I love how Brady and Phil always get into it. It reminded me of their "do atoms ever touch" video. I've learned that language really matters when describing these effects.
Brady, your interviewing is a breath of fresh air. You really relentlessly dig deep to get the answers; something that is unfortunately becoming very rare in our world today.
I've been taking midichlorians boosters for a couple weeks now. I'm already feeling the effects. More patience, calmer, and contemplative. Just the other day I landed a gnarly kick-flip over a long stairway in front of my buds and they got excited yet I remained calmed, knowing the Force is much more powerful than these meager displays of material action.
"...men were real men, women were real women, and small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri were real small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri." Anyone get that reference?
Finally the prof is slowing down to speeds below the speed of light.... I could even follow him, haha. I wish the Professor Moriarty, Brady and all at the University of Nottingham contributing to Sixty Symbols and Periodic Videos a very good 2016!
Nice one Roland :) I studied electrical engineering and we had a lot of physics and also quantum physics (that's what makes semi conductors work, so I think they thought it would help students understand electrical engineering. If anything it made it far less clear :) ). So I often can't follow him either; probably due the poor Dutch educational standards ;) but he's a great lecturer you learn something every time you see him.
I love to see people getting so genuinely excited about theoretical concepts as Prof Moriarty does in this video. Call me a nerd but that's the kind of stuff that makes me happy.
What prof. Moriarty was trying to say is that the electron field is littered with so much background noise that a miniscule distance away from one specific point in the field, and the entanglement would be lost completely. Sixty symbols was trying to ask if it's hypothetically possible to use the force if we were able to excite a group of electrons regardless of distance above background noise. I feel like this video would have been a lot more fruitful if they communicated these ideas better.
@@MiniKodjo Not really. The Kessel Run was a hyperspace route that passed near a black hole cluster, The Maw. In order to navigate it safely, pilots take a route around it. Han's brag is that his ship was fast enough to take a shortcut closer to The Maw, it's just that pop culture heard Parsec as a unit of time, not distance and created a long living misconception that then spawned misconceptions such as yours.
Prof. Phil Moriarty said something EXTREMELY CRUCIAL for science in general: "There's a big difference between a theory and something that happens practically, that can be measured" Let's not forget how many theories we give for granted, like the origin of the moon. Truth is WE DON'T KNOW.
Piotr Podgórski You're a clever man, don't act like you didn't understand what I meant. I agree with all that you said, and still mantain my original comment. I was talking in a general science context, not on a quantum physics one, and you can't deny that we've been teaching "theories" on schools for decades now.
I've been loving this youtube channel so much lately. It's really incredible, so satisfying to learn more about these topics from people who know what they are talking about. I'd just like to add my personal anecdote. I have had future visions on multiple occasions, 100 % accurate future visions, there are ways in this very universe.
+Isaac Morph I agree! My favourite two questions in this video are "What is the basic unit of entanglement?" and "If you saw a jedi using the force, what would your first line of inquiry be?".
Wait, your name is actually Moriarty? That's incredible! So did you grow up knowing that you had to be a professor at some point? Like someone named House growing up to be a doctor, or Patton growing up to be a general.
+Martymer 81 maybe? did he say that? surely if he did, he didn't mean it. He was quite explicit about the impossibility of any of this. But maybe him misspeaking will create more woo bulshit which you can then debunk, love your videos.
To anyone relying on the subtitles, may I point out that the text at around 12:45 is wrong. He does not say "elaborate many worlds theory" but "Everett many worlds theory" after Hugh Everett that devised it. There may be other mistakes of course, since I wasn't actually looking out for them; I just happened to spot this one.
There are 2 thresholds of interaction that should be invoked in this question. 1. There can't be any interaction less than the plank unit of energy. 2. If the binding force is greater than the repulsive force in a system, it is stable. Continuously pushing on a wall exerts a force but doesn't move anything.
I think rather than entanglement being weaker at a distance, it's that entanglement could only affect the universe a few photons at a time, which is pretty negligible.
I liked the Hitchhiker's reference. Also, you'd need a system where all he interference through the force would get cancled out except those few who could manipulate it. That doesn't make it any more likely, just a little less weird. But I like that it's weird. It's firmly on the science fantasy end of the science fantasy/ hard science fiction scale. That's part of the fun.
Great episode once again! I love Prof Moriarty's contributions. And those animations were really enjoyable. And I really enjoyed that Deepak was mildly ridiculed again. Also if I remember my college days correctly: Energy is a potential to cause work and work a function of a force. A force changes the movement or structure of something, and in order to do that you need "work" this "work" is a product from energy release. I'm pretty sure I tripped up somewhere in this. But the general gist is right I believe.
Explain the entanglement and its ability to affect your surrounding world like this: Draw a chalk line on the ground between you and a jumbo jet, making sure the chalk line touches your foot and a part of the jet. You and the jet are now entangled. Now try to use that chalk line to pull the jet.
His impression is that it's basically impossible to harness in such a way. He's talking about an infinitesimally small phenomenon, something intrinsic to the structure of and influences all particles, so it doesn't only influence local objects but everything. At any rate, it's definitely not something we'd be able to do with our minds.
and I was singing... my, my this here Anakin guy. Maybe Vader someday later, now he's just a small fry. He left his home and kissed his mommy goodbye, saying "soon I'm gonna be a Jedi". "soon I'm gonna be a Jedi"...
