Mapping the Quantum World | Astonishing lecture on Quantum Mechanics

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 15 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 62

  • @balasubr2252
    @balasubr2252 9 місяців тому +3

    “Time, thou shall entangle this, not I” - very well said indeed!!😊

  • @wulphstein
    @wulphstein 9 місяців тому +5

    This video is an excellent description of quantum mechanics.

  • @erichodge567
    @erichodge567 9 місяців тому +4

    This is hands down the best lecture on quantum theory for the layperson. His analogy relating superposition to musical harmony struck me as being perfectly on point. As any musician will tell you, C is a note, and C-sharp is a note, but the two played together is definitely a third thing very different from the first two.

  • @dennk735
    @dennk735 10 місяців тому +3

    Thank you Steve for everything! Congrats on a stellar career.😊

  • @ashafaghi
    @ashafaghi 9 місяців тому

    Priceless!

  • @atiqrahman7289
    @atiqrahman7289 9 місяців тому

    SPIN of electron----SPIN around axis. Angular momentum. Clickwise or counter-clockwise.

  • @atiqrahman7289
    @atiqrahman7289 9 місяців тому

    Measure a SPIN ---- direction of spin. Complex.

  • @sanjibkarjee7998
    @sanjibkarjee7998 9 місяців тому

    Pranam a lots of lots from India

  • @oremazz3754
    @oremazz3754 10 місяців тому +5

    Great lecture by Weinberg. Fortunately, in 2021 there is a new interpretation of Quantum mechanics (QM) that accomplishes logic and reasoning in the same way QM mathematics contains them. Last December, the author published a paper about the philosophical implication of this new "theory of space;" see DOI: 10.21275/SR231215193142. There is a short book on Amazon about this theory named: "Can Relativity and Quantum Mechanics go together?"... regards.

    • @AurelienCarnoy
      @AurelienCarnoy 10 місяців тому

      Hello, could gravity emerge from the recombining patern of virtual particles?
      I got the idea from looking at bending metal at atomic level. It is called "edge dislocation."
      Replace the atoms with virtual particles and their counterparts. As they recombine in a sliding fashion, space time is bending, which is gravity.
      So gravity is an emergent property of how virtual particles recombine.
      Remember when you were taught about infinite in math class?
      An infinit team of basketball players are sitting on an infinite row of chairs. Is there room for one more player?
      The players are virtual particle, the chairs are there anti virtual particles.
      To fit that one more player on a chair, each player has to scoot over to the adjacent chair.
      That scouting is gravity.
      Of cours it is random and chaotic. And makes pretty patterns like black holes.
      Rows of basketball players shooting on there chairs to make room for new player.
      In a cone pattern, to illustrate black hole.
      It is like a flow.
      It also implies that at the horizon of a back hole, nothingness is being unzipped into 2 universe.
      But that is also happening right where you are.
      Then how is the gravity of one universe affecting the other?
      It would appear as a repulsive force. Yuck.
      It is called dark energy.
      When you pull on a sock to take it off, you are pinching it in a point. It appears as a contraction. But from the point of view of your fingers, it is your foot that is expanding the sock.
      The sock is spacetime.
      Made of virtual particles.
      It is endlessly sliding off your foot.
      Does all this makes sense?
      I got to know if i am crazy or onto something.
      Thenk you.❤

    • @oremazz3754
      @oremazz3754 9 місяців тому +1

      Hi, what I can recommend is a paper about interpreting special relativity. There you can have an intuitive idea of the 4th longitudinal dimension (Ct), and how to visualize Ct by not bending the coordinate, just changing the scale factor depending on the energetic presence in that zone straight coordinates with local scale). It´s an exciting paper... DOI: 10.21275/SR23918031232. In my previous comment, there is an Amazon book by the same author that contains this and more aspects of modern physics. In a general way imagine that energy sucks space, the surrounding space moves to replace this absence. Now, any acceleration in this process of replacement is perceived by the object located in that space... that is gravity as Einstein deduced in 1907 with the "equivalent" principle. In other words, we are on Earth surrounded by a moving-accelerated space towards the center of the Earth; like a shower of space all around us in acceleration. Yes, in acceleration because it goes concentric to the center of the Earth and this acceleration is inversely proportional to the square distance to the center, i.e., Newton´s law in a simple way. I think you would enjoy reading it, regards @@AurelienCarnoy

  • @brendawilliams8062
    @brendawilliams8062 10 місяців тому +4

    Thankyou

  • @allenciuffo7576
    @allenciuffo7576 9 місяців тому +2

    I wish I had a spare 10 years to study the math of QM. I think that’s the only way to truly understand it.

