Down The Rabbit Hole Of The Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser | Answers With Joe

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 15 чер 2024
  • Get a FREE 30-day trial of Dashlane and get 10% off a subscription at www.dashlane.com/answerswithjoe
    Quantum physics has a way of melting your brain if you think about it too hard. Perhaps the biggest brain twister is the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment, the results of which seem to break all the rules of time and space.
    Want to support the channel? Here's how:
    Patreon: / answerswithjoe
    Channel Memberships: / @joescott
    Join me on the Our Ludicrous Future Podcast:
    / @ourludicrousfuture
    Get cool nerdy t-shirts at
    www.answerswithjoe.com/shirts
    Interested in getting a Tesla? Use my referral link and get discounts and perks:
    ts.la/joe74700
    Follow me at all my places!
    Instagram: / answerswithjoe
    Snapchat: / answerswithjoe
    Facebook: / answerswithjoe
    Twitter: / answerswithjoe
    LINKS LINKS LINKS:
    Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser:
    • Delayed Choice Quantum...
    Arvin Ash on Quantum Theory
    • The woo explained! Qua...
    A decent breakdown of the “consciousness” take
    • The Problem with Dr. Q...
    Quantum Mechanics Needs No Consciousness
    www.danko-nikolic.com/wp-conte...
    PBS Spacetime
    • How the Quantum Eraser...
  • Наука та технологія

КОМЕНТАРІ • 4,6 тис.

  • @Smeggit7
    @Smeggit7 4 роки тому +531

    7:17 Gotta say, the dogs lack of reaction would suggest that this is indeed Joe's natural state.

    • @Alistair
      @Alistair 4 роки тому +27

      I didn't even notice the dog until you mentioned him, that's hilarious :D

    • @angelarch5352
      @angelarch5352 3 роки тому +26

      The dog is trying very hard not to notice Joe's quantum state, so Joe can get the shot on camera. Good doggy!:)

    • @cherrydragon3120
      @cherrydragon3120 3 роки тому +1

      Hahahahha XD genius

    • @Superknullisch
      @Superknullisch 3 роки тому +1

      @@angelarch5352 Good one son!

    • @h8GW
      @h8GW 3 роки тому +2

      Some dogs are just reserved and quiet in nature. Rest assured, it still is greatly amused while looking at him.

  • @SouDeePop
    @SouDeePop 4 роки тому +1333

    Tfw your hand is both in and out of your pants at the same time until Joe looks

    • @bagelmaster2
      @bagelmaster2 4 роки тому +97

      Joetinger's Pants?

    • @professorroundbottom438
      @professorroundbottom438 4 роки тому +29

      @@bagelmaster2
      I am so so sorry that I can only like that once!
      😂👍🏆
      ✋👇👖

    • @rgerber
      @rgerber 4 роки тому +23

      Can the hand be inside if there are no pants?

    • @professorroundbottom438
      @professorroundbottom438 4 роки тому +25

      @@rgerber
      Well, yes, but then the questions become "inside what?" and "does Joe want to know enough to look?"

    • @snappygrandpappy
      @snappygrandpappy 4 роки тому +17

      Schrödinger's Hand lol

  • @MrCommanderPaul
    @MrCommanderPaul 3 роки тому +22

    "So do I!" That's it, Joe. You are now officially one of my favorite people to watch on UA-cam! You're smart, concise and easy to listen to all at once. It's a rare combination.

  • @stuartphilkill416
    @stuartphilkill416 3 роки тому +96

    I'm a filmmaker and a few years ago while shooting a documentary I used the analogy of the uncertainty principle to describe how you can't film someone without affecting their behavior. I feel even better about it knowing that you use it too!

    • @SuperLusername
      @SuperLusername 2 роки тому +12

      You can if they dont know they are being filmed

    • @garyburginjr1366
      @garyburginjr1366 2 роки тому +4

      @@SuperLusername lol wonderfully creepy comment haha

    • @mcoptimysticalrainbowkitty7462
      @mcoptimysticalrainbowkitty7462 2 роки тому +2

      TRUE FACTS ! 📽 📸 people definitely behave differently when they know they're being filmed [even security surveillance has proven that fact 😅] I'm a Photographer & Videographer, mainly been doing Event Photography at raves for the past 14 years, and because of the fact that people act differently when in front of a camera, I became a "self-proclaimed Master" of Candid Photography ! Because catching people in the element is my favoriteeee ! 😻

    • @your_average_joe5781
      @your_average_joe5781 2 роки тому +1

      @@SuperLusername Are they really being 'filmed' ? People are using digital format for quite awhile now. They are being 'recorded'. It's a video, not film. It's a recording, not footage. Just saying.

    • @SuperLusername
      @SuperLusername 2 роки тому +5

      @@your_average_joe5781 ok average Joe

  • @del132
    @del132 4 роки тому +663

    Ooooh, I get it.
    British Narrator: "He didn't, in fact, get it."

    • @martingoldfire
      @martingoldfire 4 роки тому +37

      I read that as Attenborough.

    • @davidbanks1230
      @davidbanks1230 4 роки тому +46

      Even though you said British, I still read it as Morgan Freeman lol

    • @isaacturnercreativeideas
      @isaacturnercreativeideas 4 роки тому +38

      Morgan Attenborough

    • @MechanicaMenace
      @MechanicaMenace 4 роки тому +9

      @@isaacturnercreativeideas that is something that *must* happen. We just need some top scientists and blood samples from mosquitoes preserved in amber.

    • @swolehuman1047
      @swolehuman1047 4 роки тому +7

      This have me some Stanley Parable vibes

  • @Thumbsupurbum
    @Thumbsupurbum 4 роки тому +1014

    Ha, joke's on you Joe. I'm not wearing any pants.

    • @joescott
      @joescott  4 роки тому +221

      Living your best life. Love it.

    • @johnnyappleseed79
      @johnnyappleseed79 4 роки тому +25

      Yea Joe, cause I’m wearing his pants...

    • @nockieboy
      @nockieboy 4 роки тому +12

      @@johnnyappleseed79 I'm wearing your mum's...

    • @SuperWarcio
      @SuperWarcio 4 роки тому +9

      Zedds Dead Baby
      Mmmmm... ok, that escalated quickly :)

    • @paulgodden4974
      @paulgodden4974 4 роки тому +21

      As soon as i read that my pants disappeared , wth?

  • @truerthanyouknow9456
    @truerthanyouknow9456 3 роки тому +63

    Thank you, Joe, for demonstrating how DMX is intrinsically linked to understanding quantum physics.

    • @idiotidiot5821
      @idiotidiot5821 10 місяців тому

      Lol the juxtaposition of this and the video of DMX actually using a computer.

  • @elizabeththornton940
    @elizabeththornton940 2 роки тому +1

    Watched this video today and I agree that you do have an authentic feel and it feels like I'm listening to a friend explain things in a easy to understand way. I love to watch your videos while I do my makeup, eat, and relax. I always learn something new!

  • @IntrepidFraidyCat
    @IntrepidFraidyCat 4 роки тому +360

    Particle conspiracy theorist: "They're watching us. Quick! Don't interfere! " LOL

  • @mikemanthe
    @mikemanthe 4 роки тому +380

    Quantum physics - that nervous feeling that you’re just ‘missing something’ super obvious

    • @carpathianhermit7228
      @carpathianhermit7228 4 роки тому +19

      Simulation

    • @springbloom5940
      @springbloom5940 4 роки тому +2

      Yup. Like measurement error.

