What strikes me most is the lack of views and subscribers. Why do I have this fascination and see so much meaning in Deutsch's work, but others observably do not? Love your work Brett.
Excellent visual representation and layout, Brett! -This chapter to my mind is the basis of explanation in real accessible terms of Everettian multiverse theory..
Brett, when you have photo detectors on all 4 slits, and only one detector registers it, do we really see the 4 slit pattern like David describes it or does the pattern disappear as I have read elsewhere where they say ‘observation destroys interference’. I am confused by the “actual” result of that experiment.
At 14:12 @Brett Hall says that space time is continually divisible and not quantised, as I understand him. But David is in his books says: Quantum theory gets its name from this property, which it attributes to all measurable physical quantities - not just to things like the amount of light, or the mass of gold, which are quantized because the entities concerned, though apparently continuous, are really made of particles. Even for quantities like distance (between two atoms, say), the notion of a continuous range of possible values turns out to be an idealization. There are no measurable continuous quantities in physics. Deutsch, David (2011-04-13T23:58:59.000). The Fabric of Reality (Penguin Science) . Penguin Books Ltd. Kindle Edition. These statements seem to contradict each other??
Does the speed of light change as it bends because Einstein as a train carriage moves towards the speed of lite then light seems to lose its own sense of speed therefore I'm wondering is the speed of light constant even as it is being sucked into a black hole given that this theory is hypothetical
A question that recurs often is: If Schroedinger's equation shows-as is often stated in its explanation-that once the worlds (universes, instances..) divide, they are henceforth separate and may not affect each other-then how is this undeniable interference possible? (From the time I first read this chapter, it seemed that perhaps some important key to the entire puzzle might be found in this inconsistency..?)
I know this is a misconception but maybe you can help out; You said that everywhere there is matter, there are ”copies” of matter in the other universes. But lets say I do a schroedingers cat type of experiment and if it goes one way, I build a wall and if it goes the other way I dont. 50 % of universes would then not have that wall to catch shadow photons.
Ah but that would mean that there would be an inf ....ah!.......oh.......you're ahead of me.....the TV TH-cam has skipped to Chapter 11, the Beginning of Infinity....OK, very good. carry on.
But hang on....the fact that we have a multiplying infinite number of universes is not the odd thing...the odd thing is that there are an infinite number of identical universes waiting to split into an infinite number of infinite number of universes........that is odd.....and another odd thing is why do the photons only collide with one of the other shadow photons? Surely space is jam packed with shadow photos so that they are continually bashing into each other.......I shall view on.....
Timelines not universes for me. I’m thinking it’s more geometric changes atom up, align to corresponding timeline. No system ideally would create so many universes. Rather use a kinetic space to alternative moments- time slices - atom up etc - all possible- potential variations - timelines. Just my opinion 🖖 cool vid tho.
I came here to understand - "observation destroyes interference" part and you skipped reading and explaining that part, it was one of the most important things from this chapter😑😑
Observation is a physical process. So, for example, to see something - like an electron - you need to shine a light on it. Light is needed for seeing. At the level of an electron, if you shine a light on it - you fire a photon at it. That is a physical process - an interaction between particles. What would have happened without the light (interference) does not happen with the light. So too when you are just talking photons themselves. Photon detectors have to physically interact with the photons and this alters their paths, destroying interference phenomena. So there's nothing spooky or mysterious about the observer effect. It's just physics. Observers obey the same physics as every other system.
@@bretthall9080What about quantum eraser experiment? Where the physical process of measurement does happen but the information about result of the measurement is destroyed and yet interference is supposedly observed…
What is the reasoning behind Deutsch statement that shadow photons partitioned off into parallel universes among themselves as opposed to the conclusion that all of the "shadow photons" come from the same universe in the one-particle-at-a-time double slit experiment ?
Deutsch does not say they are "partitioned off into parallel universes". Indeed he explicitly rejects the "parallel universe" conception of the multiverse: in part for reasons you hint at. The universes are only approximately parallel (which means not parallel). The barely interact but they do interact during interference events - such as the double slit experiment. Whether we say "it's a multiverse" or "the universe is much bigger than we initially thought" is nothing but a linguistic shift. The underlying explanation is the same: there are many more entities that we cannot observe required to explain what we do observe. Whether those entities are in (approximately) parallel other universes or whether they are part of our universe does not really matter. In any case the "parallel universes" are not much like whole cosmological universes. They can be tiny (even microscopic) "bubbles" within our universe. For more on that see Wallace "The Emergent Multiverse".
@@bretthall9080 I dont see the obvious thing, WHY or how would these other universes react through interference. It seems like epicycles. What does explain the double split experiment is waves. Maybe this entire theory is upside down. Instead of tryting to figure out how photons cause wave patterns , maybe we should be trying to figure out how emitted photons travel as waves .
@@AdamBlack We know photons are particles because the photoelectric effect experiment rules out the theory they are waves. The only alternative is: they are particles. That is what explains ionisation of atoms by photons: literal collisions between particles of light and electrons.
What strikes me most is the lack of views and subscribers.
Why do I have this fascination and see so much meaning in Deutsch's work, but others observably do not?
Love your work Brett.
Yeah this is THE Book I was searching for years
Are all the laws of physics applicable to shadow reality??
