I have a much simpler and shorter explanation for the Uncertainty Principle: Imagine a car moving along a road. If you want to see the exact place where the car is, you must pause time (because it's always moving). You pause time, and you mark its place. While you paused (imagine it like a photo), you CAN'T know its speed. It's a picture. If you want to find out the speed, you must unpause and measure it. But if you unpause, it's impossible to know the exact position of the car because it's changing... EDIT: Because many people cannot understand that if you put a speed-o-meter in a car you still measure the velocity in an interval and not in a point, imagine it like a video that you pause it and unpause it. You cannot interact with the car to put a speed-o-meter of some sort, because if you do, this is not the same example. EDIT2 (Years later): Some people are getting confused by the term velocity. A stationary object has 0 velocity in relation to its surroundings. A video shows a moving object that therefore has velocity. A photograph shows a stationary object.
Do you want it more simple? Ok here it is: Try to figure out the speed of a car only by looking at a photo that was taken while the car was moving. Impossible. Now try to tell someone where exactly is the car, while it is moving... Impossible.
Heisenberg and Schroedinger are in a car that gets stopped by the police. Policeman."Do you know you were doing 75mph?" Heisenberg. "Oh great, now we're lost!" Cop is not happy, checks the boot/trunk of the car. Cop. "There is a dead cat in here!" Schroedinger. "Well, there is NOW!"
Simplify the explanation, you lose the finer details... Elaborate the details, the explanation becomes too complicated... This is Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
Exactly. The matrix is like man pointing to the sky and saying “look big ball fire bring life” and never creating a single damn thing with that knowledge.
@SoHaNuR_ Yeah but the bronze age wasn't that fun, was it? And the parent comment you're replying to is talking about advancement, not whether humans can live without it or not.
One of my favorite jokes from Futurama *Prof. Farnsworth is at a horse race* The announcer declares, "And the winner is number 3, in a quantum finish!" The Professor angrily shouts -- "No fair you changed the outcome by measuring it!"
I've heard someone describe it as, "We know the past, we know the future, but time is always moving, and the present is just the nearest past that we can grasp."
When they can't show you something, in actuality, they make an animation, just like all the super-train hucksters and water-witch hucksters and solar-freaking-highway hucksters. They've got this notion, but nothing really concrete to back it up.
dude its simple the heisenberg uncertainity principal says "You can't measure the accurate position and momentum of an moving particle or wave simultaneously".
That was so cool! Although it’s hard to think of the myriad of properties a material can have, with a name like the Uncertainty Principle. It sounds more like a restriction, on surface level, of being able to know either one or the other, the momentum of an object, or the position. But as you dive deeper, you begin to appreciate and embrace the Uncertainty, which is, at quantum level, not much different from the uncertainties you and I face every day. Fantastic video, btw!
What a great explanation! I am a firm believer that no matter the complexity of an idea, it could be broken down into simple ideas or arithmetic operations. Don't ever let the complexity of a subject or a field overwhelm you. Keep learning.
WOW! This totally blew my mind! I never realized that the uncertainty principal was related to wave particle duality in any way. This FINALLY makes sense. Thank you!
In my college, sir explained this with the help of a ceiling fan. He told us to look at the fans blade when he switched on/off the fan. Particle nature : when it is switched off Wave nature : when it is switched on
Okey that's a simple example, thanks, now i got it. When its stop we certainly know where its place, but when its swinging, it become uncertain, because we never know how many position of the blade of fan exactly where.
Most awesome explanation ever recieved about heisenberg uncertainty principle because everybody who taught me misleaded me into believing this as a limit of practical precision but i always felt something wrong in that. Now it is crystal clear and i am very satisfied and happy about it. Thanks sir !
@@mxdhu can you define a wave its position which is not limited due any external boundaries ( like a tidal wave in ocean with no shores )? To do it you have to make the wave unwave by producing a distructive interefere with another wave of different wavelength . By keep making of destructive patters (in a particular way)at most places infinitely you will left with a wave like pattern at a position in the space but the wave like pattern will not have the intensity as the orginal wave(because of interference)so, by keep making of destructive patterns in such a way that onle one portion of wave is left alike wave but its wavelength will not be related to the original wave. We have to go through all this process as it has been proved that electrons behave like both wave and matter ( which has a defined postion ).
Let's say you try taking a photograph of a moving car. Say it takes your camera a tenth of a second to get the photo. What you will see is a (short) blur of the car. If you measure the length of the motion blur you can find out how fast the car was going. But you can't say where exactly the car is. The car was in all the places the blur is while you were taking the photo. Now suppose you take a perfect instantaneous picture. You know exactly where the car is. But can you even tell if it's moving at all? :D
I will admit, this example only serves for intuition. I was fortunate enough to study signal theory in undergrad and learn about the Fourier transform. Then years later, a video in sixtysymbols mentions that the Uncertainty Principle basically stems from one in the Fourier Transform (ask your local qualified physicist for details :P ) and my mind was blown to pieces.
Nice analogy! I finally get it I think, thank you. but on an unrelated topic, since I now know you're really smart, would you explain to me why am I wrong in thinking that an electromagnetic wave (and hence; everything) is a vibration (a parametric difference between locales) in the space-time fabric itself?
Another good idea, but there is nothing Quantum Mechanical about your example. What you write here is true classically as well as non-classically. The H.U.P. is a mathematical relation that "falls out" of the math used to model/describe the Quantum Mechanical world. No such thing can be said in the case of Newtonian (classical) mechanics.
S. E. It’s from the series Breaking Bad. The main character’s alias is Heisenberg. ‘You’re Goddamn right’ is one of the sentence he said in the series. You should watch it.
@3:52 Just to double check that "bigger momentum uncertainty", actually means "bigger value of the momentum uncertainty". Meaning, the momentum becomes more defined, rather than becoming more "uncertain", and thus in fact, "less uncertain" = "more certain". After all, we are reducing the "position uncertainty" value, which means we would be increasing the "momentum uncertainty" value. Fantastic video! Thank you.
Thomas Martin Tell police officer your accurate position, according to Heisenberg's principle, if you know the accurate position, you don't know the accurate velocity and since the speeding ticket is based on velocity, you can never be charged ;)
Thomas Martin he he,yup! Try telling the officer that ypir wavelength is high enough! Try telling them ypir position in terms of probability, more there n less here!
