“You know how waves are also particles?” “Yeah?” “Well... what if.. hear me out now... particles, are also waves” “woahh dude you should write a paper”
If you feel you're smarter than others then think of the quantum realm...everything in there is possible...even others are more intelligent than you in that realm
You won't understand this video unless you have studied quantum mechanics. This video is just a brief description of wave - particle duality. There is a large background behind this duality.
@@rn6045 go check out videos of the double slit experiment. They will show that particles seem to behave differently when "observed" and not "observed"
It's funny how one hundred years since the particle-wave explanation of light and matter was developed, we still don't understand its underlying principles.
We are lucky to be in a fine tuned universe for life and us to ponder these conflicting ideas. We are lucky to live in a universe where duality is possible. What would a universe be like with only particles? What would a universe be like with only waves?
@@kevinlutz5994 no duality at all , everything is wave ,what we call particles are just condensed wave i.e wave with very high frequancy , they does not want to tell you that fact
Keep up the good work! Without this channel, I'm probably crying my eyes out trying to understand it! You guys helped me understand things A LOT. thank you so much 💞
2:51 NOTE: when representing orbits from the elements in the Periodic Table, a modified representation of Bohr's Atom Representation is still used even until today!
Dude this particle duality explanation is the best. Btw can you make a video explaining subatomic particles? And do subatomic particle correlate with dark matter?
Feynman did not believe in particle wave dualism, he thought light was made of particles. He did not have an explanation for the double slit experiment, and that was his mystery. In the Auckland lecture on photons, he mocked the idea that a particle could suddenly decide to turn into a wave (the standard Copenhagen interpretation).
One way to think of wave particle duality of light and matter in the form of electrons is that it is forming a blank canvas for us (atoms) to interact with; we have waves over a period of time and particles as an uncertain future unfolds. The mathematics of quantum mechanics represents the physics of time with classical physics represents processes over a ‘period of time’ as in Newton's differential equations. In this theory the mathematics of quantum mechanics represents geometry, the Planck Constant ħ=h/2π is linked to 2π circular geometry representing a two dimensional aspect of 4π spherical three-dimensional geometry. We have to square the wave function Ψ² representing the radius being squared r² because the process is relative to the two-dimensional spherical 4π surface. We then see 4π in Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle ∆×∆pᵪ≥h/4π representing our probabilistic temporal three dimensions life. The charge of the electron e² and the speed of light c² are both squared for the same geometrical reason. We have this concept because the electromagnetic force forms a continuous exchange of energy forming what we experience as time. The spontaneous absorption and emission of light photon ∆E=hf energy is forming potential photon energy into the kinetic energy of electrons. Kinetic Eₖ=½mv² energy is the energy of what is actually happening. An uncertain probabilistic future is continuously coming into existence with the exchange of photon energy.
Ted Ed ur vedios are awesome and it gives us Amazing ideas about the topic. But one suggestion is please make the vedios in order and make all the vedios about that topic. I mean consider quantum mechanics, pls make all the vedios related to it and helps us understand it much better. Not like one or two...
Is it perfectly logical and natural only for me? I never really understood how you could have waves without particles, so for me this is actually much easier to accept. And I wonder if I actually understand this a bit or if I don't understand it at all, so it seems simple :P
Could we have a logic understanding of quantum mechanics if we explained it as an emergent interactive process unfolding photon by photon? This idea would have wave and particles nature based on: (E=ˠM˳C²)∞ with energy ∆E equals mass ∆M linked to the Lorentz contraction ˠ of space and time. The Lorentz contraction ˠ represents the time dilation of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. We have energy ∆E slowing the rate that time ∆t flows as a universal process of energy exchange or continuous creation. Mass will increase relative to this process with gravity being a secondary force to the electromagnetic force. The c² represents the speed of light c radiating out in a sphere 4π of EMR from its radius forming a square c² of probability. We have to square the probability of the wave-function Ψ because the area of the sphere is equal to the square of the radius of the sphere multiplied by 4π. This simple geometrical process forms the probability and uncertainty of everyday life and at the smallest scale of the process is represented mathematically by Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle ∆×∆pᵪ≥h/4π. In such a theory we have an emergent future unfolding photon by photon with the movement of charge and flow of EM fields. This gives us a geometrical reason for positive and negative charge with a concaved inner surface for negative charge and a convexed outer surface for positive charge. The brackets in the equation (E=ˠM˳C²)∞ represent a dynamic boundary condition of an individual reference frame with an Arrow of Time or time line for each frame of reference. The infinity ∞ symbol represents an infinite number of dynamic interactive reference frames that are continuously coming in and out of existence.
Quantum Light (h) is a dualistic quantum particle that in the cosmic vacuum can fly at a constant speed (c=1). In this movement, light uses its linear spin and it does not produce electromagnetic waves. Light behaves like a corpuscular. But light can behave like a wave if it uses its angular rotation (the torque required to accelerate angularly around the axis of rotation). In this situation, the speed of the light is faster than the constant. The speed is c>1. This situation is explained by Lorentz transformations. The problem is that we do not know the geometric shape of the light quantum.
WAVE OR PARTICLE; Psy Phy Physics from a science fiction writer Why do I look at waves not particles? Looking at waves, not particles shows the weaknesses and problems yet to be solved in quantum mechanics, also the clues to move forward. More and more I see the particle as a SUBSET of the wave. The particle is most probably in the crests and troughs, that means it is part of the wave. The particle is almost never in the nodes of the waves. There seems to be some type of duality here where the particle seems more mass like, and the wave, more energy like. Could almost say one is in space time, the other in a dimensionless point. The quantum world is never cut and dried - so that for me means spin, superposition of waves, destructive interference of waves, virtual particles, magnetic properties, direction of the waves, orbitals, binding energy, charge properties and particle wave duality: they are all going on at once, and everywhere in the atom at the same time.
Quantum Physicists are like Philosophers. Their theories have more to do with truth (in their ability to start all over and question first principles) than any other deterministic scientists.
