Squishing Light Makes It Bigger-Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 19 มิ.ย. 2024
- Check out KiwiCo.com/TheActionLab and get 50% your first month of any subscription!
In this video I show you how to demonstrate the Uncertainty Principle with nothing more than a laser and razor blade
Get Your Experiment Box Here: theactionlab.com/
Checkout my experiment book: amzn.to/2Wf07x1
Follow me on:
Twitter: / theactionlabman
Facebook: / theactionlabofficial
Instagram: / therealactionlab
Snap: / 426771378288640
Tik Tok: / theactionlabshorts - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
That wrench quite honestly is the most terrifying thing I’ve ever seen. Awesome video though James!
His name is James??
Fr
@@AkiraHartono ...charles 😓
Heloooo
perfect answer for "you wanna know how I got these scars..."
This man is literally making me listen to a physics class and i'm enjoying every second of it.
Yess
His videos became a staple of the Physics classes I taught.
THIS IS HOW THE FUCKING SCHOOLS SHOULD WORK. Instead all we get is depressed teachers who are doing this job for money.
@@NueUzrnem some experiments are quite difficult to replicate. Also, be aware, you do need to be able to calculate the numbers for any science class so math skills have to be considered.
It's funny, for me at least I hated this in school. Hated learning in general. Now that I've out I absolutely love learning again, about everything. Wish I had this drive to learn back in school haha.
Me thinking: "Pfft, it's just diffraction of light"
This man: "Jokes on you mf, I know what you're thinking"
Surely this is just diffraction though right? Since we see an interference pattern on the wall we know the light acts as waves, and doesn't it act as a particle only once it hits the wall? This would allow diffraction to occur while still making the wall glow.
The joke is on everyone who believes in particles.
@@NGC-nx7nl yeah I'm also confused how this isn't just demonstrating the waveform of light
He’s a good mentalist. Lol
@@NGC-nx7nl I didn't understand why a wave will be able to charge the wall but not a particle. Wouldn't the particle have more energy?
"I have two razor blades connected to a crescent wrench"
Me: Backing away slowly and avoiding eye contact.
What amazes me more is he can keep the frequency of posting new content and none of which is boring. Whereas big content creators run out of content, he never inspite of his main topic being science. Truly amazing. Keep up the great work 💯
I think a big reason for this is that the world is a truly fascinating place, and when you drill deep into anything you'll uncover some amazing insights. So, someone that's curious, smart, educated, and good at explaining things will have an endless supply of content from nature.
Ever wonder if there is a Goeddel’s incompleteness theorem of science?
@Marko God didn't create the device through which you decided to communicate your opinion.
@Marko nice troll
"Big content creators run out of content"
the way he said jokes on you...
I didn't even question his ways, but still felt roasted. Gad Damn Ma Man's Cool.
ikr 😂😂
This was when Walter Light, Became Heisenberg's Principle.
"Yo bitch! Where is my uncertainty?"
~Jesse Planck
"Ah, Mr. White. You make a good easy bake cupcake. How about you work for me."
@@ultraminecraft69 we need to cook!
You win lmao
You're Goddamm right
Hey James, thank you very much for doing this experiment.
Did you try coloring the razor with super black color, to rule out reflection from the edges of the blades?
I did the experiment myself and found that slight movements in the angle of the blade shows that even the thin edge of the blade reflects light and changes the diffraction pattern.
Another question that comes to my mind is why the spread of light is not uniform but scattered by bright and dark zones.
The Heisenberg principle equation does not contain anything that explain the scattering, while it can be explained easily by interference.
All valid points here, i am curious now and call for updated experiment!
the reflected light is diffuse light (not like a mirror). The light is reflected in all directions and is no longer "laser" light after reflection. It cannot reflect in a beam to strongly reach the wall. I didn't paint them because the small imperfections from the paint on the edge of the blade change the pattern enough to not be as clear. With a good paint job it will work just the same though. For example just take a piece of black paper and make a small slit and shine the light through and you will get the same spread pattern. This is not from reflection, it is from diffraction/uncertainty principle.
And also the uncertainty principle does not explain the interference pattern fully, it is a general rule that tells you the theoretical limit. This experiment shows the result of trying to tighten the variability of conjugate variables. To get the full description you have to use the schrodinger wave equation
@@TheActionLab great clarification. Thank you!
Hey James,
Thanks for your answer.
I found out that there is a rather strong reflection even if the surface diffuses light.
Even when the slit and laser were 2 meters from the wall. You can see it if the room is dark.
