Wave Particle Duality
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 вер 2024
- www.toutestquan... for other animations and explanations about quantum physics
realisation Data-Burger, scientific advisor: J. Bobroff, with the support of : Univ. Paris Sud, SFP, Triangle de la Physique, PALM, Sciences à l'Ecole, ICAM-I2CAM
copyright Bobroff 2012
That's why my work becomes messy under the watch of the boss- the observer.
lol
This video helped me to realize something that I wasn't understanding correctly about the double slit experiment. The observer at the slits doesn't convert the quantum object into a particle. The quantum object is always a quantum object, which is a wave of probabilities. The observer provides a focal point or filter where the wave of probabilities is forced to narrow, but after the wave passes through that filter it just starts propagating again from that point until it's forced to collapse to a single result.
It's not an observer human, it's a connected measurement tool. It makes it look as if a conscious mind is affecting the outcome.
conscious mind is also an observer in QM, that's crazy but true.
There's an error at 0:10 which says "The particles touch the screen randomly". In describing macro particle objects, they touch the screen deterministically and not randomly. The term "randomly" can be used to describe a quantum (not macro) particle object touching the screen since its transition from the wave function to the particle object's specific physical location on the screen can be said to be random.
What if they send, on purpose, the particles randomly? Random frequency, random direction and the like.
I’m still baffled on that last experiment. Why does it just turn into a particle like that when we make eye contact with it...and then go back to a wave...? How does it know...it’s like it’s alive or something.
It's like consciousness is the most powerful object in the universe.
What does it hint at ? A quantized particle life manifold
Last one: have a look at the video titled : "Explained ! The Double Slit Experiment".
I'm not a physicist but the 2 videos I've suggested you helped me understand how weird is the nature of sub-molecular world.
i want that song please any info ? i know lao experiment made it but whats the name ?
Actualy, music doesn't exist without video, it was only made for quantum. So that if you want to listen it many times, you will be a master in wave particle duality !
I have a doubt about this oberser. What is it exactly? I dont think it is a human oberserver, right? This means that, if somehow, a machine meansures the quantum object as a particle, then the obeject behaves as a particle and stop behaving as wave, is that it?
Hope the question is clear enough. =)
+Diego Leal if we dont measure the quantum object then it is in 2 states , so called superposition but when nature interact with the object or in another words an observer interact with it , it could be either a machine or another quantum object , then , the 2 states will collaps into one . It's very wierd actually we don't look at an electron it behaves in a certain way but when we look at it then it chenges its attribute .
@@erfanmoradi9699 as if *ITS ALIVE*
If my understanding is correct 1:37 is represented incorrectly, it should be two lines of concentrated dots on the screen directly against the slits.
Adding an observer changes this, as the wave will spread out from only one of the slits instead of two. Without the observer, the wave spreads out from two of the slits and therefore interferes with itself, but when the particle only passes through one of the slits there is nothing else to interfere with and we, therefore, get a random scattered pattern instead of the two lines of concentrated dots we usually see without the observer.
Exactly. I was wondering the same even for the first case of a particle going through two slits will have two lines.
Also for the observer case, wouldn't an observer collapse the wave and then it should be represented as a particle till the screen?
This is an amazing animation animation though.
SMZ, spc , energ , of everything !
The last part was a bit iffy. Once the electron is out of sight from the observer, wouldn't it still split into 2 and interfere with itself?
The observer is lined up with the slits, so the electron is "forced to choose" a slit to go through.
UnProx What if they are placed adjacent to the slits?
the electron gets anxiety from someone watching it, so it gets scared
@@unproxv THE CLEAR, CENTRAL, AND BALANCED MATHEMATICAL AND PHYSICAL PROOF OF WHAT IS TRUE/REAL QUANTUM GRAVITY:
I offer the following regarding the dual nature of light AND electrons. Consider what is THE SUN. The sky is blue, and THE EARTH/ground is ALSO BLUE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GREAT. E=mc2 IS F=ma. This explains the fourth dimension AND the term c4 from Einstein's field equations. BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental.
E=mc2 IS F=ma. CAREFULLY consider what is the Sun, AND carefully consider what is THE EYE ON BALANCE. (Also notice the associated DOME AND black “space” AS WELL !!) IMPORTANTLY, this NECESSARILY (AND CLEARLY) represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. Is what is a TWO dimensional surface or SPACE ON BALANCE invisible OR VISIBLE ? The answer is that it is BOTH. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE. SO, the electron AND THE PHOTON are CLEARLY and necessarily structureless ON BALANCE. Great. Indeed, as it has been written, gravity CLEARLY involves interaction. I have CLEARLY explained why the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Also, ON BALANCE, consider what is the orange AND setting Sun. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Consider TIME (AND time dilation) ON BALANCE. Excellent.
The fourth dimension is only consistent with what is (on balance) a TWO dimensional surface OR SPACE ON BALANCE. Consider what is the eye. Consider what is the balanced MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE (ON/IN BALANCE). Consider invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in fundamental equilibrium AND BALANCE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE. SO, consider what is the speed of light (c) ON BALANCE. This CLEARLY explains the fourth dimension AND the term c4 from Einstein's field equations. I have explained (or proven) why THE PLANETS move away very, very, very, very slightly in relation to what is the Sun ON BALANCE. Great. I have clearly explained the cosmological redshift AND the supergiant stars ON BALANCE. Magnificent.
Time is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE, as BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental pursuant to F=ma AND E=mc2 in balance. A galaxy consists of invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in fundamental equilibrium and BALANCE, thereby eliminating the need for any "dark" "matter" or "dark" "energy"; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is then CLEARLY gravity ON/IN BALANCE.
c squared CLEARLY means an INTERACTION on balance, as the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Balanced inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental. Consider E and “m" on balance. Great.
Stellar clustering ALSO proves (ON BALANCE) that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY (and necessarily) proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE), AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. Magnificent !!!
By Frank DiMeglio
Thank you ❤️
add an observer
nice video thx.
How the duck does this happen?
thanks
Please speak , it boring to read every concept even though the content is very nice 😩
This is just RF "wave theory".......gone potty where you can't think it's particle like the EBose condensate shows that....just change the frequency & map both the E field & H field will all become clear......to me anyhow.............at 0K all is still & add a bit of heat everything oscillates as a wave!
Thank you for making this video. 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