This was ABSOLUTELY amazing~!!!! HAHAHAHAH!!!! Watching Prof Moriarty squirm for the first 10min until he finally let go of the chains that bind him was hilarious. Great vid Brady!!
I'd love for Professor Moriarty to replace Grey on an HI episode to do a deep dive on this topic for a couple of hours. Would be even more entertaining than audio ballot counting.
Professor Moriarty should change his name to Buzzkill Buzzkillington and get a second (third? fourth?) PhD in either Theoretical Buzzkillology or Abstract Buzzkillaic Systems!
But you could tell he REALLY didn't want to be! In fact, whenever there's a fun idea that is supposedly based in physics, he tears it to shreds, leaving no trace whatsoever! :-D
+Regis Bodnar There are plenty of fun ideas that are supposedly based in physics. There are also plenty of fun ideas that don't let physics be a constraint on them. The Star Wars universe falls in the second camp, entirely, and to argue otherwise is to do a disservice to both.
At 10:10 we get an explanation of scattering, with an implication of highly chaotic interference, and we're supposed to be put off by the computational difficulty of distinguishing the wave function of one thing from the interference of other things. Gedanken: stop the video, turn on the radio (need commercials to simulate interference), and the TV, and play some music in another program on your computer and then resume the video and see if you can follow the rest of the dialogue.
***** I get your frustration with pseudoscience, but within the very limited context of a TH-cam video I wanted to suggest that your chaotic interference argument might not be an insurmountable problem. --completely aside from the woo stuff. I'd need to spend some time looking for the articles, but a few years ago I read about some research into combining ultrasound or radiographic interferometry with computer numerical analysis to produce 3D models of a radiographic or sonographic subject, and then using the models to compute/find wave functions for each of the multiple transmitters which would sum with each other and the subject to produce an interference pattern with a very small targeted distribution of high amplitude waves, for example, to non invasively destroy tumors or kidney stones. This idea may have flopped in the lab, but I don't think it is so far fetched that we should collectively stop dreaming about it. I'm not trying to defend people who are pushing pseudoscientific gobbledygook, but I think we should be doubly careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. There might be some less dramatic sounding, but dramatically more practical science in the stuff people attempt to defend pseudoscience with.
It's pretty nice thinking that even on some tiny scale, just a thought actually physically effects other people. Even if that is negligible to even the most sensitive instruments.
To inquire on the last question there, regarding seeing into the future.... If we're supposing these Jedi already have some special ability to know and read the state of all entangled particles in the universe, doesn't that mean they COULD predict the future? Purely based on how particles behave with one another? Didn't some smart guy from the past say something to the effect of "If you could know the state and position of all particles in the universe, you would know everything there is to know - present, past, and future"?
I'd like to add a point about speech: Wouldn't my decision to say something affect the physics of someone else's brain? So I could just know the right combination of words to have an effect. This was more a point about mind control than telekinesis.
I actually never thought of the Force as a force but purely as an energy field. But that might also be due to the fact that in the German translation (the version I grew up on) it is translated with "die Macht" (which I would more translate to "power" or "might" though "force" is a correct translation too depending on context) and not "die Kraft" (the German word for force in the physical sense).
Its simple, the force is energy. The common denominator in everything. The thing that all of existence has in common. There didn't have to ve energy, there could have nothing, but there isn't, thanks to the force.
Great video, love it. Mostly because Professor Moriarty acknowledges the presence of a fundamental possibility of such a force, unlike other conservative physicists. However, I understand his point, that this force is so weak at a grand scale, you could probably compare it to a couple of household magnets. However, I have seen compelling evidence, that this force may be stronger than he believes, in given circumstances. Werther this has to do with multiple universes or not, is for someone to find out. For reference, here are my "smoking guns". 1: The Egg project, out of MIT University. 2: A 70´s study, measuring conscious reaction times vs brain signal tell tale signs, which has picked up considerable speed the past few years. Google it, and please comment. If by some chance, Prof. Moriarty, you read this, please comment too. :-) Thank you and I force you a merry christmas. Pål
I came up with this crazy speculative hypothesis in which every person live their entire lives until they die of old age. NOBODY ever dies from a violent death because in the moment they are about to die, their consciousness moves to another version of themselves in a parallel universe in which they manage to stay alive.
Man, the Star Wars hype is so pervasive that it is even hitting Sixty Symbols. Which, is a damn good thing, because this is far and away the best Star Wars related video I have seen recently. Leave it up to Phil to find an interesting way to tie a silly space opera to QFT, make it seem sort of plausible, then shit all over it because it still does not satisfy his expectations of rigor. Phil > all. Also, Brady, could you please add Phil's explanation of the difference between energy and force to your nottinghamscience channel as an additional extra footage feature?
What about deterministic chain reactions? Would it make sense if Jedi are born with such a deep understanding of the universe that they can harness the power of determinism to pre-determine the outcome of their actions or their environment and thus start chain-reactions that will lead to their desired outcome? (Example: Luke hangs upside down in an ice cavern and needs his lightsaber to fly towards him, so his mind calculates subconsciously what he needs to do, for example his strange hand motion, which then causes a chain reaction of self-amplifying effects (like he extends his hand, which generates a small electromagnetic field, that causes some minuscule reaction in the planet's core, which releases a store of energy (say he managed to push a single atom past a point, which causes the molecule the atom is attached to, to fall, dragging with it more and more molten iron) which then influences the planet's magnetic field in just such a way, that the lightsaber is carried by a geo-magnetic field into Luke's hand (example: coilgun)) Obviously the force is baloney but there's still fun to be had to come up with pseudoscientific justifications ;)
One of his strongest arguments is that we don't have a tool to manipulate "the energies" at the miniscule scale of entanglement. Yet we do have that exact tool for other similarly miniscule "energies" -- specifically EM, as Light, via our optical nerves in our eyes. Just a curious subltelty which needs explaining ... namely why would one tool be impossible (or very rare such as ... a Jedi); and the other is routine in all our eyeballs.
