This is the future that is envisioned and set in the original Star Trek and TNG Star Trek universe. Personally, I believe it is either that future or we are condemned to hit a great filter and become self-extinct. There is no middle ground.
That sounds like exactly what the Nova Music Festival attendees probably thought. Unfortunately, there has to be enough of us holding the line so that others of us can live in peace.
Seth Lloyd is indeed one of the most relevant physicists today! His work in quantum computing is pioneering, especially with algorithms that harness the strange yet powerful properties of quantum mechanics. His insights have the potential to reshape not just computing, but many fields of science.
@SPVLaboratories 🙃🫣... Well je kriminal is convicted... for the crime he got what he deserve. Maybe religious people will forgive and won't judge, but legal system is legal system... For religious believe just like hippocrates oath... first do no harm. World need more good samaritans spirits... ❤️ peace. Maybe if the more samaritans spirits, people that notice will come earlier.. Anyway justice was done, he was guilty.
I was watching a video on Tensors. At the end of the video, the TH-cam algorithm auto-selected this video, but not at the beginning, it went to a point toward the end that perfectly answered a question I had in my mind about Quantum computing completely overriding all other less useful information. Almost as though the background AI search algorithms are leading us to an actual Quantum computational state by natural progression.😃 I like it!
When discussing whether a particle is spinning up or spinning down, does it not depend on the perspective of the viewer? Observing a particle on one side may appear that it's spinning upwards however observing the same particle from 180° it would appear to be spinning down. How does this factor into the equation?
Brian . As usual, brilliant, eloquent and simplified for people like us. By the way, do you keep track of how many times you take off and wear your glasses..
literally at 31:39 i was thinking the same thing "you have everything running at the same time but how do we know which one is right? how does the quantum computer know?
Whichever one fits the best. It's like training a.i. to walk through a maze. The one that's closest gets weighted for the next round of data calculations.
Brian - I first began listening to you when I bought Fabric of the Cosmos on iTunes and listened to it on my iPod click-wheel while biking during my undergrad (circa 2006ish). I can't thank you enough for doing these WSF presentations and making them available to everyone for free!
I'm new to this field... no major background in physics or maths but have a degree in Computer Science. As such it's my first experience of Seth. He's clearly great at putting ideas across, but what struck me is how similar he looks to the scientist in the original Independencd Day movie! Theg were spot on with casting!
If you can break something down that clear, you got it. And I understood that QC trades one problem for another: yes, Qbits feature superposition, but you’re ending up with quasilions of solutions and now you gotta figure out which one is the right one
You’ve got it! Quantum computing does introduce a new layer of complexity with superposition, where you can have a vast number of potential solutions, but the real challenge lies in ‘collapsing’ to the correct one. The trick is developing algorithms that effectively sift through these probabilities-it's a completely different way of computing compared to classical computers!
Yup. If you remember the double-slit experiment where the photons creates an interference pattern. Quantum computing is orchestrating an interference pattern that cacels out wrong answers and amplifies right answers.
Wow, although i didn't understand a bit in start but i really got engaged with the beautiful explanation to all those questions, doubts and probabilities.
That’s exactly how quantum stuff works! At first, it’s like trying to learn a new language where nothing makes sense, but then you get hit with that 'aha!' moment. Once you grasp even a tiny part of it, you can’t help but dive deeper. Glad you stuck with it-quantum can be such a fascinating rabbit hole once you get engaged.
at 16:26 there is something that struck me.... there are waves always everywhere and the particle just rides these waves and gets detected at a specific location..
Make the slit stage out of 1 to 5 atom layer thick sheets of graphine and the wave pattern will reduce or vanish. You will have a 2 slit pattern. Here's why. In stage 1 of the experiment: the electrons are already ommiting with randomly different vectors out of the cathode. As they hit the inner treshold of the edges of the slits on the plate in stage 2: they ricochet into different vectors, and either fail to enter the slits opening; or they enter the slit at an angle [having reflected off the imperfect inner edge of the slits opening] they then ricochet off the inner sides of the slits like tennis balls in a tunnel. As they exit the slit(tunnel) they have one; of a finite number of trajectories. This is what creates the wave like interference pattern on the screen. The relatively blank spaces between the bands of particles on the screen is geometricly correspondent to the width of the slits in the plate, the range from the plate, and the limited number of trajectories out of the slit that lead to the screen. Simply ricochets.
@TimoBlacks I didn't make that mistake. I never said the particples were on paths. Why don't you go ahead and explain the difference between paths and vectors. Then explain the difference between vectors and trajectories.
I first heard about quantum computing 20-30 years ago in Discover magazine. The article stated that functional quantum computers were expected around 2050. What I'm interested in following is the merging of quantum computing, A.I. and the Internet of Things.
Questions - Do the slits in the wall have a particular width, depth, shape to them. Are they like a fortress type slit, narrow on the inside, going wider to the outside..? Do the particles bounce off the insides of the slits or pass straight through? Is there any interference of the particle on the way towards the slit? What's causing the initial spin of the particle/electron..?
They don't really spin an the slit is not really a slit. Both are metaphores. The slit experiment has been replicated multiple times with different starting conditions and it always shows the same results.
@@johndemtopics1377 I see, so their descriptions are like two pigs in a frying pan. One of them says 'pass me the salt,' and the other says, 'what do you think I am, a radio!?' So none of them spin plates and the slit in their eyes are black as marble. Cheers for clearing that up for me! 🙂👍
@@Feverstockphotoyou could phrase it like that😅 what i was trying to say is that the whole quantum world is for real for real not explainable with words. There is a very sound level of mathematical knowledge needed to describe the world of the small and to be honest i am not yet having a grasp on the theory in the slightest. Using imaginary numbers and linear algebra to calculate a probabilty is just a nutshell description. Talking about QT is pretty exciting but practicing it is very tasking. Hence why we call it spin but it is not really spinning in a classical sense. Calling it by mathematical terms is just not useful for communicating with other people that may not want to do the math.
@@johndemtopics1377 Cool yeah, I think I understand what you mean, some things can be tricky to explain. I tried telling my parents when I was young that I wanted to be a physicist but I couldn't work out how to get the bubbles into the lemonade 🙂👍
Excellent questions! The slits in quantum experiments, like the famous double-slit, do have specific properties, and the setup is incredibly sensitive. Photons interact with their environment in fascinating ways, even when it seems like they’re traveling in a straight line. Air molecules, the slit edges, and even the way we observe can influence the outcome. These minute details make quantum experiments so mind-blowingly complex but also reveal the deep, intricate nature of reality.
Correct. I am sure the speakers are aware that it was early 19th (and not 20th) century when Young contributed that important milestone. I wonder if they were referring to the same experiment performed with electrons entities that were considered particles rather than waves at the beginning of 20th century?