You can take a credit card and move it closer to the laser (like a single blade).
Most of the time I observe a light beam perpendicular to the slit in the opposite direction. This seems like a reflection.
If I color the side of the credit card black, there is less reflection.
The interesting thing is that I also see a shorter beam going in the other direction, and that one is probably not a reflection, but perhaps because of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
You wrote: "I didn't paint them because the small imperfections from the paint on the edge of the blade change the pattern enough to not be as clear"
It's strange because using normal black paint I didn't observe much difference in the pattern.
Also, isn't the less clear pattern is exactly what we want to find?
Maybe the diffraction pattern is not because of the Heisenberg principle, and with a super black color, we could see the pure Heisenberg principle without the diffraction pattern.
@@TheActionLab
"jokes on you"
I never thought that he would say that
I guess that's the very principle of diffraction in photography. Such an interesting video, thanks !
Exactly its diffraction
@@Prox-wb9tk Isn't that the point? Heisenberg's uncertainty is an intrinsic property of waves, and since quantum objects are wave-particles, they all obey the uncertainty principle. So you could argue that the spread from diffraction is due to Heisenberg.
Bringing physics education to the general public - The Action Lab is doing the Lord’s work.
"The Lord´s Work" sounds a little religious.... 😕
But in principle you are right!
Yes
@@martin09091989 S. Ramanujan said '' An equation means nothing to me unless it express a thought of God '' S. Ramanujan was an great Indian mathematician.
@@jaythecreed7772 feels like every indian is mathematetian lol.. (no offense)
@@n0nenone why you feel that?
Amazingly good experimentalist. It's clear you're spending countless hours coming up with extremely creative ways to demonstrate concepts. Good work!
I love your videos they are so helpful
5:00 - False. This does not prove particles, because not every wave can affect every resonator. You need a specific wave length to do that, and in your charging example you used a light of different wave-length.
Right? I didn't think a red laser could charge glow in the dark stuff anyway.
@@matthewnardin7304 On the visible spectrum red light is the light with largest wavelength. My guess is that it simply too big to have a strong effect on atoms on that board. We don't really know the exact 3D structure of the atom, but what we do know is that atoms consists of things that move. I.e. atom is not a static object. And as such there should be a way to strongly affect that internal motion with frequencies in certain ranges.
Exactly. Saying that light must be a particle because whether or not it can charge a glow-in-the-dark surface depends on its momentum is like saying that sound must be a particle because whether or not it can move a diaphragm depends on its momentum. Light may simply have particle-like characteristics because of the medium it travels in, just like sound. The only difference is that light is much smaller and we struggle to make mechanisms that can measure it without modifying it. That's where the Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle comes in. But that applies to a single quanta of light, not to a beam of light.
I think it does prove as, if they were waves and if you have a high intensity beam like a laser it would easily knock off electrons as waves can clump together.
@@abhijiths5237 What do you mean waves can clump together?
Air can pressurize. Are you somehow projecting a property of air onto electrons? Because so far our experience with electrons shows that electrons cannot occupy the same space.
Or maybe the misconception is the difference between amplitude and frequency (wavelength). Both of which are a component of energy, but have very different properties including permeability. For example, look at how bright the red light is compared to the blue light in this video ( 5:22 ). It could just be a limitation of the camera, but I'd like to think that more blue light is being absorbed by the surface than red light. And we see that as a greater intensity (amplitude) of red (frequency) light being reflected.
I'm starting the year and honestly we learned about waves for the first time less than a week ago. The timing couldn't have been more perfect!
I love your channel. It's very informative and your experiments are really awesome.
However, it's hard to energize a glow in the dark substance with a light that is a lower frequency than what the glow paint re-emits. Using a UV or blue laser would take that aspect out of the experiment. I still think that spread is from diffraction.
The LIT fact sheet actually addresses this: "A light of greater frequency than the wavelength colour of light that the glow in the dark material emits.
LIT has a green light emission glow, therefore to charge it would need a light with a higher frequency green light...."
Etc.
Apparently Feynman used diffraction as a demonstration of the uncertainty principle in action. I don't think it's correct to say that the spread is not diffraction. The diffraction pattern is related to the wavelength, definitely a wave characteristic. And that's true whether what's passing through the slit is a wave on water, light, or electrons. But that doesn't mean it's not a demonstration of the uncertainty principle.
Absolutely 💯° I was thinking the same thing and wanted to see if anyone else caught that.
