The Playlist for the Lecture series on Quantum Mechanics. Kindly share :) th-cam.com/play/PLRN3HroZGu2mCtdalEmZAM2nr1xBWAtUn.html Google Drive of my Lecture notes drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Kd2VQxDxCq-x3e0zgx5_jxV3xjWlwpc-?usp=drive_link
Hello sir, I'm from pakistan and i really like your videos, Your lectures clear my concept please make the remaing lectures because after 3 week my exam get start...
Is a simpler explanation of Zero Point Energy basically that if a particle has mass, then there is a minimum finite value of energy it will still have at zero point energy?
Hello professor, great video! I am seeing that a lot of these results depends on the fact that the value of a variable is always greater than or equal to the uncertainty associated with that variable, could you elaborate on why would that be the case? I see that otherwise the uncertainty would possibilitate negative values but why would that be a problem for, for example, the position of a particle, a value that can realistic achieve negative values.
Sir thanks a lot! All i know of QM is just bcz of u sir.. I am totally dependent on your videos Just a question : Could you complete this course till 20 nov (If not please tell how much it be covered till then🙏)
I have a problem with the first part of the video, the probability of an electron being in the nucleus. First, the definition of uncertainty is a bit vague. Does it refer to the size of an object, or to one, two or three standard deviations, or to something else. Moreover, if the electron is supposed to be accepted only in a minor compartment of the nucleus, i.e. associated with a neutron, the uncertainty of position will be enormously reduced and thus supposedly satisfy the Heisenberg principle and all energy requirements. The electron seems to have some probability of nuclear location in the s-shell, according to a number of papers on internet. This said, thank you so much for the best lecture series on You Tube
If the uncertainty in position is greatly reduced, the uncertainty in momentum (and hence minimum Energy of particle) will be greatly increased, as they are inversely proportional
@ 1:15 THIS IS NOT THE CORRECT INEQUALITY. One should relate dx to the x-component of dp only! So the inequality is correct when you put a subscript x to dp.
I meant the x-component of momentum only. Most times we deal with 1D motion, so don't specify this, as it's kind of obvious, unless we deal with 3D motion
Sir I have this one question related to the displacement of a body when force is applied on it. So the question goes like this :- There is a boy travelling with a cycle and while travelling he throws a ball in upward direction (against gravity) but at the same time when boy is throwing ball he is also cycling due to which it happens that, the position of the boy when he threw the ball and the position of the boy when he caught the ball was different. The position in which the ball is caught is slightly ahead of the position in which the ball is thrown and the positions of both are different. Now basically when the position of the boy (along the cycle) has been displaced or it has been recoiled and then when we are applying force to the ball in a particular direction (meaning upward) then why is the ball back in our hands?Since we have already recoiled. So does it mean that the force we are applying is causing the displacement of ball in two directions, one towards the upward direction and one towards the direction in which boy is cycling. Sir it could be a weird question for you but as a 10th grader I'm struggling in it. Maybe I haven't clear my motion basics. It would be very much helpful if you answered it
consider the rider starting from rest and then achieving a constant velocity v now if ball is in his hand ball is travelling with v now when rider apply force in upward direction ball goes up but however there is no force in horizontal direction which makes the velocity v remain constant for the ball...due to which it moves in forward direction. so there is not a force responsible for forward motion of the ball but the inertia or conservation of momentum in horizontal direction.however when rider started with his ride keeping the ball with him must have applied the force on the ball in forward direction to let the achieve velocity v from the rest as we considerd. question was good though...made a iitian to reply.
Awesome video, but it's still wild to me that you can get rid of a factor of 2 in the denominator and end up with the right answer. I'm assuming it's the right answer and something is just going over my head.
The HUP is an INEQUALITY. Hence, it represents a limit to certain measurements/processes, and should not be considered a direct derivation as such. They merely indicate or point to a certain fact. I made this video since it's interesting, but these are not generalised derivations at all. Hope that makes sense
This video used to many heuristics for my taste. It was clever, but not actually accurate in the way these values are actually derived. … One can get into trouble with using too hand wavy arguments.