    • @gn9476
      @gn9476 4 роки тому +2

      Yes! That's exactly how I often feel.

    • @RavenAmetr
      @RavenAmetr 4 роки тому +9

      @@carpathianhermit7228
      Oh, that's kind of theory that can explain everything without explaining anything.
      How would "simulation" solve the fact that the first pair of photons end up being polarized because their counterparts are polarized, which prevents interference?
      No, of course, we can speculate, that there's probably an algorithm that calculates the universe infinite time ahead on each step of Plank's time for each particle, but don't you think it's too much to ask?

    • @pseudoscientist4585
      @pseudoscientist4585 4 роки тому +1

      the secret is ... if science can not measure it, they say it does not exist. This experiment prove sciences = scienctism.

  • @steventurner7697
    @steventurner7697 3 роки тому +59

    Hey Joe... somewhere in the past couple of years I heard a story of photons from distant stars being incorporated into the double slit or quantum eraser experiment. That light traveled light years to get to earth and still changed due to observation. Could you research that and maybe do a video on that? This is fascinating stuff! Thank you for hard work!

    • @sd789sd
      @sd789sd 2 роки тому +6

      Simple. All particles and all matter exist as a waveform before the fact of observation by a human. The fact of observation makes it a particle. Animals can not do it, by the way. It's been tried, actually.

    • @SeeMeRolling
      @SeeMeRolling 2 роки тому +4

      @@sd789sd so... whoever is observing has to be aware that they are observing, and that they are observing the way the light will react?
      Like, what about say... a 3 yr old child that doesnt know what they're supposed to do?

    • @sd789sd
      @sd789sd 2 роки тому +2

      @@SeeMeRolling Nope. It is a fact of observation itself. Has to be a human though. 3 years old will do if we somehow make 3 years old interested enough to watch. )) it is our attention that manifests energy as matter. If you serious, there are couple books you can read. )

    • @MM-24
      @MM-24 2 роки тому +2

      @@sd789sd sir, what are those books?

    • @SeeMeRolling
      @SeeMeRolling 2 роки тому +4

      @@sd789sd But what about animals that have the intelligence of a 5 year old human?
      Perhaps a crow, or an elephant?

  • @Dubious_42
    @Dubious_42 2 роки тому +8

    This is my favorite Joe Scott video, it blows my mind every time I watch it. Quality content, Good Sir.

  • @Plamkton
    @Plamkton 4 роки тому +1225

    Humans: "let's measure light"
    The universe: 🖕

    • @VictoriaSobocki
      @VictoriaSobocki 4 роки тому +45

      Exactly, wise Plank

    • @smedspets695
      @smedspets695 4 роки тому +12

      Lol love the name

    • @thomasscott116
      @thomasscott116 3 роки тому +11

      All matter has particle and wave properties at the same time. You get the same results with electrons or protons in these experiments. FYI

    • @K-A5
      @K-A5 3 роки тому +2

      Lmao

    • @FEJK82
      @FEJK82 3 роки тому +4

      Hate to be old here, but what does that little block icon signify? Been seeing it around more and more.

  • @charlesphilips2045
    @charlesphilips2045 4 роки тому +77

    I love the way your dog was looking at you in "your normal state" like 'yup that's my Joe'.

  • @DerTaran
    @DerTaran 2 роки тому +26

    Sabine Hossenfelder just mentioned you in her last episode: The always amazing Joe Scott.

  • @robertheise4570
    @robertheise4570 3 роки тому +3

    Hi Joe. Hi everyone else. I want to say thank you. Thanks for you, and for what you are doing here (with all your work). To share, to educate, to encourage, to be creative, to entertain, to boldly embrace your gifts and make this such an impassioned vocation... to care. To me, this very certainly is purposeful. Your life is purposeful Joe, and you are an inspiration. I may not be remembering well, but do I have it right that your wife is a teacher? If so, thanks for her giftedness as well. I mentioned you being an encourager because you are, and I have always believed that is one of the very most important things humans can be for one another. You mention “ love you guys” at the end of these videos, and I know you do. Again, thank you. I love learning!!!

  • @okboomer306
    @okboomer306 4 роки тому +373

    "They" be like: *Lol look at these humans, trying to understand the glitch.*

  • @br2891
    @br2891 4 роки тому +276

    It's been a century and they haven't fixed this glitch in the simulation yet? Smh

    • @DarylSpears1
      @DarylSpears1 4 роки тому +4

      Yes agent : Smith will take care of this , just as soon as he has taken care of the rebel "Neo"

    • @powerstation0872
      @powerstation0872 4 роки тому +20

      Yeah the devs are really behind on updates. Like half of the players are still experience the chronic depression bug and it's soooooo annoying. 🙄

    • @JohnBurgess37
      @JohnBurgess37 4 роки тому +4

      At best the devs are furloughed at this point smh

    • @unstanic
      @unstanic 3 роки тому +2

      It’s in the backlog somewhere

    • @Tesseract9630
      @Tesseract9630 3 роки тому +3

      They will unlikely fix this one. Maybe fixing it would cause more problems than it solves.

  • @Hyumanity
    @Hyumanity 3 роки тому

    This is the second video I’ve watched on the experiment and it was excellent. Thank you! Subscribed!

  • @alysonshorthouse8858
    @alysonshorthouse8858 3 роки тому +3

    I learn best when analogies are applied and that "beach ball in a swimming pool" analogy is the best one I've heard. It really helped, thanks

  • @RelativelyBest
    @RelativelyBest 4 роки тому +289

    "I bet 10% of you right now have your hand on your pants watching this."
    Actually waving a plastic pipe around pretending it's a sword. But, yeah, fair enough.

    • @destinkane797
      @destinkane797 4 роки тому +4

      Hand down your pants*

    • @monkeyrobotsinc.9875
      @monkeyrobotsinc.9875 4 роки тому

      THATS cool.

    • @jeffreymcgillivray5408
      @jeffreymcgillivray5408 4 роки тому +1

      Lmao, I just like to drink beer and watch his videos. No hands in my pants, but I could use a shower. Lol

    • @Ben-rz9cf
      @Ben-rz9cf 4 роки тому +8

      To be fair i was scratching my balls like a minute ago

    • @dogdriver70
      @dogdriver70 4 роки тому +7

      seriously, who wears pants?

  • @okangulal2849
    @okangulal2849 4 роки тому +90

    7:17 I love how the dog is just casually watching its human, like he does this all the time

    • @jimwhitehead1532
      @jimwhitehead1532 3 роки тому +4

      The dog is used to Scott acting nutty, in a way no sensible dog would act. Is Scott's dog smarter than Scott?

    • @cherrydragon3120
      @cherrydragon3120 3 роки тому +3

      The dog is like: oh boy... my pet has its crazy day again

    • @TheCarolgibbons
      @TheCarolgibbons 3 роки тому +2

      Noticing the dog watching makes the whole scene extra funny imho. :-)

    • @khlondon6703
      @khlondon6703 2 роки тому

      Humans should not keep pets. It is essentially slavery of a lower lifeform. The animal has no choice, often no balls, no true freedom and is trained to please.

    • @Razmoudah
      @Razmoudah Рік тому

      I take it as proof that yes, he does act like that off camera.

  • @vickielawson3114
    @vickielawson3114 3 роки тому +19

    Did they try the experiment where they split the beams but also without the cameras, so they'd be able to see if it was the splitting itself causing the collapse? That would have been really helpful.