AS WELL, I believe he is incorrect in his stating that Light is both a wave and particle. To me this is nonsense, that many genius inventors, scientists, n great thinkers in history agree with me.
Light, along with everything else in the perceived world, is comprised of waveforms, or in other words, composed of varying pressure conditions. "Light", specifically though, "is nothing other than a sound wave in the ether" (- Nikola Tesla) . It is a coaxial propagation of induction through a medium. There is nothing TRULY traveling, no Thing or item of principality, that is moving from point A to point B. It is merely the movement (or moved-moment), or perturbation or disturbance of the medium, that causes the perception of a moving instance of Light, or "beam" or "particle" of Light.
I would suggest to anyone interested in the Nature of Light, Electromagnetism, field theory, dielectricity, and DEFINITELY if you're interested in quantum mechanics, to check out the material (papers, books, videos, lectures, etc) of Nikola Tesla, Oliver Heaviside, Eric Dollard, Charles Proteus Steinmetz, Walter Russell, and Dr Edward Dowdye just to name a few among the many genius inventors, thinkers, scientists, and luminaries of our recent history,, from the late 1800's up to our current decade, with Dr Dowdye leaving this Earth and making his passage back Home on December 31st of 2020.
@@delta-KaeBee I'm not sure who you think you're agreeing with. I certainly didn't say that light does not have the same apparently dual nature as anything else.
Perhaps the world of physics has changed drastically in the last 20 years, but right up to the end of the 1990's it was not commonly held that everything is composed of waves, but rather that what makes up the universe around us has characteristics of both waves and particles and that which behaviour is observed depends on the point of view. That doesn't even necessarily imply that things are sometimes waves and sometimes particles. Only that, whatever they are, they exhibit characteristics of both.
Some geniuses may well have believed that everything is waves. After all, there was a time when people, including geniuses, believed in the notion of the ether. Geniuses, luminaries, thinkers have all made mistakes in all fields over the centuries. Heaviside, for instance, was also a critic of Einstein's theories of relativity, two of the most heavily tested physics theories of all time. Of course, that doesn't mean they're "right" in the sense of being the final word. They may turn out, like Newton's laws before them, to be approximations. Or they may turn simply to give the correct results accidentally. There are other theories that challenge the supremacy of relativity and physicists are always probing, looking for predictions of the theory to turn out to be incorrect.
I was not convicted either. This is diffraction for me too and the fact that the laser didn't light the background is due to the lower energy it conveyed compare to a blue light
@@delta-KaeBee That's quite a strong appeal to authority you got going on there. How very scientific of you.
Science class in school- Zzzzzzzz. Action lab science class- Whooooo!! I definitely would have enjoyed high school science if he were my science teacher!
His videos were a staple of the Physics classes I taught.
@King Pistachion What do you mean? I taught Physics for a semester.
Thanks, Dr. Orgill! Fascinating as always! 😁
Your work is a gift to the world!
5:54 Its >= rather than just =
This always was difficult to understand for me: even a complicated problem can have its representation in a simplified example. The hardest part was to conduct the simplification properly.
Great explanation, thank you!
Sometimes I have no idea what you are talking about, but it's still interesting. love your vids!
I've also run into a similar uncertainty when doing signal processing. The more you know about the frequency of a signal the less you know about the time at which that frequency was occurring. (Frequency resolution vs. temporal resolution)
The uncertainty principle follows from the "wave nature" of particles in QM. In fact, it holds for waves of any kind, so what you're talking about is identical. I believe this way of visualizing it is very intuitive and I wish it would get taught like that in uni courses.
And of course E = hf . (-:
Yea the frequency time uncertainty is the same as the energy time uncertainty except for a planck's constant. The spatial version is the position spatial frequency uncertainty. This is equivalent to the position momentum uncertainty except for a plancks constant.
He'd be a epic science teacher
@Nоt RicкRоll👇 really smart, but terrible execution
Oh....My....Gosh........ I've seen this experiment multiple times in so many different video animations, but still this is the BEST representation EVER!!
This MUST be used as a reference world wide as the new standard for understanding how quantum mechanics is studied!!
Wow...
great video as always
Red light wont charge glow in the dark items. There isnt enough energy at that wavelength, shorter wavelengths are needed. Actually, at a high enough power, a red laser will make charged glow in the dark items dimmer.
Yep that’s due to Stokes shift. Can’t get more energy out of the system than you put in it. A lower energy red photon can’t cause the emission of a higher energy green photon. When he shines the higher energy violet photon the emission is a lower energy green photon which makes sense.
