The ABSURDITY of Quantum Mechanics at LARGE SCALES!

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 15 тра 2024
  • Claim your SPECIAL OFFER for MagellanTV here: try.magellantv.com/arvinash Start your free trial TODAY so you can watch “Virtual Universe” about computer simulations of the universe, and the rest of MagellanTV’s science collection: www.magellantv.com/series/cos...
    REFERENCES
    Quantum tunneling: • Is Quantum Tunneling t...
    Superconductivity: • How do Superconductors...
    Quantum entanglement: • Quantum Entanglement E...
    Quantum mechanics explained: • What is Quantum Mechan...
    Frustrated Total Internal Reflection: tinyurl.com/2myks7ow
    CHAPTERS
    0:00 Magic is not real, I guess
    1:33 My inspiration
    2:40 Superposition
    4:20 Quantum tunneling
    5:37 Heisenberg Uncertainty principle
    7:54 Double slit experiment
    9:40 Why don't we see quantum behavior at macro scales?
    10:45 What is Decoherence
    11:20 Real examples of Macro scale quantum physics
    SUMMARY
    What If our everyday life was based on quantum mechanics? What if macro objects behaved like quantum objects?
    If you are in a classroom with 4 chairs, you would appear to a second student, to be sitting on all the seats at once. But as soon as he touches one of the chairs, you appear in one of the seats sitting by yourself. And he is then able to take a seat. You were in a superposition, which is the ability of a quantum object such as a photon, electron, atom or anything sufficiently isolated, to be in multiple positions at the same time until it is measured.
    This comes from the Schrodinger equation which contains a term called the wave function. The wavefunction for an object contains all the information that describes the quantum object, such as its position, spin, momentum, etc. Objects can take on almost any value according to the wavefunction prior to measurement. The wavefunction only tells us the probability. But once a measurement is made, the properties of the particle gets fixed to only one of the possible states. Note that a measurement is any kind of interaction and is a physical process that does not require a measurer.
    Let’s say you hit a squash ball against the wall in front of you. The ball disappears and shows up on the other side. This phenomenon is known as quantum tunneling. In quantum mechanics, when a quantum object like an electron encounters an energy barrier, like a wall, there is a non zero chance that it will end up on the other side of the wall. This is because its wavfunction extends to all of spacetime, meaning it can in principle end up anywhere, including the other side of the wall.
    But can any player hit the squash ball in the first place? If the squash ball is a quantum object, it is subject to the Uncertainty Principle. This principle says that there is a fundamental limit to how precisely we can know certain combinations of properties of a particle, such as its position and momentum. So if the player knows where the ball is, he won't know how fast it's going. And if he knows how fast it's going, we won't know where it is. So taking a swing, he may not hit the ball. This is not due to an observer effect. It’s not a limitation of what we can measure. It is a limitation of what we can know.
    If a squash ball machine creates and shoots squash balls onto the wall for practice purposes, you would not actually see any balls coming out of the ball machine. All you would see is balls bouncing off the wall in front of you. What's happening is that the balls coming out of the ball machine are in superposition. They only become localized and visible after they have interacted with the wall in front of you. Before this happens, their location could be anywhere in the court. The various locations would have a probability associated with them. They could even be outside the court due to quantum tunneling.
    Why don’t we actually see this in our everyday experience? Why don’t these quantum behaviors appear in our macro world? Do the laws of quantum mechanics apply only at micro scales? No, the laws of quantum mechanics apply to everything. But the effects of quantum mechanics are too small to be noticed.
    Subatomic and atomic scale objects act like waves, and so behave like quantum objects. But large objects are made of a huge number of individual waves, since a squash ball is made of almost 10^15 atoms. All these waves of atoms act in a disorganized and random way. Their individual waves interfere with each other, and average out to zero. This disorganized wave-like behavior is called “decoherence” in physics. And this cumulatively results in classical behavior. In order to get a macro object to behave like a quantum object, we would need all its quadrillions of individual waves to be coherent, and behave like one large wave. This is usually not possible.
    #quantummechanics
    #quantumatlargescales
    But you should know that coherence has been achieved in some large molecules consisting of up to 2000 atoms. Other large scale quantum effects include superconductors, Bose-Einstein condensate and superfluids.
  • Наука та технологія

КОМЕНТАРІ • 624

  • @tomaaron6187
    @tomaaron6187 Рік тому +39

    I’ve been a geophysicist for 45 years. I must thank you for re-instilling the sense of wonderment I felt in my younger days. I watch your presentations then find myself pondering it all in those quiet times of contemplation when hiking or cycling.