Bell's Theorem should have us thinking about the superluminal world. A couple of points to note are (1) In one dimension of space, the relativistic velocity addition law implies symmetry between the subluminal and superluminal worlds. Everything travelling at speed u has a doppelganger travelling at speed c squared / u. (2) Playing around with the Minkowski formalism, there appears to be more than one way to travel faster than light. The tachyonic way exchanges momentum and energy, while the other way exchanges spacelike and timelike intervals. This idea is not quite original to me - I have seen it in the literature. I am interested in working out how a computer simulation of quantum mechanics might make use of a random number generator, based on my experience with fluid mechanics and Brownian motion of vorticity. We need to add some sort of Brownian motion to quantum mechanics. I would suggest that any Wiener process simply goes straight through the light barrier and occupies both the subluminal world and superluminal world equally. The entity is in tachyonic Brownian motion. We can have wavelike behaviour, with destructive interference, in the other way to travel faster than light. The TBM is responsible for particle-like behaviour of the entity. For example if two or more detectors are trying to catch the entity, TBM breaks the symmetry and only one detector gets the prize. In this scheme, wavelike and particle-like behaviour begin by being orthogonal to each other. Both behaviours are useless for nonlocal communication. The key is knowing that there is more than one way to travel faster than light. After that you can construct your own theory and quantum mechanics becomes not so mysterious as a subject. It is still difficult but not impossibly so. We should be dishing out free testbed computer simulations of quantum mechanics so anyone can work out how to use a random number generator if my own ideas turn out to be wrong. I have written something in Excel VBA and every home should have one. One benefit of a spreadsheet is that generating a cinematic loop for the output is easy. VBA can do the sort of algebraic or object-oriented programming that we need for complex numbers and bispinors. I have a three-stage integrator for the Dirac equation. The engineering problems are being solved. It's now just a matter of using our imagination.
I’m a layman, but it seems the most obvious & logical explanation for particles acting like polarizable axial or circular, helical waves as they travel is that they’re orbiting something (a dark (or anti) matter particle perhaps). It's not unlike Earth being pulled into a wobble by the moon, or a distant star's wobble evidencing planet orbits making our trajectories as we fly thru space have an apparent axial or circular helical wave (like a packet) as well, depending on the orientation of the orbit. And since we think we know undetectable dark matter exists and should be 5 times as common as matter but don't yet know where it's distributed, it seems a logical possibility is that we are in a sea of dark matter, even in otherwise empty space, and every particle (photons, electrons, etc) is paired in orbit with one. I think gravitational waves could be dark matter waves and that gravity might be caused by the density of dark matter. This could explain the double slit experiment results, including with a detector with some interaction between the dark matter and the detector (and perhaps dark matter entanglement), it could explain the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, as well as explain the deflection of the axis of the particle's wave motion (orbit orientation) moving thru polarizing filters rotated less than 45 degrees apart. Perhaps the only reason for photons' max speed limit is the dark matter they're paired and in orbit rotation with interacting with other dark matter. This could also explain why the universe is expanding from the central singularity point of the big bang outward in all directions faster than the speed of light into previously completely empty universe space, given that there is no dark matter there yet.
You forgot one thing, the Tesla theory of ether. Dipoles of energy particles that set up around the electrons that cause that wave, the electrons do not cause the wave. The magnetic fields set up around the electrons by the ether, keep the electrons in their specific orbits and keep them from spiraling into the nucleus. Electrons do not emit photons, the magnetic field around the electron emits photons. It is the ether flow around electrons that allow electricity to flow and motors to work. And it causes gravity.
Quantum Light (h) is a dualistic quantum particle that in the cosmic vacuum can fly at a constant speed (c=1). In this movement, light uses its linear spin and it does not produce electromagnetic waves. Light behaves like a corpuscular. But light can behave like a wave if it uses its angular rotation (the torque required to accelerate angularly around the axis of rotation). In this situation, the speed of the light is faster than the constant. The speed is c>1. This situation is explained by Lorentz transformations. The problem is that we do not know the geometric shape of the light quantum.
Can anyone explain the relation between heat, IR radiation and how it fits into the modern atomic model? Is IR radiation a thing of the nucleus, electrons or both?
Infrared is just light, but in a wavelength we cannot see. Just like normal light, IR is carried by photons, created when an electron falls down the orbits inside an atom. Xray, UV, wifi, bluetooth, 3g and microwaves are just different wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation (also known as light). :)
Thank you :) But the thing that i dont uderstand is actually: If everything that has some heat in it spontaneously emits IR wavelengths, does it mean that any lattice above absolute zero has excited electrons falling to lower energy states? The same thing goes the othwer way, if i heat a crystal and its atoms wiggle around a bit more, or if i heat a gas and the kinetic energy of its atoms inrease, was it due to electrons jumping to higher states?
Rudolf Droberjár Well, yes and no. When a Gas (or any form of Matter) gets warmer, it's because of the stronger movement of the Atom itself. But thsi stronger movement causes the electrons to jump into higher energystates. It uses enrgy from the bouncing around of the object. But it doesnt work the other way around. You can have a cold atom and have its electrons in a very high state of energy. They wont speed up the atom but will just send out light (in verious frequencys). Does this make it clearer?
+leirgauk when two particles are at a distance from each other, and one "does" something, the other one does exactly the same thing, though they are not "visible" to each other. Einstein called it spooky action at a distance.
HeidiSue60 Well, that's fairly inaccurate. First, the particles had to be previously entangled. Second, if one "does" one thing (if it's measurement reveals a spin-up, for example) the second will "do" the exactly opposite thing (spin down). Third, Esintein was worried about this not because the particles can't "see" each other but because information about the state of one particle seems be transmited instantly to the other (which violates his "nothing moves faster than light" principle). And there is still a deeper problem about the existence of an objective, independent-of-the-observer reality which quantum theory (or at least The Copenhagen Interpretation) seems to deny that also troubled Einstein but i'm to lazy and stupid to try to explain that now. (Only Lovers Left Alive was a bit to pretentious for my taste).
mvr=nh/2pi :- Bohr's quantisation of orbital angular momentum Lambda= h/mv :- debroglie's wavelength of a particle moving with a velocity v and mass m K (max) = hv - work function :- Einstein's photoelectric equation
Not a physicist but it seems to me that when we talk about waves in the ocean or sound waves, we are really talking about interactions between huge numbers of larger objects such as molecules or even small life forms. In a sense, the molecules can be thought of as being rather large particles. When physicists discuss particle/wave questions involving subatomic objects, the waves are just looked at as part of some strange duality that exists within particular objects. How do they know that the waves in question don't involve huge numbers of some sorts of _sub__#sub__#particles_ that are just way to small for us to detect? And I never understood all the arguments about how looking involves consciousness and reality. Do we really need to look to change the reality? It seems to me that detection is the issue and not the observation. If we detect and do not look at the results, particles will still be detected. If I'm confused, I would appreciate it if someone can tell me what I'm missing.