Lol when he said "I know what your thinking" and proceeds to say the most sciency thing to ever science and I'm like
No... I was wondering why my palm is sp itchy and if that really means I'm gonna get some money but go off sir 😂
Iam pretty sure you are an Indian
Really nice explanation of HUP. Cleared up a thing I was always uncertain of....
I wanted to do this experiment with similar setup in my highschool, but my physic teacher didn’t let me, saying it would be impossible to do this experiment with homemade equipment. I cannot thank you enough that you made my once dream true.
I like this, but the formula is wrong.
It a >=
If it were a =
We could know one bc of the other
Hey James I have an idea for your future video that take a copper cube and dip it in pure liquid oxygen due to oxidation in pure oxygen the reaction will relatively more faster than air I am sure the results will be amazing.
Damn, u made me finally understand why we cant measure momentum and position of the particle in the same time. I was so confused by every explanation but you explained it best by just showing that energy and time is the same example... Thanks!
Awesome experiment 🤓👍 Very informative 🙏
I want him to be my science teacher
Or a another teacher with a killer smile and skills like him 😁😁😁
@@yuukina7888 do you believe we are all one consciousness experiencing ourselves subjectively?
Can "squishing" light be akin to increasing the spread of a water stream from a hose when you attempt to occlude or squish the opening?
Honestly that's making me think pretty hard. There ARE experiments that use water to simulate quantum effects...
Great video as always. Love how you explain things. I would love to see a video explaining why a glass of water moves on its own on a table. I understand stand it's a seal with compression of the air but I would love to know more about it.
Always fascinating
"The joke is on you"
XD ❤️❤️
Hank: I thought you were a chemist
Heisenberg: I thought you were a geologist
finally someone actually showed the experiment. thats so cool
A single slit experiment. Love it!
There's definitely a limit to how simple this concept can be explained. He for sure wrestled with that this episode
Does the reflective nature of the gap not interfere with the output out light? Those blades are pretty mirrored, would you get the same result if you sprayed the blades matt back... 🤔
Yes you would. This experiment can be done with ultra-black blades, Mosquito nets, a small piece of hair at home. Professional diffraction gratings are just tiny parallel scratches (going to but not limited to 100,000 per inch) on transparent plastic. Or the really good ones etched or some other highly priced technology. It does not matter what the material is as long as it imposes a passing and non passing (absorption/reflection/diffusion) region for the photons.
@@dragoscoco2173 thanks for the reply 👍
This was enlightning
Wow great video!!
Ok, now I understand...
Its not a V neck shirt, its his mic.
Goddamnit
You can charge that background with a flashlight to emit a smooth green light and then use the red laser to stimulate emission, leaving dark trails.
I don't understand what exactly you're saying, but it sounds cool
I thought I was watching a new chapter of Saw!
Kidding, love action lab and how real world it is. My generation lived MR Wizard…..today we have this!!! Never over complex but not dumbed down.
Kudos as always!
i just tried it out except i used scissors and normal white paper and it works!!!science is amazing
This isn't some weird thing with the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle, but it's actually just the diffraction of light since light is a wave and when sent through something small it just diffracts and spreads out.
But the joke isn't on me! Your explanation of the red light being a particle is insufficient.
Does that apply to the double slit experiment as well?
True, this is Fraunhofer diffraction
I thought the principle had a >= and not an =
You are supertalented. Thank you
I've heard this experiment hundreds of times here on youtube and in class but seeing it and explained this clearly still blows my mind, thanks !
How much do you charge for 1000 positive comments?
@@realedna much more than doing ur mom
You're god damn inteligent !!
How can you be sure, the pattern wasn't created from the light being reflection at the edges of the blade?
Perhaps, reflection could also explain why the light is getting more and more pale as it get away from the center.
I would be curious to see the same experiment but with a non reflecting surface on the edge like some black tape for example..
Light is reflected from the edges of the blade (as I noticed when doing this experiment myself).
To rule out the influence of the reflection I suggest coloring the blades with super black color. (I only had normal black colors, and they still reflect the laser)
How would it be reflected? The angle was all wrong for it.
No it's not reflection. You can do it with anything, a slot in paper will do. It's just the result of the wave-duality of light. You can actually calculate the shape of the pattern of light in accordance with the wave length of light and the size and shape of the slot
Laser reflection is very strong. Even a 0.25 mm paper reflects a lot of light.
Try pointing a laser on the side of a paper and you will see it reflects very brightly.
So I would not rule out this option without an experiment.