38:00 matrix multiplication is a very important algorithm used in protein folding, AI, graphics process, graph theory, etc. 39:40 He is actually talking about the problem that google recently broke through recently
Great question! The square of a wave function gives us probabilities, so it can't technically be negative. However, complex values in wave functions can lead to interference effects that can seem to cancel out probabilities in certain cases.
String theorists in general get smack from certain people such as Eric Weinstein who r salty n claim that their theories aren't being listened to (because they don't provide accuracies and predictions akin to ST). But I haven't seen any hate directed to Brian specifically.
Quantum computing can calculate the mass of the proton in real time in every water molecule twice, which requires on the order of 1e16 or more classical computations. ;-) The only question is whether we can make this programmable, not how powerful it is.
Love these science events, love these discussions and more importantly we all Love ❤️ Brian. For me he's the best science communicator today. Better than Susskind, degrasse Tyson and even Sean ..I forget his last name.
this discussion helped clear up what a qbit is... so its basically just storing all the possible information running at the same time, rather than a finite amount of info.. sort of like an LLM? ... or?
I am not an specialist but I think 100 to 900 years in qubits could be possible to have and be able to use and benefit the completely full potential of the result on quantum mechanics in the quantum computer. I am positive, I would love to work to make that possible even sooner! Thank you for the information.🙏🏽
Love the enthusiasm. Absolutely no details on what this stuff can do besides break encryptions, though. I think scientists globally are saying "We don't know what it'll be good for or really how it works but, you know....science"
Nice spin lol But what they always fail to show is that by having such a system are we actually going to solve useful problems better, faster and cheaper? That holy grail remains such a hype
I don't think something as small as a partical can travel in a straight line anways... doesn't it have to travel in a sort of sine wave? Can you imagine a basketball traveling in a sine wave towards a hoop? I'm just a normal idiot but is this an invalid point???
There is problem with two slit experiment: 1) the photon source that shoots 2) the two slits 3) the receiver board 4) the measuring device All these variables. How accurate they are. 1) The source that shoots photons: does this shoot straight? What is the effect of air molecules interacting with one photon at a time? 2) two slits: how thin are they? What happens photos touch edges of slits? 3) no issues here 4) device that observes photon : how does this work?
@@glennet9613pick up a physics book and youll find out... A 40 minute talk isnt going to teach you quantum mechanics... Been there done that it takes time and effort
1) photon path can be manipulated 2) varying stardards are use to build up a calibrated scale but that makes it vary the reading of photons. My theory is divergence 3) 4) fluorescence screens light up when hit by photons
So, we could potentially have all the answers to everything all at once, but just not be able to comprehend which question goes with which answer...probably...perhaps. That's a good stream to float on ❤
So quantum computing immensely increases computational results of varying probability amplitudes-both positive, negative and anywhere in between-per computing cycle which can then be leveraged informationally based on their probabilistic character at a moment of observation?
Exactly! Quantum computing leverages these probability amplitudes across many possible states in parallel. It’s like exploring countless possible solutions all at once, and then using observation to narrow down the most relevant outcome.
All this is getting interesting and it's coming at a pace that human have no idea how fast this is going to be it's going to be an interesting future!!!
So using quantum computer is like dr strange peeking into multiple possibility to search for one answer and tried to move/attempt to harmonised his current timeline/mutilverse/possibility dimension towards that right outcome?
i love Doc Brown, such a smart man and his playful sense of humour makes the information a little more accessible, sometimes. Enjoyed that presentation
Absolutely-Seth Lloyd is brilliant, but as with any emerging technology, we do need to be cautious about overhyping quantum computing’s capabilities. The field has immense potential, but there are still significant hurdles to overcome, like error correction and qubit stability. As for Brian Greene, his clarity and passion are unparalleled when it comes to explaining physics!
Feynman said no one understands QM, because Hilbert space is so vast. The real problem is how does infinite complexity can rearrange its sequence of actions when determinism is partly satisfied and partly reality remains probabilistic. As for life and consciousness, infinite lotteries were won in a row.
Wait, so do the probabilities cross each other out and there’s 0% chance of a particle appearing in-between the discrete lines? Or is there still a super tiny chance?
Quantum computing holds immense promise, potentially revolutionizing fields from cryptography to material science. However, while the hype suggests we're on the brink of a quantum revolution, the reality is that many challenges such as error rates and qubit stability remain unsolved. Are we truly close to realizing the full potential of quantum computing, or is the excitement outpacing the technological advances needed for practical, scalable solutions?
I can't remember where I heard it but I remember hearing that technological advancements in quantum computing are developing at an exponential rate. With that said it's becoming more evident that AI could help us with this endeavor.
Spot on! While the hype surrounding quantum computing is exciting, the reality is that we’re still facing significant challenges, such as error rates and qubit coherence times. The technology holds incredible promise, but the path to scalable, practical quantum computers is still a work in progress. It’s an exciting field to follow as researchers continue to push boundaries!
Then the hype is still legit imo Like Graphene, Nuclear Fusion and Room temperature superconductors, the hype is not overhyped at all, it's just very out of reach (Maybe not as far out of reach as we think with A.I. on the horizon)
When intuiting 0 and 1 (as a QUBIT) represented at the same time, we can use colour i.e. if 0 = Red and 1 = Blue then 01 is Magenta (the mix of Red and Blue). Any colour (frequency) is just a representation of some proportion of the three primary colours.
Agreed! The graphics really help bring the abstract concepts to life, and the host asks the kinds of questions that make the subject feel approachable. It’s a powerful combination when explaining something as challenging as quantum computing.
Excellent discussion. But noise of often completely ignored. When you 300 qbits you have to do a ton of reruns and ‘error correction’ so you really have very very few real bits. Until this noise issue is solved
Brian, fantastic episode! Is there any way to bridge the gap between the overlapping of waves at ~32:50 and a real world problem? I generally understand the former, but can't seem to make the leap to the latter. Maybe drug design? What would the waves represent? Atom-atom interactions at lowest energy state?
Question, why would a company or government agency want to buy quantum computers? What will they be replacing with quatum computers or is a QC an additional tool that companies-agencies may use? Is the goal speed, energy efficiency, scalability at a lower cost, raw computing power?
That’s a valid point. Some notations use left/right or other terms for spin, depending on the context. It’s all about how the spin is measured relative to an axis.
The power of quantum computing comes from it's ability to parallel process, which classical computers can't match, as classical computing requires additional CPU cores to process in parallel. The tradeoff comes from the difference in power to run the stacks. Quantum Computer's can represent 2^N positions per q-bit simultaneous in quantum memory. Which quickly becomes an unimaginable amount of positions to represent at once. But it could be used to model the observable universe, possibly beyond.
Well put! Quantum computers have a parallel processing advantage that can quickly outscale classical machines, thanks to the exponential increase in possible states represented by qubits.
Great question! The interference pattern actually does depend on the orientation of the slits, but the principles of wave interference remain the same. If the slits are horizontal instead of vertical, you’d see a similar pattern, but along a different axis. It’s all about how those wave functions overlap and interfere with each other.