I found that watching this at 0.5 speed (YT settings menu) provides a great deal of amusement. It sounds like I imagine a pub evening with physics doctorates to be ^_^
My Physics professor in Florence, Italy explained the concept with a colorful metaphor: if you pee in the ocean you technically raise its level, but of such a small quantity that it's beyond negligible.
f=ma. E=mc^2 E=(f/a)c^2 energy and the force are the same. it is density of mass being accelerated through space and impacting particles surrounding it.
Great video, One thing that might be worth an addendum or an annotation of some sort is that coupling and entanglement are NOT the same thing. That didn't come across very clearly in the video to me. Coupling has to do with two different "variables" (degrees of freedom) influencing each other in one term in the Hamiltonian of a system. In other words, it affects the dynamics of the system or particle or whatever. Entanglement on the other hand is a property of the quantum state itself. It just tells us that our knowledge of the state is conditional and depends on how certain degrees of freedom are correlated. As an illustrative example: an electron and atomic nucleus are *coupled* through the spin-orbit interaction. The Hamiltonian contains a term that depends on both the spin state of the electron and what orbital the electron lives in. This does not mean the electron and the atom are entangled! If we have two entangled particles, they may be in some composite state such that the spins must be both up or both down. Accordingly, after measuring one, we know what the outcome of measuring the other one must be. This is entanglement. These are difficult concepts not easily boiled down into a TH-cam comment. But I hope this clears things up if anyone is interested.
+Chris Flower Shoot, this is actually not 100% right. The Spin-Orbit interaction isn't really an example of coupling between the nucleus and the electron. That's the hyperfine interaction for anyone interested. Spin-Orbit is coupling of the spin states of the electron to the electron's angular momentum states (which manifests itself as the orbital around the nucleus.) Apologies for making this more complicated than it had to be!
A certain genetic tag confers (with extreme infrequency) the ability for the adept to affect the Planck Basal Tension directly. A novice might explode, or scream off at the speed of light into vacuum, or whatever, while the master could affect more articulate transfers of potential by sparking a Planck connexion.. That's how I handle Psionic Powers in my novels.
In one of veritasium's videos it was explained how you couldn't send information using quantum entanglement because you wouldn't know the spin of a particle until you measured it. And only then you could predict that the entangled particle would have to have opposite spin. So how would a Jedi know (i.e. measure) the spin of a particle without manipulating it?
wait...if the force is created by all living beings and binds the galaxy together, then why do galaxies exist, since there cannot be living beings without galaxies, and there cannot be galaxies without the force?
3:15 no wonder creationists say that evolution is only a theory when they see something like that. Somebody needs to sort this "theory" thing once and for all. We need some changes in modern language.
+caballeroPL Prof. Moriarty's use of "theory" is correct, (apart from that I'd drop the "a"). Contrary to both incorrect uses of "theory" I've seen used in creationist and anti-creationist arguments, to an actual scientist, "theory" is the modelling of physical systems using mathematical constructs, which is contrasted with "experiment", which involves observation of actual physical systems. In theory, all electrons are part of a single electron field, even if they're light years apart; in experiment, this connection is absolutely impossible to observe if the electrons are any sizeable distance apart, so in other words, in experiment, there is no connection in those cases. With computers being common, theory is nowadays also often split into analytical theory (often also just called "theory"), and numerical theory (often just called "simulation"). In simulation, the connection would also be absolutely impossible to observe, unless you're using absurd precision arithmetic. Also, contrary to other arguments I've seen, nothing needs to be vetted in order to be "theory"; a lot of theory ends up being falsified in experiment (or simulation of more detailed models), because the fact that a model has been proposed that fits with existing observations doesn't mean that it will fit with future observations. Theory also doesn't need to apply to all scenarios, because there are many models that make vital simplifying assumptions, so some models work very well in certain contexts and not at all in others. Notice how I never said "a theory", because that doesn't even make sense to me as a phrase, except possibly as an accident when "theory" alone was intended. Some people are less strict about that, though.
+Neil G. Dickson Well, the major problem is that a vast majority of people say "theory" when they mean "hypothesis", which makes some people think, that, for example, the Theory of Evolution is not as well-founded or universal as it actually is.
Jerry Nilsson Yep. Unfortunately, the usual response I've seen people provide to counter that is to say that ideas can't become "theories" in science until they've been subject to and passed thorough tests to make sure that they are an accurate representation of reality, which is completely false, and confuses matters further. I've seen so very many theory papers presenting ideas that are nonsense and not at all representative of reality, and others that are interesting and maybe represent something that could be a thought experiment, but that don't represent anything that could ever be conceivably constructed, let alone tested. They're still theory, regardless of their potential validity or utility, because "theory" just means that they're proposing or analysing a model for some aspect of something.
+caballeroPL _"We need some changes in modern language."_ We really only need some changes to the quality of modern science education. When science teachers aren't required to have a single degree in science to teach it, we will unavoidably run into problems. That being said, bottom of the barrel religious apologetics is largely to blame as well but that leads right back to educational standards.