Heisenberg's uncertainty principle: Δх * Δр ≥ ħ/2 The Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is correct, moreover, it is fundamental. If the uncertainty principle is incorrect, then all quantum mechanics is incorrect. Heisenberg's justified the ncertainty principle in order to save quantum mechanics. He understood that if it is possible to measure with every accuracy both the coordinate and momentum of a microparticle, then quantum mechanics will collapse, and therefore further justification was already a technical issue. It is the uncertainty principle that prohibits microparticles in quantum mechanics from having a trajectory. If the coordinates of the electron are measured at definite time intervals Δt, then their results do not lie on some smooth curve. On the contrary, the more accurately the measurements are made, the more "jumpy", chaotic the results will be. A smooth trajectory can only be obtained if the measurement accuracy is small, for example, the trajectory of an electron in a Wilson chamber (the width of the trajectory is enormous compared to the microworld, so the accuracy is small). Heisenberg's formulated the uncertainty principle thus: if you are studying a body and you are able to determine the x-component of a pulse with an uncertainty Δp, then you can not simultaneously determine the coordinate x of the body with an accuracy greater than Δx = h / Δp. Here is a more general formulation of the principle of uncertainty: it is impossible to arrange in any way an instrument that determines which of the two mutually exclusive events has occurred, without the interference pattern being destroyed. It should be immediately said that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle inevitably follows from the particle-wave nature of microparticles (there is a corpuscular-wave dualism is the principle of uncertainty, there is no corpuscle-wave dualism - there is no uncertainty principle, and in principle quantum mechanics, too). Therefore, there is an exact quantitative analogy between the Heisenberg uncertainty relation and the properties of waves. Consider a time-varying signal, for example, a sound wave. It is pointless to talk about the frequency spectrum of the signal at any point in time. To accurately determine the frequency, it is necessary to observe the signal for some time, thus losing the accuracy of time determination. In other words, sound can not simultaneously have the exact value of its fixation time, as it has a very short pulse, and the exact frequency value, as it is for a continuous (and, in principle, infinitely long) pure tone (pure sine wave). The time position and frequency of the wave are mathematically completely analogous to the coordinate and (quantum-mechanical) momentum of the particle. We also need to clearly understand that the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle practically prohibits predicting behavior (in the classical sense, since Newton was able to predict the position of the planets), for example, an electron in the future. This means that if the electron is in a state described by the most complete way possible in quantum mechanics, then its behavior at the following moments is fundamentally ambiguous. Therefore, quantum mechanics can not make strict predictions (in the classical sense). The task of quantum mechanics consists only in determining the probability of obtaining a particular result in the measurement, and this is fundamental. That is why the uncertainty principle has such a fundamental meaning (there is no uncertainty principle - there is no quantum mechanics). But this does not mean that we do not know any "laws or variables that are hidden from us", etc. No. It's just the reality. This is analogous to how a particle can exhibit corpuscular and wave properties - just this is reality and nothing more. And even if we know the "hidden parameters" (compare, understand why the wave properties and corpuscular ones are manifested), this reality will not change, and the uncertainty principle will also work, but we will understand it more fully. It must be added that not all physical quantities in quantum mechanics are measurable simultaneously, that is, they can have simultaneously definite values. If physical quantities can simultaneously have definite values, then in quantum mechanics they say that their operators commute. The sets of such physical quantities (complete sets) that have simultaneously defined values are remarkable in that no other physical quantity (not being their function) can have a definite value in this state. The fully described states (for example, the description of the electron state) in quantum mechanics arise as a result of the simultaneous measurement of a complete set of physical quantities. By results of such measurement it is possible to determine the probability of the results of subsequent measurements, regardless of what happened with the electron before the first measurement. If physical quantities can not simultaneously have definite values, then their operators do not commute. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle establishes the limit of the accuracy of the simultaneous determination of a pair of physical quantities that are not described by commuting operators (for example, coordinates and momentum, current and voltage, electric and magnetic fields). Let's add a little history. A. Einstein assumed that there are hidden variables in quantum mechanics that underlie the observed probabilities. He did not like the principle of uncertainty, and his discussions with N. Bohr and W. Heisenberg greatly influenced quantum mechanics and science as a whole. In the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics (N. Bohr and followers), the uncertainty principle is adopted at the elementary level, and it is in this interpretation that it is believed that this can not be predicted at all by any method. And it was this interpretation that Einstein questioned when he wrote to Max Born: "God does not play dice." To which Niels Bohr, answered: "Einstein, do not tell to God what to do." Einstein was convinced that this interpretation was erroneous. His reasoning was based on the fact that all the already known probability distributions were the result of deterministic events. The distribution of the tossed coin or rolling bone can be described by the probability distribution (50% eagle, 50% tails). But this does not mean that their physical movements are unpredictable. Conventional mechanics can calculate exactly how each coin will land, if the forces acting on it are known, and the eagles / tails will still be randomly distributed (with random initial forces). But it is unlikely that this experience can be extended to quantum mechanics. The position of Bohr and Einstein must be viewed as views from different angles of view on one phenomenon (problem), and in the end it may turn out that they are right together. This can be demonstrated by lottery. Despite the fact that theoretically the results of the lottery can be predicted uniquely by the laws of classical mechanics, knowing all the initial conditions (it is necessary only to determine all the forces and perturbations, and to make the necessary calculations), in practice the lottery results are always probabilistic, and only in theory they can be predicted (try win the jackpot :). Even in this simplest case, we will be "inaccessible" to all the initial data for calculations. It is logical to assume that the quantum system will be incomparably more complicated than the lottery, and therefore, if we master the "true" laws of the quantum world, the probabilistic picture will remain, since the microworld is such in essence. Moreover, if you think about it, then our world is also probabilistic. It is deterministic only in theory, and practically, in everyday life, we can only predict, for example, tomorrow (or a second, or a year, or 10 years) with a certain probability (who can guarantee the event of tomorrow with 100% probability?). And what is interesting is that only after having lived it (by making a measurement), we can say what probability was realized. Quantum mechanics in action :). More see by link: www.quora.com/Is-Heisenbergs-principle-of-uncertainty-wrong/answer/Volodymyr-Bezverkhniy?share=b4884212 Benzene on the basis of the three-electron bond: REVIEW. Benzene on the basis of the three-electron bond (full version, 93 p.). vixra.org/pdf/1612.0018v5.pdf 1. Structure of the benzene molecule on the basis of the three-electron bond. vixra.org/pdf/1606.0152v1.pdf 2. Experimental confirmation of the existence of the three-electron bond and theoretical basis ot its existence. vixra.org/pdf/1606.0151v2.pdf 3. A short analysis of chemical bonds. vixra.org/pdf/1606.0149v2.pdf 4. Supplement to the theoretical justification of existence of the three-electron bond. vixra.org/pdf/1606.0150v2.pdf 5. Theory of three-electrone bond in the four works with brief comments. vixra.org/pdf/1607.0022v2.pdf 6. REVIEW. Benzene on the basis of the three-electron bond (full version, 93 p.). vixra.org/pdf/1612.0018v5.pdf 7. Quantum-mechanical aspects of the L. Pauling's resonance theory. vixra.org/pdf/1702.0333v2.pdf 8. Quantum-mechanical analysis of the MO method and VB method from the position of PQS. vixra.org/pdf/1704.0068v1.pdf Bezverkhniy Volodymyr (viXra):vixra.org/author/bezverkhniy_volodymyr_dmytrovych Свернуть ОТВЕТИТЬ
Tbh it could be possible to manufacture meth in an RV but a blue meth IS 100% impossible. So it's not possible for any person to be a blue meth king, named Heisenberg.
No, it isn't. A good explanation would be a really lengthy one (I mean hours long) that *actually* covers the topic. This video is dumbed down to the point it only gives people a tiny hint about the subject.
@@bluepeacemaker I agree that it only gives people a tiny hint about the subject, but I would argue that that is the point of the TED-Ed videos anyway. This video serves as a little introduction to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle using the concepts of wave-particle duality and Fourier transforms - although not covering absolutely everything, definitely fulfils its purpose of shedding some light on the subject. Maybe you have more experience on quantum physics, and so find this video oversimplified. For a meagre high school student like me though, I feel that it definitely serves its purpose ;)
This is well done. Thanks for explaining this properly rather than just giving the Heisenberg uncertainty principle formula and saying that is how it works.
Охтеров Егор I really used to think that measuring devices were the cause of uncertainty. I knew it can't be that way .it had to be some thing else..this video cleared that.
which is not exactly true, but just one competing interpretation of quantum physics, which is the most popular, but acknowledged to be incomplete, thus possibly wrong. The pilot-wave interpretation, also incomplete, but less popular, keeps the heisenberg uncertainty, which has been proven to be correct, and attributes it to the observation process, which by nature, implies interaction with the observed object. According to this theory, particles are particles, waves are waves, and particles are piloted by waves, thus everything is still completely deterministic if you know the function wave and a particle's position, but if you try to measure them, you'll modify bot of them and you won't even know it, so you'll reach to wrong results.
Actually the measuring devices change the momentum and the position of the particle but the simply act of measuring it, so, yes, they change its uncertainty.
