What do the Twistors of Roger Penrose and the Hopf Fibrations of Eric Weinstein and the "Belt Trick" of Paul Dirac have in common? It takes two complete turns to get down the "rabbit hole" (Alpha Funnel 3D--->4D) to produce one twist cycle (Quantum unit).
First graphical depiction of spin 1/2 that made all sense! A wave function connecting to itself after two rounds. More precisely, there are no "rounds" because both "rounds" exist in the exact same time, creating a sum wave function that pulsates in its maximums and minimums and in that way it creates a faint quantum locality and changing probability of an so called "electron". This is also the best way for me to understand wave function entanglement.
In this 2D space there is a start and a finish. The further it gets away from the start the closer it gets to the start, if this was converted to 3D space, the electron moves so fast it occupies the in quanta of time. But on a sphere there cannot be a finish so for this to be conserved, it must be a property within the orbital field equally distributed?. The faster it goes the closer it gets to being everywhere all at once within it's field so no matter where you look you can find it within said field.
One is up and one is down… it has to do with the magnetic moment and how they interact with a magnetic feild… it’s pretty close to a bar magnet with the north pole at the top or at the bottom, in classical physics it would mean it’s spinning in one of the two directions, even though it’s most likely not spinning at all, it’s just a property of it’s magnetic feild… nobody knows for sure, but the math works…
So as electrons gain more energy do they gain more cycles or are they always at 0.5 or -0.5 cycles, are electrons fundamentally Möbius strips or can be described as one
Electrons are always up or down (1/2 or -1/2) no matter which orbital they are occupying… mobius is good insight, nobody knows exactly what they are actually doing the math just describes observation. Something in the feild twisted up like a mobius is probably close to what it actually is, at least to me. I’ve always thought of it as a knot even though I can’t picture what it looks like…
Great depiction, thank you! How would the spin look like for a free Electron with a linear wavefunction? Then there is no circeling back to the origin. How can I imagin the spin then?
Both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature. (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. An artificial Christmas tree can hold the ornaments in place, but it is not a real tree. String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension? What did some of the old clockmakers use to store the energy to power the clock? Was it a string or was it a spring? What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Fixing the Standard Model with more particles is like trying to mend a torn fishing net with small rubber balls, instead of a piece of twisted twine. Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: “We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr (lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957-8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958) The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with some aspects of the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose, and the work of Eric Weinstein on “Geometric Unity”, and the work of Dr. Lisa Randall on the possibility of one extra spatial dimension? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics? When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if Quark/Gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks where the tubes are entangled? (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Charge" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry. Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Gluons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change. ===================== Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons? Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension? Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons . Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The production of the torus may help explain the “Symmetry Violation” in Beta Decay, because one end of the broken tube section is connected to the other end of the tube produced, like a snake eating its tail. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process, which is also found in DNA molecules. Could the production of multiple writhe cycles help explain the three generations of quarks and neutrinos? If the twist cycles increase, the writhe cycles would also have a tendency to increase. Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. ( Mass=1/Length ) The “Electric Charge” of electrons or positrons would be the result of one twist cycle being displayed at the 3D-4D surface interface of the particle. The physical entanglement of twisted tubes in quarks within protons and neutrons and mesons displays an overall external surface charge of an integer number. Because the neutrinos do not have open tube ends, (They are a twisted torus.) they have no overall electric charge. Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms. In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter? Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles? I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist producing a twisted 3D/4D membrane. This topological Soliton model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles. ==
Hm. I’m not sure I quite understand what the loop here represents. When you mentioned the two valued function, are these two complex values the spinor? The wavefunction should have domain R^3 , right? And I imagine that this is in a spherically symmetric potential well. Ok well, the spin here is adding with the 12, so presumably the 12 is representing the orbital angular momentum? And in this case, this is all about a particular axis?
I am confused as well. I thought this might represent an electron precessing in a constant magnetic field, with energies quantized as (n+1/2) and understood in terms of the angular momentum. However, the 12 +/- 1/2 part made less sense to me with this picture, as that seems to be referring to spin flips (where the energy would be +/- a value related to the field strength) instead of some extrinsic angular momenta. Perhaps he is trying to do both, and this is meant to show the doublet ground states of an ion's valence electron.
It’s a circular electron orbit in R^3, thus the electron’s position can be described by 1 number, BUT the spiral is C^1, and square it’s magnitude to find the probability amplitude. This the electron has an equal probability to be found anywhere on the circle (after normalizing the sum of amplitudes to 1).
It represents abstract math nothing more. In no way is it a visual of what the electron is or what it’s doing… it’s just a way to visualize the math… all you really need is the electron has two states either up or down. Trying to visualize it is probably a fool’s errand, as even if you do it, which is doubtful, there is no way to verify what you’re imagining is correct or not…
@@robertw1871 I’m not trying to visualize it more so than this video already does, I’m trying to understand how this math corresponds to other math describing it.