I think the problem with the force existing in our universe is not that it simply doesn't exist, but that there is no mechanism in biological life to sense, amplify, and manipulate the closest analogous concept.
Maybe the force requires another type of particle. One that is almost identical to an electron, but when they appear in the same atom, amplify each others field exponentially. These electrons have a distinct property like mass that draws them together, so that once they're near enough to be on a body, they almost never leave. A Jedi simply has many of these special electrons and thus has a unique ability to entangle long distances (due to these same electrons existing in the atmosphere). They can also carry information/influence other electrons.
I feel sorry for the professor that he had to "measure" what he said because of the fear of *fanatics* (of Star Wars) Sometimes more freedom (from/by fanatics) make more harm than less freedom.
This video was nice to watch, even without much knowledge about one or the other. The explanaitions were engaging and charming and I like the accent. Could anyone tell me, what accent this is?
Pauli exclusion principle states: "two identical fermions (particles with half-integer spin) cannot occupy the same quantum state simultaneously". Similarly to Brian Cox's lecture, where Brian rubbed a diamond, changing quantum states of electrons in the diamond, claiming that "all of the electrons in our universe have to adjust to a change in a quantum state". Perhaps the Force is a Jedi's ability to willingly change the quantum states of electrons in their organism, causing desired changes to occur in the quantum states of other electrons in the universe.
My thought always was that the Jedi could change a microscopic amount of matter into energy and use it to alter electromagnetic, gravitation, and even color (quarks and stuff) fields to suit their whim. or perhaps they are changing the likelihood of particles being found at certain locations, modifying the equations for the uncertainty principal to match what they need. just thoughts.
There's this story that Lucas' own plans for eps 7-9 would've been about the jedi discovering that midichlorians are in fact an advanced microbial civilization employing microbial ftl drives and time machines, with the goal of communicating with the macro universe. The force there being a side effect of nearly godlike technology.
f=ma.E=mc^2E=(f/a)c^2 - - - energy and the force are the same. it is density of mass being accelerated through space and impacting particles surrounding it.
Entanglement? The first thing I think of when thinking of what could be used as a magik is the possibility of another force with the users being able to generate bosons of the field.
I love how persistent Brady is. He keeps pushing: "That's what makes the Jedi special!" Keep up the good work Brady (and Professor Phil)!
5:34
The sound of physics hitting metaphysics.
+DrDress Hehehehehee
+DrDress WELL FF FF MNNNNNNNNNNNNN
+DrDress lol
+DrDress Bahaha, perfect.
*Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam.* _"I do not know, it must be the Force!"_
"I hate entanglement, it's coarse, rough and irritating... and it gets everywhere. Not like here. Here everything is soft, and smooth." - Anakin
You've taken your first step into a larger world...
I love how Brady and Phil always get into it. It reminded me of their "do atoms ever touch" video. I've learned that language really matters when describing these effects.
So disappointed Moriarty's force versus energy explanation didn't make the cut.
Is that seriously his name?!
Phil Moriarty
You should meet his brother, Professor James Moriarty.
same, I was really interested in hearing what he had to say about that
@@warhero0414 Force and energy are not the same, THE END
Brady, your interviewing is a breath of fresh air. You really relentlessly dig deep to get the answers; something that is unfortunately becoming very rare in our world today.
Nonetheless, I will continue my Jedi training, as I have almost completed my lightsaber.
Do you have midichlorians though?
Majanus Hehehe. Midichlorians never fail to annoy.
+Der Wolf I am sure he just took a Midichlorian shot.
+Cythil What the heck is a Midichlorian?
BrackenWood
Better you do not find out.
I've been taking midichlorians boosters for a couple weeks now. I'm already feeling the effects. More patience, calmer, and contemplative. Just the other day I landed a gnarly kick-flip over a long stairway in front of my buds and they got excited yet I remained calmed, knowing the Force is much more powerful than these meager displays of material action.
If we strike you down in the comments Prof. Moriarty, you would become more powerful than we could possibly imagine
William Roe I can imagine quick a bit
Prof. Moriarty is such a joy to watch and listen to. Thanks for the great video!
"...men were real men, women were real women, and small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri were real small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri."
Anyone get that reference?
+Bigjakestudios Hitchikers
42 ;)
+Bigjakestudios of course :)
+Bigjakestudios you are clearly a hoopy frood who really knows where his towel's at.
+Bigjakestudios Let me finish this Pan-Galactic Gargleblaster and I'll tell you...or not.
As a lay-man of senior years, I find these videos a real treat. It's just a shame they're not as frequent of late.
"So disappointed Moriarty's force versus energy explanation didn't make the cut."
Yeah... I also wanted to know abou what he was saying there =/
Finally the prof is slowing down to speeds below the speed of light.... I could even follow him, haha. I wish the Professor Moriarty, Brady and all at the University of Nottingham contributing to Sixty Symbols and Periodic Videos a very good 2016!
Nice one Roland :) I studied electrical engineering and we had a lot of physics and also quantum physics (that's what makes semi conductors work, so I think they thought it would help students understand electrical engineering. If anything it made it far less clear :) ). So I often can't follow him either; probably due the poor Dutch educational standards ;) but he's a great lecturer you learn something every time you see him.
+Raymond Doetjes Oh yes, I agree. I do not doubt that! It is just... well... I am getting older, I gues...
I love to see people getting so genuinely excited about theoretical concepts as Prof Moriarty does in this video. Call me a nerd but that's the kind of stuff that makes me happy.