Uncertainty does indee come from the particle itself, but that 'uncertainty' is only really a problem when you try to measure either position or momentum.
Simply put: you can’t measure the exact position and velocity of a subatomic particle at the same time because while you r measuring it, the act of measuring would already have changed the position or velocity of said subatomic particle, rendering it impossible to know its original position or velocity. Why the subatomic particle behaves as such is because it exists in state of probability rather certainty.
That's not what it means, the uncertainty principal has nothing to do with measurement. It's an intrinsic character for particles. It actually can explain a lot of stuff like why we can't reach 0 Kelvin or why absolut vacuum doesn't exist.
It's a very common mistake for people to make, even physics students doing their masters degree would do it. And honestly it's quite weird to think about it, but weirdness and quantum physics are not foreign to each others.
@@faisalajin491 Agreed, sir. I think the way HUP is introduced as some magical, enigmatic fact of the mystical superscience of Quantum Mechanics... is wrong and beats around the bush all while hiding the true nature of the HUP which you correctly mentioned. HUP is an intrinsic, unavoidable easy to prove and powerful fact of nature. The uncertaininty principle not only holds between x and p but many other pairs of observables. One particular case I think gets brushed of is that for a free particle, not only do x and p follow HUP, but also x and E, because for a free particle Hamiltonian is function solely of linear momentum p (1D case for simplicity) and because commutator of x and p is non-zero (which is the root cause of HUP), in this case the commutator of x and E is also non-zero which causes HUP to be applicable of position and energy also! HUP is beautiful.
My favorite interpretation is that objects (including photons) literally don't have position and momentum at the same time. Everything moves as a wave, but arrives as a particle. The level of observer necessary to collapse the wave into a particle is anything; when one object "hits" any other object, the wave becomes a particle.
im studying about this currently...n this is video is so helpful...the animation is really easy to understand n interpret, the vocabulary used n the explanation.. everything is so easy to understand n learn... thankyou so much 💜💜
to elaborate further on the point i just made. An object CAN'T be a particle and a wave at the same time. It means that not only we have uncertainty measuring both position and momentum at the same time, but actually, when we measure an object's position, then this object doesn't have any momentum at this particular time. same goes the other way around. when we are measuring an object's momentum, then this object doesn't have a position at this particular time. and that's because a particle and a wave or a position and a momentum doesn't meet/exist at the same time..
Thank you!! I have watched many videos, had gone to all the lectures of my uni ( the number one uni in the country lol) and only understood this now! Much blessings and love on your way!
This is the absolute best explaination I’ve ever heard of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. If you didnt get it then forget taking up a career in Physics!
that´s just one piece of a piece of a piece of a piece ........etc.......... that could some day, change your life. But for that you still have to continue on that way.
You know if humans wouldn't have discovered Quantum mechanics then the device you are holding while reading this comment won't exist. All the technology that you see around yourself works on the principal of qm. Without it we will be back in 19th century.
Saul Cifuentes Jazz Well, I'm the center of the universe, so you are one of many interesting people in my orbit. When I pay you attention, you begin to exist at a point in time.
so many websites just say "you can't know momentum if you know position" but not _why._ I finally get it now, thanks. I'm just trying to understand quantum mechanics a little because it's interesting... I'm curious to see how far I get by reading up on it until I get stuck -- like I did with this -- and continuing until I understand it all, or can't understand a certain aspect
The other day I searched for "Heisenberg picture", and google returned me literal photographs of Bryan Cranston. I have now learnt my lesson to append "in quantum mechanics" whenever there is "Heisenberg" in the search phrase from now on.
in short : everything has particle and wave nature both. but in the case of particle, momentum can’t be found and in case of wave, exact position can’t be found. thus the uncertainty principle : everything in this universe has no exact position or momentum
The fundamental consideration is the existence of uncertainties in measurement - the uncertainty principle quantifies the idealised error in all measurements - hence it is a limitation upon measurement not saying that you cannot know the exact location/speed of a particle it is the fact that any measurement contains errors and that hbar/2 is the limitation of precision present in a any measurement :)
What I like about the uncertainty principle is that it has a similar ethos to it like the chaos and order theory, which is embedded in everything when you drill down. So uncertainty most definitely has its place. What could be argued is that it certainty of the uncertainty principle is not necessarily applicable in all states, which then allows it even more credibility for it to not be where we would expect it to be as we are the very "Observers" that create the uniqueness of "Change" in every given situation. Taking that one step upwards would therefore leave us only to be able to speculate where it might be and to make matters worse it's not to say that it has to be in one particular place but literally in an infinite number of places in the space time continuum. Which will upset everyone because it throws out the possibility that we can even begin to predict where exactly it is, because it has it's own signature which is an unknown variable, and it has it's own decision to choose to be wherever it wants to be at any given time. This for me makes far more sense in understanding the uncertainty principle because it removes the rigid science that we have used in order to try to trap it. Somethings in the Multiverse have to be far more fluid, which is why others have come up with the wave function, and that in itself allows us to accept that if it is as some have speculated part of the wave function then who are we to say that it's not. The wave function has a lot going for it, as with the spin of an atom, has a lot going for it. Ironically if you think about God, and creation, we see that in the beginning was the mist. Which sounds a little crazy as a mist we can see as a fog, or we probably could also experience in some degree as a wave function, which cannot be ruled out. So if it was there at the beginning to time, perhaps we missed not recognising what it was. Recently I've been toying around the unchartered characteristics of a single drop of water, and again I think we've missed a beat in terms of it's true identity and it's true purpose. We know it sustains life, and allows for everything to grow, with the assistance of other interactions of other things, but what we do not really know is the secrets that it contains... So let me give you an insight when you couple water with light, it then produces an array of other things, and if you add water, light, and sound that produces more and more things. So it is very intrinsic to cause and effect to a whole host of things when you put it like that. What we need to do is drilling down to understand how water interacts with things to see its relationship more importantly and how the latent energy within the water molecule itself can be tapped. In the same manner dare I say to "Zero Point " energy' which I have to conclude it has some bearing to, or can be identified with. We've played around with Hard Water' and that has produced some stunning results, but have we really unpacked the endless potential when it comes to a single drop of water. Personally, I believe that water has a separate intelligence that is both on the single atomic level and the accumulative scale. So it works alone, and its an entity that works in synergy when on a collective scale. That is why the power of a Tsunami is so devastating. It is the collective force of one drop of water that works alongside the likeminded that creates the synergy to act as a force that no longer becomes calculable.
If I’d ever met Heisenberg, I’d ask him just a simple question: why didn’t he ever state the principle in one single sentence: between two ends of extreme in every spectrum, there is a point with maximum efficiency. Between too close and too far away, between too fast and too slow, between too small and too large. Wouldn’t this make Werner Heisenberg the biggest genius of humankind? Indeed, uncertainty theory manifests in every aspect of man’s intellect.
@@golddropper2747 let’s put it in a context: if you hold your phone/tablet too close to your eyes, you can see the letters but not the whole text. If you look at this text from far away, you can see the whole text but can’t read. Therefore, there is a range of distance that you can read this text, and a point, which is the best for your eyes to read without stress.
Perhaps it is a bit rushed to call him the ‘greatest’ genius of all time, but his absence from the current world’s subconscious, which is still filled with Einstein, is strange. He should be brought forward for purposes of study and evaluation much more emphatically, and without reference to the oppressive politics of the time
@@riazhassan6570 Einstein possibly smelled the magnitude of Heisenberg before anyone else and to maintain his insecure popularity race, he did anything he could to undermine or distract Heisenberg.