Nice that he simply said I don't know. That guy is clearly a genius. It's always disappointing when people hype something that they don't understand so far up that it can never meet people's expectations, where we are all eventually disillusioned and filled with cynicism. It's okay not to know. At least it seems possible and they're trying.
Yes, that’s correct! A qubit can exist in a superposition of both up and down states simultaneously, which is what makes quantum computing so powerful.
The Stern-Gerlach experiment does measure spin along a specific direction, like up or down, but relative to the chosen axis. Gravity isn't necessarily a factor in the measurement, though it helps to visualize it that way.
@@wildfunctionsyour reply is appreciated. It raises further questions. At the quantum level, what field would that be? Magnetic fields, being the dynamic systems they are, aren't always aligned. Given the classical idea of a stable polar field, are we talking perpendicular to the axis? Is it relative to its attractive force? How is a magnetic field measured at that scale?
This was a great talk about Quantum computer and its algorithmic functions. I watched it 3 times to understand little about Quantum computer. Professor Brian Greene asked some great questions but the answers weren't convincing. Quantum mechanics and Quantum entanglement have big role in Qubits algorithm. Quantum entanglement which was spooky action for great Albert Einstein, but His General Relativity also interacts with modern Particle Physics to predict theory of Single Graviton Particle which is outstanding. The Single Graviton Particle is completely different from other particles. It is million times powerful than all other observable particles. The entire gravity force has only one particle and that's the Single Graviton Particle which controls entire Earth's gravitational force and Its objects not to collide with one another. Its mass, energy, light and power is beyond the imagination. A beautiful article can be written about theory of Single Graviton Particle to predict Its energy density and functions. Professor Brian Greene said well" you don't need to calculate the number, you need to understand the dynamical process"
Very insightful! Quantum entanglement is indeed a critical aspect of quantum computing, and its implications in algorithms are vast. I love how you tied Einstein’s "spooky action at a distance" to the modern search for the graviton. There's still so much to explore in the quantum realm!
You may imagine bowmen are shooting their arrows to a target. If they are shooting arrows to the target an arrow in every 15 minutes. The arrows may hit the center more, but if they shoot an arrow in every 20 seconds, then the arrows may hit randomly around the center. I may think the conditions from the paths and source are making a patterns. This concept may apply to every things in the universe. It is really hard to keep movements consistently because the conditions are continuing to change any moment.
I love this analogy! It really does capture how patterns can emerge in complex systems, even when things appear random. The universe is full of shifting variables, and it’s fascinating how this principle echoes across different scales.
Thinking about spinning as a natural state whether moving or not now think movement only as not a basketball would move easier way is take directionality like a snooker ball would move on a table as directionality unless impeded by force of another kind will be as in motion or directionality
Why electrons have spin is still one of the great mysteries, linked deeply to quantum mechanics. It’s a fundamental property, yet its origin remains elusive!
Dear Prof Brian Greene I wish you and all your colleagues the Godess of Wisdom to touch your mind to find all the answers what the science world need to make the human understanding more equip to what it is to be alive somehow. And how to be a "good human" for the society . Thank you so much. I imagine my self to have learned some sense of it. Best Cleaning Lady Berlin/ Germany
So why do we talk about probabilities in QM if they can be negative? And what happens if two waves meet at point 0.9 "probability" for each particle? What is then the resulting probability/amplitude? And the last question: aren't these "probability" waves just standard waves (of mass or energy) propagating through space?
Quantum probabilities are a bit counterintuitive. When two waves meet, they can interfere either constructively or destructively, resulting in positive, negative, or even zero probability amplitudes at certain points. It’s part of the magic of quantum mechanics, where probabilities aren't just classical chances, but linked to the underlying wave functions. If two waves meet, we need to add their complex amplitudes. If their amplitudes align constructively, they can reinforce each other, potentially increasing the probability. If they destructively interfere, the result could be smaller or even zero probability at certain points.
The things that can be negative or even imaginary are probability *amplitudes* and not probabilities. The actual probabilities work out all fine and behave as what you would've expect. And when one describes two particles, the wave is actually somewhat like an object that spans across two copies of space they live in, determining the probability for the first AND the second particle to be in their respective locations, and if you're familiar with probability linguo, essentially a joint probability. The essential difference between quantum uncertainties and usually probabilities is that the former combines things by combining those weird probability amplitudes.
They are not waves of mass or energy. They are instead waves encoding the probability of the quantum object being in a certain place if we are talking about these waves being in space. But in fact these waves do not have to be in actual physical space. They can be waves in the "space" of all the possible values of momentum, for example.
Reminds me of Monte Carlo simulation on inputs to a business case I did where each variable can be set to vary by a number of standard deviations. Then if you run enough simulations and capture the output (like NPV, revenue, profit) then you get a convergence for maximum, minimum, most likely outcomes. Maybe quantum computer can run this faster ? 🤔
Yes, quantum computers are expected to revolutionize simulations like Monte Carlo, where probabilities and distributions are key. It could process those simulations at speeds that classical computers just can’t match.
Brian really has a gift for bringing these deep, mind-blowing topics to a wider audience, doesn’t he? You can feel the love and passion he puts into explaining these concepts in a way that makes us all want to learn more. Blessings indeed!
If you think of everything as fields, and "particles" as excited areas of a field, then things are still confusing, but not quite as confusing. Plus our brains are quantum computers! Our brains use a lot of shortcuts to process information, quantum mechanically, for us to understand. As our brains evolve, along w/ technology, we'll have a better, and eventually even complete, understanding of what happens at the quantum level. Considering we continue to have the ability to evolve/advance at any rate. If you take all of that into account, just remember, I'm not a physicist, even though physics is my favorite thing! 🍻
No really. With classical random fields, you would only have to distinguish between thermal and Lorentz-invariant noise. Quantum computers are continuous systems and will never be fully error corrected. We knew this by the 30s. It's like these guys have never investigated the standard model.
Our brains are classical meat computers, definitely not quantum computers. My brain can't even multiply 4.123 x 12.582 without a piece of paper. It definitely isn't processing with bazillions of Q bits.
I love the enthusiasm! Thinking of particles as excited areas of fields does clear up some of the mystery, but quantum mechanics is still a mind-bender. And you’re right about our brains being incredibly powerful information processors-it’s almost poetic that we’re using our own quantum systems to understand the quantum world. Maybe one day we’ll figure it out, but for now, we’re just chipping away at the surface. Keep geeking out on physics-it’s how we evolve too!