Quantum Light (h) is a dualistic quantum particle that in the cosmic vacuum can fly at a constant speed (c=1). In this movement, light uses its linear spin and it does not produce electromagnetic waves. Light behaves like a corpuscular. But light can behave like a wave if it uses its angular rotation (the torque required to accelerate angularly around the axis of rotation). In this situation, the speed of the light is faster than the constant. The speed is c>1. This situation is explained by Lorentz transformations. The problem is that we do not know the geometric shape of the light quantum.
After 0:10: "Everything in the universe behaves like a particle and a wave AT THE SAME TIME"??? On the contrary, nothing can behave like a particle and a wave at the same time!
Incrível vídeo. Só queria fazer uma crítica construtiva quanto a legenda em português, "órbitas" é referente ao movimento planetário e "orbitais" ao movimento dos elétrons entorno do núcleo.
From my modest knowledge, the experiment is that, when left alone, the electron behaves like a wave, but when it's observed the electron acts like a particle, spooky isn't it? The idea is that, the reality of everything isn't yet real until it measured, and that's true, but in this one, you need to dig a bit deeper the meaning of everything...🤔
@@srikrishna2561 no dont be foold , there is only one fundumentl nature of matter : A wave Nature It may behave like aparticle ,it may have mass , but its still has tiny waving
Time needs to be brought up in this. A particle is a single entity, a vibration in a quantum field, and a wave is a pattern of many entities, vibrating at up and down and left and right as it propagates through space. Particles only show their wave pattern over a period of time.
So, what I don't understand ins the mystery behind this, it seems common sense that if you shoot something with mass at things with mass, it changes the trajectory. And in a laboratory where it is to us windless, there is a sertain "wind" per say at a molecular level. I've never heard on non -dissipated pockets of hydrogen, oxygen, and helium gasses floating along... They seem to mix a sertain way like salt in a glass of water. Same amount of salt, as if it can only dissipate so much of it. Big question is what makes you think it isn't just pinballing around the countless other electrons? Being composed of the same substructures, and commonality of the movement of the photon and or electron, seems to be more of a kentucky windage effect to the layman. Temperature changes, burning sensation such found in the realms of radioactivity. You can feel the electron excitement on your skin, and the amount of electrons that are absorbed and emitted. It is almost as if photons are the energy that makes the universe work in general. Almost as if we need light to keep from decaying.
TED-ed shows in another video how in the slit experiment each electron passes through both slits at the same time. In this video they show the electron passing through just one slit at a time. Can you make your mind up what is happening?
If the speed of light is constant and e=mc^2, than with any variation in speed should increase the weight of the object moving? Or does spacetime simply just bend and adjust to account for that speed change? It has to be one or the other because if you increase speed (energy,"e") the "m" must increase because "c^2" is constant. Hence e=mc^2
Right on. this is also why you can't go faster than light, because the closer you get to light speed the heavier the object gets, and the more energy you need to accelerate it, this can also help understand why photons are weightless, because an object moving at light speed is either infinitely heavy (we don't know of any objects of this kind) or completely weightless.
***** Mass does not increase with velocity. This is a way to common misconception that came about because of a poor definition of mass. The m in e=mc^2 is better known as the rest mass. The rest mass of an object is an intrinsic property of the object and does not change. What does change when an object increases its velocity is it's momentum. What many people don't realize is that e=mc^2 only applies to stationary objects. It's a simplified version of a more complex equation with takes velocity into account, e^2 = (mc^2)+(pc)^2. If the velocity is 0, then (pc)^2 becomes 0 and you get e=mc^2. However, if the rest mass is zero(like for a photon), then you get e=pc.
Great video, only one important remark. There´s not dualistic nature, the dualism comes from our old terms and understanding, photons are not particles, not waves, non-dualistic new "thighs", Richard Feynman put it clear that calling them part waves part particle was just a linguistic simplification.
Jumping from De Boglie to Feynman, forgetting Schrödinger and Heisenberg is a bit strange. Feynman contributed virtually nothing to elementary quantum mechanics. There was also Born, Jordan and Dirac. The wave aspect of the electron has been proved for the first time by the experiment of Davisson and Germer, through scattering by the surface a cristal.
Ion Absolutely none. Tesla was a visionary and a genius, but he wasn't this "supergenius rejected by the world" that invented "free energy" bullshit that Tesla fans love to tell themselves.
tesla was more into the current and magnetism field of physics than into the Quantum mechanics field. Infact there was no quantum mechanics in his time
Particles do not behave like wave when they are not moving. It's the movement of the particle that causes the wave and the frequency of that wave is proportional to the speed of the particle.
That sounds highly sensible to me. But it implies that you can know both the position and the momentum of a particle and goes against the quantum beliefs in many ways. And when you take into account of the 'fact' that motion is relative, that creates chaos in the religion of modern physics. debunkingrelativity.com/2014/03/22/revamping-wave-mechanics/
drgsrinivas, some of your theory reminds me of Jim Schofield's empty photon theory. www.e-journal.org.uk/shape/papers/s03home.html The vacuum mechanics theory is also similar. www.vacuum-mechanics.com/ Well, I have a lot of reading to do on your website. Thanks, Rene
Rene, Thank you very much for the great links. It just felt like rediscovering myself over there. I think if one's mind doesn't give up rational thinking, and doesn't yield and 'succumb' to the weird teachings of the 'authorities' of knowledge, one would invariably arrive at the same logical conclusion sooner or later and experience the ultimate reality.
Ohhh, really, how can you possibly shut one single electron out of this thing? They are immensely small! How can you even see them on that board behind the barrier? Please, explain this to me.
Why is it that a photon of light is visible and a light-wave is not? Which is why space is not flooded with light as it should be. I understand that light has particle/wave duality, but does this mean that light changes wavelength and frequency when it interacts with matter (and becomes a photon)?
اللهم إني أستعين بك يا الله ،اللهم حقق لي حلمي واجعل لي الخير وإن كنت أطمع في دخول كلية الطب وأطمع بأعلى المنازل ،اللهم ارزقنا الخير يا الله فنحن نطلب العلم ونُستنزف نفسيا وجسديا وماديا سبيل ذلك , اللهم أعنا على طاعتك وحسن عبادتك وكن لنا عوناً وقت الإمتحان يا الله
I laughed,for what, I was fascinated, I'm 15 and tried to undertsand this mystery and I was thinking too what if the particles behaved like waves, ( NO LYING ) . And here is the answer, PHYSICS always FASCINATE you
Since we know we’re in a sea of undetectable dark matter but don’t know exactly where it’s distributed and since everything in the universe from electrons to solar systems is in orbit with something else, why isn’t the first assumption of how or why a photon acts like a particle but also as a “wave packet” for every physics student to think every photon might be in orbit with a dark matter particle pulling it into a polarizable axial or helical apparent wave as they travel?