Things don't behave like a particle and a wave at the same time. It's far more subtle than that, nobody has the slightest idea on how this works. It's like describing a liquid, while being only familiar with gases and solids. The liquid isn't solid and a gas at the same time, it's not one of them depending on the situation, and it's not really neither of the two. It's just different. Quantum physics share the same logic, but on a level that's out of our grasp.
well light is both a particle and a wave at the same time, the only way to make light be just a particle is quite hard, right now it has only been possible to be done once (that i know) and it was very recently, but in normal cases light has both properties of particles and waves.
Adds a whole new meaning to the phrase, "I see your point, but I don't know where you're going with it."
clever
Nice
Also
"I see where you're going
But I don't see where/what is the point"
@@vsaratha4508 -- And suddenly I understand NASA reentries.
@@anvisup it is you're
Me to my brain: "Got it?"
My brain: "Never ever dare to show me this again."
lol
😂
😂😂😂
Thankyou for this comment. Never seeing this video again.
lol
When I'm feeling smart I come here to watch videos and get rid of that nonsense feeling.
Haha lol 😂
Patrick,
that's great man.
Are you my clone or what?
lol😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😆😆😆😆😆😆😆
😂
"The only thing we are absolutely certain about is that nothing is certain."
-Werner Heisenberg
Isnt speed of light certain??
@@marcus.the.younger certainly
@@olbradley
But i thought only the direction can be bent...
I doubt if Heisenberg REALLY said this, but if he did, it's a plagiarism of Socrates motto: "I only know one thing, that I know nothing".
@@XwpisONOMA not really the same thing...close but not the same thing...
I have a much simpler and shorter explanation for the Uncertainty Principle:
Imagine a car moving along a road. If you want to see the exact place where the car is, you must pause time (because it's always moving). You pause time, and you mark its place. While you paused (imagine it like a photo), you CAN'T know its speed. It's a picture. If you want to find out the speed, you must unpause and measure it. But if you unpause, it's impossible to know the exact position of the car because it's changing...
EDIT: Because many people cannot understand that if you put a speed-o-meter in a car you still measure the velocity in an interval and not in a point, imagine it like a video that you pause it and unpause it. You cannot interact with the car to put a speed-o-meter of some sort, because if you do, this is not the same example.
EDIT2 (Years later): Some people are getting confused by the term velocity. A stationary object has 0 velocity in relation to its surroundings. A video shows a moving object that therefore has velocity. A photograph shows a stationary object.
This is much simpler
Do you want it more simple? Ok here it is:
Try to figure out the speed of a car only by looking at a photo that was taken while the car was moving. Impossible.
Now try to tell someone where exactly is the car, while it is moving... Impossible.
Manolis Grifoman thanks
+Manolis Grifoman (Demented Composer) WOW this is a great explination
Thank you :)
"Say my name"
"Uncertainty Principle"
"You're Goddamn right."
Im the one who knocks.
Uncertainly.
"Say my name"
"Uncertainty Principle"
"Probably, but i don't know for sure"
Than maybe your best course, would be to...tread uncertainty
I was hoping there would be a Breaking Bad comment here hahaha that shows a masterpiece
@@DunkYTP no doubt, only few shows got better with each season it was one of them
Heisenberg and Schroedinger are in a car that gets stopped by the police.
Policeman."Do you know you were doing 75mph?"
Heisenberg. "Oh great, now we're lost!"
Cop is not happy, checks the boot/trunk of the car.
Cop. "There is a dead cat in here!"
Schroedinger. "Well, there is NOW!"
This explains every thing.
This is my new favorite science joke
@@snakery18 Thanks, it has been mine for several years! My previous favourite was;
"Where do you get mercury from?
Hg wells!"
Damn. 🤣👌
I have no uncertainty regarding your sense of humor! 😄
They named it the Uncertainty Principle because no one knew what Heisenberg was talking about.
Zackamoca true and still no one understand it either😂
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Even Einstein couldn't understand that..
so tru !!!
No man he explained very well as compared to in our class
You never know when it's Walter White and when Heisenberg kicks in. That's the real Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
True
Have you seen the cat lately ?
fax
Simplify the explanation, you lose the finer details... Elaborate the details, the explanation becomes too complicated...
This is Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
Exactly. The matrix is like man pointing to the sky and saying “look big ball fire bring life” and never creating a single damn thing with that knowledge.
Yeah, wow
More evidence that’s our reality is just an engine running on a computer with limited computational power. :(
Who are you so wise in the ways of science
Uncertainty Uncertainty Principle
cop: how fast you were going on this road
me: let me tell you a story.....
If I were a cop, I would rather shoot first then talk...
@@ganeshprasad9851 youre officialy an american
@@dusty6299 this is pure Florida man.
@@bruhtm108
@@ganeshprasad9851 that's brutal and very brutal at the same time.
This is the moment Werner became Heisenberg...
I cried when the wave said 'it's wavin' time!' and wave'd all over the particle
Weeeeerrrrrneeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrr Zzzziiiiiiieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeggggleeeerrrrrrrrrrrr
I came here to learn. After watching the video, the only thing i've learned is im dumb.
or maybe they are
ScrewDrvr
i'm*
position and momentum or position and speed?
I'm
Say my principle!
I don't know it
SAY IT!
Heisenberg's uncertainty principle
You're God Damn Right!
***** get off my territory
***** I'm the one who knocks !!!
+Munchies romero Shouldn't you say, "I'm not sure!"? xD
+Munchies romero "Well shit."
+Munchies romero we on the same wavelength
Hats off to scientists, who have to deal with all this complex stuff, So that humanity can advance .
Yeh I mean I think they love their job but still we gotta thank them
@SoHaNuR_ Yeah but the bronze age wasn't that fun, was it? And the parent comment you're replying to is talking about advancement, not whether humans can live without it or not.
One of my favorite jokes from Futurama
*Prof. Farnsworth is at a horse race*
The announcer declares, "And the winner is number 3, in a quantum finish!"
The Professor angrily shouts -- "No fair you changed the outcome by measuring it!"
8bitpineapple th-cam.com/video/t5MohK5FHEY/w-d-xo.html
hahaha
V-Rex I'm sure they were referencing both but wow I get it* now 10 years later lol this comment section made my day
Former CBS crime drama "Numbers" brought me here!
Oliver Sacco Thank you
I'm uncertain of my understanding of the uncertainty principle
so you doubt your certainty about uncertainty
Rahul Disari I am certain that you are doubting his "certainty" about his understanding of the uncertainty principle
No one is certain about quantum physics either.
@@yiumyoumsan6997 true!
@@yiumyoumsan6997 So true
I've heard someone describe it as,
"We know the past, we know the future, but time is always moving, and the present is just the nearest past that we can grasp."
That went from 0 to 100 really quickly.
how quickly? where?
Lololol
Superposition
That’s over 9000
In India, fourteen to fifteen year old kids have to learn that
A cop stops Heisenberg for speeding and asks him "Do you know how fast you were going?". He replies "No, but I know where I am".
actually he stops him for having a broken windshield
@@akayysworld “hellfire RAINED DOWN ON MY HOUSE”
That is the moment walt became Eyesinberg
He was once asked by a tourist sir where am I right now and Heisenberg said " no but you do walk really swiftly boy"
I took quantum chemistry in college. Long story short: I had to seduce my professor.
And?
I don't get it
Lmao
@@aianonymousinfo3216 that very uncertain
LOL
*cop pulls over heisenberg* Cop: Do you know how fast you were going?! Heisenberg: No, but I know where I was! Hahahahahaha
The police spent 4 years in quantum physics get degree then finally understand the joke.
Shadow Amigo
And 120k
@@lagroad depends on the country
@@xXDESTINYMBXx on the government* A country doesn't decide anything
TED-ED, you guys have great animation with great narration, but, I can't understand anything 😂
When they can't show you something, in actuality, they make an animation, just like all the super-train hucksters and water-witch hucksters and solar-freaking-highway hucksters. They've got this notion, but nothing really concrete to back it up.