@@abcdefgh-db1to
Laser is not really a parallel beam.
It spreads with a certain angle.
For example, the farther away you are from the wall, the laser spot gets bigger.
Since the beam is not really parallel, light can hit the edges with an angle and reflect.
@@Mernom
While watching this I was thinking "but that's not because of Heisenberg's principle, it's because of diffraction", but then he said "I know what you are thinking, this is due to diffraction", I I went :o . But then bam!! He also said after that "but the joke is on you because this is a glow in the dark screen"... and then I went :ooo. Amazing video!! (Also, that's a very clever way to make a variable single slit light).
Hiii, much love from Brazil, love your videos, very interesting
What you and others fail to realize is that the atoms and molecules, in this case of the razor blades, have an associated magnetic field with them. Light, 'em', also has a magnetic component to it. Magnetism is magnetism, varying possibly only in density and energy frequency. The magnetic portion of the 'em' interacts with the magnetic portion of the atoms and molecules of the razors, thereby causing the indications observed.
You don't make any sense. This is the wave-particle duality of light that is displayed here. The material the razor blade is made of doesn't matter at all, it doesn't interact " magnetically" with the light
@@abcdefgh-db1to Here is an idea I had quite a while ago for what I believe is a better explanation to the dual slit experiment: (copy and paste from my files):
It is only an idea on my part but it goes something like this:
1. Charged particles have their associated magnetic fields with them.
2. Protons and electrons are charged particles and have their associated magnetic fields with them.
3. Photons also have both an electrical and magnetic components to them.
4. Whenever a proton, electron, or photon is shot out of a gun, it's respective magnetic field interacts with the magnetic fields of the electrons in the atoms and molecules of the gun itself, the medium the projectile is traveling through (ie: air), and/or from around the slits themselves.
5. Via QED (quantum electrodynamics), newly generated photons might occur.
6. The projectile goes on it's own way and the newly generated photons go on their own way. It gives the illusion of a wave particle duality, but it is not that way in actual reality.
7. Specifically in the case of protons or electrons, the newly generated EM wave travels faster than the particles. The new EM waves go through both slits and sets up "hills and valleys" of field energy. When the proton or electron goes through one of the slits, it then follows whatever "valley" it enters thereby over time, even shooting only one proton or one electron at a time, the interference pattern will still emerge.
8. As far as detectors are concerned, they probably have an energy field that is one way when on and a different way when off. The interaction of this energy field (or the lack thereof) with whatever is passing through it, gives the indication that is observed.
Now, for those who hold fast to reality being probability waves that are condensed down by an observer into one single physical reality, then:
a. What exactly are these probability waves made up of?
b. Where exactly are these probability waves stored at until they are observed?
c. How exactly does an observer in physical reality actually observe these probability waves and condense them down into one single physical reality?
d. Who and/or what observed the first observer?
e. What exactly happens when two or more observers observe different probability waves? Which one takes precedent in physical reality?
For me, while this observer condensing probability waves down into one single physical reality might work well on paper, it does not appear to reflect actual reality.
Now, utilizing the scientific principal of Occam's razor, which way is more probably correct? My way by utilizing known scientific principals, or that is as discerned on paper as stated above is how reality actually is?
You know this diffraction pattern is being studied from 100’s of years right? And you know brilliant minds have explained the phenomenon and 1000’s of experiments conducted by millions of scientists confirm them right. You think you are smartest of them all?
@@charlesbrightman4237 your understanding of the interaction between charged particles and magnetic fields is very wrong.
As for your denying of quantum mechanics and probability happening in the physical world, how then can you imagine quantum computing, which actually works in the physical world.
As for when two observers observe different probability waves, it doesn't even make sense. As soon as you make a measurement, you interfere with the probability wave and you basically fixate the state the particle is in, if a second observer arrives, he will observe exactly the same thing as the first.
And believe me, when you do the math, the physical world is in perfect accordance with quantum mechanics. There are still lots of areas of unknown but everything you have mentioned is overall well understood and is pretty basic quantum mechanics knowledge.
@@abcdefgh-db1to Nope, you are wrong and do not understand QED and QCD.
How do we know for sure that some of the laser light wasn't reflecting off the imperfect edges of the razor blades and thus spreading out to either side. It looks like an interference pattern as well, which could be light from each left/right blade edge reflection?
I also though the pattern may be caused by reflection of the edges of the blade. It would explain why the light were more and more dim on the side. It should have put a non reflecting surface on the edge like some black tape.
Check out diffraction due to a single slit, it's the phenomenon that's occuring as the blades get super close together.