  • @DanteGabriel-lx9bq
    @DanteGabriel-lx9bq Рік тому +166

    I cannot express how good you are at explaining this stuff, you deserve so much more!

    • @user-qz5ox5ov2f
      @user-qz5ox5ov2f Рік тому +4

      exactly

    • @divyanshipatel8570
      @divyanshipatel8570 Рік тому +4

      Yeah, Like I'm being 14 and understanding all of this says alot

    • @dongshengdi773
      @dongshengdi773 Рік тому

      @@user-qz5ox5ov2f This is proof that magic is real

    • @markjapan4062
      @markjapan4062 Рік тому

      JESUS BSAID SATAN WOULD APPEAR AS AN ANGEL AND DECIEVE MANY THESE ARE MUSLIMS THERE WAS NO GABRIEL ALLAH THE SUN GOD AKBAR THE MOON GOD...

    • @omarwhaibi8395
      @omarwhaibi8395 Рік тому

      He actually is. Thank you for videos.

  • @vinvic1578
    @vinvic1578 Рік тому +67

    I love your emphasis on the Heseinberg uncertainty being a consequence of wave mechanics as opposed to an observer effect. As a physics student I can attest this misconception is everywhere in pop science ! Great video all around.

    • @treeofgrowth
      @treeofgrowth Рік тому +2

      You mean "woowoo channels" like Destiny?

    • @dialecticalmonist3405
      @dialecticalmonist3405 Рік тому +2

      Saying something is "uncertain" is not an answer to any question.
      Saying something has a point origin at an event horizon, at least makes an attempt at a definitive answer.
      You might not like the "observer" explanation, but it is a more rigorous definition of reality.
      "Limitation of what we can know," vs "limitation of what we can measure" is just semantics. It is the same thing.

    • @vinvic1578
      @vinvic1578 Рік тому +4

      @@dialecticalmonist3405 what are you talking about ? its quite obvious you have no scientific training, I'm sorry, read up on the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, Fourier transforms and an undergrad QM book (I recommend Griffiths) and I think these concepts will be much clearer. This has nothing to do with dialectics, its a mathematical property of wave packets.

    • @rolandmeyer3729
      @rolandmeyer3729 Рік тому

      I see you are a materialist "scientist."

    • @herrroin6867
      @herrroin6867 Рік тому

      We don’t really know if it has an effect though

  • @claudiorassouli1240
    @claudiorassouli1240 Рік тому +83

    Your animations about physics are some of the best anywhere. I love how you point to formulas and break them down. How long does it take you to make the animations? Do you do them yourself? Either way it is very impressive.

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  Рік тому +52

      Thanks. I don't make them myself. I just guide the animators. This ones in this video took about a month by people who know what they are doing.

    • @thezone5840
      @thezone5840 Рік тому +1

      @@ArvinAsh Can you tell me what would happen if something that is 1inch X 1inch X 1 Inch would behave if the waves were all in coherence?
      According to particle physics, why is this impossible or overly difficult to accomplish?

    • @flambambam3578
      @flambambam3578 Рік тому +8

      @@thezone5840 An average atom has a radius of 0.1 nanometers. A solid 1'x1'x1' volume would have something on the order of 10^23 atoms, each with their own wave functions that would have to be nearly perfectly in-phase which each other to produce a noticeable effect from our perspective. If you had a ball of 10^23 tangled rubber bands, how difficult would it be to lay out every single one in a neat grid?

    • @siddharthshekhar909
      @siddharthshekhar909 Рік тому +7

      @@ArvinAsh Give my respects to the animators and the people involved in the storyboarding . They deserve an applause . 👏

    • @markjapan4062
      @markjapan4062 Рік тому

      WHY ARE THERE MILLIONS OF QURAN IN THE SEWERS IN MECCA IF IT IS HOLY IT IS NOT..

  • @adels8205
    @adels8205 Рік тому +10

    I agree with the other comment here, I cannot express how grateful I am for having discovered you. Really like your style of explaining complex problems.