Fantastic lesson by a communications master. Thank you. I'm eagerly looking forward to your introduction of the Shroedinger equation in 2027 and the Dirac Equation in 2029. Please ditch this QM tutorial and go back to fun stuff like modeling the Magnus effect on Scilab...
I apologise for creating that feeling. I am myself facing a similar Uncertainty Principle, in TH-cam videos. The more I try to finely resolve the presentation of each video topic, the greater the time between individual videos. Jokes aside, to be honest, I could record all upcoming videos at one go without any preparation!! But I am scared the video and presentation quality would suffer. So I spend days making fresh notes on each topic, then recording, then upload+thumbnail (even though the ROI is very less and hardly any financial incentive is there) I have to take out 1-2 days out of my jam-packed week for each video. After taking sometimes 4 hrs of continuous lectures on a day to day basis, my brain is drained. Having said that, I will try. I don't know how, but I completely understand the disappointed, and will try to upload more frequently
The Playlist for the Lecture series on Quantum Mechanics. Kindly share :)
th-cam.com/play/PLRN3HroZGu2mCtdalEmZAM2nr1xBWAtUn.html
Google Drive of my Lecture notes
drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Kd2VQxDxCq-x3e0zgx5_jxV3xjWlwpc-?usp=drive_link
Man, you're my hero... I wanna become a physics teacher like you
He really is amazing. I wish he would explain gravitational waves.
I am eagerly waiting for this thanks a lot.
BEST TEACHER SO FAR!!! LOTS OF INFO IN ADDITION TO NORMAL LECTURES!!
Thanks sir ❤❤
one the the best physics teacher i have ever seen..thanks a lot sir❤
Wonderful video
I am very excited to upcoming basic quantum mechanics video .your teaching style is uncredible ❤
Sir pls make complete lecture on Schrodinger wave machanics.
Grate lecture sir❤
Hello sir, I'm from pakistan and i really like your videos, Your lectures clear my concept please make the remaing lectures because after 3 week my exam get start...
Merci beaucoup ❤
33:47
25:32
Sir, (h cut) = h/2π... so in uncertainty also it should
(h cut) /2.
But for derivation you have used h cut only.
I think he is just approximating and also looking at limits not actual results. He is making points not doing calculation
😅🎉 I subscribed.
I love this topic.❤
👍
Thank you so much for the video sir but I think you might have forgot to attach pdf notes in description..
Is a simpler explanation of Zero Point Energy basically that if a particle has mass, then there is a minimum finite value of energy it will still have at zero point energy?
Hello professor, great video! I am seeing that a lot of these results depends on the fact that the value of a variable is always greater than or equal to the uncertainty associated with that variable, could you elaborate on why would that be the case? I see that otherwise the uncertainty would possibilitate negative values but why would that be a problem for, for example, the position of a particle, a value that can realistic achieve negative values.
Sir thanks a lot!
All i know of QM is just bcz of u sir..
I am totally dependent on your videos
Just a question : Could you complete this course till 20 nov
(If not please tell how much it be covered till then🙏)
Pls upload more videos on quantum mechanics ❤❤❤❤
thanks sir
The Bohr Model of the Atom is in both
LC PHYSICS
LC CHEMISTRY
I have a problem with the first part of the video, the probability of an electron being in the nucleus. First, the definition of uncertainty is a bit vague. Does it refer to the size of an object, or to one, two or three standard deviations, or to something else. Moreover, if the electron is supposed to be accepted only in a minor compartment of the nucleus, i.e. associated with a neutron, the uncertainty of position will be enormously reduced and thus supposedly satisfy the Heisenberg principle and all energy requirements. The electron seems to have some probability of nuclear location in the s-shell, according to a number of papers on internet.
This said, thank you so much for the best lecture series on You Tube
If the uncertainty in position is greatly reduced, the uncertainty in momentum (and hence minimum Energy of particle) will be greatly increased, as they are inversely proportional
Love ♥️
Great instruction so far! Question: at time stamp 38:00, where does the 2 pie come from? Thank you!
I multiplied 2pie in both numerator and denominator to re-write the expression in terms of h_cut
@@FortheLoveofPhysics okay, got it! Thank you for the explanation. I greatly appreciate your work.