The brain itself is too big to be entirely quantum but all chemical processes are in the end a combination of quantum effects and statistical processes. When you talk about many molecules, you are at a level where you look at rates. If quantum effects played too much a role in the brain to make it fancy the brain and the body would be way more fragile. On the other hand the biochemistry itself takes quantum effects into account but only on a level of chemical reactions. In the end the question is - when you have many reactions at the same times probability turns into rates. Let's say quantum mechanics allows for different reactions happening at the same time and you get certain probabilities for them. Yet to have resilience in a physical world you need tons of redundancy. Seeing the body as a big chemical machine if individual quantum effects were so strong that it would strongly influence decisions then the human body and mind would be incredible fragile. It already is incredible fragile compared to most stable chemical structures due to its complexity but still has amazing repair mechanisms. What I mean is the following - you have to distinguish between all the fancy spooky stuff in quantum information that allows for more information storage and processing, quantum randomness, classical randomness and quantum chemistry. Quantum chemistry describes how small reaction mechanisms look like and some of those effects may play a part. But this is just normal physics, that chemistry is quantum, is old and known. If you want to look at the fancy stuff in quantum information you need to look at very isolated systems. Entanglement in systems as complex as biochemical systems might play some role but it still is rather neglectable compared to the complexity of the system as a whole. If your brain was a quantum computer somehow you could not live. So for forming new synapses in the brain I'd rather bet on statistical mechanics combined with some optimizations by quantum chemistry.
Love Brian Green and his book "The Elegant Universe" is one of the best pop. science books I've ever read, but he do move and talk like someone making an impersonation of Brian Green on snl ;)
A single electron itself only form a single spot. The interference pattern is a property of a collection of dots produced by many electrons in the collection. Thus wave nature, if at all, is only exhibited by the collection, so DSE does not say that a single electron is a wave. It may be riding a terrain established by a latent, standing probability wave that is a function of configuration of distances in the experiment. Bohmian mechanics proposes existence of such a wave which is separate from the electron itself. For example if we keep changing the distances in the experiment, for every electron, the pattern may disappear altogether. or become fuzzier.
Great point! Bohmian mechanics does suggest that the wave guiding the electron is distinct. It adds an interesting perspective on how particles interact with probability waves, particularly in setups like the double slit experiment.
Great job prof Greene Thoroughly enjoyed although I Should admit that I did not quite understand a lot of it . Lets keep politics out . Keep up the excellent work
May it mean that each photon is not delimited to the centre of the photon as we have defined it up ontil now only, but that its field even extends into its surrounding space in a etheric field beyond itself? And the center of the photon and the trajectory of it is then influenced by the way this extended field interacts with the fields of matter around the slits. Maybe its not so strange or mysterious if we also could assume that the first photon would leave an etheric track that will subsequently cause the next photon to follow a different trajectory than if a previous photon had not been sent before in the first place?
A company called Wimi Hollogram has today announced, that they have developed FPGA-Based Digital Quantum Computer Verification Technology. This technology offers a completely new approach to quantum computing by using digital quantum bits, or discrete finite state machines. Not only does this mark a new milestone in the field of quantum computing, but it also lays a solid foundation for the future realization and application of quantum computers. Can someone dumb it way down for me and explain what that means!?
I wished i had teachers like these guys
Quantum Music is a project exploring the connection between quantum physics and classical music.
It's a very novel kind of symphony. 33:55
A quantum symphony requires quantum instruments.
Hype also means "to cheer up" or emphasize! 33:58
But you just had these mentors work for you!
This is the thing people should concentrate on, no geopolitics, no war no religious fanatism.
This and morality
Morality is emergent
@@walterrodriguez4325 then we should be figuring out how to predict it and set adaptable rules for any situation
This is the future that is envisioned and set in the original Star Trek and TNG Star Trek universe.
Personally, I believe it is either that future or we are condemned to hit a great filter and become self-extinct. There is no middle ground.
That sounds like exactly what the Nova Music Festival attendees probably thought. Unfortunately, there has to be enough of us holding the line so that others of us can live in peace.
I gave this video a spin up👍
Brian Greene just makes life so much more beautiful, what a guy.
make respect my dear. he have wife.
🤦♀️
@@RanjakarPatel what do you mean? How is my comment disrespectful?
unfortunately bit woke
@@abdulazizrehan he is no san francisco. he have wife. he marry. please respect my friendly
Love this format for the show. Very engaging.
i loooooooooooooooove putting these on and smoking the bong and then cuddling up in my blanket and fallin asleep to brian greene
😂😂
What music would you play in the background? 😊
Same
@@kitwest61 Alice in chains
Same here Bud Merry Christmas
The older he gets, the crazier he looks. You just have to love Seth Lloyd!
Reminded me of Dr Brakish Okun (Brent Spiner in Independence Day).
That look gives off dirty old man vibes 🫤
@@lynd9028 Only if you have those kinds of fantasies. Thankfully, I don't have that.
@@asterixx6878 fantasies? More like nightmares!
Seth Lloyd is teaching at MIT, so make sure your kids do not go there. Brain damage might be irreversible.
I love TH-cam. The sharing of knowledge is amazing.
Yes ! The promise of the internet realized! So why are we generally so stupid
IKR who needs tv?
Seth Lloyd has to be one of the most relevant physicist of our time
Programming by chasing away noise 😅😅😅😊 ❤️
Seth Lloyd is indeed one of the most relevant physicists today! His work in quantum computing is pioneering, especially with algorithms that harness the strange yet powerful properties of quantum mechanics. His insights have the potential to reshape not just computing, but many fields of science.
Just don’t ask him about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein
@SPVLaboratories 🙃🫣...
Well je kriminal is convicted... for the crime he got what he deserve.
Maybe religious people will forgive and won't judge, but legal system is legal system...
For religious believe just like hippocrates oath... first do no harm.
World need more good samaritans spirits...
❤️ peace.
Maybe if the more samaritans spirits, people that notice will come earlier..
Anyway justice was done, he was guilty.
@@SPVLaboratoriesNDT had to have been to the island too.
I was watching a video on Tensors. At the end of the video, the TH-cam algorithm auto-selected this video, but not at the beginning, it went to a point toward the end that perfectly answered a question I had in my mind about Quantum computing completely overriding all other less useful information.
Almost as though the background AI search algorithms are leading us to an actual Quantum computational state by natural progression.😃 I like it!
When discussing whether a particle is spinning up or spinning down, does it not depend on the perspective of the viewer? Observing a particle on one side may appear that it's spinning upwards however observing the same particle from 180° it would appear to be spinning down. How does this factor into the equation?
24:30 quantum computing talk starts
Why does the conversation about quantum computing only start here?! 27:09
Why does the conversation about quantum computing only start here?! 27:09
Hype is generally associated with something negative.
Many see quantum computing's advent as marking a paradigm shift from classical, or conventional, computing. 30:03
Buzz is generally associated with something positive.
Brian . As usual, brilliant, eloquent and simplified for people like us. By the way, do you keep track of how many times you take off and wear your glasses..