Even this video had a misguiding graph at the end, doesn't it?, They showed the absorbed places if elections on the screen and then compared it to a graph, but why??? I thought waves were because of the superposition of wavelets after the slits?
That's happening because when we try to watch the particle, we have to measure it we some kind o detector. To detect something we have to shoot photons to the electron. So when the photon hits the electron, it changes electron energy and place and then it behaves like a particle :)
It has nothing to do with it "being watched". This was an early hypothesis that has since been thrown out long ago. But it makes for catchy pop science that is easy for the masses to digest. What is really happening is that quantum particles (or waves) are so small, and carry so little information, that trying to extract information about them, like their position in space, momentum, energy level or anything else, changes this very information about the particle you're trying to extract. Imagine having a huge field with a football in it, rolling across the grass. Observing where the football is, or the direction it's moving in, or what color it is, by shining photons on it, and having those photons reflect back into your eye, isn't an issue. Unless the football is the size of an electron. Now even a single photon will change the footballs' position, direction and momentum when you hit it. And this is not a fault of our equipment not being advanced enough, this is a fundamental truth about the universe. The bare minimum of information needed to define objects means that extracting that information, causes them to "not exist" or change into a different object.
yes, they behave like a particle at one spacetime set up and behave like wave at another environment setup!! Language can only reflect our interpretation of the phenomena but cant give you about what electron is!!! I agree that there is linguistic problem for quantum world!!!
Everything is wave and it has infite possibilities and when seen through an instrument its seem something else, that instrument is anything including your body . If there are infinite instruments, infinite world can be seen in that wave.
Quantum mechanic is no mysterious. There's no difference between sub atomic mechanic and larger scale logic. You just have to understand that "random" and "free will" both describe the same phenomenon (the first one is from a "viewer" POV and the latter from the "actor" POV). So basically if you looked at the earth from a distant POV and with a time scale way faster: you would see that components of earth (humans for example, but seen as millions and over century seeming as minutes) have a very predictable behavior (look at history of humanity), but if you look closer, each human seem to behave randomly and are hard to predict (they even think they have free will). The big mystery in all that is that we are all connected unconsciously and when we think we do think under our own free will, we actually behave in a fake random/free-will way which actually balance the univers energy. Also, there is no wave/particle duality for the simple reason that there is not such a think as "particle". The idea of particle is just a leftover of a misconception induced by our senses (mainly vision). The "absolute zero" theory proves it. everything is wave; disturbance of energy (electricity, thus magnetism and electromagnetism) radiating and interfering with others.
This 5 minutes video summarizes one whole chapter i studied in class11
At least 2
That's so true
Are you from India or Pakistan ?
True 🤚🏻
Yup
Louis de Broglie: *takes a hit from joint* Wh.. what if electrons... were like particles but WAVES!
What if they were parwaves!!
@@BumanHeing Wavicles*
“You know how waves are also particles?” “Yeah?” “Well... what if.. hear me out now... particles, are also waves” “woahh dude you should write a paper”
والله انا جاي من كتاب مستر محمود مجدي مكنتش اعرف ان الحوار كبير كد
😂😂😂😂
😂😂
وانا والله 😂😂😂😂😂
شوف حلقه الدحيح بتاعه اعظم تجربه فالفيزيا وهتفهم
الدحيح والعلم بالملعقة تكلموا عن الموضوع
Came to feel smarter. Left feeling dumber.
Slipy Duck The more you now, the more there is to know
Yeah, so basically what I've gathered is that no one really knows what the heck is going on.
@@IEIDIDO Physics explains that uncertainty certainly exists.
If you feel you're smarter than others then think of the quantum realm...everything in there is possible...even others are more intelligent than you in that realm
You won't understand this video unless you have studied quantum mechanics. This video is just a brief description of wave - particle duality. There is a large background behind this duality.
The double slit experiment always messed with my head a long time ago
So was I. I was deeply shocked when my Professor taught wave - particle duality :)))
@Astute Cingulus what do you mean waves become restrained? I'm having trouble understanding that concept
@@rn6045 go check out videos of the double slit experiment. They will show that particles seem to behave differently when "observed" and not "observed"
@@anhlehoang3492 why did u shocked? It has been known almost one century.
@@dickyarjuna1566 That was the first time I got known to Quantum theory.
It's funny how one hundred years since the particle-wave explanation of light and matter was developed, we still don't understand its underlying principles.
Maybe because it's being kept as secret, they don't want people to know we are living in a Matrix 😂
The greatest shock delivered is when they tell us"Everything you learnt about the Bohr's Atomic Model is Incorrect. Forget it."💔
We are lucky to be in a fine tuned universe for life and us to ponder these conflicting ideas. We are lucky to live in a universe where duality is possible. What would a universe be like with only particles? What would a universe be like with only waves?
@@techstuff3409 Are we living in a simulation? 🤖
@@kevinlutz5994 no duality at all , everything is wave ,what we call particles are just condensed wave i.e wave with very high frequancy , they does not want to tell you that fact
Keep up the good work! Without this channel, I'm probably crying my eyes out trying to understand it! You guys helped me understand things A LOT. thank you so much 💞
Great! Now i have to clean up my wall because my brain just exploded.
I want those people behind that video as my teachers!
You are in the wrong universe friend
Vinny Horapeti what
@@amikishimoto7680 I mean you will not find these kind of teachers in school
In a sense, they already are! That;s what I love about TH-cam. I can watch 5 videos about the same thing until I find one that I can understand.
مستر محمود مجدي 😍
Electrons are soo damn amazing
all fundamental particles are amazing
Why don't u just call particles waves and vice versa
why don't you marry one then.
why just electrons and not protons and neutrons ?
@@saltycyanide2738 all of them behaves this way
احلى فيزيكس مع م.محمود مجدي ❤
دفعة 2024
فهمتي حاجه
2:51 NOTE: when representing orbits from the elements in the Periodic Table, a modified representation of Bohr's Atom Representation is still used even until today!
Chad makes is soo clear! Give that man a raise!
I love you Chad !
He’s a Chad
Dude this particle duality explanation is the best. Btw can you make a video explaining subatomic particles? And do subatomic particle correlate with dark matter?