So can I apply the uncertainty principle with any quantum state?
Does the lifespan of 10 ns mean that is the length (in time) of the photon wave packet?
@ 1:15 THIS IS NOT THE CORRECT INEQUALITY.
One should relate dx to the x-component of dp only!
So the inequality is correct when you put a subscript x to dp.
I meant the x-component of momentum only. Most times we deal with 1D motion, so don't specify this, as it's kind of obvious, unless we deal with 3D motion
@@FortheLoveofPhysics In physics, not specifying a direction means you're in 3D, my friend.
Sir I have this one question related to the displacement of a body when force is applied on it.
So the question goes like this :-
There is a boy travelling with a cycle and while travelling he throws a ball in upward direction (against gravity) but at the same time when boy is throwing ball he is also cycling due to which it happens that, the position of the boy when he threw the ball and the position of the boy when he caught the ball was different. The position in which the ball is caught is slightly ahead of the position in which the ball is thrown and the positions of both are different. Now basically when the position of the boy (along the cycle) has been displaced or it has been recoiled and then when we are applying force to the ball in a particular direction (meaning upward) then why is the ball back in our hands?Since we have already recoiled. So does it mean that the force we are applying is causing the displacement of ball in two directions, one towards the upward direction and one towards the direction in which boy is cycling.
Sir it could be a weird question for you but as a 10th grader I'm struggling in it. Maybe I haven't clear my motion basics. It would be very much helpful if you answered it
consider the rider starting from rest and then achieving a constant velocity v now if ball is in his hand ball is travelling with v now when rider apply force in upward direction ball goes up but however there is no force in horizontal direction which makes the velocity v remain constant for the ball...due to which it moves in forward direction. so there
is not a force responsible for forward motion of the ball but the inertia or conservation of momentum in horizontal direction.however when rider started with his ride keeping the ball with him must have applied the force on the ball in forward direction to let the achieve velocity v from the rest as we considerd.
question was good though...made a iitian to reply.
Awesome video, but it's still wild to me that you can get rid of a factor of 2 in the denominator and end up with the right answer.
I'm assuming it's the right answer and something is just going over my head.
The HUP is an INEQUALITY. Hence, it represents a limit to certain measurements/processes, and should not be considered a direct derivation as such. They merely indicate or point to a certain fact. I made this video since it's interesting, but these are not generalised derivations at all. Hope that makes sense
This video used to many heuristics for my taste. It was clever, but not actually accurate in the way these values are actually derived. … One can get into trouble with using too hand wavy arguments.
Well it does it's job since this is a beginner course,it gives enough info to get u excited to dive into the more complex stuff later
Like other lecture I need to watch again until I feel gravity force under my feet .
I feel lost myself in quantum space.
Uncertainty is only in our measurements not with the particles any way.
Baitho beta abhi bhot kuch pdhna hai
Baitho beta abhi bhot kuch pdhna hai
Fantastic lesson by a communications master. Thank you. I'm eagerly looking forward to your introduction of the Shroedinger equation in 2027 and the Dirac Equation in 2029. Please ditch this QM tutorial and go back to fun stuff like modeling the Magnus effect on Scilab...
I apologise for creating that feeling. I am myself facing a similar Uncertainty Principle, in TH-cam videos. The more I try to finely resolve the presentation of each video topic, the greater the time between individual videos.
Jokes aside, to be honest, I could record all upcoming videos at one go without any preparation!! But I am scared the video and presentation quality would suffer. So I spend days making fresh notes on each topic, then recording, then upload+thumbnail (even though the ROI is very less and hardly any financial incentive is there) I have to take out 1-2 days out of my jam-packed week for each video. After taking sometimes 4 hrs of continuous lectures on a day to day basis, my brain is drained.
Having said that, I will try. I don't know how, but I completely understand the disappointed, and will try to upload more frequently
Quantum mechanics, we know but we don't . We are but we aren't . There is something or is there? .
🤍🤍🤍
Sir please make video on physics of tantra mantra and physics of magic
😂😂😂😂