What prof. Moriarty was trying to say is that the electron field is littered with so much background noise that a miniscule distance away from one specific point in the field, and the entanglement would be lost completely.
Sixty symbols was trying to ask if it's hypothetically possible to use the force if we were able to excite a group of electrons regardless of distance above background noise.
I feel like this video would have been a lot more fruitful if they communicated these ideas better.
I think its fun having real scientists talk about sci fi stuff, and specifically if it could be possible
"Many bothans died to bring us this information." Thanks - now I have coffee and spit on my keyboard.
Hitch-hiker's reference!
+42 froodyness points
+Moriarty2112 you hoopy frood you.
+Moriarty2112 Did you lose your towel somewhere?
+AlanKey86 its not 42 its actually 41.999999999999999999999
What do you get when you multiply six by nine?
I don't see Star Wars as science fiction, I see Star Wars as Science Fantasy
there isn't much science in star wars. The only time is when they tried to use "parsecs" and got it wrong....
@@MiniKodjo Not really. The Kessel Run was a hyperspace route that passed near a black hole cluster, The Maw. In order to navigate it safely, pilots take a route around it. Han's brag is that his ship was fast enough to take a shortcut closer to The Maw, it's just that pop culture heard Parsec as a unit of time, not distance and created a long living misconception that then spawned misconceptions such as yours.
The distinction was already made.
Hard science fiction is called what you would like to call science fiction.
Prof. Phil Moriarty said something EXTREMELY CRUCIAL for science in general:
"There's a big difference between a theory and something that happens practically, that can be measured"
Let's not forget how many theories we give for granted, like the origin of the moon. Truth is WE DON'T KNOW.
Piotr Podgórski You're a clever man, don't act like you didn't understand what I meant. I agree with all that you said, and still mantain my original comment.
I was talking in a general science context, not on a quantum physics one, and you can't deny that we've been teaching "theories" on schools for decades now.
How could one measure the collective disappointment with episodes 1-3 compared to the excitement for the original 3 Star Wars movies?
I've been loving this youtube channel so much lately. It's really incredible, so satisfying to learn more about these topics from people who know what they are talking about. I'd just like to add my personal anecdote. I have had future visions on multiple occasions, 100 % accurate future visions, there are ways in this very universe.
What a great interviewer you are Brady!
+Isaac Morph I agree!
My favourite two questions in this video are "What is the basic unit of entanglement?" and "If you saw a jedi using the force, what would your first line of inquiry be?".
I would have very much liked to have seen Professor Moriarty's discussion of force vs energy,
:/
but it was an amazing video non-the-less LOL
Energy = d(Force)/dt
Wait, your name is actually Moriarty? That's incredible! So did you grow up knowing that you had to be a professor at some point? Like someone named House growing up to be a doctor, or Patton growing up to be a general.
7:09 The lead-up to the line “… and that special person is a Jedi.” was pure comedy 😂😂
0.5 Speed. This is how the interview sounds if done at the pub after a view pints.
PS> I love this channel (Accidentally set speed to low lol )
I had such respect for you, Phil... But then you said the m-word. ;)
Wut
+Martymer 81 maybe? did he say that? surely if he did, he didn't mean it. He was quite explicit about the impossibility of any of this. But maybe him misspeaking will create more woo bulshit which you can then debunk, love your videos.
+MrRolnicek He said Midichlorian. It's like Star Wars heresy to some fans.
+mainecolbs why???
+mainecolbs why?
To anyone relying on the subtitles, may I point out that the text at around 12:45 is wrong. He does not say "elaborate many worlds theory" but "Everett many worlds theory" after Hugh Everett that devised it.
There may be other mistakes of course, since I wasn't actually looking out for them; I just happened to spot this one.
I love your questions and how they're basically designed to sadistically pick apart his lecture, it's hilarious to watch!
Dr. Moriarty is so into his physics. I love it. It’s so entertaining. And damn is he convincing.
There are 2 thresholds of interaction that should be invoked in this question.
1. There can't be any interaction less than the plank unit of energy.
2. If the binding force is greater than the repulsive force in a system, it is stable. Continuously pushing on a wall exerts a force but doesn't move anything.
I think rather than entanglement being weaker at a distance, it's that entanglement could only affect the universe a few photons at a time, which is pretty negligible.
C'mon Brady,upload the force vs energy part, don't leave us hanging.
I liked the Hitchhiker's reference.
Also, you'd need a system where all he interference through the force would get cancled out except those few who could manipulate it. That doesn't make it any more likely, just a little less weird.
But I like that it's weird. It's firmly on the science fantasy end of the science fantasy/ hard science fiction scale. That's part of the fun.
Great episode once again! I love Prof Moriarty's contributions.
And those animations were really enjoyable. And I really enjoyed that Deepak was mildly ridiculed again.
Also if I remember my college days correctly:
Energy is a potential to cause work and work a function of a force. A force changes the movement or structure of something, and in order to do that you need "work" this "work" is a product from energy release.
I'm pretty sure I tripped up somewhere in this. But the general gist is right I believe.
Explain the entanglement and its ability to affect your surrounding world like this: Draw a chalk line on the ground between you and a jumbo jet, making sure the chalk line touches your foot and a part of the jet. You and the jet are now entangled. Now try to use that chalk line to pull the jet.