Feynman did not believe in particle wave dualism, he thought light was made of particles. He did not have an explanation for the double slit experiment, and that was his mystery. In the Auckland lecture on photons, he mocked the idea that a particle could suddenly decide to turn into a wave (the standard Copenhagen interpretation).
Yeah , you are right
I feel smarter AND dumber at the same time, that’s quantum learning I guess...
... or not.
@Bhaswanth
Or entirely different.
Schrödinger's learning
One way to think of wave particle duality of light and matter in the form of electrons is that it is forming a blank canvas for us (atoms) to interact with; we have waves over a period of time and particles as an uncertain future unfolds. The mathematics of quantum mechanics represents the physics of time with classical physics represents processes over a ‘period of time’ as in Newton's differential equations.
In this theory the mathematics of quantum mechanics represents geometry, the Planck Constant ħ=h/2π is linked to 2π circular geometry representing a two dimensional aspect of 4π spherical three-dimensional geometry. We have to square the wave function Ψ² representing the radius being squared r² because the process is relative to the two-dimensional spherical 4π surface. We then see 4π in Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle ∆×∆pᵪ≥h/4π representing our probabilistic temporal three dimensions life. The charge of the electron e² and the speed of light c² are both squared for the same geometrical reason. We have this concept because the electromagnetic force forms a continuous exchange of energy forming what we experience as time. The spontaneous absorption and emission of light photon ∆E=hf energy is forming potential photon energy into the kinetic energy of electrons. Kinetic Eₖ=½mv² energy is the energy of what is actually happening. An uncertain probabilistic future is continuously coming into existence with the exchange of photon energy.
Ted Ed ur vedios are awesome and it gives us Amazing ideas about the topic. But one suggestion is please make the vedios in order and make all the vedios about that topic. I mean consider quantum mechanics, pls make all the vedios related to it and helps us understand it much better. Not like one or two...
Brilliantly explained!!
🥰 👍🏻💯agreed
i've watched various TED ED video, and it's good for my understanding. But for this one, i need to learn again to understand it.
i lost track when he started talking
Planck was never really happy with this but Einstein picked it up and ran with it.. 😂😂😂
wonderful explanation, thank you!
+Tyler Brown
are you tyler dewitt's brother?
Is it perfectly logical and natural only for me? I never really understood how you could have waves without particles, so for me this is actually much easier to accept. And I wonder if I actually understand this a bit or if I don't understand it at all, so it seems simple :P
Could we have a logic understanding of quantum mechanics if we explained it as an emergent interactive process unfolding photon by photon? This idea would have wave and particles nature based on: (E=ˠM˳C²)∞ with energy ∆E equals mass ∆M linked to the Lorentz contraction ˠ of space and time. The Lorentz contraction ˠ represents the time dilation of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. We have energy ∆E slowing the rate that time ∆t flows as a universal process of energy exchange or continuous creation. Mass will increase relative to this process with gravity being a secondary force to the electromagnetic force. The c² represents the speed of light c radiating out in a sphere 4π of EMR from its radius forming a square c² of probability. We have to square the probability of the wave-function Ψ because the area of the sphere is equal to the square of the radius of the sphere multiplied by 4π. This simple geometrical process forms the probability and uncertainty of everyday life and at the smallest scale of the process is represented mathematically by Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle ∆×∆pᵪ≥h/4π. In such a theory we have an emergent future unfolding photon by photon with the movement of charge and flow of EM fields. This gives us a geometrical reason for positive and negative charge with a concaved inner surface for negative charge and a convexed outer surface for positive charge. The brackets in the equation (E=ˠM˳C²)∞ represent a dynamic boundary condition of an individual reference frame with an Arrow of Time or time line for each frame of reference. The infinity ∞ symbol represents an infinite number of dynamic interactive reference frames that are continuously coming in and out of existence.
scientists are the real life superheroes that we dont deserved but we needed.
I wish your channel should have more subscribers than t-series or piewdepie
WE NEED MORE VIDEOS LIKE THIS ... amazing ^_^
BRILLIANT !! It's part of Malaysian High School Physics syllabus, newly introduced 1 year back 👍🏻👍🏻😁 .. definitely helps in understanding
Quantum Light (h) is a dualistic quantum particle that in the cosmic vacuum
can fly at a constant speed (c=1). In this movement, light uses its linear spin
and it does not produce electromagnetic waves. Light behaves like a corpuscular.
But light can behave like a wave if it uses its angular rotation (the torque required
to accelerate angularly around the axis of rotation). In this situation, the speed
of the light is faster than the constant. The speed is c>1.
This situation is explained by Lorentz transformations.
The problem is that we do not know the geometric shape of the light quantum.
best quantum physics related video i have ever seen. thanks :)
observing the process or not observing makes a difference. thats the most amazing fact.
Because the so-called "observation" changes the state of the wave/particle.
WAVE OR PARTICLE; Psy Phy Physics from a science fiction writer
Why do I look at waves not particles? Looking at waves, not particles shows the weaknesses and problems yet to be solved in quantum mechanics, also the clues to move forward.
More and more I see the particle as a SUBSET of the wave. The particle is most probably in the crests and troughs, that means it is part of the wave. The particle is almost never in the nodes of the waves. There seems to be some type of duality here where the particle seems more mass like, and the wave, more energy like. Could almost say one is in space time, the other in a dimensionless point.
The quantum world is never cut and dried - so that for me means spin, superposition of waves, destructive interference of waves, virtual particles, magnetic properties, direction of the waves, orbitals, binding energy, charge properties and particle wave duality: they are all going on at once, and everywhere in the atom at the same time.
I don't know how but got suddenly interested in physics.. thank you for the video
Seems like Louis de Brogile is the forgotten Hero here
حبيبي ي مستر حوده😂
جبت كام؟😂
It's not plOnk it's plAnck
more like plahnk
@@Insertnamesz No, it's not a long A
It's... *Planhanke*
Could you please tell ...where are you did the animation of your video????🙏🙏🙏
Quantum Physicists are like Philosophers. Their theories have more to do with truth (in their ability to start all over and question first principles) than any other deterministic scientists.
Quantum physics tries to explain reality and relativity.
Bell's Theorem should have us thinking about the superluminal world. A couple of points to note are
(1) In one dimension of space, the relativistic velocity addition law implies symmetry between the subluminal and superluminal worlds. Everything travelling at speed u has a doppelganger travelling at speed c squared / u.
(2) Playing around with the Minkowski formalism, there appears to be more than one way to travel faster than light. The tachyonic way exchanges momentum and energy, while the other way exchanges spacelike and timelike intervals. This idea is not quite original to me - I have seen it in the literature.