It's always fun when we catch those little quirks in a presentation. Brian definitely knows how to keep us engaged :D
literally at 31:39 i was thinking the same thing "you have everything running at the same time but how do we know which one is right? how does the quantum computer know?
Whichever one fits the best. It's like training a.i. to walk through a maze. The one that's closest gets weighted for the next round of data calculations.
Make sure you listen to this at least 3 times because each time you watch it your electrons spin different ways.
Brian - I first began listening to you when I bought Fabric of the Cosmos on iTunes and listened to it on my iPod click-wheel while biking during my undergrad (circa 2006ish). I can't thank you enough for doing these WSF presentations and making them available to everyone for free!
He's not interested
I'm new to this field... no major background in physics or maths but have a degree in Computer Science. As such it's my first experience of Seth. He's clearly great at putting ideas across, but what struck me is how similar he looks to the scientist in the original Independencd Day movie! Theg were spot on with casting!
thought exactly the same.... Alien spoke through him....
Which came 'first' though...😊
If you can break something down that clear, you got it. And I understood that QC trades one problem for another: yes, Qbits feature superposition, but you’re ending up with quasilions of solutions and now you gotta figure out which one is the right one
You’ve got it! Quantum computing does introduce a new layer of complexity with superposition, where you can have a vast number of potential solutions, but the real challenge lies in ‘collapsing’ to the correct one. The trick is developing algorithms that effectively sift through these probabilities-it's a completely different way of computing compared to classical computers!
Yup. If you remember the double-slit experiment where the photons creates an interference pattern. Quantum computing is orchestrating an interference pattern that cacels out wrong answers and amplifies right answers.
You've provided seen it by now but the 2nd most recent video addresses your concern.
@@TechnologyBeyondTomorrow-TBTyoy mean AI?
Light wave computing will take over. Then binary will be outdated.
Wow, although i didn't understand a bit in start but i really got engaged with the beautiful explanation to all those questions, doubts and probabilities.
That’s exactly how quantum stuff works! At first, it’s like trying to learn a new language where nothing makes sense, but then you get hit with that 'aha!' moment. Once you grasp even a tiny part of it, you can’t help but dive deeper. Glad you stuck with it-quantum can be such a fascinating rabbit hole once you get engaged.
at 16:26 there is something that struck me.... there are waves always everywhere and the particle just rides these waves and gets detected at a specific location..
see de Broglie-Bohm pilot wave theory
Make the slit stage out of 1 to 5 atom layer thick sheets of graphine and the wave pattern will reduce or vanish. You will have a 2 slit pattern.
Here's why. In stage 1 of the experiment: the electrons are already ommiting with randomly different vectors out of the cathode. As they hit the inner treshold of the edges of the slits on the plate in stage 2: they ricochet into different vectors, and either fail to enter the slits opening; or they enter the slit at an angle [having reflected off the imperfect inner edge of the slits opening] they then ricochet off the inner sides of the slits like tennis balls in a tunnel. As they exit the slit(tunnel) they have one; of a finite number of trajectories. This is what creates the wave like interference pattern on the screen. The relatively blank spaces between the bands of particles on the screen is geometricly correspondent to the width of the slits in the plate, the range from the plate, and the limited number of trajectories out of the slit that lead to the screen. Simply ricochets.
You nailed it, the pin hole camera comes to mind.
Is it practically done
We need to play more with this
@AX-sq5vm Whattayamean?
@@GingerWildcat Your mistake is thinking particles are on paths.
@TimoBlacks I didn't make that mistake. I never said the particples were on paths. Why don't you go ahead and explain the difference between paths and vectors. Then explain the difference between vectors and trajectories.
I first heard about quantum computing 20-30 years ago in Discover magazine. The article stated that functional quantum computers were expected around 2050.
What I'm interested in following is the merging of quantum computing, A.I. and the Internet of Things.
Who ended up here after the Willow announcement? 😊
I ended up here after watching a video on general relativity. How I ended up here, it was the next recommendation 😂
I love this channel. I always say...one of the best things I did was learning English .
Questions - Do the slits in the wall have a particular width, depth, shape to them. Are they like a fortress type slit, narrow on the inside, going wider to the outside..? Do the particles bounce off the insides of the slits or pass straight through? Is there any interference of the particle on the way towards the slit? What's causing the initial spin of the particle/electron..?
They don't really spin an the slit is not really a slit. Both are metaphores. The slit experiment has been replicated multiple times with different starting conditions and it always shows the same results.
@@johndemtopics1377 I see, so their descriptions are like two pigs in a frying pan. One of them says 'pass me the salt,' and the other says, 'what do you think I am, a radio!?' So none of them spin plates and the slit in their eyes are black as marble. Cheers for clearing that up for me! 🙂👍
@@Feverstockphotoyou could phrase it like that😅 what i was trying to say is that the whole quantum world is for real for real not explainable with words. There is a very sound level of mathematical knowledge needed to describe the world of the small and to be honest i am not yet having a grasp on the theory in the slightest. Using imaginary numbers and linear algebra to calculate a probabilty is just a nutshell description. Talking about QT is pretty exciting but practicing it is very tasking. Hence why we call it spin but it is not really spinning in a classical sense. Calling it by mathematical terms is just not useful for communicating with other people that may not want to do the math.
@@johndemtopics1377 Cool yeah, I think I understand what you mean, some things can be tricky to explain. I tried telling my parents when I was young that I wanted to be a physicist but I couldn't work out how to get the bubbles into the lemonade 🙂👍
Excellent questions! The slits in quantum experiments, like the famous double-slit, do have specific properties, and the setup is incredibly sensitive. Photons interact with their environment in fascinating ways, even when it seems like they’re traveling in a straight line. Air molecules, the slit edges, and even the way we observe can influence the outcome. These minute details make quantum experiments so mind-blowingly complex but also reveal the deep, intricate nature of reality.
Brian. Thank you.
Please do a series on the engineering, tools and methods people use to measure qbits
Great request! Hope he takes a dive into that.
The initial double slit experiment was conducted by Thomas Young, an English scientis,1801. This demonstrated the wave property of light.
I hang out with thomas youngs great great grandson all the time he works for amazon
Correct. I am sure the speakers are aware that it was early 19th (and not 20th) century when Young contributed that important milestone. I wonder if they were referring to the same experiment performed with electrons entities that were considered particles rather than waves at the beginning of 20th century?
@@Hihello45682that is so cool!
38:00 matrix multiplication is a very important algorithm used in protein folding, AI, graphics process, graph theory, etc.
39:40 He is actually talking about the problem that google recently broke through recently
17:12 how in the world the square of the module of the complex wave function becomes negative?
Great question! The square of a wave function gives us probabilities, so it can't technically be negative. However, complex values in wave functions can lead to interference effects that can seem to cancel out probabilities in certain cases.
Fascinating lecture on quantum mechanics, thanks a lot. ❤
Ppl hate on Brian Greene but dudes fr legit a great spokesperson and physicist
Who is hating on him?