The clip on mic + the creases in your shirt make it look like you have a GIANT spider on you! 🕷 :D
Wow that backboard is cooool! I want one!
Hey,
If the mass of light is 0 , then it's momentum will be
Momentum= Mass* Velocity
Momentum= 0 * Velocity
Therefore momentum of light is zero.
Special relativity
Photons rest mass is zero but as speed increases mass also increases but in momentum of light we use another formula not mass ×velocity
Don't use *p=mv* formula. It won't work to calculate particles momentum.
This formula is for macro object but not valid for atomic level...
For atomic particle Momentum =root*(l(l+2))h/2pie. Where l is azimuthal quantum no
Although light has no mass it does in fact still carry momentum. This is why we have solar sails that can be pushed by photons as some of the lights momentum is transferred to the sail. The momentum of light is given by p=h*wavelength. As for why light carries momentum, this is a consequence of lorentz transformations that show that as long as a massless object travels at the speed of light, they also carries momentum.
I'm the FIRST😭😭😭😭😭
@@MysticLGD i don't understand?
These videos are gold! I hadn't thought of the wave-particle duality as a fundamental consequence of uncertainty principle, but it is!
E = hf, t = x/c...and on the other side h/4 pi, and the h just cancels out across, add a bit of physics, and you'll get optics. Brilliant!
I think it is the other way around ... the uncertainty principle is a consequence of the wave particle duality.
Look at how fourier transforms can effectively build a 'particle' out of waves and the uncertainty that arises therefrom.
I will search for a reference...
Few days ago I saw a video of Veritasium where he explained exactly this concept with sophisticated equipments but you just used the household equipments. You are awesome!!!!!!
Fun fact: Their sponsor was also Kiwico on that video.
Great video!
Great episode
One of the best visualization of one of the toughest principles appear in Quantum Mechanics! ❤️
Really cool video!
Purely physics explained beautifully thanks action lab man.
So cool!
Heisenberg was a genius for producing this theory. And you are a genius for demonstrating and explaining all these complex topics so dullards like me can understand. Thank you.
Love how 15-20 years ago being smart was the weird nerd thing, now being smart and being called a nerd is a compliment
Amazing 💙💙💙
0:38 @The Action Lab.. Heisenberg looks like if James took a photo of him back in time in the 50s... The resemblance is uncanny...👌👌❤️❤️from India..you are awesome sir..just quenching my scientific thirst....👍👍🙏🙏
what a timing
I'm searching for video to share with class
tq
You have all the charisma of an ornamented doorknob. But you talk about crazy interesting topics, so I love your stuff!
Super helpful
Bless you, I need to know this for chem recitations tomorrow you just saved my ass
Amazing video. I like to know more. If you could conduct an experiment explaining reasons for why energy and time cannot be observed fully accurately simultaneously. THANK YOU
I don't understand much but I love how you explain things
oh thank you that was useful
Excellent example of the duality of light. Can you do the double slit experiment and demonstrate how wave functions collapse when observed?
Omg i was eating an actual 🥝 while watching this!!
Also, one of my fav subjects, awesome experiment and video!
Thank you Mr. Data
The way I understand it, it is both diffraction and a consequence of the uncertainty principle. Meaning that if you describe the system in classical diffraction theory and quantum mechanics, both would yield the same results. What you are probably missing is that diffraction theory DOES have the concept of "canonically conjugate variables" embedded in it disguised within the Fourier transform formulation of diffraction theory.
Also shouldn't the transfer of energy between light and your glow wall be related to wavelength as oppose to the wave/particle description of light?
i wasnt really knowing that fraunhofer diffraction has to do something with heisenberg principle thank you awesome video
watching my school practical in action... nostalgia!!!!
Blowing topics 🤯🤯🤯
Ah. A wonderful concept of Young's Double Slit Experiment. With terrifying sums and calculations. What a thrill! 😂
Cool diffraction pattern
I have an exam tommorow on social but I’m here watching the action lab instead
P.s I’m enjoying every moment of it
How do the results change if the razor blade shutter is coated with one of the near perfect black cloths or paints you have shown in previous vids? A comparison to near perfect white would also be interesting.
This guy is a good teacher
Thats a very dangerous slit experiment sir! lolol Nice video!! I was definitely not Uncertain about learning Physics here *terrible pun lololol*
Amazing experiment. Next you should try to do it with two more razor blades perpendicular to the two first, so that you are confining it along two axes instead of one.
Good idea!
Amazing