    • @cjthenarhwalking1378
      @cjthenarhwalking1378 Рік тому +4

      Yes in the delayed choice quantum eraser the particles that had their information scrambled did not collapse

    • @cjthenarhwalking1378
      @cjthenarhwalking1378 Рік тому

      @Svenson c+d did get an interference pattern due to their path not being measured. That's what was explained.

    • @DavidByrden1
      @DavidByrden1 Рік тому

      There is no "collapse" in quantum mechanics.

  • @joshuaflackua
    @joshuaflackua 3 роки тому +1

    Hey, absolutely loved the video. First video I've seen by you, but I'll definitely be checking out more. Just FYI, Bell's Theorem rules out classical hidden variable explanations for quantum phenomena.

  • @Monkey-fv2km
    @Monkey-fv2km 4 роки тому +271

    I'm sort of comfortable these days with quantum physics not making sense, I just recognise that the human brain only understands linear time and three dimensional reality, which is likely not the whole picture, so we need mathematical hacks to translate actual reality.
    Also if I understand correctly, photons don't even experience time, they subjectively experience all of their existence at once, so time travel and cause/effect are irrelevant for them. Not that they think a great deal about time travel.

    • @ot0m0t0
      @ot0m0t0 4 роки тому +30

      Finemann actually suggest once that there might be only one photon in existance going back and forth through time. Turned out to be wrong but still... :)

    • @tomf3150
      @tomf3150 4 роки тому +6

      Or in quantum world the time itself is subject to tunnel effect / is quantizied.

    • @edibleapeman2
      @edibleapeman2 4 роки тому +9

      Unfortunately it still sounds crazy to tell people that you experience/sense time non-linearly.

    • @Sletty73
      @Sletty73 4 роки тому +11

      Problem is, the delayed choice quantum eraser should work in this way also if You consider quantum particles with mass and that therefore actually "experience" time...

    • @ThePlatnumAlkemist
      @ThePlatnumAlkemist 4 роки тому +8

      I'm not sure but this might have been tested with other particles like electrons too. I think it applies to any particles in a superposition and entangled state. Electrons, protons and atoms certainly don't travel at the speed of light so they do experience time in the traditional sense. So in theory, anything in a superposition would experience this bizarre effect, even macroscopic objects, assuming you can set them into a superposition.

  • @burningpapersun1
    @burningpapersun1 4 роки тому +165

    "A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools."

    • @redosem9868
      @redosem9868 4 роки тому +4

      Quote of the year

    • @abram730
      @abram730 4 роки тому +25

      “Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.”
      ― Rick Cook

    • @burningpapersun1
      @burningpapersun1 4 роки тому

      "No single thing abides; and all things are fucked up." - PKD

    • @justin.d.whitehead
      @justin.d.whitehead 4 роки тому +5

      @@burningpapersun1 Other than The Dude. The Dude always abides.

    • @joegibbskins
      @joegibbskins 4 роки тому

      Justin D. Whitehead itself a reference to this ua-cam.com/video/5rlFiEe6S24/v-deo.html

  • @d.tripp1160
    @d.tripp1160 2 роки тому +4

    I never do this for UA-cam videos but I have come back to this one so many times just due to the crazy nature of the video and how well you present the information I’ve heard many people on this site explain this experiment but in my opinion none have executed it to this level

    • @Tony-dp1rl
      @Tony-dp1rl Рік тому

      Sadly, he got it wrong, so you are pointing people to bad information. The pattern on the screen does NOT change depending on what happens to the entangled partner. Their states are entangled and you can see correlation when you measure everything later, but it doesn't work like he described here.

    • @d.tripp1160
      @d.tripp1160 Рік тому

      @@Tony-dp1rl any reason I should believe you over him?

    • @d.tripp1160
      @d.tripp1160 Рік тому

      @@Tony-dp1rl also this was from a year ago are you okay ?

  • @sudhakarankarunakaran6932
    @sudhakarankarunakaran6932 3 роки тому +1

    Beautifully explained. Usually all the explanations were with one figure. You explained it stage by stage and explained it well. 👍

  • @frank1803
    @frank1803 4 роки тому +36

    Q. What's the difference between an automobile mechanic and a quantum mechanic?
    A. A quantum mechanic can get his car into the garage without opening the door.

  • @JeremyKolassa
    @JeremyKolassa 4 роки тому +54

    Delayed release of the episode on Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser? I see you, Joe. I see you.

    • @tomf3150
      @tomf3150 4 роки тому +13

      Jeremy Kolassa Great, you've collapsed the episode, happy ?

    • @onlypranav
      @onlypranav 4 роки тому +1

      @@tomf3150 Nice! We can non-temporality in action

    • @joescott
      @joescott  4 роки тому +1

      I wish I could say I was that clever. I was actually waiting for the sponsor to approve the sponsor message.

  • @oremazz3754
    @oremazz3754 2 роки тому +6

    Be careful, interference patterns observed at D0 are not the same, they are shifted at position x. If you add both data you would have the clumping pattern observed at D3. The clue is that entangled photons at BBO are phase opposite, which will give at 4 combinations arriving at D0 (25% each: up-up, up-down, down-up, down-down); basically, 50% of that "red path" photon will have the same phase of the "blue path" and 50% chance opposite phase between them. That is the reason why interference patterns are shifted in x, 50% of the data will show one interference and 50% of the other data will interfere on the other position x; the high frequency of one interference coincides with the low frequency of the other; and vice versa. Now, on D3 or D4 there is no selection between phases, so the pattern observed is the addition of the two shifted interference pattern shifted on x, so... the interference will be mixed and the clumping pattern is expected. In D1 and D2 the difference or equality of phase will give only one detector for the same phase interference and the other detector for the opposite phase situation. So, on D1 and D2 interference patterns are independently observed. NO delay choice and quantum eraser from the future to the present !!

    • @monnig73
      @monnig73 Рік тому

      Ok... But how you explain the experiment at 8.41 with two detectors A and B that can be far away but you will always obtain no interference pattern in the screen if they are on. Seems like information goes back in time.

    • @earlparker1800
      @earlparker1800 Рік тому

      So when do we get to read your entire paper? And surely you have a theory on how to prove this without variables with the act of the observation removed? Let me know please. I think you may be on to something.🇺🇸💪🇺🇦🖕🇷🇺

  • @pendurton3081
    @pendurton3081 2 роки тому +2

    Joe Scott, videos like this are why you are with out a doubt by far my favorite UA-camr

  • @Najakeeper
    @Najakeeper 4 роки тому +38

    The way his dog watching Joe when he is dancing like that is priceless!

  • @pratikshukla9573
    @pratikshukla9573 2 роки тому

    Of all the explanstions i viewed, i found yours most elucidating. Hats off for the originality.

  • @baydrixnewzealandwarrobotf2681

    Hi Joe hope all is well. Thanks for another year of cool vids all the bewt for 2023

  • @bagelmaster2
    @bagelmaster2 4 роки тому +77

    I'm ashamed to say you were right about the hand in pants thing. It's cold in my room!

    • @malcolmhardwick4258
      @malcolmhardwick4258 4 роки тому +7

      Phosphorus51 you gotta keep it warm 😄

    • @jayknight139
      @jayknight139 4 роки тому

      Same here 😢

    • @WookENTP
      @WookENTP 4 роки тому +4

      Same here, but was scratching... stuff...

    • @TechtalkwithBob
      @TechtalkwithBob 4 роки тому +3

      10% you say 🤔

    • @mdkooter
      @mdkooter 4 роки тому +2

      In my defense it was resting on my hip, not in my crotch.