I am interested in working out how a computer simulation of quantum mechanics might make use of a random number generator, based on my experience with fluid mechanics and Brownian motion of vorticity. We need to add some sort of Brownian motion to quantum mechanics. I would suggest that any Wiener process simply goes straight through the light barrier and occupies both the subluminal world and superluminal world equally. The entity is in tachyonic Brownian motion. We can have wavelike behaviour, with destructive interference, in the other way to travel faster than light. The TBM is responsible for particle-like behaviour of the entity. For example if two or more detectors are trying to catch the entity, TBM breaks the symmetry and only one detector gets the prize. In this scheme, wavelike and particle-like behaviour begin by being orthogonal to each other. Both behaviours are useless for nonlocal communication.
The key is knowing that there is more than one way to travel faster than light. After that you can construct your own theory and quantum mechanics becomes not so mysterious as a subject. It is still difficult but not impossibly so. We should be dishing out free testbed computer simulations of quantum mechanics so anyone can work out how to use a random number generator if my own ideas turn out to be wrong. I have written something in Excel VBA and every home should have one. One benefit of a spreadsheet is that generating a cinematic loop for the output is easy. VBA can do the sort of algebraic or object-oriented programming that we need for complex numbers and bispinors. I have a three-stage integrator for the Dirac equation. The engineering problems are being solved. It's now just a matter of using our imagination.
من طرف محمود مجدي 😂
I’m a layman, but it seems the most obvious & logical explanation for particles acting like polarizable axial or circular, helical waves as they travel is that they’re orbiting something (a dark (or anti) matter particle perhaps).
It's not unlike Earth being pulled into a wobble by the moon, or a distant star's wobble evidencing planet orbits making our trajectories as we fly thru space have an apparent axial or circular helical wave (like a packet) as well, depending on the orientation of the orbit.
And since we think we know undetectable dark matter exists and should be 5 times as common as matter but don't yet know where it's distributed, it seems a logical possibility is that we are in a sea of dark matter, even in otherwise empty space, and every particle (photons, electrons, etc) is paired in orbit with one. I think gravitational waves could be dark matter waves and that gravity might be caused by the density of dark matter.
This could explain the double slit experiment results, including with a detector with some interaction between the dark matter and the detector (and perhaps dark matter entanglement), it could explain the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, as well as explain the deflection of the axis of the particle's wave motion (orbit orientation) moving thru polarizing filters rotated less than 45 degrees apart.
Perhaps the only reason for photons' max speed limit is the dark matter they're paired and in orbit rotation with interacting with other dark matter.
This could also explain why the universe is expanding from the central singularity point of the big bang outward in all directions faster than the speed of light into previously completely empty universe space, given that there is no dark matter there yet.
من كتابب ابو مجدييي🙈💗
A complex question answered simply thankyou for making such video and keep making the videos
يا مستر حودة احنا بنفهم عربي بالعافية 😂
Best Explanation of Light. Thank you!
You forgot one thing, the Tesla theory of ether. Dipoles of energy particles that set up around the electrons that cause that wave, the electrons do not cause the wave. The magnetic fields set up around the electrons by the ether, keep the electrons in their specific orbits and keep them from spiraling into the nucleus. Electrons do not emit photons, the magnetic field around the electron emits photons. It is the ether flow around electrons that allow electricity to flow and motors to work. And it causes gravity.
Outstanding explanation. I could never understand what Max Planck was envisioning and trying to resolve. Thank you!!!
Quantum Light (h) is a dualistic quantum particle that in the cosmic vacuum
can fly at a constant speed (c=1). In this movement, light uses its linear spin
and it does not produce electromagnetic waves. Light behaves like a corpuscular.
But light can behave like a wave if it uses its angular rotation (the torque required
to accelerate angularly around the axis of rotation). In this situation, the speed
of the light is faster than the constant. The speed is c>1.
This situation is explained by Lorentz transformations.
The problem is that we do not know the geometric shape of the light quantum.
Can anyone explain the relation between heat, IR radiation and how it fits into the modern atomic model? Is IR radiation a thing of the nucleus, electrons or both?
Infrared is just light, but in a wavelength we cannot see. Just like normal light, IR is carried by photons, created when an electron falls down the orbits inside an atom.
Xray, UV, wifi, bluetooth, 3g and microwaves are just different wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation (also known as light). :)
Thank you :) But the thing that i dont uderstand is actually: If everything that has some heat in it spontaneously emits IR wavelengths, does it mean that any lattice above absolute zero has excited electrons falling to lower energy states? The same thing goes the othwer way, if i heat a crystal and its atoms wiggle around a bit more, or if i heat a gas and the kinetic energy of its atoms inrease, was it due to electrons jumping to higher states?
Rudolf Droberjár Well, yes and no. When a Gas (or any form of Matter) gets warmer, it's because of the stronger movement of the Atom itself. But thsi stronger movement causes the electrons to jump into higher energystates. It uses enrgy from the bouncing around of the object. But it doesnt work the other way around. You can have a cold atom and have its electrons in a very high state of energy. They wont speed up the atom but will just send out light (in verious frequencys). Does this make it clearer?
Yes it does. Thanks a lot :)
مستر محمود مجدي، حبيبي حبيبي❤❤❤❤
محمود مجدي عاملكوا قيمه 😂❤️
😂😂
😂😂😂
0:24 "Spooky action at a distance" - what's he referring to?
+leirgauk Quantum entanglament and the way it was "described" by Einstein.
+leirgauk when two particles are at a distance from each other, and one "does" something, the other one does exactly the same thing, though they are not "visible" to each other. Einstein called it spooky action at a distance.
HeidiSue60
Well, that's fairly inaccurate. First, the particles had to be previously entangled. Second, if one "does" one thing (if it's measurement reveals a spin-up, for example) the second will "do" the exactly opposite thing (spin down). Third, Esintein was worried about this not because the particles can't "see" each other but because information about the state of one particle seems be transmited instantly to the other (which violates his "nothing moves faster than light" principle). And there is still a deeper problem about the existence of an objective, independent-of-the-observer reality which quantum theory (or at least The Copenhagen Interpretation) seems to deny that also troubled Einstein but i'm to lazy and stupid to try to explain that now. (Only Lovers Left Alive was a bit to pretentious for my taste).
