn't be measured as an electron, or even have deffernt properties. Each wave could maybe even colide with a completely different type of wave and those interactions would be seen irl. Like electron wave colliding with a proton wave at a certian strength would resalt in a radical fenammena.
This is just a thought don't take me a some lunitic like you would see in hystory books. But you never know i could be wright, since the only way to prove it is if we could prove that every partile is actually a wave. In my opinion the universe is made of waves is actually seemingly possible, it just would mean we can't measure it yet but with this video it proves that while it isn't a fact, it proves that we can measure at least some part of it, even if its just yhe cerface level of it
Nope. ;-)
Wave !.
The basketball segue was hilarious
😂
Few electrons must be going in that way too but probability will be less significantly.
I know i am dumb 😂but how exactly they shot Electron 😁if they dont know were is 🤗they put to gun only posibility of location?... So cloud with unknown is bullet🤭
Better not invent an electron microscope, according to you, one would get a blurry image
This is broke my brain 🧠 🤕
I guess nothing is solid or static
yes..electron is same whether its on pluto or on earth
This so called boss is just how it works. Like a machine can only do what it is built to do. Or a computer program runs only what it is programed to run. And gravity is what gravity is because of mass(pretty much, untill we find out what actually gives a particle its mass) and does what gravity does thats how it works in this univeres laws. Like a math problem always it is only a matter if time to find out what that missing function value is, then we might know what causes these wierd physics.
But then we'll start questioning why does it happen again and we just go on this loop untill its literally impossible to know the origin of everything.
one time, next time
if they didnt us so many filters and taint there own test. u gave the light multiple points to reflect from or another photon by atumism. you can't make it shot one photon or electron. there both field perturbations a disturbance in a medium thats everywhere.
dark energy... the aether
dark matter.... electromagnetism and its tied to magnetism and electricity as they are all apart of the same thing the aether.
ice. steam. H2O at room temp. hard water... doesn't matter what form u c still water.
nothing is a particle, yopu cannot quantify a field.