  • @contrarianduude3463
    @contrarianduude3463 4 роки тому +19

    College kid: Hey professor, I'm having problems understanding the theory of everything?
    College Professor: Why, there's almost nothing to it.

  • @zombiasnow15
    @zombiasnow15 3 роки тому +1

    Thank You Joe! Appreciate it!
    Stay Safe!

  • @Scottdent213
    @Scottdent213 Рік тому

    just had my first ad within a youtube ad. It was a standard youtube ad during your dashlane ad. magnificent

  • @tara5742
    @tara5742 4 роки тому +94

    Contemplating my 1st tattoo for 15 years now. The interference pattern seems timeless and beautiful in a simple way. Turns out having my son a year ago put this image on my body. Naturally. They’re called stretch marks 😁

    • @mikeoxsmal8022
      @mikeoxsmal8022 4 роки тому +6

      Get an iron and iron out the stretch marks

    • @autohmae
      @autohmae 4 роки тому +4

      @Sticky Steve Mine are just from when I grew fat as a kid, not much honor in that other than honoring all those who came before us who gave us something close to abundance I guess.

    • @gearhead1302
      @gearhead1302 4 роки тому +1

      😂 that's great

    • @texasdeeslinglead2401
      @texasdeeslinglead2401 4 роки тому +1

      I wish I could truelly dive deep into this topic . It used to be a struggle for my wife . Now it's her mark maturity.

    • @gearhead1302
      @gearhead1302 4 роки тому +1

      @@texasdeeslinglead2401 Stretch marks absolutely destroyed my wife's self esteem after our first child. It still bothers her badly to this day but there's nothing I can do to help her feel any better about it. Just have to wait until we have the technology to erase them I guess.

  • @pamcake958
    @pamcake958 4 роки тому +243

    I didn’t understand one thing I just heard, and yet, I was thoroughly entertained 🍻.

    • @kaylielopez6460
      @kaylielopez6460 3 роки тому +2

      that sums up joe :)

    • @Belenus3080
      @Belenus3080 3 роки тому +3

      That means you understand it I think

    • @drrocketman7794
      @drrocketman7794 3 роки тому +6

      I think I understand what he was saying....that doesn't mean what he said made any sense....quantum physics is *WEIRD.*

    • @Zoroaster4
      @Zoroaster4 3 роки тому +4

      "if you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics"

    • @beepboopgpt1439
      @beepboopgpt1439 3 роки тому +3

      That traveling back in time is my favorite!

  • @TheCarolgibbons
    @TheCarolgibbons 3 роки тому

    I love the perspective with the dance and the dog-----Perfect!!!

  • @treble8921
    @treble8921 3 роки тому

    7:17 I don't always "Like" videos that I like, but this moment is almost enough to make me "like" every one of your videos, ever. Good show xd

  • @joearnold6881
    @joearnold6881 4 роки тому +175

    So what you’re telling us is...
    We need to shoot comets through two slits to find Planet Nine.
    Got it

    • @pseudoscientist4585
      @pseudoscientist4585 4 роки тому +4

      got it.

    • @winstonsol8713
      @winstonsol8713 4 роки тому +3

      Thanks, Kathy Newman.
      :p

    • @blackalgae370
      @blackalgae370 4 роки тому +1

      I believe this is the only thing for science should be working on

    • @joearnold6881
      @joearnold6881 4 роки тому

      monkeygirl000
      Thanks.
      I low-key love myself!

    • @Merennulli
      @Merennulli 4 роки тому

      Just don't observe which slit they went through.

  • @godimas101
    @godimas101 4 роки тому +44

    Ok, just stick with me a minute and hear me out....
    "Dancers With Joe"
    Twice weekly youtube channel where Joe gives pro tips for all the latest dance moves. Total winner. It sells itself.

    • @redosem9868
      @redosem9868 4 роки тому +1

      Sign me in

    • @IamBHM
      @IamBHM 4 роки тому

      Uh... Yes please!

    • @solomonrivers5033
      @solomonrivers5033 4 роки тому

      Might I recommend subscribing to Lindybeige. He is full of random interestingness AND dance tips

    • @dREHER0009
      @dREHER0009 4 роки тому

      Y'all gon' make me louse my mind!

    • @hdmat101
      @hdmat101 4 роки тому

      Yes please

  • @kaiulani_luna
    @kaiulani_luna 2 роки тому +2

    I think another good way to understand how measurement affects the properties of a quantum particle is by remembering that these particles are waves, and all of our methods of measurement use some sort of wave in order to detect the particle (like an electromagnetic wave) so there is guaranteed to be some kind of interference between the measurement wave and the particles "wave".
    The issue is understanding that the "waving" motion of the particle is actually a probability wave, not anything that actually propagates through space.

  • @mattkeyes8385
    @mattkeyes8385 2 роки тому +1

    Great video. I'm still looking for a good definition of "the observer" in QP but this was a nice attempt at explaining it. I think it still left a big question mark, though. I've always wondered what was the first "observer" in our universe (and I'm not trying to insinuate some kind of deity or divine force - if anything, I think our universe is a sub-system in a larger system much like an atom is in a body).

  • @CameraManBlaise
    @CameraManBlaise 4 роки тому +35

    This is the best answers with joe you've ever made! I've never laughed so hard learning quantum mechanics, i almost lost my mind.

    • @joescott
      @joescott  4 роки тому +18

      Up in here?

    • @loki_the_wicker
      @loki_the_wicker 3 роки тому +5

      @@joescott up in here.

    • @HarryNicNicholas
      @HarryNicNicholas 2 роки тому +1

      @@joescott sabine hossenfelder has a nice little video that explains the mistake everyone has been making about the quantum eraser.

  • @mattca353
    @mattca353 4 роки тому +86

    The dog is totally unphased at how Joe is acting.

    • @jjohnston94
      @jjohnston94 4 роки тому

      Unfazed

    • @musicfan789
      @musicfan789 4 роки тому +2

      Joe's a freak lol

    • @joescott
      @joescott  4 роки тому +53

      Did you think I was lying about that being my normal state?

    • @ewmegoolies
      @ewmegoolies 4 роки тому +4

      lol. you danced for the camera as if it was operating with a quantum eraser. And does your staircase have pictures of a staircase hung on it?

    • @Salah-qu4cs
      @Salah-qu4cs 4 роки тому

      Maybe because it's nothing out of the ordinary to him lol

  • @robertsparks3685
    @robertsparks3685 2 роки тому

    Another excellent video! You might want to consider the Michelson-Morley experiment. I have heard that there are disparate interpretations. And perhaps all the data was not published.

  • @134552Adnan
    @134552Adnan 3 роки тому +1

    You're literally the best channel on UA-cam!!!I like Dr. Tyson's explanation where he explains what a 3D sphere would look like as it's pasting through a 2D universe. Just a point that turns into a circle that gets bigger and bigger then smaller until it becomes a point again and then disappears. It would look crazy to 2D life forms but we can clearly see that it's a sphere. The same could be true for higher dimensional phenomena passing through our dimension/universe.

  • @lemarreyes1014
    @lemarreyes1014 4 роки тому +50

    Lmao Joe's dog just looking at him like, "He's at it again."

    • @anarchyantz1564
      @anarchyantz1564 4 роки тому +7

      Actually he is thinking, "I was going to tell him the answer to Quantum Physics if he took me for a walk like he promised but oh no, he just had to start recording a video again. Welp thats it, I am instead going to share it with the cat, not that the cat cares really".