But i liked Dead Man and Down By Law ;)
Ion Moi? fairly inaccurate hahahaha. But thanks for the much better explanation. I have the bare rudiments of a grasp on all that quantum stuff.
mvr=nh/2pi :- Bohr's quantisation of orbital angular momentum
Lambda= h/mv :- debroglie's wavelength of a particle moving with a velocity v and mass m
K (max) = hv - work function :- Einstein's photoelectric equation
Not a physicist but it seems to me that when we talk about waves in the ocean or sound waves, we are really talking about interactions between huge numbers of larger objects such as molecules or even small life forms. In a sense, the molecules can be thought of as being rather large particles.
When physicists discuss particle/wave questions involving subatomic objects, the waves are just looked at as part of some strange duality that exists within particular objects. How do they know that the waves in question don't involve huge numbers of some sorts of _sub__#sub__#particles_ that are just way to small for us to detect?
And I never understood all the arguments about how looking involves consciousness and reality. Do we really need to look to change the reality? It seems to me that detection is the issue and not the observation. If we detect and do not look at the results, particles will still be detected.
If I'm confused, I would appreciate it if someone can tell me what I'm missing.
No, that's not what physicists are talking about. :-)
@@schmetterling4477 (-:
Quantum Light (h) is a dualistic quantum particle that in the cosmic vacuum
can fly at a constant speed (c=1). In this movement, light uses its linear spin
and it does not produce electromagnetic waves. Light behaves like a corpuscular.
But light can behave like a wave if it uses its angular rotation (the torque required
to accelerate angularly around the axis of rotation). In this situation, the speed
of the light is faster than the constant. The speed is c>1.
This situation is explained by Lorentz transformations.
The problem is that we do not know the geometric shape of the light quantum.
man this is a chapter in my book
Do more on from quanta to quarks!
After 0:10: "Everything in the universe behaves like a particle and a wave AT THE SAME TIME"??? On the contrary, nothing can behave like a particle and a wave at the same time!
Quantum Physics: How 'bout I do it *anyway*
Amazing video
Find no words to praise
Incrível vídeo. Só queria fazer uma crítica construtiva quanto a legenda em português, "órbitas" é referente ao movimento planetário e "orbitais" ao movimento dos elétrons entorno do núcleo.
From my modest knowledge, the experiment is that, when left alone, the electron behaves like a wave, but when it's observed the electron acts like a particle, spooky isn't it? The idea is that, the reality of everything isn't yet real until it measured, and that's true, but in this one, you need to dig a bit deeper the meaning of everything...🤔
I think it's because the "observation" changes the Nature of the electron.
@@srikrishna2561 no dont be foold , there is only one fundumentl nature of matter : A wave Nature
It may behave like aparticle ,it may have mass , but its still has tiny waving
@@nanotechnano7193I never thought it that way thx
Light is particles according to quantum mechanics. The wave like nature is a probability distribution
Partical-Wave duality? Or are our macroscopic notions of space and time (locality) not directly applicable to small scales?
Excellent explanation.
Time needs to be brought up in this. A particle is a single entity, a vibration in a quantum field, and a wave is a pattern of many entities, vibrating at up and down and left and right as it propagates through space. Particles only show their wave pattern over a period of time.
Yes, all of that was 100% false. ;-)
Really Lessons worth sharing keep sharing with us......
thankyou for this!!💜💜
So, what I don't understand ins the mystery behind this, it seems common sense that if you shoot something with mass at things with mass, it changes the trajectory. And in a laboratory where it is to us windless, there is a sertain "wind" per say at a molecular level.
I've never heard on non -dissipated pockets of hydrogen, oxygen, and helium gasses floating along...
They seem to mix a sertain way like salt in a glass of water. Same amount of salt, as if it can only dissipate so much of it.
Big question is what makes you think it isn't just pinballing around the countless other electrons? Being composed of the same substructures, and commonality of the movement of the photon and or electron, seems to be more of a kentucky windage effect to the layman.
Temperature changes, burning sensation such found in the realms of radioactivity. You can feel the electron excitement on your skin, and the amount of electrons that are absorbed and emitted.
It is almost as if photons are the energy that makes the universe work in general.
Almost as if we need light to keep from decaying.
TED-ed shows in another video how in the slit experiment each electron passes through both slits at the same time. In this video they show the electron passing through just one slit at a time. Can you make your mind up what is happening?
I think both are true.
Because even other sources show both.
Very nicely explained
Mesmerizing!
Wonderful. Thanks
If the speed of light is constant and e=mc^2, than with any variation in speed should increase the weight of the object moving? Or does spacetime simply just bend and adjust to account for that speed change? It has to be one or the other because if you increase speed (energy,"e") the "m" must increase because "c^2" is constant. Hence e=mc^2
Right on. this is also why you can't go faster than light, because the closer you get to light speed the heavier the object gets, and the more energy you need to accelerate it, this can also help understand why photons are weightless, because an object moving at light speed is either infinitely heavy (we don't know of any objects of this kind) or completely weightless.
***** I'm about to spend some time researching this further but if photons are weightless (I do agree) are they pure energy?
Cole Ryan Everything you perceive is energy (massive and massless particles). What do you mean by pure?
Yeah that was a dumb question. Matter is condensed energy.
***** Mass does not increase with velocity. This is a way to common misconception that came about because of a poor definition of mass. The m in e=mc^2 is better known as the rest mass. The rest mass of an object is an intrinsic property of the object and does not change. What does change when an object increases its velocity is it's momentum. What many people don't realize is that e=mc^2 only applies to stationary objects. It's a simplified version of a more complex equation with takes velocity into account, e^2 = (mc^2)+(pc)^2. If the velocity is 0, then (pc)^2 becomes 0 and you get e=mc^2. However, if the rest mass is zero(like for a photon), then you get e=pc.
Great video, only one important remark. There´s not dualistic nature, the dualism comes from our old terms and understanding, photons are not particles, not waves, non-dualistic new "thighs", Richard Feynman put it clear that calling them part waves part particle was just a linguistic simplification.
+Jm Jones wavicles
They are just simplifying things so that people entirely new to the subject can understand
we spent 3 weeks covering the exact same (if not less) information than this 5 minute video.
science teachers take note!
Plz explain negative temperature of laser its QM hard
Jumping from De Boglie to Feynman, forgetting Schrödinger and Heisenberg is a bit strange. Feynman contributed virtually nothing to elementary quantum mechanics. There was also Born, Jordan and Dirac. The wave aspect of the electron has been proved for the first time by the experiment of Davisson and Germer, through scattering by the surface a cristal.