@@harrymills2770 what are you on about
dude its simple the heisenberg uncertainity principal says "You can't measure the accurate position and momentum of an moving particle or wave simultaneously".
That was so cool! Although it’s hard to think of the myriad of properties a material can have, with a name like the Uncertainty Principle. It sounds more like a restriction, on surface level, of being able to know either one or the other, the momentum of an object, or the position. But as you dive deeper, you begin to appreciate and embrace the Uncertainty, which is, at quantum level, not much different from the uncertainties you and I face every day.
Fantastic video, btw!
Mate you give an aspirin a headache....
+MrHan Thanks for summing up the concept in 7 words.. ;)
+MrHan watch kurzgesagt's videos, you won't get a headache, they are better at this.
MrHan your thumbnail reminds me of something... argh... can you tell me what that was related to?
Its the cover for
***** Oohhh!! Thnx
What a great explanation! I am a firm believer that no matter the complexity of an idea, it could be broken down into simple ideas or arithmetic operations.
Don't ever let the complexity of a subject or a field overwhelm you. Keep learning.
after learn all these physics for hours straight this was exactly what i needed.
When you think you understand, you actually don't understand
same here.. midterms in 3 days
@@amiiimeee
This is the moment that Walt became Heisenberg.
I wondered if I was the only one to pick up on that.
But in particle or wave? “I am the danger... I am the one who knocks!” (With a boatload of momentum, or is it velocity?) Let’s ask Walter Heisenberg.
WOW! This totally blew my mind! I never realized that the uncertainty principal was related to wave particle duality in any way. This FINALLY makes sense. Thank you!
The Tuco "confused anger" principal is when you watch a science video and get angry because youre lost 30 seconds in to the video.
Are they punkin' me?
It's not your fault. He makes numerous unjustified leaps of what you might as well call faith.
In my college, sir explained this with the help of a ceiling fan. He told us to look at the fans blade when he switched on/off the fan.
Particle nature : when it is switched off
Wave nature : when it is switched on
Okey that's a simple example, thanks, now i got it. When its stop we certainly know where its place, but when its swinging, it become uncertain, because we never know how many position of the blade of fan exactly where.
and you *believed* that obvious nonsense?
plainly there is no limit whatsoever to the credulity of men (human beings)
@@H__J__9902 yes.
@@vhawk1951kl sorry, but you are incoherent. what do you mean? the theory or the example.
Most awesome explanation ever recieved about heisenberg uncertainty principle because everybody who taught me misleaded me into believing this as a limit of practical precision but i always felt something wrong in that. Now it is crystal clear and i am very satisfied and happy about it. Thanks sir !
wait can you clarify more on that?
@@mxdhu can you define a wave its position which is not limited due any external boundaries ( like a tidal wave in ocean with no shores )? To do it you have to make the wave unwave by producing a distructive interefere with another wave of different wavelength . By keep making of destructive patters (in a particular way)at most places infinitely you will left with a wave like pattern at a position in the space but the wave like pattern will not have the intensity as the orginal wave(because of interference)so, by keep making of destructive patterns in such a way that onle one portion of wave is left alike wave but its wavelength will not be related to the original wave. We have to go through all this process as it has been proved that electrons behave like both wave and matter ( which has a defined postion ).
Let's say you try taking a photograph of a moving car. Say it takes your camera a tenth of a second to get the photo. What you will see is a (short) blur of the car. If you measure the length of the motion blur you can find out how fast the car was going. But you can't say where exactly the car is. The car was in all the places the blur is while you were taking the photo. Now suppose you take a perfect instantaneous picture. You know exactly where the car is. But can you even tell if it's moving at all? :D
I will admit, this example only serves for intuition. I was fortunate enough to study signal theory in undergrad and learn about the Fourier transform. Then years later, a video in sixtysymbols mentions that the Uncertainty Principle basically stems from one in the Fourier Transform (ask your local qualified physicist for details :P ) and my mind was blown to pieces.
Nice analogy! I finally get it I think, thank you.
but on an unrelated topic, since I now know you're really smart, would you explain to me why am I wrong in thinking that an electromagnetic wave (and hence; everything) is a vibration (a parametric difference between locales) in the space-time fabric itself?
Hero
aslam khan Missing the point there: You can get a perfect still photo. But if you did, you wouldn't be able to deduce if it's moving or not.
Another good idea, but there is nothing Quantum Mechanical about your example. What you write here is true classically as well as non-classically. The H.U.P. is a mathematical relation that "falls out" of the math used to model/describe the Quantum Mechanical world. No such thing can be said in the case of Newtonian (classical) mechanics.
1:13 that transition was amazing
Makes more sense why Breaking Bad used the name. The uncertainty of where Walt was in terms of his mindset, morality and motives.
And the uncertainty in the momentum of Walt.
Wow bro this is a very underrated comment!
This comment is on point.
Bruh
You're goddamn right!
Heisenberg's principle: "I am the one who knocks".
T-Bag VEVO You are goddamn right.
How is your hand, T-Bag?
Can someone explain that to me please?
@@thepolarsavage716 bro watch breaking bad web series
S. E. It’s from the series Breaking Bad. The main character’s alias is Heisenberg. ‘You’re Goddamn right’ is one of the sentence he said in the series. You should watch it.
@3:52 Just to double check that "bigger momentum uncertainty", actually means "bigger value of the momentum uncertainty". Meaning, the momentum becomes more defined, rather than becoming more "uncertain", and thus in fact, "less uncertain" = "more certain". After all, we are reducing the "position uncertainty" value, which means we would be increasing the "momentum uncertainty" value. Fantastic video! Thank you.
Who are you? And why do you sound so knowledged??
How can I use this to defend my speeding ticket?
Thomas Martin Tell police officer your accurate position, according to Heisenberg's principle, if you know the accurate position, you don't know the accurate velocity and since the speeding ticket is based on velocity, you can never be charged ;)
Thomas Martin he he,yup! Try telling the officer that ypir wavelength is high enough!
Try telling them ypir position in terms of probability, more there n less here!
saber kolm And while the officer is confused, RUN.
ask the officer the specific time and place he caught you speeding then explain this principle. Boom
Yeahh xplain this to him..nd thn end up in jail... wohoo!
Heisenberg's uncertainty principle: Δх * Δр ≥ ħ/2
The Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is correct, moreover, it is fundamental. If the uncertainty principle is incorrect, then all quantum mechanics is incorrect. Heisenberg's justified the ncertainty principle in order to save quantum mechanics. He understood that if it is possible to measure with every accuracy both the coordinate and momentum of a microparticle, then quantum mechanics will collapse, and therefore further justification was already a technical issue. It is the uncertainty principle that prohibits microparticles in quantum mechanics from having a trajectory. If the coordinates of the electron are measured at definite time intervals Δt, then their results do not lie on some smooth curve. On the contrary, the more accurately the measurements are made, the more "jumpy", chaotic the results will be. A smooth trajectory can only be obtained if the measurement accuracy is small, for example, the trajectory of an electron in a Wilson chamber (the width of the trajectory is enormous compared to the microworld, so the accuracy is small).
Heisenberg's formulated the uncertainty principle thus:
if you are studying a body and you are able to determine the x-component of a pulse with an uncertainty Δp, then you can not simultaneously determine the coordinate x of the body with an accuracy greater than Δx = h / Δp.
Here is a more general formulation of the principle of uncertainty: it is impossible to arrange in any way an instrument that determines which of the two mutually exclusive events has occurred, without the interference pattern being destroyed.