    • @TheMemesofDestruction
      @TheMemesofDestruction 4 роки тому +1

      Lemar Reyes I just noticed the dog 🐕 ^.^

    • @monksmom1
      @monksmom1 4 роки тому

      That dog is hysterical. His head followed his every movement, like he was studying something absolutely fascinating. I felt the same way....

    • @zf5656
      @zf5656 4 роки тому

      lol i didnt even notice the dog

  • @dieubermensch
    @dieubermensch 4 роки тому +172

    It's a "shortcut" the programmer took when he was making our simulation. We see this in videogames

    • @TheRedbeardpirate
      @TheRedbeardpirate 4 роки тому +26

      Hey, that makes about as much sense as any of the leading explanations 🤷‍♂️

    • @vezokpiraka
      @vezokpiraka 4 роки тому +40

      Actually very reasonable. Only calculate collapse wave functions when they matter, otherwise just use the mean value of stuff.

    • @ManishSharma-rg1wp
      @ManishSharma-rg1wp 4 роки тому +4

      Can you explain that a lil bit

    • @GRiNDZoMBi
      @GRiNDZoMBi 4 роки тому +14

      The simulation answer is a non-answer.

    • @stevechance150
      @stevechance150 4 роки тому +38

      I think you are absolutely correct. Only render it when someone is focused on it, otherwise just use an approximation and you can cut down on the computation load.

  • @jadedcatlady
    @jadedcatlady Рік тому

    Thank you for that clip of your dancing. Absolutely made my day.

  • @mojitomaker
    @mojitomaker 2 роки тому

    Great video on a great channel - however, what is driving me more crazy than effect > cause quantum mechanics is the expert green screen and keying you use. It is so well done, I just stare through the whisps of your hair for the colour of the bookcase. Nada. Do you have a behind the scenes of standard and tangent cam setup? I want to see behind the curtain!

  • @LEDewey_MD
    @LEDewey_MD 4 роки тому +73

    The Quantum Eraser is definitely one of those phenomenon that cues "The Twilight Zone" music in your mind as you try to wrap your head around it. A great description of it can be found in Dr. Brian Greene's "The Fabric of the Cosmos", especially pages 191-199. (Unfortunately, it wasn't covered at all in the Nova movie of his book.). Great stuff!!

    • @XxXspawndXxX
      @XxXspawndXxX 4 роки тому +1

      I just bought that book, thanks!

    • @autohmae
      @autohmae 4 роки тому +1

      Some would say say information has no weight. It's just a pattern.
      What if light, just like information isn't a things, just a pattern.
      Or maybe I'm overthinking it... :-)

    • @yansakuya1
      @yansakuya1 4 роки тому

      @@autohmae If it is a pattern why does it takes the shape of a particle when measured?

    • @chrisfuller2069
      @chrisfuller2069 4 роки тому

      @@autohmae A pattern is just another way of saying a wave form.

    • @autohmae
      @autohmae 4 роки тому

      @@chrisfuller2069 Yeah, that's why I changed my tune at the end... I'm overthinking it.

  • @JP-8469
    @JP-8469 4 роки тому +27

    I didn't know Joe had legs- - - mind BLOWN

    • @MyrddinREmrys
      @MyrddinREmrys 4 роки тому +1

      ... those legs are a quantum thing ..he does and doesn't have them ..or, they could be the property of StreXcorp ..or, as the most biggest thinker would say ..there's no way to know, nobody knows *chuckle *chuckle

    • @MrDoboz
      @MrDoboz 4 роки тому

      There was a video about electric cars where he tried to hook up with a woman in the intro. He did have legs there

  • @WillBraks
    @WillBraks 2 роки тому

    Great vid bro! Great info with some comedy! Keep it up 👍🏽

  • @davidclark9143
    @davidclark9143 3 роки тому

    Ty very much for this information I appreciated it...!

  • @dirtydamfino1429
    @dirtydamfino1429 4 роки тому +47

    11:00 is officially when I threw my hands up and said “I’m out.”

    • @supersonicph
      @supersonicph 4 роки тому +4

      Joe should create a separate video for this

    • @kuryamtl
      @kuryamtl 3 роки тому +4

      But were they in your pants before you threw them up?

    • @mr.barkyvonschnauzer1710
      @mr.barkyvonschnauzer1710 3 роки тому

      Not a smart guy here, but I think since splitting the entangled particles failed they had to split it a couples more to change the point of origin.
      Splitting one entangled particle will not technically separate them as they act like they share the same WiFi signal.
      But detecting half of the particle on the measuring device does not give them any new result since the other half is still reacting no different.
      Kind of like someone pretending to be 2 different people on 4chan but in the end they're just using the same ip address and you can see that.
      So why not he use his computer with his WiFi. Pull out his tablet and pair it with his neighbors WiFi and then on top of that use his phone with its mobile data.
      It looks like multiple people are sh!t posting but little do I know, it's all synced up to one device.
      I would not know that so I would go on arguing with 3 people not ever knowing its just one.

  • @ryandwyer1009
    @ryandwyer1009 4 роки тому +62

    6:49 I actually had my hand down my pants at that exact moment, that Lowkey freaked me out

    • @nahCmeR
      @nahCmeR 2 роки тому

      I bet you also have a number between 0-10(12?) fingers.

    • @40watt53
      @40watt53 2 роки тому

      Because of Joe?

  • @steveshugart7415
    @steveshugart7415 2 роки тому +1

    I learned two things: 1) wave form collapse has nothing to do with observer (consciousness) and is entirely a byproduct of measuring. 2) when we erase the information after measuring wave form doesn't collapse and interference pattern remains intact. All crystal clear now.

    • @TheShattenjager
      @TheShattenjager 3 місяці тому

      It is not actually accurate. There's an element missing. Look up The Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Debunked by Sabine Hossenfelder video. She explains the wave patterns from each side when combined produces the full scattering appearance because they're slightly apart. The "no interference pattern" is actually two interference patterns combined together, slightly offset, to produce a full field. That's something Joe and many others missed.

  • @tolentarpay5464
    @tolentarpay5464 2 роки тому

    Man, this is my FAVORITEEST UA-cam vid of all time! I love watching this over!
    SO, I studied Economics at college, not physics, but I reckon there's a take-away here;
    The FIRST thing they always teach you on your FIRST day of Microeconomics 101 = All models are based on Assumptions! If something isn't working, it cld be a genuine discovery - but Occam's Razor applies too, & it's far more likely you've got one of your Assumptions wrong...
    What these Delayed Choice experiments are telling me is we've misunderstood the nature of Time, & based on the results I'm thinking it's MORE accurate to describe Time in terms of a "neutral" Planar Co-Ord system (like we do with Height, Width & Depth), rather than the "Time Tunnel" (anybody remember that show? Rad & Cool!) concept we're fixated upon...

    • @tolentarpay5464
      @tolentarpay5464 2 роки тому

      AND, if there really is no "Arrow-of-Time" & reverse time-travel is possible, how wld that infl. particles? For instance, does baryonic-matter, traveling backwards thru time, turn into anti-matter? Cld that solve the "Missing Antimatter Problem"?
      Just one tweak to our Assumptions & all kinds of stuff comes tumbling out...

  • @pohkeee
    @pohkeee 4 роки тому +23

    Yeah... I love the smell of melted brain in the morning! First lesson, when jumping in pools, make sure it’s the deep end! Wait...what? Everyone get the hell out of the pool, it’s time to drain the magical water...going back to bed, my brain hurts.

    • @nguyenvan9474
      @nguyenvan9474 4 роки тому +1

      How is this 3 hours ago????