  • @elpuerco6059
    @elpuerco6059 Рік тому +26

    Decoherence perfectly describes my mental state 😂
    Excellent explanation and video, as always, professor.

    • @TheFos88
      @TheFos88 Рік тому

      That's what I said when he mentioned frustrated total internal reflection lol

  • @alimmaqsa
    @alimmaqsa Рік тому +4

    I love when u say :" right now".👍

  • @mariobrambilla4099
    @mariobrambilla4099 Рік тому +6

    The most excellent explanation I’ve ever seen on this subject. Congratulations Arvin! Keep going!

  • @christiannissen5339
    @christiannissen5339 Рік тому +2

    Thanks Arvin, and what excellent job you do

  • @jmcampo9388
    @jmcampo9388 Місяць тому +1

    Excellent presentation with utmost insight and clarity, Congratulations Arvin!

  • @kallesamuelsson8052
    @kallesamuelsson8052 Рік тому +8

    After another 1000 explanation clips or so I just might start to grasp this subject. It's so fascinating but so confusing. Keep up the good work Arvin!

  • @magellantv
    @magellantv Рік тому +3

    Wow! This was amazing and incredibly well done 👏

  • @JohnSmith-pd2dq
    @JohnSmith-pd2dq Рік тому +2

    Excellent .... take my hat off for you Arvin!!

  • @jorgearango6108
    @jorgearango6108 Рік тому +2

    Wow!!! Excellent
    Thank you for that explanation!🏆

  • @robertryder1097
    @robertryder1097 Рік тому +2

    Thank you - brilliant presentation of a fascinating subject!

  • @Trevesten
    @Trevesten Рік тому +4

    This video should be in the top-5 videos one should start watching to get familiar with the quantum world. Thank you so much Arvin, you are doing an amazing job in educating us!

  • @maitlandbowen5969
    @maitlandbowen5969 Рік тому +1

    What a marvellously clear capture of the information related to the question asked - provides guidance (frameworks) for ongoing and greater explanation in the area. Thank you. You are tops, so very across the material.

  • @rwarren58
    @rwarren58 Рік тому +8

    Thanks for another great video! I love being able to understand the basics of Quantum Mechanics. Oh and great splash page. 😎

  • @6099rahul
    @6099rahul Рік тому +1

    Finally. Thank you Arvinash!

  • @aryansingh7209
    @aryansingh7209 Рік тому +20

    I'm a big fan of you, Arvin! You made everything complex as hell simple as a piece of cake.

  • @cycklist
    @cycklist Рік тому +2

    This is beautifully explained. Thank you.

  • @jmcsquared18
    @jmcsquared18 Рік тому +5

    It should be noted, decoherence is often quoted as a solution to why we never see quantum behavior on macroscopic scales, but this isn't the full story. Decoherence is just a term used to describe what happens when a huge quantum system's many parts interact, both with each other and with their environment. Everything gets scrambled up, and the system's parts begin to behave according to classical probability rules instead of the Born rule. What this does model is the emergence of classical statistical mechanics.
    But there is no mechanism that decoherence provides that explains the quantum measurement problem. As a system begins to interact with its environment, the state of the system, at least in principle, remains stuck is a massive entangled superposition, all the way to the macroscopic level. Interactions by themselves do nothing, according to Schrödinger's equation, to force a system to leave a superposition of states. This only appears to happen (for some reason) once the system interacts with measurement devices.
    Therefore, it's still an interpretive question, and an unanswered one at that, to ask what the state of the system at large scales.

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  Рік тому

      Good. Thanks.

    • @b43xoit
      @b43xoit Рік тому

      Can it be explained as entanglement? I think this is something that Susskind is saying. The system under observation gets entangled with the particles of the measuring instrument.

    • @jmcsquared18
      @jmcsquared18 Рік тому

      @@b43xoit You may be describing one of two things with the words "entanglement" and "Susskind." One is the idea of Everette's interpretation, which is that the universe splits in some sense. Different branches of the entangled wave function describes different outcomes of a measurement. The other thing you could be referring to is the ER = EPR conjecture from Susskind and Maldacena. So, I'd ask to clarify what specifically you're referencing here.