Excellent visual representation and layout, Brett! -This chapter to my mind is the basis of explanation in real accessible terms of Everettian multiverse theory..
Brett, when you have photo detectors on all 4 slits, and only one detector registers it, do we really see the 4 slit pattern like David describes it or does the pattern disappear as I have read elsewhere where they say ‘observation destroys interference’. I am confused by the “actual” result of that experiment.
Thanks Brett for this video. The different images really help to follow along!
At 14:12 @Brett Hall says that space time is continually divisible and not quantised, as I understand him. But David is in his books says:
Quantum theory gets its name from this property, which it attributes to all measurable physical quantities - not just to things like the amount of light, or the mass of gold, which are quantized because the entities concerned, though apparently continuous, are really made of particles. Even for quantities like distance (between two atoms, say), the notion of a continuous range of possible values turns out to be an idealization. There are no measurable continuous quantities in physics.
Deutsch, David (2011-04-13T23:58:59.000). The Fabric of Reality (Penguin Science) . Penguin Books Ltd. Kindle Edition.
These statements seem to contradict each other??
Does the speed of light change as it bends because Einstein as a train carriage moves towards the speed of lite then light seems to lose its own sense of speed therefore I'm wondering is the speed of light constant even as it is being sucked into a black hole given that this theory is hypothetical
A question that recurs often is: If Schroedinger's equation shows-as is often stated in its explanation-that once the worlds (universes, instances..) divide, they are henceforth separate and may not affect each other-then how is this undeniable interference possible? (From the time I first read this chapter, it seemed that perhaps some important key to the entire puzzle might be found in this inconsistency..?)
I know this is a misconception but maybe you can help out; You said that everywhere there is matter, there are ”copies” of matter in the other universes. But lets say I do a schroedingers cat type of experiment and if it goes one way, I build a wall and if it goes the other way I dont. 50 % of universes would then not have that wall to catch shadow photons.
Ah but that would mean that there would be an inf ....ah!.......oh.......you're ahead of me.....the TV TH-cam has skipped to Chapter 11, the Beginning of Infinity....OK, very good. carry on.
But hang on....the fact that we have a multiplying infinite number of universes is not the odd thing...the odd thing is that there are an infinite number of identical universes waiting to split into an infinite number of infinite number of universes........that is odd.....and another odd thing is why do the photons only collide with one of the other shadow photons? Surely space is jam packed with shadow photos so that they are continually bashing into each other.......I shall view on.....
It was my realization that there were other photons,other slits and other people doing the experiment that changed my world view.
Finally, an explanation that dispenses with the woo of the perpetually misunderstood observer effect! Halle-bloody-luja….😊
Timelines not universes for me. I’m thinking it’s more geometric changes atom up, align to corresponding timeline. No system ideally would create so many universes. Rather use a kinetic space to alternative moments- time slices - atom up etc - all possible- potential variations - timelines. Just my opinion 🖖 cool vid tho.
I came here to understand - "observation destroyes interference" part and you skipped reading and explaining that part, it was one of the most important things from this chapter😑😑
Observation is a physical process. So, for example, to see something - like an electron - you need to shine a light on it. Light is needed for seeing. At the level of an electron, if you shine a light on it - you fire a photon at it. That is a physical process - an interaction between particles. What would have happened without the light (interference) does not happen with the light. So too when you are just talking photons themselves. Photon detectors have to physically interact with the photons and this alters their paths, destroying interference phenomena. So there's nothing spooky or mysterious about the observer effect. It's just physics. Observers obey the same physics as every other system.
@@bretthall9080 thanks Brett, good explanation.
@@bretthall9080What about quantum eraser experiment? Where the physical process of measurement does happen but the information about result of the measurement is destroyed and yet interference is supposedly observed…
What is the reasoning behind Deutsch statement that shadow photons partitioned off into parallel universes among themselves as opposed to the conclusion that all of the "shadow photons" come from the same universe in the one-particle-at-a-time double slit experiment ?
Deutsch does not say they are "partitioned off into parallel universes". Indeed he explicitly rejects the "parallel universe" conception of the multiverse: in part for reasons you hint at. The universes are only approximately parallel (which means not parallel). The barely interact but they do interact during interference events - such as the double slit experiment. Whether we say "it's a multiverse" or "the universe is much bigger than we initially thought" is nothing but a linguistic shift. The underlying explanation is the same: there are many more entities that we cannot observe required to explain what we do observe. Whether those entities are in (approximately) parallel other universes or whether they are part of our universe does not really matter. In any case the "parallel universes" are not much like whole cosmological universes. They can be tiny (even microscopic) "bubbles" within our universe. For more on that see Wallace "The Emergent Multiverse".
@@bretthall9080 I dont see the obvious thing, WHY or how would these other universes react through interference.
It seems like epicycles.
What does explain the double split experiment is waves.
Maybe this entire theory is upside down. Instead of tryting to figure out how photons cause wave patterns , maybe we should be trying to figure out how emitted photons travel as waves .
@@AdamBlack We know photons are particles because the photoelectric effect experiment rules out the theory they are waves. The only alternative is: they are particles. That is what explains ionisation of atoms by photons: literal collisions between particles of light and electrons.