    • @pohkeee
      @pohkeee 4 роки тому +1

      Nguyen Van : comes out early for Patreon members 🤓😉

    • @frmcf
      @frmcf 4 роки тому +1

      Nguyen Van Quantum time machine

  • @drgunsmith4099
    @drgunsmith4099 4 роки тому +70

    Everyone’s gangster till Quantum Eraser enters your brain 😂

  • @eziowayne
    @eziowayne 3 роки тому

    This video is amazing. Thank you!

  • @gabriellautaru4058
    @gabriellautaru4058 3 роки тому +7

    Thank you. When I first started watching this video, I thought that you'd lose me along the way. But you didn't, and that counts for a lot in my books. Well done. It's a complex subject, but the humor you've thrown in simply said 'hey, I'm not here to bore you to death, after all'.
    Additional trivia: Feynman, when asked by a reporter to explain the work for which he got the Nobel prize, apparently retorted that if he could explain it (presumably simple and concise enough to make it into news), then he wouldn't have won it. Absolutely brilliant! He was also the one who poignantly used a piece of rubber dunked into a glass of ice cold water to demonstrate how rubber loses its elasticity in low temperatures, and thus prove the O-ring seals failure on the solid fuel boosters as the cause of the Challenger space shuttle.

  • @darkseid6412
    @darkseid6412 4 роки тому +39

    THE ALIENS RUNNING OUR SIMULATION ARE DROWNING IN TEARS OF LAUGHTER!!!

    • @crownspecialties
      @crownspecialties 4 роки тому +2

      THE DOUCHEBAG Funny cuz it’s true. True that some people actually believe that! 😂

    • @squirlmy
      @squirlmy 4 роки тому

      @@crownspecialties there's absolutely no way to prove or disprove it without the "aliens" actually interfering from outside. I'm not sure why you find it laughable. You have no evidence to disprove it, and that fact should make it a little humbling. What if the Bible (Either Hebrew scriptures or New Testament, take your pick) might be about beings coming to interfere in our simulation. Almost any religion can be re-interpreted this way. Think about it.

    • @crownspecialties
      @crownspecialties 4 роки тому +2

      Cuvtixo D Believe in any crazy thing besides the obvious, that we and the universe were created by god.
      Of course I can’t disprove aliens and I never said they don’t exist. If Aliens do exist on some other planet who started saying that they were the ones that created us, that’s so far-fetched. And why do we need to live in a computer simulation, this is real life you’re talking about a movie. We have zero proof that Aliens exist and tons and tons of proof beyond common sense that we were created by something intelligent. We have the Bible!! The Word of God. We are a design. This universe is a design. It didn’t just happen accidentally. Something intelligent planned this out then meet us. And that something is the God of the Bible. But most people don’t like what the Bible says most people just want to be their own guards and seek sinful pleasures to obtain temporary happiness.

    • @danielmoelders7290
      @danielmoelders7290 4 роки тому

      @@crownspecialties prove the existence of god or the bible's correctness, then we can talk.

    • @BMac420
      @BMac420 4 роки тому

      @@crownspecialties idk bro ufos are real so like...

  • @bretgraham7554
    @bretgraham7554 4 роки тому +6

    I can't tell you enough how much I enjoy your videos! I think I watch some of your content every day. I find that the casual conversational tone and humor combined with the layman like yet very informed way you present all sorts of topics is refreshing and enjoyable to watch. Well done, Sir.

  • @osogrl1
    @osogrl1 2 роки тому

    Joe explains things brilliantly !

  • @daveysodyssey9990
    @daveysodyssey9990 3 роки тому +8

    Thank you Joe. My brain has become jello and trickled out of my ears. 😂 my brain hurts now.

  • @WildBillCox13
    @WildBillCox13 4 роки тому +74

    In some ways this is your best post yet, Joe.

    • @WildBillCox13
      @WildBillCox13 4 роки тому +1

      The act of meeting one neighbor automatically makes the other neighbor a stranger. Stranger is RIGHT!

    • @WildBillCox13
      @WildBillCox13 4 роки тому +2

      "It's quantum fields, Joe! Wait! I mean it's Planck level synchronicity! You know: strings!"

    • @artdonovandesign
      @artdonovandesign 4 роки тому +1

      @@WildBillCox13 Yeah. That's the ticket! :)

  • @Miller6616
    @Miller6616 4 роки тому +37

    The game only needs to render the part of the world you're in :)

    • @stevechilds1547
      @stevechilds1547 4 роки тому

      Ah, but what if there's a cat inside a box, does it need to render the inside of the box, or even the cat itself?

    • @justinmallaiz4549
      @justinmallaiz4549 4 роки тому +2

      silly humans...assuming the rendering of the universe is going forward in time

    • @etahydri
      @etahydri 4 роки тому

      Not even that... just the moment to moment subjective experience of thinking you're in a real world.

    • @kyjo72682
      @kyjo72682 4 роки тому

      @@etahydri That's assuming that subjective experience CAN be "rendered". Maybe it's not possible to simulate consciousness, or it's extremely hard to do so. Anyway even if possible, this would still be prohibitively expensive to compute.. I mean, to simulate a single experience of a human in 2019 you would have to go through the evolution of the whole observable universe up until that point. So what would be the difference from the "real thing"? None.

    • @milesreid1825
      @milesreid1825 4 роки тому

      Well, and the spawn chunks

  • @classybean6960
    @classybean6960 3 роки тому

    This is the best explained video of this thank you

  • @ec92009y
    @ec92009y 3 роки тому

    Joe. The contents is awesome as always. Quantum cray cray? Doesn’t get any better.
    Just a note on the form. I’d be happier with softer (or no) background music.
    Music or not. I love the show. Keep it up.

  • @D-Man_Jam
    @D-Man_Jam 4 роки тому +36

    Richard Fyneman: _"Nobody understands quantum mechanics."_
    Crowd: *Laughs in stupidness*

    • @inyobill
      @inyobill 4 роки тому

      That was not a naive audience. They laughed because they got it.

  • @UnderTheGoldenGate
    @UnderTheGoldenGate 4 роки тому +30

    Finally a confirmation that when you observe the particle going through the slit (collapsing the wave function) you need to hit it with another particle to observe it. I've asked this question dozens of times and nobody (even the "experts") confirm that yes you are disturbing the particle, they always gave me another complex explanation that made no sense (probably because they didn't understand it well enough). One of the biggest problems with the double slit experiment is the experiment itself not being explained properly (e.g. how the detector works). Well done, thanks! It all makes more sense - a particle will behave as a wave of probability until it interacts with another particle (and the information of the interaction is maintained!...)