    • @b43xoit
      @b43xoit Рік тому

      @@jmcsquared18 I don't know about an entangled wave function having branches; that's farther along than I have studied to. My understanding is that for any given pair of particles, there is no entanglement, full entanglement, or partial entanglement, and these things can be inferred from measurements, at least partially. And when I refer to Leonard Susskind, I'm not referring to the conjecture you cite, necessarily. Just the material he states here on UA-cam.

    • @jmcsquared18
      @jmcsquared18 Рік тому

      @@b43xoit Then I suppose I'm not sure what specifically you're asking/claiming.

  • @hanssteyn9775
    @hanssteyn9775 Рік тому +1

    Love listening to you. Thank you.

  • @gypsycruiser
    @gypsycruiser 8 місяців тому

    Very well presented!

  • @Snowman_44
    @Snowman_44 Рік тому +1

    You've got a new subscriber. Amazing contents!

  • @thedouglasw.lippchannel5546
    @thedouglasw.lippchannel5546 5 місяців тому +1

    Bravo! Arvin is amazing.

  • @MrFlemmingjensen
    @MrFlemmingjensen Рік тому +2

    Great video Mr. Ash , as always. :)

  • @mmogaddict
    @mmogaddict Рік тому +3

    I am already living the Quantum Mechanical lifestyle, most of the time I know neither where I am nor where I am going.

  • @Quantum-1157
    @Quantum-1157 Рік тому +2

    As always a great upload full of insights explained in a simple and interesting way! Thnx!

  • @surajvkothari
    @surajvkothari Рік тому +6

    Content like this is a blessing! Such a unique take on quantum behaviour compared to lectures!

  • @saeeddargahi4750
    @saeeddargahi4750 Рік тому +1

    Very glad that I found this channel,really great topics👍👍

  • @eugeniag37
    @eugeniag37 Рік тому +1

    Excellent video, as usual!

  • @anishashee8511
    @anishashee8511 Рік тому +1

    Excellent work. You always make that much awesome video and explain it very intuitively. 👏🔥

  • @antoniocampos9721
    @antoniocampos9721 Рік тому +1

    Absolutely fantastic. Thanks for this...I'm a Brazilian subscribed.

  • @CassianLore
    @CassianLore Рік тому +1

    Another excellent video Arvin ! See you in the next video my friend 👍

  • @michaelfoxbrass
    @michaelfoxbrass Рік тому +1

    This is a brilliant teaching video for the layman’s introduction to this amazing field of research! Thank you for making it!

  • @captainzappbrannagan
    @captainzappbrannagan 11 місяців тому +1

    Love these vids on how to simplify and make the hard topics understandable and exciting!

  • @brunofalconeguerra3428
    @brunofalconeguerra3428 Рік тому +1

    What a great video!! Congrats

  • @robotaholic
    @robotaholic Рік тому +2

    This is creative and interesting and funny. Thank you for all that work!

  • @abhishek_sengupta
    @abhishek_sengupta Рік тому +1

    Aaahaaa!! Loved it ❤️❤️

  • @Name-js5uq
    @Name-js5uq Рік тому +2

    You explained that perfectly. I totally get it.thanks so very much!!

  • @markgowers5713
    @markgowers5713 Рік тому +3

    Excellent, the best explanation of Quantum Mechanics I have see on UA-cam!

  • @rohankulkarni100
    @rohankulkarni100 Рік тому +1

    Excellent visualisation 😊

  • @Bhaumikpk
    @Bhaumikpk Рік тому +1

    Very nice presentation. Many thanks.

  • @dogasal
    @dogasal Рік тому +1

    scuh a beatiful explanation! Thank you

  • @mcwulf25
    @mcwulf25 Рік тому +1

    Thanks. A clear explanation using some examples I haven't seen before.

  • @poojarakshit1000
    @poojarakshit1000 Рік тому +4

    Outstanding as usual.Your videos excite me like a little child wanting to learn the mysteries of the universe.I'd love to meet you in person & discuss physics.

  • @Name-js5uq
    @Name-js5uq Рік тому +2

    You really deserve so much more subscribers, like at least a million more!

  • @beniaminmarin1596
    @beniaminmarin1596 Рік тому +2

    I've been waiting for years for someone to make this video.