This is amazing
Just a quick correction. Ernest Rutherford was a New Zealand physicist that worked in Manchester and was born in Brightwater, Nelson New Zealand
This video confirms Tesla as the all time genius.
And what was his contribution to quantum physics?
Ion Absolutely none. Tesla was a visionary and a genius, but he wasn't this "supergenius rejected by the world" that invented "free energy" bullshit that Tesla fans love to tell themselves.
tesla was more into the current and magnetism field of physics than into the Quantum mechanics field. Infact there was no quantum mechanics in his time
Standard conspiratard claim.
@@BlackInMind5 as far as I know he said something like if you want to know the secrets of the universe look in the direction of waves and frequencies
i thought this is some high level of knowledge until i realise i learnt this back in high school ...
Particles do not behave like wave when they are not moving.
It's the movement of the particle that causes the wave and the frequency of that wave
is proportional to the speed of the particle.
That sounds highly sensible to me. But it implies that you can know both the position and the momentum of a particle and goes against the quantum beliefs in many ways.
And when you take into account of the 'fact' that motion is relative, that creates chaos in the religion of modern physics.
debunkingrelativity.com/2014/03/22/revamping-wave-mechanics/
drgsrinivas, some of your theory reminds me of Jim Schofield's empty photon theory. www.e-journal.org.uk/shape/papers/s03home.html
The vacuum mechanics theory is also similar.
www.vacuum-mechanics.com/
Well, I have a lot of reading to do on your website.
Thanks, Rene
Rene, Thank you very much for the great links. It just felt like rediscovering myself over there. I think if one's mind doesn't give up rational thinking, and doesn't yield and 'succumb' to the weird teachings of the 'authorities' of knowledge, one would invariably arrive at the same logical conclusion sooner or later and experience the ultimate reality.
Ohhh, really, how can you possibly shut one single electron out of this thing? They are immensely small! How can you even see them on that board behind the barrier? Please, explain this to me.
Why is it that a photon of light is visible and a light-wave is not? Which is why space is not flooded with light as it should be. I understand that light has particle/wave duality, but does this mean that light changes wavelength and frequency when it interacts with matter (and becomes a photon)?
اللهم إني أستعين بك يا الله ،اللهم حقق لي حلمي واجعل لي الخير وإن كنت أطمع في دخول كلية الطب وأطمع بأعلى المنازل ،اللهم ارزقنا الخير يا الله فنحن نطلب العلم ونُستنزف نفسيا وجسديا وماديا سبيل ذلك , اللهم أعنا على طاعتك وحسن عبادتك وكن لنا عوناً وقت الإمتحان يا الله
عملت ايه ؟
@@Offlinee...23ملوش لازمة السؤال
@@Offlinee...23 دخلت صيدلة المنصورة الحمدلله شد حيلك يا بطل الله يوفقك
I laughed,for what, I was fascinated, I'm 15 and tried to undertsand this mystery and I was thinking too what if the particles behaved like waves, ( NO LYING ) . And here is the answer, PHYSICS always FASCINATE you
Thank you :)
Favourite part: 2:45 atoms obviously exist :)
I can’t believe that the Zero Escape franchise got me interested in quantum mechanics and physics.
Since we know we’re in a sea of undetectable dark matter but don’t know exactly where it’s distributed and since everything in the universe from electrons to solar systems is in orbit with something else, why isn’t the first assumption of how or why a photon acts like a particle but also as a “wave packet” for every physics student to think every photon might be in orbit with a dark matter particle pulling it into a polarizable axial or helical apparent wave as they travel?
الي جاي من عند محمود مجدي 😂😂
Why didn't you mention the uncertainty principle?
and the observer effect and the measurement problem.
" if electrons are waves, it's easy to explain Bhor's rule for picking out the special orbits " WHY?
nice video thank you
Even this video had a misguiding graph at the end, doesn't it?, They showed the absorbed places if elections on the screen and then compared it to a graph, but why??? I thought waves were because of the superposition of wavelets after the slits?
what surprises me that electron behaves like particle when being watched... how is that ?!
Quantum consciousness! My simplistic view point. The Universe is alive!
That's happening because when we try to watch the particle, we have to measure it we some kind o detector. To detect something we have to shoot photons to the electron. So when the photon hits the electron, it changes electron energy and place and then it behaves like a particle :)
It has nothing to do with it "being watched". This was an early hypothesis that has since been thrown out long ago. But it makes for catchy pop science that is easy for the masses to digest.
What is really happening is that quantum particles (or waves) are so small, and carry so little information, that trying to extract information about them, like their position in space, momentum, energy level or anything else, changes this very information about the particle you're trying to extract. Imagine having a huge field with a football in it, rolling across the grass. Observing where the football is, or the direction it's moving in, or what color it is, by shining photons on it, and having those photons reflect back into your eye, isn't an issue. Unless the football is the size of an electron. Now even a single photon will change the footballs' position, direction and momentum when you hit it. And this is not a fault of our equipment not being advanced enough, this is a fundamental truth about the universe. The bare minimum of information needed to define objects means that extracting that information, causes them to "not exist" or change into a different object.
@@Kleaz80 no lol thats not true. Stop living in dreams.
@@Kleaz80 That's Pseudoscience.
Planck quark manipulation It takes a lot of practice
yes, they behave like a particle at one spacetime set up and behave like wave at another environment setup!! Language can only reflect our interpretation of the phenomena but cant give you about what electron is!!! I agree that there is linguistic problem for quantum world!!!
Everything is wave and it has infite possibilities and when seen through an instrument its seem something else, that instrument is anything including your body .
If there are infinite instruments, infinite world can be seen in that wave.
Quantum mechanic is no mysterious. There's no difference between sub atomic mechanic and larger scale logic.
You just have to understand that "random" and "free will" both describe the same phenomenon (the first one is from a "viewer" POV and the latter from the "actor" POV).
So basically if you looked at the earth from a distant POV and with a time scale way faster: you would see that components of earth (humans for example, but seen as millions and over century seeming as minutes) have a very predictable behavior (look at history of humanity), but if you look closer, each human seem to behave randomly and are hard to predict (they even think they have free will).
The big mystery in all that is that we are all connected unconsciously and when we think we do think under our own free will, we actually behave in a fake random/free-will way which actually balance the univers energy.
Also, there is no wave/particle duality for the simple reason that there is not such a think as "particle". The idea of particle is just a leftover of a misconception induced by our senses (mainly vision). The "absolute zero" theory proves it.
everything is wave; disturbance of energy (electricity, thus magnetism and electromagnetism) radiating and interfering with others.