His impression is that it's basically impossible to harness in such a way. He's talking about an infinitesimally small phenomenon, something intrinsic to the structure of and influences all particles, so it doesn't only influence local objects but everything. At any rate, it's definitely not something we'd be able to do with our minds.
and I was singing...
my, my this here Anakin guy.
Maybe Vader someday later, now he's just a small fry.
He left his home and kissed his mommy goodbye, saying "soon I'm gonna be a Jedi".
"soon I'm gonna be a Jedi"...
weird al, isn't it? A genius!
I never could understand those lyrics.
telekinesis, clairvoyance, creating design, making plans seeing the whole picture, these are the tools of the force. the force is an intelligence.
This was ABSOLUTELY amazing~!!!! HAHAHAHAH!!!! Watching Prof Moriarty squirm for the first 10min until he finally let go of the chains that bind him was hilarious. Great vid Brady!!
Ha ha ha...10 seconds of the professor discussed force versus energy...fantastic.
I'd love for Professor Moriarty to replace Grey on an HI episode to do a deep dive on this topic for a couple of hours. Would be even more entertaining than audio ballot counting.
Professor Moriarty should change his name to Buzzkill Buzzkillington and get a second (third? fourth?) PhD in either Theoretical Buzzkillology or Abstract Buzzkillaic Systems!
+Regis Bodnar Honestly, he was much more accommodating than I was expecting.
But you could tell he REALLY didn't want to be! In fact, whenever there's a fun idea that is supposedly based in physics, he tears it to shreds, leaving no trace whatsoever! :-D
+Regis Bodnar There are plenty of fun ideas that are supposedly based in physics. There are also plenty of fun ideas that don't let physics be a constraint on them. The Star Wars universe falls in the second camp, entirely, and to argue otherwise is to do a disservice to both.
+Regis Bodnar You want him to lie? I'm sure a neckbeard like you is captain fun...
4uqzz
lv
e2ooo3o1 hD!ýuyhi900p0u5u2 😁😮
I love the banter between these guys
At 10:10 we get an explanation of scattering, with an implication of highly chaotic interference, and we're supposed to be put off by the computational difficulty of distinguishing the wave function of one thing from the interference of other things.
Gedanken: stop the video, turn on the radio (need commercials to simulate interference), and the TV, and play some music in another program on your computer and then resume the video and see if you can follow the rest of the dialogue.
***** I get your frustration with pseudoscience, but within the very limited context of a TH-cam video I wanted to suggest that your chaotic interference argument might not be an insurmountable problem. --completely aside from the woo stuff.
I'd need to spend some time looking for the articles, but a few years ago I read about some research into combining ultrasound or radiographic interferometry with computer numerical analysis to produce 3D models of a radiographic or sonographic subject, and then using the models to compute/find wave functions for each of the multiple transmitters which would sum with each other and the subject to produce an interference pattern with a very small targeted distribution of high amplitude waves, for example, to non invasively destroy tumors or kidney stones.
This idea may have flopped in the lab, but I don't think it is so far fetched that we should collectively stop dreaming about it. I'm not trying to defend people who are pushing pseudoscientific gobbledygook, but I think we should be doubly careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. There might be some less dramatic sounding, but dramatically more practical science in the stuff people attempt to defend pseudoscience with.
It's pretty nice thinking that even on some tiny scale, just a thought actually physically effects other people. Even if that is negligible to even the most sensitive instruments.
To inquire on the last question there, regarding seeing into the future.... If we're supposing these Jedi already have some special ability to know and read the state of all entangled particles in the universe, doesn't that mean they COULD predict the future? Purely based on how particles behave with one another? Didn't some smart guy from the past say something to the effect of "If you could know the state and position of all particles in the universe, you would know everything there is to know - present, past, and future"?
Upload an extra or part 2 where he explains the energy and force.
I'd like to add a point about speech: Wouldn't my decision to say something affect the physics of someone else's brain? So I could just know the right combination of words to have an effect.
This was more a point about mind control than telekinesis.
I actually never thought of the Force as a force but purely as an energy field. But that might also be due to the fact that in the German translation (the version I grew up on) it is translated with "die Macht" (which I would more translate to "power" or "might" though "force" is a correct translation too depending on context) and not "die Kraft" (the German word for force in the physical sense).
thumbs up for the pain you caused him :) I nearly felt Prof Moriarty's suffering with your questions, a mathematician here speaking :)
This guys voice is the most calming sound ever!
I've never heard Brady be so passionately argumentative before.
Finally ! Phil is back !
Its simple, the force is energy. The common denominator in everything. The thing that all of existence has in common. There didn't have to ve energy, there could have nothing, but there isn't, thanks to the force.
Great video, love it. Mostly because Professor Moriarty acknowledges the presence of a fundamental possibility of such a force, unlike other conservative physicists. However, I understand his point, that this force is so weak at a grand scale, you could probably compare it to a couple of household magnets. However, I have seen compelling evidence, that this force may be stronger than he believes, in given circumstances. Werther this has to do with multiple universes or not, is for someone to find out. For reference, here are my "smoking guns". 1: The Egg project, out of MIT University. 2: A 70´s study, measuring conscious reaction times vs brain signal tell tale signs, which has picked up considerable speed the past few years. Google it, and please comment. If by some chance, Prof. Moriarty, you read this, please comment too. :-) Thank you and I force you a merry christmas.
Pål
I came up with this crazy speculative hypothesis in which every person live their entire lives until they die of old age. NOBODY ever dies from a violent death because in the moment they are about to die, their consciousness moves to another version of themselves in a parallel universe in which they manage to stay alive.
