ScienceCasts: Quantum Foam
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 лют 2025
- As 2015 comes to a close, tell us which ScienceCast you've learned the most from! What do you want to see in 2016?
Visit science.nasa.gov/ for more.
Researchers have used NASA space telescopes to prove that space-time is much less "foamy" than some models predict. Understanding their result requires a trip into the world of quantum physics.
I made it through all four minutes and my brain only partially imploded! [Rocky theme]
This is the best explanation for the educated non scientist of q. foam. I am surprised at its simplicity in the telling when the math is sooo involved. So this is my nomination for the one I learned the most from.
I love this channel with a passion
This is Bayes at quantum-scale; if the substrate is actual, then all events in spacetime are co-eval, co-extant &
co-terminous, & equally accessible via the 6, 10 or 11 putative dimensions.
It blows my mind that people can dislike science...
1:19 this is what I see when I press my eyelids hard against my eyes with my hands.
Wikipedia has a section on quantum foam here:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_foam
It helps to have a printed section on this and other subjects for readers to view and get a better understanding of the subject.
Happy new year :D, best place to post!
Hey ... Michelle Thaller! You are one of my favorite astronomers! :)
could upload from now on only in 1440p please ?
well that was interesting ... it made me go open a can of beer for further research ...
An integral part of that ever famous Quantum cloud
Quantum foam, brought to you by Duff beer.
Now you got me contemplating a planck size quantum beer.
Who is narrator?
Is it Barbara Oakley from OU?
Effusive: What, is inside, the foam: less dense space, or unsaturated, space? In the model I occasionally refer-to, the Bernoulli-Venturi-Liquid-aether-'noodle' model, noodles broadside noodles-and create momentary diversions in every BVL-noodle path...
Holographic Interferometer?
Beautiful
That sounds like Lisa Randall narrating.
So basically, the mind bending theories of bathing
Quantum foam, or monadic singularity??
Whoa!
I hope string theory is the right thing to explain "everything", I want 10 dimensions =)
Very interesting - but way beyond me...
put more math in the videos please
Would it not be better to try and explain the Universe relative to what we can observer rather than coming up with ideas like ‘quantum foam’ LOL
oh, so the ether is real.
There are other theories that do not rely on undetectable, imaginary things. Math is an extremely useful tool, no doubt. Over applied, however, math can also be used to imagine things that most likely will only exist in the equations alone.
There is another theory that has not yet worked out all of the equations, although it has many. This theory does not conjure up exotic multidimensional space. It does not use gravity, (pressing spheres down into a horizontal flexible membrane,) to demonstrate gravity. It has developed and continues to develop laboratory experiments to measure physical results of detectable things.
In one application this other theory better predicted the findings of the many recent comet probes than the dirty snowball theory.
How you proceed after new facts have been discovered that disprove old theories is a true measure of your character. What does the scientific method say about negative results; what do we do with the theory, squeeze it harder like a hurt teddy bear and place a bandage on the boo boo?
Ignore the new data and carry on with current research based upon dis-proven theories because it is easier. You know in your heart that this arrangement cannot go on indefinitely. Changeover hardships aside, would it not be better and more exciting to work on something new, something with a real future?
ua-cam.com/video/ktFFUJaFSL8/v-deo.html
+Michael Taylor Perhaps Ontological Mathematics
My mouth foams of wat
🤔
Science, like philosophy, should begin w/humble acknowledgement of the ontological conundrum, which rebuts & renders nugatory, not just claims of metacosmic certainty, but axiological preference* as well...[videlicet History of Science 101]...verity-sets [via simplicials, groupoids & homotopy types] can remain true, even when superceded or aborbed; e.g., gravity as described by Newton is still sufficient for quotidian purposes, tho 'fine-tuned' by Einstein v-a-v the universe-at-scale...*of course, some virtues are socio-politically absolute [due-process of law, resource parsimony, equal access to public services] & some behavior must be repressed [theft, mendacity, violence, racism, jingoism, torture & hegemonism]...the right to believe & object, by contrast, must be protected...quod erat loquitur.
nice