It should be immediately said that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle inevitably follows from the particle-wave nature of microparticles (there is a corpuscular-wave dualism is the principle of uncertainty, there is no corpuscle-wave dualism - there is no uncertainty principle, and in principle quantum mechanics, too). Therefore, there is an exact quantitative analogy between the Heisenberg uncertainty relation and the properties of waves.
Consider a time-varying signal, for example, a sound wave. It is pointless to talk about the frequency spectrum of the signal at any point in time. To accurately determine the frequency, it is necessary to observe the signal for some time, thus losing the accuracy of time determination. In other words, sound can not simultaneously have the exact value of its fixation time, as it has a very short pulse, and the exact frequency value, as it is for a continuous (and, in principle, infinitely long) pure tone (pure sine wave). The time position and frequency of the wave are mathematically completely analogous to the coordinate and (quantum-mechanical) momentum of the particle.
We also need to clearly understand that the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle practically prohibits predicting behavior (in the classical sense, since Newton was able to predict the position of the planets), for example, an electron in the future. This means that if the electron is in a state described by the most complete way possible in quantum mechanics, then its behavior at the following moments is fundamentally ambiguous. Therefore, quantum mechanics can not make strict predictions (in the classical sense). The task of quantum mechanics consists only in determining the probability of obtaining a particular result in the measurement, and this is fundamental. That is why the uncertainty principle has such a fundamental meaning (there is no uncertainty principle - there is no quantum mechanics). But this does not mean that we do not know any "laws or variables that are hidden from us", etc. No. It's just the reality. This is analogous to how a particle can exhibit corpuscular and wave properties - just this is reality and nothing more. And even if we know the "hidden parameters" (compare, understand why the wave properties and corpuscular ones are manifested), this reality will not change, and the uncertainty principle will also work, but we will understand it more fully.
It must be added that not all physical quantities in quantum mechanics are measurable simultaneously, that is, they can have simultaneously definite values. If physical quantities can simultaneously have definite values, then in quantum mechanics they say that their operators commute. The sets of such physical quantities (complete sets) that have simultaneously defined values are remarkable in that no other physical quantity (not being their function) can have a definite value in this state. The fully described states (for example, the description of the electron state) in quantum mechanics arise as a result of the simultaneous measurement of a complete set of physical quantities. By results of such measurement it is possible to determine the probability of the results of subsequent measurements, regardless of what happened with the electron before the first measurement.
If physical quantities can not simultaneously have definite values, then their operators do not commute. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle establishes the limit of the accuracy of the simultaneous determination of a pair of physical quantities that are not described by commuting operators (for example, coordinates and momentum, current and voltage, electric and magnetic fields).
Let's add a little history. A. Einstein assumed that there are hidden variables in quantum mechanics that underlie the observed probabilities. He did not like the principle of uncertainty, and his discussions with N. Bohr and W. Heisenberg greatly influenced quantum mechanics and science as a whole.
In the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics (N. Bohr and followers), the uncertainty principle is adopted at the elementary level, and it is in this interpretation that it is believed that this can not be predicted at all by any method. And it was this interpretation that Einstein questioned when he wrote to Max Born: "God does not play dice." To which Niels Bohr, answered: "Einstein, do not tell to God what to do." Einstein was convinced that this interpretation was erroneous. His reasoning was based on the fact that all the already known probability distributions were the result of deterministic events. The distribution of the tossed coin or rolling bone can be described by the probability distribution (50% eagle, 50% tails). But this does not mean that their physical movements are unpredictable. Conventional mechanics can calculate exactly how each coin will land, if the forces acting on it are known, and the eagles / tails will still be randomly distributed (with random initial forces). But it is unlikely that this experience can be extended to quantum mechanics.
The position of Bohr and Einstein must be viewed as views from different angles of view on one phenomenon (problem), and in the end it may turn out that they are right together. This can be demonstrated by lottery. Despite the fact that theoretically the results of the lottery can be predicted uniquely by the laws of classical mechanics, knowing all the initial conditions (it is necessary only to determine all the forces and perturbations, and to make the necessary calculations), in practice the lottery results are always probabilistic, and only in theory they can be predicted (try win the jackpot :). Even in this simplest case, we will be "inaccessible" to all the initial data for calculations. It is logical to assume that the quantum system will be incomparably more complicated than the lottery, and therefore, if we master the "true" laws of the quantum world, the probabilistic picture will remain, since the microworld is such in essence. Moreover, if you think about it, then our world is also probabilistic. It is deterministic only in theory, and practically, in everyday life, we can only predict, for example, tomorrow (or a second, or a year, or 10 years) with a certain probability (who can guarantee the event of tomorrow with 100% probability?). And what is interesting is that only after having lived it (by making a measurement), we can say what probability was realized. Quantum mechanics in action :).
More see by link: www.quora.com/Is-Heisenbergs-principle-of-uncertainty-wrong/answer/Volodymyr-Bezverkhniy?share=b4884212
Benzene on the basis of the three-electron bond:
REVIEW. Benzene on the basis of the three-electron bond (full version, 93 p.).
vixra.org/pdf/1612.0018v5.pdf
1. Structure of the benzene molecule on the basis of the three-electron bond.
vixra.org/pdf/1606.0152v1.pdf
2. Experimental confirmation of the existence of the three-electron bond and theoretical basis ot its existence.
vixra.org/pdf/1606.0151v2.pdf
3. A short analysis of chemical bonds.
vixra.org/pdf/1606.0149v2.pdf
4. Supplement to the theoretical justification of existence of the three-electron bond.
vixra.org/pdf/1606.0150v2.pdf
5. Theory of three-electrone bond in the four works with brief comments.
vixra.org/pdf/1607.0022v2.pdf
6. REVIEW. Benzene on the basis of the three-electron bond (full version, 93 p.). vixra.org/pdf/1612.0018v5.pdf
7. Quantum-mechanical aspects of the L. Pauling's resonance theory.
vixra.org/pdf/1702.0333v2.pdf
8. Quantum-mechanical analysis of the MO method and VB method from the position of PQS.
vixra.org/pdf/1704.0068v1.pdf
Bezverkhniy Volodymyr (viXra):vixra.org/author/bezverkhniy_volodymyr_dmytrovych
Свернуть
ОТВЕТИТЬ
Volodymyr Bezverkhniy
Holy flutternuggets. Nice work with that explination.
As Salieri said to Mozart, TOO MANY NOTES!
ok
Your explanation and discussion of this difficult problem in physics is the best - clearest, also well organized - of all those I've read.
Saved
Amazing video! its difficult to explain that concept but in my opinion you made a great video for that :)
Heisenberg uncertainty principle is not knowing who knocks the door..
Yet, action is always the same...thats why relatively is more of an important theory than uncertainty. ..
@@moderngladiators300 its a breaking bad joke. "I'm not in danger, I am the danger...I am the one who knocks."
And he knocks good
@@moderngladiators300 😂
As long as it isn’t the secret police...
This is a much better (yet still a bit hard to follow) explanation of Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle than the ones that I've read before.
I wanted to learn how to manufacture methamphetamine in a RV, but this is also cool for me.
Haha Mr.White
Yeah mr. White , yeah science
@@elmerburger8030 Iam not in danger IAM THE DANGER, iam the one who knocks.🕶️🎩
Tbh it could be possible to manufacture meth in an RV but a blue meth IS 100% impossible. So it's not possible for any person to be a blue meth king, named Heisenberg.
Breaking Bad 👏
Now, say my principle's name.
I guess you meant principal. :/
Red Sniper no he doesn't
It's Heisenberg
Halley's Meteor You're godamn right.
Halley's Meteor I thought it was Schrödinger, oh well..
This is one of the best explanations I've found on TH-cam.
Great job Ted-Ed!
No, it isn't. A good explanation would be a really lengthy one (I mean hours long) that *actually* covers the topic. This video is dumbed down to the point it only gives people a tiny hint about the subject.