Great and funny discussion, I love these videos.
Man, the Star Wars hype is so pervasive that it is even hitting Sixty Symbols. Which, is a damn good thing, because this is far and away the best Star Wars related video I have seen recently. Leave it up to Phil to find an interesting way to tie a silly space opera to QFT, make it seem sort of plausible, then shit all over it because it still does not satisfy his expectations of rigor. Phil > all.
Also, Brady, could you please add Phil's explanation of the difference between energy and force to your nottinghamscience channel as an additional extra footage feature?
What about deterministic chain reactions?
Would it make sense if Jedi are born with such a deep understanding of the universe that they can harness the power of determinism to pre-determine the outcome of their actions or their environment and thus start chain-reactions that will lead to their desired outcome? (Example: Luke hangs upside down in an ice cavern and needs his lightsaber to fly towards him, so his mind calculates subconsciously what he needs to do, for example his strange hand motion, which then causes a chain reaction of self-amplifying effects (like he extends his hand, which generates a small electromagnetic field, that causes some minuscule reaction in the planet's core, which releases a store of energy (say he managed to push a single atom past a point, which causes the molecule the atom is attached to, to fall, dragging with it more and more molten iron) which then influences the planet's magnetic field in just such a way, that the lightsaber is carried by a geo-magnetic field into Luke's hand (example: coilgun))
Obviously the force is baloney but there's still fun to be had to come up with pseudoscientific justifications ;)
+d3rrial Too many questionable assertions in your supposition, but it's not serious, so whatever. Also determinism isn't a power, it's a concept.
there's a video of him killing it with a guitar and using metal riffs to explain the uncertainty principle. thought you guys might want to know that.
One of his strongest arguments is that we don't have a tool to manipulate "the energies" at the miniscule scale of entanglement. Yet we do have that exact tool for other similarly miniscule "energies" -- specifically EM, as Light, via our optical nerves in our eyes. Just a curious subltelty which needs explaining ... namely why would one tool be impossible (or very rare such as ... a Jedi); and the other is routine in all our eyeballs.
I found that watching this at 0.5 speed (YT settings menu) provides a great deal of amusement. It sounds like I imagine a pub evening with physics doctorates to be ^_^
He's not force sensitive..
My Physics professor in Florence, Italy explained the concept with a colorful metaphor: if you pee in the ocean you technically raise its level, but of such a small quantity that it's beyond negligible.
Man, Prof Phil waves his hands like crazy when explaining stuff.
So what I took from this is that Phil Moriarty is Hans Solo
f=ma.
E=mc^2
E=(f/a)c^2
energy and the force are the same. it is density of mass being accelerated through space and impacting particles surrounding it.
Is entanglement weaker then gravity? Also which fundamental force is responsible for it? You should show us some numbers.
dutchrjen
Awesome. Thank you.
So are all electrons entangled with each other or are there some special entangled pairs?
Great video, One thing that might be worth an addendum or an annotation of some sort is that coupling and entanglement are NOT the same thing. That didn't come across very clearly in the video to me.
Coupling has to do with two different "variables" (degrees of freedom) influencing each other in one term in the Hamiltonian of a system. In other words, it affects the dynamics of the system or particle or whatever.
Entanglement on the other hand is a property of the quantum state itself. It just tells us that our knowledge of the state is conditional and depends on how certain degrees of freedom are correlated.
As an illustrative example: an electron and atomic nucleus are *coupled* through the spin-orbit interaction. The Hamiltonian contains a term that depends on both the spin state of the electron and what orbital the electron lives in. This does not mean the electron and the atom are entangled!
If we have two entangled particles, they may be in some composite state such that the spins must be both up or both down. Accordingly, after measuring one, we know what the outcome of measuring the other one must be. This is entanglement.
These are difficult concepts not easily boiled down into a TH-cam comment. But I hope this clears things up if anyone is interested.
+Chris Flower Shoot, this is actually not 100% right. The Spin-Orbit interaction isn't really an example of coupling between the nucleus and the electron. That's the hyperfine interaction for anyone interested. Spin-Orbit is coupling of the spin states of the electron to the electron's angular momentum states (which manifests itself as the orbital around the nucleus.)
Apologies for making this more complicated than it had to be!
A certain genetic tag confers (with extreme infrequency) the ability for the adept to affect the Planck Basal Tension directly. A novice might explode, or scream off at the speed of light into vacuum, or whatever, while the master could affect more articulate transfers of potential by sparking a Planck connexion.. That's how I handle Psionic Powers in my novels.
In one of veritasium's videos it was explained how you couldn't send information using quantum entanglement because you wouldn't know the spin of a particle until you measured it. And only then you could predict that the entangled particle would have to have opposite spin.
So how would a Jedi know (i.e. measure) the spin of a particle without manipulating it?
This makes me want to learn more on this subject. Now I'm not going to get any sleep tonight.
"What is the SI unit for entanglement?" Entanglement is commonly measured in terms of entropy, so units of action (energy x time).
wait...if the force is created by all living beings and binds the galaxy together, then why do galaxies exist, since there cannot be living beings without galaxies, and there cannot be galaxies without the force?
Love the animation! Very much in the style of Quentin Blake.
You need to release that discussion of force vs. energy.
3:15 no wonder creationists say that evolution is only a theory when they see something like that. Somebody needs to sort this "theory" thing once and for all. We need some changes in modern language.