I don't see how this describes spin. how would you represent the electron on a straight line? Would the wave-function be zero at one end and at max height on the other? For the electron to be confined, you need the WF to be 0 at both ends. For half-spin particles, the spin phase changes with half the position phase. I don't see how that is represented here. The greatest minds in science have yet to find a proper way to visually depict half-integer spin.
Excellent illustration. Just a small suggestion to make it even more visually clear. Even though the wave goes through the loop twice is part of a single wave, it would be helpful to illustrate the second half of the wave with a different color to be able to see the wave interleaving with itself.
Yeah it does, it just has to go around the loop twice. You can think of it going around one way as the electron component, and coming back the other way as the positron component
No... electrons are leptons which all have a fundamental spin of 1/2. The nucleons are made of up and down quarks which also have their own spins, so its not caused by the nucleus only
It's always the things that I don't need to study that I'm most interested in
Hah meow too
@@akale2620 That's stress reduction behaviour.
Totally meeee
You are not alone
What do the Twistors of Roger Penrose and the Hopf Fibrations of Eric Weinstein and the "Belt Trick" of Paul Dirac have in common?
It takes two complete turns to get down the "rabbit hole" (Alpha Funnel 3D--->4D) to produce one twist cycle (Quantum unit).
This is exactly the picture of electron in nonlinear electromagnetic theory.
Nice demonstration! The best I've seen.
First graphical depiction of spin 1/2 that made all sense! A wave function connecting to itself after two rounds. More precisely, there are no "rounds" because both "rounds" exist in the exact same time, creating a sum wave function that pulsates in its maximums and minimums and in that way it creates a faint quantum locality and changing probability of an so called "electron". This is also the best way for me to understand wave function entanglement.
Your spin videos were the reason i first subscribed. Pretty damn cool!
What a fantastic demonstration, Amazing explanation. You just gained a new sub :)
Now that's the best explanation of spin I've ever seen!
Is the starting point of 12 cycles significant?
In this 2D space there is a start and a finish. The further it gets away from the start the closer it gets to the start, if this was converted to 3D space, the electron moves so fast it occupies the in quanta of time. But on a sphere there cannot be a finish so for this to be conserved, it must be a property within the orbital field equally distributed?. The faster it goes the closer it gets to being everywhere all at once within it's field so no matter where you look you can find it within said field.
Is it means to complete one cycle of wave it needs to spin twice and if it spin once it covers half cycle ?
Sure but how exactly do spin +1/2 and -1/2 differ here?
One is up and one is down… it has to do with the magnetic moment and how they interact with a magnetic feild… it’s pretty close to a bar magnet with the north pole at the top or at the bottom, in classical physics it would mean it’s spinning in one of the two directions, even though it’s most likely not spinning at all, it’s just a property of it’s magnetic feild… nobody knows for sure, but the math works…
Great demo. Thanks.
So as electrons gain more energy do they gain more cycles or are they always at 0.5 or -0.5 cycles, are electrons fundamentally Möbius strips or can be described as one
Nothing mobius about things here, at least as presented in this video.
Electrons are always up or down (1/2 or -1/2) no matter which orbital they are occupying… mobius is good insight, nobody knows exactly what they are actually doing the math just describes observation. Something in the feild twisted up like a mobius is probably close to what it actually is, at least to me. I’ve always thought of it as a knot even though I can’t picture what it looks like…
Notice they don't say about time period. Might be at close to light speed, time is of no significant factor.
Shut up, and calculate.
@@pelimies1818 Oh how Quantum of you!
Great depiction, thank you! How would the spin look like for a free Electron with a linear wavefunction? Then there is no circeling back to the origin. How can I imagin the spin then?
I notice you have 24 peaks in the original graphic. What about 28 like the Sun ?
So an electron is a mobius strip
Cool video. It’s a good way of showing the weirdness of quantum physics.
I have not seen a better illustration of the spin of an electron and its direction ...
Why you took 12.5 cycle for +half and 11.5 cycle for -half
is this expansion and contraction. elasticity?
Spin links🔗 1-D to 2-D, cam-locking with positron and electron.
From the way you have presented it, spin appears to consist of a phase shift in the wave function.
Both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature. (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.)
Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. An artificial Christmas tree can hold the ornaments in place, but it is not a real tree.
String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension? What did some of the old clockmakers use to store the energy to power the clock? Was it a string or was it a spring?
What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Fixing the Standard Model with more particles is like trying to mend a torn fishing net with small rubber balls, instead of a piece of twisted twine.
Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules:
“We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr
(lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957-8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958)
The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with some aspects of the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose, and the work of Eric Weinstein on “Geometric Unity”, and the work of Dr. Lisa Randall on the possibility of one extra spatial dimension? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics?
When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if Quark/Gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks where the tubes are entangled? (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Charge" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry.
Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Gluons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other.
Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change.
=====================
Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons?
Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension?
Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons
. Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The production of the torus may help explain the “Symmetry Violation” in Beta Decay, because one end of the broken tube section is connected to the other end of the tube produced, like a snake eating its tail. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process, which is also found in DNA molecules. Could the production of multiple writhe cycles help explain the three generations of quarks and neutrinos? If the twist cycles increase, the writhe cycles would also have a tendency to increase.
Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. ( Mass=1/Length )
The “Electric Charge” of electrons or positrons would be the result of one twist cycle being displayed at the 3D-4D surface interface of the particle. The physical entanglement of twisted tubes in quarks within protons and neutrons and mesons displays an overall external surface charge of an integer number. Because the neutrinos do not have open tube ends, (They are a twisted torus.) they have no overall electric charge.
Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms.
In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137.
1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface
137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted.
The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.)
How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter?
Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles?
I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist producing a twisted 3D/4D membrane. This topological Soliton model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles.
==
Maybe the word "Spin" is throwing people off?
Yes, like most things physics the naming of stuff is often poor lol…
@@robertw1871 Yeah
Yes indeed! Did the term 'spin' for this electron behaviour come from Stern Gehrlach?
"People " being "me"
A great contribution, Thank You!
Where comes the number 12 from?
How many of these parameters can actually be measured ; or seen?
What is the loop? And why 12(±½)?
this is pretty nice
A spin is Not the ordinary spin for an somewhat circular object in case of a wave function !
It is completely a different phenomenon physically
How did you render these? Python+Matplotlib?
Blender, most likely (check the rest of the channel)
Before this eye opener I always had the idea of an orange that needs to be rotated twice to get to the same side.
Hm. I’m not sure I quite understand what the loop here represents.
When you mentioned the two valued function, are these two complex values the spinor?
The wavefunction should have domain R^3 , right? And I imagine that this is in a spherically symmetric potential well.
Ok well, the spin here is adding with the 12, so presumably the 12 is representing the orbital angular momentum? And in this case, this is all about a particular axis?
I am confused as well. I thought this might represent an electron precessing in a constant magnetic field, with energies quantized as (n+1/2) and understood in terms of the angular momentum. However, the 12 +/- 1/2 part made less sense to me with this picture, as that seems to be referring to spin flips (where the energy would be +/- a value related to the field strength) instead of some extrinsic angular momenta. Perhaps he is trying to do both, and this is meant to show the doublet ground states of an ion's valence electron.
It’s a circular electron orbit in R^3, thus the electron’s position can be described by 1 number, BUT the spiral is C^1, and square it’s magnitude to find the probability amplitude. This the electron has an equal probability to be found anywhere on the circle (after normalizing the sum of amplitudes to 1).
That makes sense. I’ll assume the physical picture is of a moving electron in a constant B-field.
It represents abstract math nothing more. In no way is it a visual of what the electron is or what it’s doing… it’s just a way to visualize the math… all you really need is the electron has two states either up or down. Trying to visualize it is probably a fool’s errand, as even if you do it, which is doubtful, there is no way to verify what you’re imagining is correct or not…
@@robertw1871 I’m not trying to visualize it more so than this video already does, I’m trying to understand how this math corresponds to other math describing it.
I wonder if that's the reason why the DNA is a double helix,
BEST…SPIN…GRAPHIC…EVER!
Spin Up and spin down according to gyromagnetic precession. Disk wabbling and timing to reach harmonic resonance by geometric size.
Hello where are you
lloydwatt
Return and EXPLAIN
us
quantic 2:40
Fabulous - thank you!
Very good 🙏🙏🙏
Thank You.
I don't see how this describes spin. how would you represent the electron on a straight line? Would the wave-function be zero at one end and at max height on the other? For the electron to be confined, you need the WF to be 0 at both ends. For half-spin particles, the spin phase changes with half the position phase. I don't see how that is represented here. The greatest minds in science have yet to find a proper way to visually depict half-integer spin.
U know there's some about this and angles I can't put my finger on
Excellent illustration. Just a small suggestion to make it even more visually clear.
Even though the wave goes through the loop twice is part of a single wave, it would be helpful to illustrate the second half of the wave with a different color to be able to see the wave interleaving with itself.
Insightful.
How'd you differentiate between a +1/2 spin and a -1/2 spin? The resulting graph looks similar
It's hard to tell bc there are so many loops, but the +1/2 has one extra rotation of each of the two spirals vs the -1/2
They start in different directions/rotate around the loop in the opposite direction
Why is it getting recommended rn?
I think the demonstrations with 11.5 and 12.5 cycles were extraneous - 1 cycle was far clearer.
Anyways, great video.
That would cancel the wave completely. The “wave” in the wavefunction doesn’t loop.
unless the loop represents change over time
Yeah it does, it just has to go around the loop twice. You can think of it going around one way as the electron component, and coming back the other way as the positron component
looks like phase cancellation
How did ancient Egyptians built the pyramids ?!
Mostly with their hands.
All fine and dandy, but NOT a "demonstration". What's the experimental DATA??????
Zitterbewegung
It’s mathematically accurate but pictorially doesn’t simplify for the average person, there are better teaching aids.
The so called "spin" it's not an electron propriety, but it is caused by nucleus only. Think again 😉
No... electrons are leptons which all have a fundamental spin of 1/2. The nucleons are made of up and down quarks which also have their own spins, so its not caused by the nucleus only
So you reject intrinsic angular momentum?