@@bluepeacemaker I agree that it only gives people a tiny hint about the subject, but I would argue that that is the point of the TED-Ed videos anyway. This video serves as a little introduction to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle using the concepts of wave-particle duality and Fourier transforms - although not covering absolutely everything, definitely fulfils its purpose of shedding some light on the subject. Maybe you have more experience on quantum physics, and so find this video oversimplified. For a meagre high school student like me though, I feel that it definitely serves its purpose ;)
This is the moment Werner became Heisenberg, Bravo Ted-Ed
Electron: exists
Human: saw it
Electron : Well now I don't want to be an electron
This is well done. Thanks for explaining this properly rather than just giving the Heisenberg uncertainty principle formula and saying that is how it works.
This was 91.96 % pure
You god damn right
It was 99.1% pure
"Say my name."
"I'm not sure."
"You're goddamn right."
double
What is Heisenberg's uncertainty principle?
I'm not sure.
JP and hence negative by negative is a positive, i feel like you are good to go.
I am not certain**
Ha! I was going to write exactly the same thing, but thought I’d better check, somebody is sure to have written it already.
r/whoooosh
Dammit! I just wrote that!
So much for my wit.
Now, if I can just find that damn cat.
I was taught that principle when I was in senior high school. It still amazes me. Thanks
Finally! I understood this amazing topic after soo many years!!
Heisenberg made a lot of good science. Too bad he threw it all away when he started cooking meth.
No - no - It was Vinny Heisenberg who cooked the meth - Werner was always trying to determine whether he was uncertain about his uncertainty.
Nobody can unlike this comment 😆
LMAO
hey he cooked some good meth though
Lol
The only thing I got from that video is that uncertainty doesn't come from the measuring devices, but from the particle itself.
That is easilly the most important result of the uncertainty principle
Охтеров Егор I really used to think that measuring devices were the cause of uncertainty. I knew it can't be that way .it had to be some thing else..this video cleared that.
which is not exactly true, but just one competing interpretation of quantum physics, which is the most popular, but acknowledged to be incomplete, thus possibly wrong. The pilot-wave interpretation, also incomplete, but less popular, keeps the heisenberg uncertainty, which has been proven to be correct, and attributes it to the observation process, which by nature, implies interaction with the observed object. According to this theory, particles are particles, waves are waves, and particles are piloted by waves, thus everything is still completely deterministic if you know the function wave and a particle's position, but if you try to measure them, you'll modify bot of them and you won't even know it, so you'll reach to wrong results.
Actually the measuring devices change the momentum and the position of the particle but the simply act of measuring it, so, yes, they change its uncertainty.
Uncertainty does indee come from the particle itself, but that 'uncertainty' is only really a problem when you try to measure either position or momentum.
Simply put: you can’t measure the exact position and velocity of a subatomic particle at the same time because while you r measuring it, the act of measuring would already have changed the position or velocity of said subatomic particle, rendering it impossible to know its original position or velocity. Why the subatomic particle behaves as such is because it exists in state of probability rather certainty.
That's not what it means, the uncertainty principal has nothing to do with measurement. It's an intrinsic character for particles. It actually can explain a lot of stuff like why we can't reach 0 Kelvin or why absolut vacuum doesn't exist.
Faisal Ajin Maybe you r right. But that was how I remember from my second year Quantum Mechanics class. 😂
It's a very common mistake for people to make, even physics students doing their masters degree would do it. And honestly it's quite weird to think about it, but weirdness and quantum physics are not foreign to each others.
There’s a certain probability that I agree with your position on this.
@@faisalajin491 Agreed, sir. I think the way HUP is introduced as some magical, enigmatic fact of the mystical superscience of Quantum Mechanics... is wrong and beats around the bush all while hiding the true nature of the HUP which you correctly mentioned.
HUP is an intrinsic, unavoidable easy to prove and powerful fact of nature.
The uncertaininty principle not only holds between x and p but many other pairs of observables. One particular case I think gets brushed of is that for a free particle, not only do x and p follow HUP, but also x and E, because for a free particle Hamiltonian is function solely of linear momentum p (1D case for simplicity) and because commutator of x and p is non-zero (which is the root cause of HUP), in this case the commutator of x and E is also non-zero which causes HUP to be applicable of position and energy also!
HUP is beautiful.
U explaind it 1000 times better than how's its explained to us in 11th class in india. Well done!!
every time I have a test I always watch this video again and again..... It's helps me in clearing my concepts
When you begin to understand, I will tell my advanced race that humans are capable of learning. We were uncertain.
UNCERTAIN you say?
Steve Jackson You are quick for a human. Maybe your race CAN be domesticated. I hope your species likes being walked on leashes. (*-*)
I must appreciate the crystal clear voice 👍👍👍
This was so helpful, I didn’t know momenthum and position were related to wave and particle nature. Thanks a lot!!
My favorite interpretation is that objects (including photons) literally don't have position and momentum at the same time. Everything moves as a wave, but arrives as a particle. The level of observer necessary to collapse the wave into a particle is anything; when one object "hits" any other object, the wave becomes a particle.
im studying about this currently...n this is video is so helpful...the animation is really easy to understand n interpret, the vocabulary used n the explanation.. everything is so easy to understand n learn... thankyou so much 💜💜
"It a quantum finish!"
"NO FAIR! You changed the outcome by measuring it!"
very simply explained-thank you!
This is too abstract
to elaborate further on the point i just made. An object CAN'T be a particle and a wave at the same time. It means that not only we have uncertainty measuring both position and momentum at the same time, but actually, when we measure an object's position, then this object doesn't have any momentum at this particular time. same goes the other way around. when we are measuring an object's momentum, then this object doesn't have a position at this particular time. and that's because a particle and a wave or a position and a momentum doesn't meet/exist at the same time..
You guys always impress me ..... How do you simply those complicated stuffs, they are super cool.
very true
Mom : "what are you watching?"
Me : "the Heisenberg uncertainty principle."
Mom : "so what is it?"
Me : "......"
LOL,Good one......
. I will never tell anyone that i ever studied hygenber's principle.
.
Thank you!!
I have watched many videos, had gone to all the lectures of my uni ( the number one uni in the country lol) and only understood this now!
Much blessings and love on your way!
Well, one thing is certain: this explanation went over my head. ;)
Adds ammunition to the saying "Those who claim to understand quantum theory don't understand quantum theory". It's a strange world.
That's nothing. Wait 'til they hit you with critical race theory! It's the closest a non-Catholic will ever get to Parochial School.
Basically quantum theory is small things doing random stuff
"Who came up with the uncertainty principle?"
-"Heisenberg"
"You're god-damn right"
Haha!!
😂😂😂
Came here solely for Breaking Bad references.
Bitch....
Mr.White
+Dennis Sandoval yeah science
Did you find any references?
Heisenberg LMAO
Very well presented, even for us non-scientist types. Thanks.
+Greg Scott Actually, no. But someone here told a much more simple explanation, and its ok now
sguitas Understood, squitas. I should have said... "I find it well presented, even though I am not a scientist."
But this is in 11th grade high school.
@@saurabhshukla1126 would you mind telling me what high school you go to?
@@giovannip8600 In India we learn it in high school.
One of the best explanation for the uncertainty rule of Heisenberg out there .Means alot.❤✌
@Uncle Nik then don't man it's just fine 🤷🏻♀️
@Uncle Nik yeah my mistake 🥱
@Uncle Nik well am not a doctor 🤷🏻♀️ and I really don't mind to be true
TED ED always amaze us with great animation and precise explanation!
Friend: hey particle where you going, where can we meet up.