+caballeroPL Prof. Moriarty's use of "theory" is correct, (apart from that I'd drop the "a"). Contrary to both incorrect uses of "theory" I've seen used in creationist and anti-creationist arguments, to an actual scientist, "theory" is the modelling of physical systems using mathematical constructs, which is contrasted with "experiment", which involves observation of actual physical systems. In theory, all electrons are part of a single electron field, even if they're light years apart; in experiment, this connection is absolutely impossible to observe if the electrons are any sizeable distance apart, so in other words, in experiment, there is no connection in those cases. With computers being common, theory is nowadays also often split into analytical theory (often also just called "theory"), and numerical theory (often just called "simulation"). In simulation, the connection would also be absolutely impossible to observe, unless you're using absurd precision arithmetic.
Also, contrary to other arguments I've seen, nothing needs to be vetted in order to be "theory"; a lot of theory ends up being falsified in experiment (or simulation of more detailed models), because the fact that a model has been proposed that fits with existing observations doesn't mean that it will fit with future observations. Theory also doesn't need to apply to all scenarios, because there are many models that make vital simplifying assumptions, so some models work very well in certain contexts and not at all in others.
Notice how I never said "a theory", because that doesn't even make sense to me as a phrase, except possibly as an accident when "theory" alone was intended. Some people are less strict about that, though.
الا
+Neil G. Dickson
Well, the major problem is that a vast majority of people say "theory" when they mean "hypothesis", which makes some people think, that, for example, the Theory of Evolution is not as well-founded or universal as it actually is.
Jerry Nilsson Yep. Unfortunately, the usual response I've seen people provide to counter that is to say that ideas can't become "theories" in science until they've been subject to and passed thorough tests to make sure that they are an accurate representation of reality, which is completely false, and confuses matters further. I've seen so very many theory papers presenting ideas that are nonsense and not at all representative of reality, and others that are interesting and maybe represent something that could be a thought experiment, but that don't represent anything that could ever be conceivably constructed, let alone tested. They're still theory, regardless of their potential validity or utility, because "theory" just means that they're proposing or analysing a model for some aspect of something.
+caballeroPL _"We need some changes in modern language."_
We really only need some changes to the quality of modern science education. When science teachers aren't required to have a single degree in science to teach it, we will unavoidably run into problems. That being said, bottom of the barrel religious apologetics is largely to blame as well but that leads right back to educational standards.
All things are interconnected, but some things are more interconnected than others ;{
I think the problem with the force existing in our universe is not that it simply doesn't exist, but that there is no mechanism in biological life to sense, amplify, and manipulate the closest analogous concept.
The effect of entanglement is, to quote Matt Parker, "Double Zero. That's for when things are *reeeally* zero."
Dein Name: i see what u did there
I might have got a better grade in physics if I had had a lecturer like this guy. My lecturers were dry as dust and pedantic with it!
Maybe the force requires another type of particle. One that is almost identical to an electron, but when they appear in the same atom, amplify each others field exponentially. These electrons have a distinct property like mass that draws them together, so that once they're near enough to be on a body, they almost never leave. A Jedi simply has many of these special electrons and thus has a unique ability to entangle long distances (due to these same electrons existing in the atmosphere). They can also carry information/influence other electrons.
I feel sorry for the professor that he had to "measure" what he said because of the fear of *fanatics* (of Star Wars)
Sometimes more freedom (from/by fanatics) make more harm than less freedom.
Great video! I love Prof. Moriarty.
Brady is The main antagonist in this show. He's like a rejected batman villain.
Poor Prof. Moriarty... :D
This video was nice to watch, even without much knowledge about one or the other.
The explanaitions were engaging and charming and I like the accent.
Could anyone tell me, what accent this is?
Irish
+Countryen Irish
Monaghan, ireland i think
Pauli exclusion principle states: "two identical fermions (particles with half-integer spin) cannot occupy the same quantum state simultaneously".
Similarly to Brian Cox's lecture, where Brian rubbed a diamond, changing quantum states of electrons in the diamond, claiming that "all of the electrons in our universe have to adjust to a change in a quantum state". Perhaps the Force is a Jedi's ability to willingly change the quantum states of electrons in their organism, causing desired changes to occur in the quantum states of other electrons in the universe.
12:12 The amplifiers are Midichlorians. A Jedi's Midichlorian count relates directly to breadth his power.
My thought always was that the Jedi could change a microscopic amount of matter into energy and use it to alter electromagnetic, gravitation, and even color (quarks and stuff) fields to suit their whim.
or perhaps they are changing the likelihood of particles being found at certain locations, modifying the equations for the uncertainty principal to match what they need.
just thoughts.
Fabulous artwork!
Rocking the beard!! It's mountainous! Love it!
The force in Star Wars is a reference to Occult knowledge. I have plenty of ammo to back this up if anyone has doubt.
Owen Prescott agree
Whoever does not love does not know the Force, because the Force is love.
There's this story that Lucas' own plans for eps 7-9 would've been about the jedi discovering that midichlorians are in fact an advanced microbial civilization employing microbial ftl drives and time machines, with the goal of communicating with the macro universe. The force there being a side effect of nearly godlike technology.
This is a new record for Brady talking in a video that doesn't feature him.
f=ma.E=mc^2E=(f/a)c^2
-
-
-
energy and the force are the same. it is density of mass being accelerated through space and impacting particles surrounding it.
Entanglement? The first thing I think of when thinking of what could be used as a magik is the possibility of another force with the users being able to generate bosons of the field.