  • @SampathKumar-nx5xh
    @SampathKumar-nx5xh Рік тому +1

    You are wonderful in explaining and extremely knowledgeable man. Hats off !!!

  • @damongulley9865
    @damongulley9865 Рік тому +1

    Fantastic..loved it dude. Quantum is a tough subject & you pulled it off.

  • @That_Freedom_Guy
    @That_Freedom_Guy Рік тому +1

    You are one of the first, that I know of, to show quantum weirdness at a human scale. I've been looking out for such videos. Thanks. ❤

  • @Parnell50
    @Parnell50 Рік тому +2

    This was a pretty good video, I'm utterly impressed

  • @niloymondal
    @niloymondal Рік тому +1

    Great Video. A video on everyday life implications of Delayed Choice Experiment would be super cool.

  • @aem4670
    @aem4670 Рік тому +1

    Great job 👍

  • @mixerD1-
    @mixerD1- Рік тому +1

    Thoroughly enjoyed this video...thank you Arvin. An incoherent understanding is slightly more coherent due to it.

  • @mostafakhorsandi5421
    @mostafakhorsandi5421 Рік тому

    Awsome, thank you :)

  • @theshowmanuk
    @theshowmanuk Рік тому +5

    Absolutely superb demonstration ! I am sure this will encourage students (young and old) to get into the maths and physics to get a greater understanding and appreciation of quantum mechanics.

  • @dr.satishsharma9794
    @dr.satishsharma9794 Рік тому +2

    Excellent..... thanks 🙏.

  • @ScienceNerder
    @ScienceNerder Рік тому +2

    Awesome explanation....

  • @sumedhburbure4173
    @sumedhburbure4173 Рік тому +1

    Great video!

  • @shaundurant7415
    @shaundurant7415 Рік тому +1

    This was insightful.

  • @evdrivertk
    @evdrivertk Рік тому +2

    Thanks for the excellent presentation. Another analogy for the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle I like to use is detecting audio at different frequencies. You can easily detect the start and stop of a high-pitch noise, light the "high-hat" sound in dance music. Low-frequency tones (20-30Hz) are so spread out that it's far more difficult to tell where they start in time. In typical music, a bass thud is really a short high-pitch impulse followed by the long bass note to give the listener a better sense of when the "beat" starts. Keep up the great videos!

    • @jayvaibhawverma
      @jayvaibhawverma Рік тому

      Nice. That's a good analogy. But aren't the low frequency tones generally pressure waves? Or more correctly, sound vibrations are pressure waves. So, can we consider the Energy-time equation of the Heisenberg's Uncertainty to deduce the analogy you have given? Because I think that Position-momentum uncertainty will become vague for understanding this. What do you think?

  • @paulbk2322
    @paulbk2322 Рік тому

    This has been mind blowing 👍👍

  • @Dolores5000
    @Dolores5000 Рік тому +1

    Dang son! I love this! And you! Fascinating

  • @jayaprakashrao7535
    @jayaprakashrao7535 Рік тому +1

    Superb presentation....

  • @user-kq8rk1vd3u
    @user-kq8rk1vd3u Рік тому +1

    This episode came in the right time i was searching for superposition for weeks and quantum lifes thanks for the episode

  • @reynalindstrom2496
    @reynalindstrom2496 Рік тому

    Great video! This was one of the best. Love from Sweden💛💙

  • @mohammedfahadnyc1385
    @mohammedfahadnyc1385 Рік тому

    As always, Awesome video Arvin! By the way, I was thinking what would the animation look like when you put a photon detector on the double slit experiment? Like then we’d be able to see the ball coming out off the ball throwing machine and going thru the slit in two straight lines but still creating the interference pattern?
    Also for fingers thru glass containing water, I don’t think thats photon demonstrating quantum behavior , thats merely total internal reflection, but I admit it’s a good analogy for Quantum tunneling