Never seen a single hate post on Brian. Genuinely curious.
String theorists in general get smack from certain people such as Eric Weinstein who r salty n claim that their theories aren't being listened to (because they don't provide accuracies and predictions akin to ST). But I haven't seen any hate directed to Brian specifically.
What was he referring to Einstein being wrong about?
At least these guys are honest and rational on the state of quantum computing, and not exaggerate and get over-hyped on what can quantum computing do.
Quantum computing can calculate the mass of the proton in real time in every water molecule twice, which requires on the order of 1e16 or more classical computations. ;-)
The only question is whether we can make this programmable, not how powerful it is.
Love these science events, love these discussions and more importantly we all Love ❤️ Brian. For me he's the best science communicator today. Better than Susskind, degrasse Tyson and even Sean ..I forget his last name.
Yes, brilliant as Sean Carroll is, Brian is the gold standard.
this discussion helped clear up what a qbit is... so its basically just storing all the possible information running at the same time, rather than a finite amount of info.. sort of like an LLM? ... or?
Finally computer geeks who understand quantum physics and reality. Thanks for this information!
I am not an specialist but I think 100 to 900 years in qubits could be possible to have and be able to use and benefit the completely full potential of the result on quantum mechanics in the quantum computer. I am positive, I would love to work to make that possible even sooner! Thank you for the information.🙏🏽
Thanks for the Tracey Day of Prof. Brian's interview with Seth Lloyd. MIT and Boston U people and Harvard really are great places.
Very good content. The last 20 or so minutes really help us laypeople get sense of the state of the field.
Love the enthusiasm. Absolutely no details on what this stuff can do besides break encryptions, though. I think scientists globally are saying "We don't know what it'll be good for or really how it works but, you know....science"
Nice spin lol But what they always fail to show is that by having such a system are we actually going to solve useful problems better, faster and cheaper? That holy grail remains such a hype
Does the thickness of the material that have the slits play a roll? A basketball can go in or miss, can't it bounce off the rim????????
I don't think something as small as a partical can travel in a straight line anways... doesn't it have to travel in a sort of sine wave? Can you imagine a basketball traveling in a sine wave towards a hoop? I'm just a normal idiot but is this an invalid point???
Có thể đó phụ thuộc quán tính đầu cuối tỉ lệ cực nhỏ
Looking forward to this 👍
It's a privilage to listen to you two try to help us all think.
There is problem with two slit experiment:
1) the photon source that shoots
2) the two slits
3) the receiver board
4) the measuring device
All these variables. How accurate they are.
1) The source that shoots photons: does this shoot straight? What is the effect of air molecules interacting with one photon at a time?
2) two slits: how thin are they? What happens photos touch edges of slits?
3) no issues here
4) device that observes photon : how does this work?
This is the problem I have with all these talks, they don’t explain that sort of detail and it leaves question marks in my brain.
@@glennet9613pick up a physics book and youll find out... A 40 minute talk isnt going to teach you quantum mechanics... Been there done that it takes time and effort
1) photon path can be manipulated
2) varying stardards are use to build up a calibrated scale but that makes it vary the reading of photons. My theory is divergence
3)
4) fluorescence screens light up when hit by photons
in decades of scientific rigour no one has ever thought of these points you've brought up..
There is no problem, you just need to do your own research about it.
So, we could potentially have all the answers to everything all at once, but just not be able to comprehend which question goes with which answer...probably...perhaps. That's a good stream to float on ❤
This channel is such a great source of science information
Enjoyed the interview. Advanced stuff but said simply enough.
Does anyone know the piece of music at 43:39?
Asking same. Did you find an answer. It's familiar, but cannot place it.
So quantum computing immensely increases computational results of varying probability amplitudes-both positive, negative and anywhere in between-per computing cycle which can then be leveraged informationally based on their probabilistic character at a moment of observation?
Exactly! Quantum computing leverages these probability amplitudes across many possible states in parallel. It’s like exploring countless possible solutions all at once, and then using observation to narrow down the most relevant outcome.
All this is getting interesting and it's coming at a pace that human have no idea how fast this is going to be it's going to be an interesting future!!!
So using quantum computer is like dr strange peeking into multiple possibility to search for one answer and tried to move/attempt to harmonised his current timeline/mutilverse/possibility dimension towards that right outcome?
i love Doc Brown, such a smart man and his playful sense of humour makes the information a little more accessible, sometimes. Enjoyed that presentation
Brian Green has studied at the William Shatner school of hand movement and facial gestures.
Haha, I never thought of it that way, but now I can’t unsee it! Brian Greene's passion definitely comes through in his gestures.
Seth is absolutely brilliant! Have to be careful when people sell QC. And, as usual Brian is the best explanator of physics on this planet!
Absolutely-Seth Lloyd is brilliant, but as with any emerging technology, we do need to be cautious about overhyping quantum computing’s capabilities. The field has immense potential, but there are still significant hurdles to overcome, like error correction and qubit stability. As for Brian Greene, his clarity and passion are unparalleled when it comes to explaining physics!
Feynman said no one understands QM, because Hilbert space is so vast. The real problem is how does infinite complexity can rearrange its sequence of actions when determinism is partly satisfied and partly reality remains probabilistic. As for life and consciousness, infinite lotteries were won in a row.
Wait, so do the probabilities cross each other out and there’s 0% chance of a particle appearing in-between the discrete lines? Or is there still a super tiny chance?
Quantum computing holds immense promise, potentially revolutionizing fields from cryptography to material science. However, while the hype suggests we're on the brink of a quantum revolution, the reality is that many challenges such as error rates and qubit stability remain unsolved. Are we truly close to realizing the full potential of quantum computing, or is the excitement outpacing the technological advances needed for practical, scalable solutions?
I can't remember where I heard it but I remember hearing that technological advancements in quantum computing are developing at an exponential rate. With that said it's becoming more evident that AI could help us with this endeavor.
Spot on! While the hype surrounding quantum computing is exciting, the reality is that we’re still facing significant challenges, such as error rates and qubit coherence times. The technology holds incredible promise, but the path to scalable, practical quantum computers is still a work in progress. It’s an exciting field to follow as researchers continue to push boundaries!
Agreed
Why do I always get fusion vibes from this?
Then the hype is still legit imo
Like Graphene, Nuclear Fusion and Room temperature superconductors, the hype is not overhyped at all, it's just very out of reach
(Maybe not as far out of reach as we think with A.I. on the horizon)
When intuiting 0 and 1 (as a QUBIT) represented at the same time, we can use colour i.e. if 0 = Red and 1 = Blue then 01 is Magenta (the mix of Red and Blue). Any colour (frequency) is just a representation of some proportion of the three primary colours.
Just a question: can you play games with a quantum computer (maybe Quantum Leap)?
Quantum leap would be a really tiny show
great graphics and even greater host asking good questions.