    • @leslierhorer1412
      @leslierhorer1412 4 роки тому +8

      I don't see a question there. It's a little difficult to answer a question that hasn't been asked.
      Both Relativity and Quantum Mechanics require that in order to exist, an object must interact with the universe. It must engage in one or more of the four fundamental physical interactions: Strong Nuclear Force, Weal Nuclear Force, EM, and Gravity, or it just is not real. An object comes into existence when it is realized, for example, in a Hawking interaction at the event horizon of a black hole. Let's think of perspective, for a moment. We are creatures of electrons and mass, so to us the universe, although quite sparse, is alive with gravity, chemistry, and light. Consider the perspective of a Neutrino, though. To it, Gravity is almost non-existent. It only feels the effects of Gravity to any noticeable affect near a Neutron Star or Black Hole. Light doesn't exist at all, and we humans, even the entire Earth are so ghostly as to be almost imaginary phantoms. Stars are a bit like fluffy clouds: definitely there and not totally insubstantial, but more like a low density foam than a massive object. Our aforementioned friends the Neutron Stars are definitely quite solid, and while a black hole probably can't tear a Neutrino apart the way it can a human body, or even an atom, it is still a daunting object.
      To exist, then, is to be affected by some force. A force, however, is taken to be an exchange of Gauge Bosons. When one charged particle passes another, its path is altered by their electric and magnetic field interactions, mediated by virtual photons. We can infer the position and momentum of the charged particle by observing the particle's effect on the other particles near it. In doing so, however, we alter the very things we wish to measure, since the object not only affects the test particles, but the test particles also affect the object in question. In this scenario, we are not observing the object directly, but rather through its affect on other objects. The point is, whether the interaction we observe is direct or indirect, the fact the object exists means it not only affects the universe, but it is also affected by the universe at each and every interaction.
      The fact is there is no such thing as a direct observation, but If we want to observe the object a bit more directly than inferring its properties from the effects on the rest of the universe, we can employ a real Vector Boson, rather than a virtual one. (We can, of course, also employ collisions with non-gauge particles, but we can set that aside for now.) Any Vector Boson might be employed, depending upon the nature of the object, but let's just talk about light. If we want to know the position of a particle, we can send out a barrage of photons and see which one bounces back, pinpointing the particle. That, or if the particle is self-luminescent, we can just wait for it to emit a photon, and see from where the photon came. There are two problems, however. The first is the photon has a finite spatial extent quantified by its wavelength. We can only pinpoint the particle's position at the time it emitted / reflected the photon with an accuracy no better than the wavelength of the photon. If the photon has a wavelength of 1000nm, then we only know the position of the particle to within 1000nm. In order to nail down the particle's position better than that, we must employ a photon of shorter wavelength. Practical matters may intervene, but theoretically there is no finite limit to how accurately we can measure the position of the particle.
      That brings up the second problem. Even if the particle was at rest when it emitted / reflected the photon, it isn't any longer. By conservation of momentum, we know the particle's momentum must change after interacting with the photon. What's more, the amount of change in momentum depends upon the momentum of the photon. The greater the momentum of the photon, the greater the change in the particle's momentum. Since the particle's position cannot be known precisely, this also means the momentum cannot be known precisely. Furthermore, the shorter the wavelength of the photon, the greater the uncertainty of the momentum of the particle. This leads directly to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, but the point here is the observational limits are not just an empirical hardship, but are in fact the fundamental nature of the universe, and of space-time itself. In the very deepest sense, reality *IS* observation.

    • @leslierhorer1412
      @leslierhorer1412 4 роки тому

      I don't see a question there. It's a little difficult to answer a question that hasn't been asked.
      Both Relativity and Quantum Mechanics require that in order to exist, an object must interact with the universe. It must engage in one or more of the four fundamental physical interactions: Strong Nuclear Force, Weal Nuclear Force, EM, and Gravity, or it just is not real. An object comes into existence when it is realized, for example, in a Hawking interaction at the event horizon of a black hole. Let's think of perspective, for a moment. We are creatures of electrons and mass, so to us the universe, although quite sparse, is alive with gravity, chemistry, and light. Consider the perspective of a Neutrino, though. To it, Gravity is almost non-existent. It only feels the effects of Gravity to any noticeable affect near a Neutron Star or Black Hole. Light doesn't exist at all, and we humans, even the entire Earth are so ghostly as to be almost imaginary phantoms. Stars are a bit like fluffy clouds: definitely there and not totally insubstantial, but more like a low density foam than a massive object. Our aforementioned friends the Neutron Stars are definitely quite solid, and while a black hole probably can't tear a Neutrino apart the way it can a human body, or even an atom, it is still a daunting object.
      To exist, then, is to be affected by some force. A force, however, is taken to be an exchange of Gauge Bosons. When one charged particle passes another, its path is altered by their electric and magnetic field interactions, mediated by virtual photons. We can infer the position and momentum of the charged particle by observing the particle's effect on the other particles near it. In doing so, however, we alter the very things we wish to measure, since the object not only affects the test particles, but the test particles also affect the object in question. In this scenario, we are not observing the object directly, but rather through its affect on other objects. The point is, whether the interaction we observe is direct or indirect, the fact the object exists means it not only affects the universe, but it is also affected by the universe at each and every interaction.
      The fact is there is no such thing as a direct observation, but If we want to observe the object a bit more directly than inferring its properties from the effects on the rest of the universe, we can employ a real Vector Boson, rather than a virtual one. (We can, of course, also employ collisions with non-gauge particles, but we can set that aside for now.) Any Vector Boson might be employed, depending upon the nature of the object, but let's just talk about light. If we want to know the position of a particle, we can send out a barrage of photons and see which one bounces back, pinpointing the particle. That, or if the particle is self-luminescent, we can just wait for it to emit a photon, and see from where the photon came. There are two problems, however. The first is the photon has a finite spatial extent quantified by its wavelength. We can only pinpoint the particle's position at the time it emitted / reflected the photon with an accuracy no better than the wavelength of the photon. If the photon has a wavelength of 1000nm, then we only know the position of the particle to within 1000nm. In order to nail down the particle's position better than that, we must employ a photon of shorter wavelength. Practical matters may intervene, but theoretically there is no finite limit to how accurately we can measure the position of the particle.
      That brings up the second problem. Even if the particle was at rest when it emitted / reflected the photon, it isn't any longer. By conservation of momentum, we know the particle's momentum must change after interacting with the photon. What's more, the amount of change in momentum depends upon the momentum of the photon. The greater the momentum of the photon, the greater the change in the particle's momentum. Since the particle's position cannot be known precisely, this also means the momentum cannot be known precisely. Furthermore, the shorter the wavelength of the photon, the greater the uncertainty of the momentum of the particle. This leads directly to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, but the point here is the observational limits are not just an empirical hardship, but are in fact the fundamental nature of the universe, and of space-time itself. In the very deepest sense, reality *IS* observation.

    • @ShanniBananni
      @ShanniBananni 4 роки тому +6

      Thank you for this comment. I was confused. By "observe", I thought he meant "to look", but the sensors were actually interacting with the beam of light in order to measure it. Now, it makes sense that it would behave differently under "observation".

    • @Wyman642
      @Wyman642 3 роки тому +10

      Interference while measurement doesn’t explain or account for the strange behavior that occurs during the experiments that measure and then “forget” the measurements. Though measured and interfered with, the light particles somehow reacquire superposition, which is plain nuts.

    • @Deciheximal
      @Deciheximal 2 роки тому

      if an entangled particle can affect the other instantly through space it makes sense it can do it through time - time is another dimension much like space, we just seem to be moving at c through it.

  • @junkiejackflash
    @junkiejackflash Рік тому

    I fell asleep watching Joe's videos last night, and I'm going back through them now, and now it totally makes sense why I was hearing DMX in my dream.

  • @nurwsama
    @nurwsama 4 роки тому +8

    Yes I believe thought and feel has a part in the real life events.
    I two times before I had and accident, i have something that keeps bothering my mind/heart that something isn't right or weird feeling. And actually i got accident a couple hours after that.
    First time i feel it accident happened (boss chew me on work for the first time).
    But the next one when i feel it again i prepared my heart/mind and do everything more carefully to minimize the impact of accident(chain on my bike broke) because i ride slower than usual than everything is okay.
    And it happened more than 5 times to me (with different cases and feel) .
    Or everything is just coincidence and I just over think it. 🤔😵

    • @Vixtorz
      @Vixtorz 2 роки тому

      What language is this?