  • @cykkm
    @cykkm Рік тому

    Arvin, what a didactically amazing idea!!! I've never seen anything like this before, and such an animation is immensely instructive for looking at the unintuitive wave properties! A tiny nitpick, at 5:50, about the uncertainty principle (UP), it would have been better to say more unambiguously that the UP had been _estimated_ by Heisenberg and _derived_ a few years later; it's simply the Schwarz inequality between conjugate uncertainties in the position and momentum spaces, related by FT-but you know it, whom I'm talking to! I personally know that many physics enthusiasts who try to wrap their heads around QM believe the inequality has been _postulated_ axiomatically, like, for example, the Born rule has. Possibly, the persistent imprecise wording is due to the fact that Heisenberg didn't derive the formula later named after him, as the Stigler's law (formulated and named after Stigler by Merton, naturally) predicts. He only used an order of mag estimation.
    Too bad we use imprecise “principle,” “rule,” “postulate” etc. in physics. QM is sheer math, with its complex-valued operators and infinite-dimensional state spaces corresponding to nothing in Nature, that, IMO, it would be less confusing-assuming generously that QM _could be_ less confusing-to use “theorems” and “axioms,” as mathematicians do. “Heisenberg's theorem,” “Born's axiom;” no ambiguity :)
    Owning a 5-string bass guitar with an added low B2 string (~125 Hz), I often use it as an example: if the player slides his finger up or down a semitone, changing the length and thus resonant frequency on this slow-vibrating string, how much time does one need to recover a new note-i.e, the change in frequency? The answer is derived (with a few technical assumptions) with FT and the same bounding inequality on the time and frequency domain uncertainties: exactly 1/4 of the period. It's a warm-up math before the full UP derivation. :)

  • @stevensbox9625
    @stevensbox9625 Рік тому +1

    Dude,
    Seriously, you keep my retired engineer mind sharp & wanting more. Keep up the good work. God's speed.

  • @sunshinemama9143
    @sunshinemama9143 Рік тому +1

    Just found this channel, and WOW!

  • @davidsellon4580
    @davidsellon4580 Рік тому +1

    What a great, intuitive explanation of why we don't see quantum behavior at our macro level. How is it that after watching dozens of other videos from various creators about the quantum world, this is the first time I've understood the quantum/macro relationship?

  • @tomusic8887
    @tomusic8887 Рік тому

    Thank you so much and beautifully done! Making the non intuitive and hard to believe awkwardness of quantum mechanics visible!!!! 👍👍👍😃

  • @yuwumi870
    @yuwumi870 Рік тому

    Really enjoyed the video and the tunneling explanation. Would've loved to see mention of De Broglie's hypothesis/equation. For me personally, it really solidified the idea that these subatomic particles aren't bound to "particle-like" behavior.

  • @DownhillAllTheWay
    @DownhillAllTheWay Рік тому +1

    In the last month or so, I have seen quite a lot of videos on similar topics to this, of which three have been outstanding. Those three include this one.

  • @tejasraysad933
    @tejasraysad933 Рік тому +1

    U nailed it❤️👍

  • @carlstanland5333
    @carlstanland5333 Рік тому +1

    I followed the link for the FTIR and I’m trying to understand it. How about a video on this phenomenon? Love your videos!

  • @aryangoswami7512
    @aryangoswami7512 Рік тому

    Super explanation sir

  • @kricketflyd111
    @kricketflyd111 Рік тому

    Very nice explanation of where the understandings end and theories of gobbledygook begin. 🙃

  • @aguma2067
    @aguma2067 Рік тому +1

    Excelente vídeo 👍👌

  • @joeanarumo616
    @joeanarumo616 Рік тому +1

    I really wish educators were held to a much much higher standard (& compensated as such). Imagine a generation of people, 80+% of which being educated by people somewhere near Arvin's level.

  • @timjohnson979
    @timjohnson979 Рік тому +8

    Very will done, Arvin! I'm reminded of George Gamow's Mr Tompkins series. He did a few short illustrative stories on quantum effects if we could see them such as "Quantum Billiards" and "Quantum Jungles".

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  Рік тому +1

      Indeed. It was an inspiration.

  • @brigittelars5564
    @brigittelars5564 Рік тому

    Very fine lectures there Arvin. Your (and other tutors') theme in quantum mechanics is "probability".
    Let's sort out this matter of "probability"...
    Is probability a natural function/phenomenon in the cosmos or its a function/method of human limited mind for getting information?