    • @enterprisesoftwarearchitect
      @enterprisesoftwarearchitect 9 місяців тому

      It’s not too late - and it’s less difficult than you might imagine it. Find Alex Flournoy’s (RIP) UA-cam channel’s particle physics class … then order Weiberg’s “Quantum Theory of Fields”. For an easy start, try Leonard Susskind’s “Quantum Mechanics: The Theoretical Minimum” first - that may even be enough to satisfy you!

  • @atiqrahman7289
    @atiqrahman7289 8 місяців тому

    Electrons ----- particle / and waves --- DUALITY.

  • @karlnortheast6843
    @karlnortheast6843 9 місяців тому +1

    Presumably spin has energy causing the spin. If un observed electrons have multiple spins until observed - where does the energy go when a spin vanishes?

  • @atiqrahman7289
    @atiqrahman7289 9 місяців тому

    Positive SPIN or Negative SPIN. WHAT IS IT??

  • @williamstearns4581
    @williamstearns4581 5 місяців тому +1

    What if you super charged ligbt with energy and focused on something then it'sa laser right. What if you super charged the negative parts of light and forced it into High output super charged positive side and forced them together before they left the charged chamber in short bursts. 🤔.

  • @jfffjl
    @jfffjl 9 місяців тому

    I think many physicists have developed a tuition of convenience for dealing with the quantum world.

  • @showmewhyiamwrong
    @showmewhyiamwrong 9 місяців тому

    Here is something to consider that "on the surface" might not seem obvious or important, but perhaps is. what I am thinking is that the reason we may believe probability seems to govern the Quantum level is because we have not fully grasped the role of “Time” in the Quantum Realm. We throw around the concept of “Certainty” like “our” Certainty is everyone’s Certainty. Without Time there can be no certainty and we know that Time is not an “absolute” but it can be different for different observers. Therefore perhaps the “measurement problem” is only a problem because are imposing our concept of “Time” on the Quantum Realm and it gives us the only answer possible from “its” perspective which is a range of probabilities that may apply in our Macro Realm. In other words just as Einstein suggested that Time was not absolute maybe “certainty” is not an absolute but can be different for different observers in different levels of what we call Reality. Maybe what is needed is mathematical equation/s that would describe exactly how to transform the certainty at the quantum level to the certainty at some other level of Reality. Perhaps this would remove the"probabilistic uncertainty" that plagues us when we try to bring the Quantum and the Macro together.

  • @tempesttree8839
    @tempesttree8839 9 місяців тому

    It's really unbelievable to me that scientists and mathmaticians have fully embraced the utilization of and belief in a quasi theoretical mathematical offspring of physics that has never been imperically proven to be a working form of math within the vectors of reality.

  • @atiqrahman7289
    @atiqrahman7289 9 місяців тому

    Wave function ---what is it??

  • @christophergame7977
    @christophergame7977 9 місяців тому +4

    You don’t know the precise initial conditions in quantum mechanics.

  • @mrityunjaynath
    @mrityunjaynath 10 місяців тому +4

    Weinberg ❤

  • @jcksnmt
    @jcksnmt 10 місяців тому +1

    Can't find documentation regarding the Lin-Blatz equation. Any leads?

    • @Mentaculus42
      @Mentaculus42 10 місяців тому +1

      Lindbladian or Lindblad Equation ⇔ Wikipedia

  • @atiqrahman7289
    @atiqrahman7289 9 місяців тому

    ELECTRON waves ---- like water wave strikes a rock--- and waves go different directions!!

  • @mikehoman7351
    @mikehoman7351 8 місяців тому

    Q M is a provisional theory - it does not address structure

  • @VipulAnand751
    @VipulAnand751 9 місяців тому +1

    wow!!

  • @michaeltrillium
    @michaeltrillium 9 місяців тому +1

    Omg! It takes the creator of String Theory to make QM a bit more palatable

  • @alex79suited
    @alex79suited 10 місяців тому

    Thank you sir, you've helped me out like you can't possibly believe. Oh my. Is it that simple can it be real, true. Are we that so egotistical that when it's staring right at you, we can't let it just be that simple. It trickles down and up. Incredible. Peace 😎 ✌️. Perception

  • @temporoboto
    @temporoboto 9 місяців тому

    💙

  • @atiqrahman7289
    @atiqrahman7289 9 місяців тому

    Electron study is complex.