Particle. Hehe can’t tell you both 😉
This is the absolute best explaination I’ve ever heard of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. If you didnt get it then forget taking up a career in Physics!
i learned about this alot, but dont really know how it changes my life
Basically we are all waves.
that´s just one piece of a piece of a piece of a piece ........etc.......... that could some day, change your life. But for that you still have to continue on that way.
Keep learning.
Measure yourself. It changes everything.
You know if humans wouldn't have discovered Quantum mechanics then the device you are holding while reading this comment won't exist. All the technology that you see around yourself works on the principal of qm. Without it we will be back in 19th century.
“I am the danger!” - Heisenberg
I wrote notes and followed each line and the animation,it make my life simpler
This is the exact moment the Uncertainty Principle becomes Heisenberg.
I think i get but then again.......
It's Uncertain...
Marco Pohl I got it, one cannot know the speed and location of an object simultaneously
You are fast, but I don't know where you are.
Locutus D'Borg Where am i exactly?
Where is here?
Saul Cifuentes Jazz Well, I'm the center of the universe, so you are one of many interesting people in my orbit. When I pay you attention, you begin to exist at a point in time.
so many websites just say "you can't know momentum if you know position" but not _why._ I finally get it now, thanks.
I'm just trying to understand quantum mechanics a little because it's interesting... I'm curious to see how far I get by reading up on it until I get stuck -- like I did with this -- and continuing until I understand it all, or can't understand a certain aspect
Watched
Still know nothing
+Michael Jeckson Aint you Jon Snow by an accident ?
+Michael Jeckson its ok as long as your a good singer
+John Wayne How did Jon Snow come in here?
Unexpectedly.
Michael Jeckson *U CANT SAY IT OR KNO IT BCUZ HESENBER RINCIPLE U STUPID FF*
I thought we were going to learn about making meth
..edit; wow a 1000 likes i am very humbled thanks i am glad you enjoyed the joke
Same
*FBI* open up!
i love the reference
Befote cooking meth he cooked math
😂
I didn't learn anything from this TedEd. Please someone needs to see to this. Thanks.
"Jesse, where's my TED Talk?"
This is kind of like that one show where that one dude breaks bad
this is a great and understanding explanation.
Heisenberg, you know, he's the one who knocks
Lol
The other day I searched for "Heisenberg picture", and google returned me literal photographs of Bryan Cranston. I have now learnt my lesson to append "in quantum mechanics" whenever there is "Heisenberg" in the search phrase from now on.
YEAH MR. WHITE, YEAH SCIENCE!
ese
The name 'Heisenberg' certainly has some epicness adhered to it.
He on purpose sabotaged the construction of atom bomb for Nazis
@@lc1777 Einstein on the other hand...
I clicked because I thought this was insight into the life and dealings of Walter White. Not totally disappointed.
I came looking for *Walter White* I found *Quantum Physics*
in short :
everything has particle and wave nature both.
but in the case of particle, momentum can’t be found and in case of wave, exact position can’t be found.
thus the uncertainty principle : everything in this universe has no exact position or momentum
This is possibly the best and the most understandable explanation of the uncertainty principle I've seen so far.
Thanks!
From this day on whenever I start feeling smart I'll come back to this video to remind myself that I'm actually quite stupid in some areas.
Suddenly it makes a whole lot of sense, cheers! :)
The fundamental consideration is the existence of uncertainties in measurement - the uncertainty principle quantifies the idealised error in all measurements - hence it is a limitation upon measurement not saying that you cannot know the exact location/speed of a particle it is the fact that any measurement contains errors and that hbar/2 is the limitation of precision present in a any measurement :)
What I like about the uncertainty principle is that it has a similar ethos to it like the chaos and order theory, which is embedded in everything when you drill down. So uncertainty most definitely has its place. What could be argued is that it certainty of the uncertainty principle is not necessarily applicable in all states, which then allows it even more credibility for it to not be where we would expect it to be as we are the very "Observers" that create the uniqueness of "Change" in every given situation. Taking that one step upwards would therefore leave us only to be able to speculate where it might be and to make matters worse it's not to say that it has to be in one particular place but literally in an infinite number of places in the space time continuum. Which will upset everyone because it throws out the possibility that we can even begin to predict where exactly it is, because it has it's own signature which is an unknown variable, and it has it's own decision to choose to be wherever it wants to be at any given time.
This for me makes far more sense in understanding the uncertainty principle because it removes the rigid science that we have used in order to try to trap it. Somethings in the Multiverse have to be far more fluid, which is why others have come up with the wave function, and that in itself allows us to accept that if it is as some have speculated part of the wave function then who are we to say that it's not.
The wave function has a lot going for it, as with the spin of an atom, has a lot going for it. Ironically if you think about God, and creation, we see that in the beginning was the mist. Which sounds a little crazy as a mist we can see as a fog, or we probably could also experience in some degree as a wave function, which cannot be ruled out. So if it was there at the beginning to time, perhaps we missed not recognising what it was.
Recently I've been toying around the unchartered characteristics of a single drop of water, and again I think we've missed a beat in terms of it's true identity and it's true purpose. We know it sustains life, and allows for everything to grow, with the assistance of other interactions of other things, but what we do not really know is the secrets that it contains...
So let me give you an insight when you couple water with light, it then produces an array of other things, and if you add water, light, and sound that produces more and more things. So it is very intrinsic to cause and effect to a whole host of things when you put it like that. What we need to do is drilling down to understand how water interacts with things to see its relationship more importantly and how the latent energy within the water molecule itself can be tapped. In the same manner dare I say to "Zero Point " energy' which I have to conclude it has some bearing to, or can be identified with.
We've played around with Hard Water' and that has produced some stunning results, but have we really unpacked the endless potential when it comes to a single drop of water. Personally, I believe that water has a separate intelligence that is both on the single atomic level and the accumulative scale. So it works alone, and its an entity that works in synergy when on a collective scale. That is why the power of a Tsunami is so devastating. It is the collective force of one drop of water that works alongside the likeminded that creates the synergy to act as a force that no longer becomes calculable.
If I’d ever met Heisenberg, I’d ask him just a simple question: why didn’t he ever state the principle in one single sentence: between two ends of extreme in every spectrum, there is a point with maximum efficiency. Between too close and too far away, between too fast and too slow, between too small and too large. Wouldn’t this make Werner Heisenberg the biggest genius of humankind? Indeed, uncertainty theory manifests in every aspect of man’s intellect.
Heisenberg: tf you talking about? We need to cook.
@@golddropper2747 let’s put it in a context: if you hold your phone/tablet too close to your eyes, you can see the letters but not the whole text. If you look at this text from far away, you can see the whole text but can’t read. Therefore, there is a range of distance that you can read this text, and a point, which is the best for your eyes to read without stress.
@@mathxp r/woooosh
Perhaps it is a bit rushed to call him the ‘greatest’ genius of all time, but his absence from the current world’s subconscious, which is still filled with Einstein, is strange. He should be brought forward for purposes of study and evaluation much more emphatically, and without reference to the oppressive politics of the time
@@riazhassan6570 Einstein possibly smelled the magnitude of Heisenberg before anyone else and to maintain his insecure popularity race, he did
anything he could to undermine or distract Heisenberg.
Great explanation; This is what can happen with a combination of an artist and a teacher..
Things don't behave like a particle and a wave at the same time. It's far more subtle than that, nobody has the slightest idea on how this works. It's like describing a liquid, while being only familiar with gases and solids. The liquid isn't solid and a gas at the same time, it's not one of them depending on the situation, and it's not really neither of the two. It's just different. Quantum physics share the same logic, but on a level that's out of our grasp.
well light is both a particle and a wave at the same time, the only way to make light be just a particle is quite hard, right now it has only been possible to be done once (that i know) and it was very recently, but in normal cases light has both properties of particles and waves.