  • @krisdarthvader7651
    @krisdarthvader7651 Рік тому

    AWESOME VID

  • @Name-js5uq
    @Name-js5uq Рік тому +2

    I cannot wait until you reach one million subscribers. You deserve it 10 times over. I love your explanations so very much! Thank you very much Arvin. Don't worry it will happen very soon I hope. You are the best physics explanations on the entire you tube by far. Absolutely love you!!!❤❤❤

  • @frun
    @frun Рік тому

    Great explanation of coherence 11:40

  • @shubhamsharan1761
    @shubhamsharan1761 Рік тому

    Your imaginations are awesome.
    It is all possible because of you that we are able to see these science behind all these.
    And due to your effort and hardwork we are able to understand real implications of high school physics that we have just crammed in our schools.
    Lot of love 💛 and appreciation for you.

  • @bobs182
    @bobs182 Рік тому +1

    This is the first time I have understood why large objects don't act like quantum objects. I was stuck on the idea that it must be a perception problem of different scales of existence but your wave function interference cancelling each other makes sense.

  • @DrSlipperyFist
    @DrSlipperyFist Рік тому +1

    I'm 40, wish this content was available when I was 14. Great work, videos keep getting better - huge fan.

  • @jawadmbarak5959
    @jawadmbarak5959 Рік тому +1

    Woww you brilliant.. 🎉

  • @vaclavkrpec2879
    @vaclavkrpec2879 Рік тому +1

    Re the uncertainty principle: I think that's actually one of the least "weird" properties of "quantum world". Because it's simply an inherent property of all waves, not just the wave function.
    For example, you can observe a very similar thing with sound: you may have a nice tone, which is a sinusoid wave---so you can easily measure its frequency (wavelength) and that's what defines the pitch. But you can't locate a tone to a singular moment---only to an interval in time during which it sounded. On the other hand, a clap or a gunshot is easily pinned to a moment, but you can't really say what's its pitch; as it's just one sound pressure peak, there's no frequency to it... Same thing.

  • @patriciajob7829
    @patriciajob7829 Рік тому

    Thank you very much to explain so well. Didn't go to university but with you and your videos I catch up ! Thank you very much to help me understand the world (inside and outside) so clever and pédagogue. Thanks so much. So, is it possible that it is not a socer player sending the ball (or not) into the goal but more the expectation of each one in the public ? Interesting. I won't see the world the same way. Thanks again. Have a sweet day.

  • @user-nl6hr8oq3d
    @user-nl6hr8oq3d Рік тому +1

    As a student of physics I was addicted to your channel, especially quantum mechanics . I have a great curiosity from longtime to know about your qualification I mean in which field of physics you studied so that you motivated to make such amazing and elaborate explanations even though professors don't gave such explanations ;if you interested pls replay...

  • @channel4me434
    @channel4me434 Рік тому +1

    Thanks (again) Arvin for this video.
    I always wondered why the double slit experiment doesn't work for large objects, but is does for electrons, while electrons do also interfere with their surrounding. Of course an electron is much smaller than a tennis ball, but is has a charge and mass and even the smallest interaction should prevent an object (electron) to come in superposition.
    But now I understand that if an object is not a pure wave function because it exists of many waves that are not in sync, it can not be in superposition.

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  Рік тому

      An electron is a single wave, and so behaves like a single wave. A grain of sand is trillions of waves that interfere with each other. It no longer behaves like a wave overall.

  • @eatbutter
    @eatbutter Рік тому

    this is the best arvin ash video

  • @juzoli
    @juzoli Рік тому +1

    In the example where we shoot waves at the wall, and a ball comes back, it would be more accurate to show that another wave comes back, but from a specific point of the wall.
    It is never “not a wave”, the collapse of the wave function is just the beginning of another wave function.

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  Рік тому

      it would be a 3D localized wave, which would be like a fuzzy sphere. What we showed is pretty close imo.

  • @clarkeeeee
    @clarkeeeee 9 місяців тому +1

    Major props to people who play quantum squash, it looks pretty difficult.

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 8 місяців тому +1

      There are no such people, unless they can make an infinite number of clones of themselves. :-)

  • @casb2480
    @casb2480 Рік тому

    Thank you for finally mentioning that measurement does not mean measurement in a literal sense, this used to confuse me so much

  • @AdityaChaudhary-oo7pr
    @AdityaChaudhary-oo7pr Рік тому

    Very nice explanation Arvin .... It will be interesting if we understand the quantum properties of dark matter ..