Agreed! The graphics really help bring the abstract concepts to life, and the host asks the kinds of questions that make the subject feel approachable. It’s a powerful combination when explaining something as challenging as quantum computing.
Excellent discussion. But noise of often completely ignored. When you 300 qbits you have to do a ton of reruns and ‘error correction’ so you really have very very few real bits. Until this noise issue is solved
Brian, fantastic episode! Is there any way to bridge the gap between the overlapping of waves at ~32:50 and a real world problem? I generally understand the former, but can't seem to make the leap to the latter. Maybe drug design? What would the waves represent? Atom-atom interactions at lowest energy state?
Question, why would a company or government agency want to buy quantum computers? What will they be replacing with quatum computers or is a QC an additional tool that companies-agencies may use? Is the goal speed, energy efficiency, scalability at a lower cost, raw computing power?
Isn't spin left and spin right a proper notation instead of up and down?
That’s a valid point. Some notations use left/right or other terms for spin, depending on the context. It’s all about how the spin is measured relative to an axis.
The power of quantum computing comes from it's ability to parallel process, which classical computers can't match, as classical computing requires additional CPU cores to process in parallel. The tradeoff comes from the difference in power to run the stacks. Quantum Computer's can represent 2^N positions per q-bit simultaneous in quantum memory. Which quickly becomes an unimaginable amount of positions to represent at once. But it could be used to model the observable universe, possibly beyond.
Well put! Quantum computers have a parallel processing advantage that can quickly outscale classical machines, thanks to the exponential increase in possible states represented by qubits.
@@TechnologyBeyondTomorrow-TBT Thanks! It's good to know my ramblings aren't total gibberish ☯
@@MatrixVectorPSI Keep it up
The slits are always orientated vertically……is the interference pattern same with slits orientated horizontally ??
Just turn your phone over and see for yourself
Great question! The interference pattern actually does depend on the orientation of the slits, but the principles of wave interference remain the same. If the slits are horizontal instead of vertical, you’d see a similar pattern, but along a different axis. It’s all about how those wave functions overlap and interfere with each other.
Nice that he simply said I don't know. That guy is clearly a genius. It's always disappointing when people hype something that they don't understand so far up that it can never meet people's expectations, where we are all eventually disillusioned and filled with cynicism. It's okay not to know. At least it seems possible and they're trying.
Seth Lloyd is awesome.
what do they mean when they talk about intuition?
there is one thing that puzzles me in interference experiments: where does the energy go in case of destructive interference?
Isn't single qbit supposed to be in not just up/down but superposition of those 2 states, theoretically?
Yes, that’s correct! A qubit can exist in a superposition of both up and down states simultaneously, which is what makes quantum computing so powerful.
@@TechnologyBeyondTomorrow-TBT so the numbers for qubit storage capacity are a lot larger than those shown in that table
At graph at 29:08, where is 110?
Best illustration/explanation to date.
Someone explain the Stern Gerlock measurement for me. It was said to be measured moving up or down. Is there a reference point? Relative to gravity?
Orientation of the magnetic field
The Stern-Gerlach experiment does measure spin along a specific direction, like up or down, but relative to the chosen axis. Gravity isn't necessarily a factor in the measurement, though it helps to visualize it that way.
Orientation of the magnetic field
@@wildfunctionsyour reply is appreciated. It raises further questions. At the quantum level, what field would that be? Magnetic fields, being the dynamic systems they are, aren't always aligned. Given the classical idea of a stable polar field, are we talking perpendicular to the axis? Is it relative to its attractive force? How is a magnetic field measured at that scale?
How does this view change with quantum chip from google?
Since light is both a particle and wave, how do you emit a single photon particle and not just the smallest light wave we can send?
Thank you very much!🌈💚🌻🎶
This was a great talk about Quantum computer and its algorithmic functions. I watched it 3 times to understand little about Quantum computer. Professor Brian Greene asked some great questions but the answers weren't convincing. Quantum mechanics and Quantum entanglement have big role in Qubits algorithm. Quantum entanglement which was spooky action for great Albert Einstein, but His General Relativity also interacts with modern Particle Physics to predict theory of Single Graviton Particle which is outstanding.
The Single Graviton Particle is completely different from other particles. It is million times powerful than all other observable particles. The entire gravity force has only one particle and that's the Single Graviton Particle which controls entire Earth's gravitational force and Its objects not to collide with one another. Its mass, energy, light and power is beyond the imagination. A beautiful article can be written about theory of Single Graviton Particle to predict Its energy density and functions.
Professor Brian Greene said well" you don't need to calculate the number, you need to understand the dynamical process"
Very insightful! Quantum entanglement is indeed a critical aspect of quantum computing, and its implications in algorithms are vast. I love how you tied Einstein’s "spooky action at a distance" to the modern search for the graviton. There's still so much to explore in the quantum realm!
You may imagine bowmen are shooting their arrows to a target. If they are shooting arrows to the target an arrow in every 15 minutes. The arrows may hit the center more, but if they shoot an arrow in every 20 seconds, then the arrows may hit randomly around the center.
I may think the conditions from the paths and source are making a patterns. This concept may apply to every things in the universe. It is really hard to keep movements consistently because the conditions are continuing to change any moment.
I love this analogy! It really does capture how patterns can emerge in complex systems, even when things appear random. The universe is full of shifting variables, and it’s fascinating how this principle echoes across different scales.
Why do electrons have spin?
Thinking about spinning as a natural state whether moving or not now think movement only as not a basketball would move easier way is take directionality like a snooker ball would move on a table as directionality unless impeded by force of another kind will be as in motion or directionality
@@JohnDoolan-f2i so do scientists see particles as spinning or just as a magnetic moment?
Why electrons have spin is still one of the great mysteries, linked deeply to quantum mechanics. It’s a fundamental property, yet its origin remains elusive!
@@brahmprakash462 magentic moment
@@brahmprakash462 they can be witnessed in other ways, for e.g. working backwards with the knowledge of conservation of angular momentum
Dear Prof Brian Greene
I wish you and all your colleagues the Godess of Wisdom to touch your mind to find all the answers what the science world need to make the human understanding more equip to what it is to be alive somehow.
And how to be a "good human" for the society .
Thank you so much. I imagine my self to have learned some sense of it.
Best
Cleaning Lady
Berlin/ Germany
Indeed, The search for understanding in science is a quest for wisdom! Cheers
The kind of professors I would give my whole tution fee to learn from
So why do we talk about probabilities in QM if they can be negative? And what happens if two waves meet at point 0.9 "probability" for each particle? What is then the resulting probability/amplitude? And the last question: aren't these "probability" waves just standard waves (of mass or energy) propagating through space?