  • @alex79suited
    @alex79suited 10 місяців тому +1

    Working on it.

  • @adude9882
    @adude9882 4 місяці тому +1

    Why does the Universe have to make sense to us?

  • @atiqrahman7289
    @atiqrahman7289 9 місяців тому

    QUANTON MECHANICS, what is it really??

  • @theklaus7436
    @theklaus7436 9 місяців тому

    Are er sure there isnt a theory undelying quantum physics! Do we know that for sure??

  • @christophergame7977
    @christophergame7977 9 місяців тому

    It seems weird and counterintuitive because physicists like it so.

  • @JAYMOAP
    @JAYMOAP 10 місяців тому +1

    👌

  • @JungleJargon
    @JungleJargon 9 місяців тому +1

    The variable speed of light is so simple. General relativity is about the changing measures of time and distance which are used to measure the speed of light. This means the speed of light isn't constant across vast distances where the measures of time and distance change. Why don't they teach this in astro physics courses? It's so simple. It explains so many observed anomalies such as superluminal motion and the faster than expected movements of the spiral arms of galaxies.

    • @joeboxter3635
      @joeboxter3635 9 місяців тому +2

      Because it does not conform to experiment. We have done experiments where by we measure the speed of light from moving frames, and we measured the velocities of the speed of light are the same. This forced us into the situation that time and space are not absolute, but the speed of light apparently is.
      No one wanted this outcome. We were forced into it by experimental results. If you believe the speed of light is variable, then you must explain the null result of the Michaelson Morley experiment.
      Not saying you are wrong. Just saying there are experimental results you would have to explain, than create a new theory, apply it to other theories like E&M, and QM, then show that those results fit the observations as has been done with SR.

    • @JungleJargon
      @JungleJargon 9 місяців тому

      @@joeboxter3635 I'm not talking about special relativity. In general relativity, the way speed is measured is with a measure of time and a measure of distance both of which are known to change. It's like going from 60 kilometers an hour to 60 miles an hour. It remains 60 units of measure but the measure changes size. Compounding the effect, the measure of time is like going from 60 miles an hour to 60 miles a minute across vast distances, especially considering the difference of being near a black hole and some place between galaxies.

    • @joeboxter3635
      @joeboxter3635 9 місяців тому +1

      @@JungleJargon Yeah. I get what you are saying. Building in the effect of GR through variability of speed of light is interesting. But if the only thing that changes is the speed of light, what makes gravity different than relative motion? And if only light is affected, how do you explain that time slows down near massive objects?

    • @JungleJargon
      @JungleJargon 9 місяців тому

      @@joeboxter3635 Everything is affected. We are near a massive object inside of the Milky Way galaxy. That’s why we see light taking time to arrive. Distance is also contracted where life forms can exist. Gravity drops off exponentially outside of the galaxy. That’s where distance is expanded ( not expanding) and time passes by faster.

  • @atiqrahman7289
    @atiqrahman7289 9 місяців тому

    Difficult to understand this all.

  • @atiqrahman7289
    @atiqrahman7289 9 місяців тому

    Do not understand positive spin and negative spin.

  • @williamstearns4581
    @williamstearns4581 5 місяців тому

    The EPR paper explains most of this but the ER verses EPR paper are incomplete . Albert Einstein said that this need too.be further questioned and investigated. Quantum entanglement is what bothered Albert Einstein now let's get together and solve this. I believe that it's a doorway if you add Tesla's 369 .Open your mind this could be the next-gen step.

  • @christophergame7977
    @christophergame7977 9 місяців тому

    It seems that Weinberg is beginning to wake up. Well done. Keep pressing on. Try to stop thinking in terms of "measurement". Just think of interaction.

    • @mikefisher5005
      @mikefisher5005 9 місяців тому

      He was brilliant. RIP. He did fine without your "advice".

  • @atiqrahman7289
    @atiqrahman7289 9 місяців тому

    No one understands "QUANTUM MECHANICS"!!

  • @billyranger2627
    @billyranger2627 9 місяців тому

    Such a desperate attempt to defend that which cannot be defended. Sad. Pathetic.

  • @tomvanschaik8919
    @tomvanschaik8919 10 місяців тому +1

    Thankyou