  • @pg5353
    @pg5353 4 роки тому +108

    When I was small, grandma told me,
    *Matter is just an illusion*
    Then I studied science and it seemed like its only matter that matters.
    Then I heard about Quantum physics.
    Then I knew grandma was right.

    • @monkeyrobotsinc.9875
      @monkeyrobotsinc.9875 4 роки тому +3

      ur grandmas kewl

    • @informitas0117
      @informitas0117 4 роки тому +4

      As a schizophrenic your grandma was schizophrenic

    • @garysutherland9706
      @garysutherland9706 4 роки тому +4

      @@informitas0117 There is a theory that on the bell-curve of human intellectual evolution; the minority of people who are most highly developed will most likely be found in mental institutions. Well, that was back when mental institutions existed. Now they might be in prisons.

    • @javiermercado5407
      @javiermercado5407 4 роки тому

      @@garysutherland9706 this speaks to me

    • @coltonbates629
      @coltonbates629 4 роки тому

      Cant like bcuz theres 69 rn

  • @OttawaOldFart
    @OttawaOldFart 4 роки тому +24

    The dog had no reaction, thus this is normal.

    • @PinataOblongata
      @PinataOblongata 4 роки тому

      Or it's blind.

    • @pariscatblue
      @pariscatblue 4 роки тому

      The dog is patterns on the wall and Joe is detectors being moved to and fro

  • @danerman73
    @danerman73 3 роки тому

    Bell's inequality seems to show that there are not a finite number of hidden variables. So that makes it much more likely we just have to confront the locality and time weirdness. Love this video.

  • @Liveium
    @Liveium 3 роки тому

    I very much appreciate all of this.

  • @MsJenniferwilson
    @MsJenniferwilson 4 роки тому +668

    This comment didn't exist until you looked at it.

    • @TimothyFord
      @TimothyFord 4 роки тому +17

      You exist, it existed to you the moment your pretty little eyes viewed it and inevitably measured it. Now it exists to me as well, have a wonderful day ❤

    • @ufodove
      @ufodove 4 роки тому +2

      Miss J oh god

    • @TimothyFord
      @TimothyFord 4 роки тому +1

      @Kevin w But you thought about looking at it, remember what measuring actually is... Muahahahahahah :D

    • @brianbates2770
      @brianbates2770 4 роки тому +5

      Both eyes or all eight?

    • @tottenhamhotspurish
      @tottenhamhotspurish 4 роки тому +4

      Miss J - What if someone can’t read, would it still exist.. Or do we have a paradox.

  • @mayoite160
    @mayoite160 4 роки тому +9

    when i 1st saw that dance i was like "yup, Joe's got a few screws loose" & at the end of the video i was like "yup, Joe's remarkably restrained"

  • @Mooba2
    @Mooba2 3 роки тому +2

    I love that the dog is just sitting there watching Joe be weird like "yeap. Just another day"

  • @ladymiss4711
    @ladymiss4711 3 роки тому

    I love your videos so much!

  • @garn5341
    @garn5341 4 роки тому +5

    My God Joe, I'm always impressed when you put these in depth videos together! Keep them up my friend!

  • @calebstone22
    @calebstone22 4 роки тому +34

    All the confusion and “woo woo” has to do with interpretation of what’s happening. This is why Schrodinger’s cat examples so great it’s not an explanation he was taking a shot at the ridiculousness of the interpretation

    • @cedurick
      @cedurick 4 роки тому +5

      so many don't realize this it's insane.

    • @samik83
      @samik83 4 роки тому

      Well, what's your interpretation?
      The particles more or less take similar paths, the only difference being that in some cases we can't tell which was path was taken and in some, we can. The physical systems in both cases are basically the same, so what actually changes from the perspective of the photon that makes it act differently?

    • @calebstone22
      @calebstone22 4 роки тому

      From the photons perspective the interaction with the physical experiment and the physical means of the observer detecting the photon.
      In general what I’m saying is that we don’t “know” squat. The theory is either incomplete or wrong.

    • @calebstone22
      @calebstone22 4 роки тому +4

      Even more generally, just because the maths work doesn’t mean it’s right in describing what’s happening in our physical world. If a math equation doesn’t have a corresponding physical explanation that can be pointed at then I am automatically skeptical. ( constants and other non physical values)

    • @moozooh
      @moozooh 4 роки тому +4

      @@calebstone22 In engineering, the same concept is referred to as blackboxing (reproducing the output of an unknown system without the fundamental understanding of the underlying logic) as opposed to whiteboxing (reproducing the logic of a system by its design document or a description of its logic).

  • @alwaysdisputin9930
    @alwaysdisputin9930 2 роки тому

    Nicely explained TY

  • @justthinking4670
    @justthinking4670 2 роки тому

    As I listened to Joe talk about the double slit experiment. I was reminded of my college physics class and discussing the photon wave or partical dilemma with my physics instructor.
    I said then
    What if light was a photon that traveled in a "corksrew" motion. A single stream of light energy moving like a 4 D synisodal wave, "A Qork Skrew".
    BTW
    Same instructor and I discuss the dilemma of superposition of Electrons.
    I said then
    "What if the electron was a loop of energy, not a partical running around doing laps in a circle.

  • @cfergie89
    @cfergie89 4 роки тому +14

    I love the look your dog gives you, like "wtf is he doing now" 😂😂

    • @Sentiqus1
      @Sentiqus1 4 роки тому +2

      The dog is just perfect :D

  • @fabrisseterbrugghe8567
    @fabrisseterbrugghe8567 4 роки тому +5

    The .muttered "this going to be demonetised" makes it art.

  • @user-qt5ge3ir4x
    @user-qt5ge3ir4x 12 днів тому

    A great video dude. As simple as it can get.. Also funny af. Subscribed at the blink of an eye

  • @deoxysysteme
    @deoxysysteme 3 роки тому

    Great explanation!!

  • @Millennium7HistoryTech
    @Millennium7HistoryTech 4 роки тому +44

    One day we will wake up and say "Ah, yes, that's how it is! So simple"

  • @MossyGirly
    @MossyGirly 4 роки тому +17

    Me, having a nice day, thinking I have a decent understanding of the world: Life is good.
    Quantum Mechanics: *Let me introduce myself.*

  • @knob500
    @knob500 3 роки тому

    Man, you explained this very, very well. Props to your 'on-screen' persona, buddy.

  • @jankoszuta9835
    @jankoszuta9835 Рік тому

    Great stuff, thanks

  • @diyeana
    @diyeana 4 роки тому +15

    Why did I watch this before drinking coffee? Not enough power to compute.
    Nice segway at the end, Joe. It does work.

    • @chrisp6458
      @chrisp6458 4 роки тому +3

      segue

    • @squirlmy
      @squirlmy 4 роки тому +2

      coffee didn't help me at all, And I didn't think the segue worked, it was incredibly clumsy. And I hate BigMacs. we're so totally different. It's like you're a particle and I'm a waveform. (BTW Segway is the two wheeled electric scooter. Segue is the word for a transition in presentations)

    • @diyeana
      @diyeana 4 роки тому +2

      Ohhhh, I learned a new word today too! Thank you! I don't know how I missed that one.

    • @diyeana
      @diyeana 4 роки тому +1

      @@squirlmy I don't like BigMacs. It is a play on my last name. 😁

    • @chrisp6458
      @chrisp6458 4 роки тому +2

      @@diyeana No problem. Understandable mistake. The segway is something you ride. The company that makes it used the off spelling as a play on words. A segue takes you from one subject to another. The Segway takes you from one place to another.