Quantum probabilities are a bit counterintuitive. When two waves meet, they can interfere either constructively or destructively, resulting in positive, negative, or even zero probability amplitudes at certain points. It’s part of the magic of quantum mechanics, where probabilities aren't just classical chances, but linked to the underlying wave functions. If two waves meet, we need to add their complex amplitudes. If their amplitudes align constructively, they can reinforce each other, potentially increasing the probability. If they destructively interfere, the result could be smaller or even zero probability at certain points.
The things that can be negative or even imaginary are probability *amplitudes* and not probabilities. The actual probabilities work out all fine and behave as what you would've expect. And when one describes two particles, the wave is actually somewhat like an object that spans across two copies of space they live in, determining the probability for the first AND the second particle to be in their respective locations, and if you're familiar with probability linguo, essentially a joint probability. The essential difference between quantum uncertainties and usually probabilities is that the former combines things by combining those weird probability amplitudes.
They are not waves of mass or energy. They are instead waves encoding the probability of the quantum object being in a certain place if we are talking about these waves being in space. But in fact these waves do not have to be in actual physical space. They can be waves in the "space" of all the possible values of momentum, for example.
If they are waves of something real, then it travels faster than light.
Reminds me of Monte Carlo simulation on inputs to a business case I did where each variable can be set to vary by a number of standard deviations. Then if you run enough simulations and capture the output (like NPV, revenue, profit) then you get a convergence for maximum, minimum, most likely outcomes. Maybe quantum computer can run this faster ? 🤔
Yes, quantum computers are expected to revolutionize simulations like Monte Carlo, where probabilities and distributions are key. It could process those simulations at speeds that classical computers just can’t match.
Brian Greene makes for an amazing scientific communicator!
God bless you Brian lots of love
Brian really has a gift for bringing these deep, mind-blowing topics to a wider audience, doesn’t he? You can feel the love and passion he puts into explaining these concepts in a way that makes us all want to learn more. Blessings indeed!
Look i just need to know if I'm going to get at least a steady 60 frames in path of exile 2 with these quantum pcs...
If you think of everything as fields, and "particles" as excited areas of a field, then things are still confusing, but not quite as confusing.
Plus our brains are quantum computers! Our brains use a lot of shortcuts to process information, quantum mechanically, for us to understand.
As our brains evolve, along w/ technology, we'll have a better, and eventually even complete, understanding of what happens at the quantum level. Considering we continue to have the ability to evolve/advance at any rate.
If you take all of that into account, just remember, I'm not a physicist, even though physics is my favorite thing! 🍻
No really. With classical random fields, you would only have to distinguish between thermal and Lorentz-invariant noise. Quantum computers are continuous systems and will never be fully error corrected. We knew this by the 30s. It's like these guys have never investigated the standard model.
Our brains are classical meat computers, definitely not quantum computers. My brain can't even multiply 4.123 x 12.582 without a piece of paper. It definitely isn't processing with bazillions of Q bits.
I love the enthusiasm! Thinking of particles as excited areas of fields does clear up some of the mystery, but quantum mechanics is still a mind-bender. And you’re right about our brains being incredibly powerful information processors-it’s almost poetic that we’re using our own quantum systems to understand the quantum world. Maybe one day we’ll figure it out, but for now, we’re just chipping away at the surface. Keep geeking out on physics-it’s how we evolve too!
The brain itself is too big to be entirely quantum but all chemical processes are in the end a combination of quantum effects and statistical processes. When you talk about many molecules, you are at a level where you look at rates. If quantum effects played too much a role in the brain to make it fancy the brain and the body would be way more fragile. On the other hand the biochemistry itself takes quantum effects into account but only on a level of chemical reactions. In the end the question is - when you have many reactions at the same times probability turns into rates. Let's say quantum mechanics allows for different reactions happening at the same time and you get certain probabilities for them. Yet to have resilience in a physical world you need tons of redundancy. Seeing the body as a big chemical machine if individual quantum effects were so strong that it would strongly influence decisions then the human body and mind would be incredible fragile. It already is incredible fragile compared to most stable chemical structures due to its complexity but still has amazing repair mechanisms. What I mean is the following - you have to distinguish between all the fancy spooky stuff in quantum information that allows for more information storage and processing, quantum randomness, classical randomness and quantum chemistry. Quantum chemistry describes how small reaction mechanisms look like and some of those effects may play a part. But this is just normal physics, that chemistry is quantum, is old and known. If you want to look at the fancy stuff in quantum information you need to look at very isolated systems. Entanglement in systems as complex as biochemical systems might play some role but it still is rather neglectable compared to the complexity of the system as a whole. If your brain was a quantum computer somehow you could not live. So for forming new synapses in the brain I'd rather bet on statistical mechanics combined with some optimizations by quantum chemistry.
Love Brian Green and his book "The Elegant Universe" is one of the best pop. science books I've ever read, but he do move and talk like someone making an impersonation of Brian Green on snl ;)
A single electron itself only form a single spot. The interference pattern is a property of a collection of dots produced by many electrons in the collection. Thus wave nature, if at all, is only exhibited by the collection, so DSE does not say that a single electron is a wave. It may be riding a terrain established by a latent, standing probability wave that is a function of configuration of distances in the experiment. Bohmian mechanics proposes existence of such a wave which is separate from the electron itself. For example if we keep changing the distances in the experiment, for every electron, the pattern may disappear altogether. or become fuzzier.
Great point! Bohmian mechanics does suggest that the wave guiding the electron is distinct. It adds an interesting perspective on how particles interact with probability waves, particularly in setups like the double slit experiment.
Thank you for this highly informative and insightful session that focused on explaining the most counterintuitive stuffs in layman’s terms
Is it possible to mark an individual photon and see its.path?
Great job prof Greene Thoroughly enjoyed although I Should admit that I did not quite understand a lot of it . Lets keep politics out . Keep up the excellent work
Keeping politics out of it and focusing on the science definitely makes for a more enjoyable experience. Glad you enjoyed it despite the complexities!
Happy New Year
Why was so easy understanding wave-particle duality with this video? 😂😂😂. Thank you guys
May it mean that each photon is not delimited to the centre of the photon as we have defined it up ontil now only, but that its field even extends into its surrounding space in a etheric field beyond itself? And the center of the photon and the trajectory of it is then influenced by the way this extended field interacts with the fields of matter around the slits. Maybe its not so strange or mysterious if we also could assume that the first photon would leave an etheric track that will subsequently cause the next photon to follow a different trajectory than if a previous photon had not been sent before in the first place?
A company called Wimi Hollogram has today announced, that they have developed FPGA-Based Digital Quantum Computer Verification Technology.
This technology offers a completely new approach to quantum computing by using digital quantum bits, or discrete finite state machines. Not only does this mark a new milestone in the field of quantum computing, but it also lays a solid foundation for the future realization and application of quantum computers.
Can someone dumb it way down for me and explain what that means!?
What do you think about a World Science Festival episode broadcast from the future. First 1 year, then 20 years, then 500 years?
They make it so fun to hear
Thanks for this informative discussion and conversation. I