Erwin Schrödinger - "Do Electrons Think?" (BBC 1949)

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ต.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 272

  • @Lechatbleu-dd1wp
    @Lechatbleu-dd1wp 4 ปีที่แล้ว +61

    Thank you for the video, it means a lot to hear Schrödingers’ voice. A man who inspired me to keep moving on during my depression. I was so inspired by him that he is one of the reasons he that I am alive today. What an amazing individual!
    Many thanks!!!

    • @Who_70
      @Who_70 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      So do I 🤎 Π

    • @xaverstenliz8466
      @xaverstenliz8466 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Me too, as i realized that all is one, things changed 😊

    • @bantuvoicemuchaik.k.7715
      @bantuvoicemuchaik.k.7715 ปีที่แล้ว

      Me too....
      But he turned up as a drunkard in love with quantum... Just like you two above guys i guess..
      What is life... I love his curiosity

  • @altunhasanli
    @altunhasanli 7 ปีที่แล้ว +65

    It's great to hear Schrödinger's voice, thank you for uploading this awesome video. I'm learning german to understand his german videos.

  • @hjalmarschacht2559
    @hjalmarschacht2559 5 ปีที่แล้ว +79

    Erwin Schrödinger ROCKS! He was the coolest of the first-generation quantum scientists. I like to know who the 7 morons are who gave this talk thumbs down.

    • @varundunna4317
      @varundunna4317 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      He was handsome as well.

    • @luisbreva6122
      @luisbreva6122 4 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      The husbands of his lovers perhaps

    • @chizhang2765
      @chizhang2765 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Must be an adherent of those ghastly matrix mechanics (joking)

    • @monsieurmitosis
      @monsieurmitosis 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Yeah but then he would have about 500 dislikes

    • @arpitthakur45
      @arpitthakur45 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      I did...just because

  • @snarky77005
    @snarky77005 10 ปีที่แล้ว +46

    Thank you so much for uploading this. I have been looking for this and couldn't find it anywhere. Schrodinger was a fascinating scientist. It's great to hear his voice.

  • @ChemistryAtomistic
    @ChemistryAtomistic 7 ปีที่แล้ว +101

    This guy is my hero! Only he and Einstein understand the whole thing! They are so ahead of their time!

    • @irfanbozkurt9194
      @irfanbozkurt9194 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      @@o.s.h.4613 Yes, he was not on good terms with the probability side of quantum theory, but still, he understood Schrodinger very well, although very, very few people did.

    • @ElSmusso
      @ElSmusso 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      O.S.H. Of course he understood Schrödinger, but he discussed other solutions to the problem. The EPR thought experiment is very clever.

    • @TheDummbob
      @TheDummbob 4 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      Well the true nature of quantum mechanics may be probabilistic, but the true nature of nature itself may not be quantum mechanical

    • @kostantinos2297
      @kostantinos2297 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@TheDummbob
      That's a very good way to put it.

    • @onefodderunit
      @onefodderunit 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@TheDummbob _"the true nature of nature itself may not be quantum mechanical"_
      You are realer than that Einstein plagiarist quack.

  • @tvikramsingh
    @tvikramsingh 3 ปีที่แล้ว +16

    I highly recommend his book "What is Life" to the interested readers. You would first read it, then re-read to understand what he says and then you would keep reading to enjoy every sentence in that book. His genius was way beyond his theories.

  • @deadname9949
    @deadname9949 7 ปีที่แล้ว +23

    I understand how strange this may sound, however I did a research report on Schrödinger in seventh grade ( 2015-2016). I know a lot about this man, and I think he was an amazing person/scientist. Indeed it is wonderful to hear his voice, for once in my life.

    • @andersbjorkman8666
      @andersbjorkman8666 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      Never give up your interest :) Keep going strong man, and learn as much as you can about the sciences and the human psyche :)

    • @erikascholl3061
      @erikascholl3061 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      I understand! I did lots of research on him out of my own interest during the summer vacation last year before going to college. He was so passionate and keen for life even in one of the most difficult times in history, and was committed to the popularization of science during his stay in Ireland and later in Austria. A respectable scientist and amazing person. So nice to meet fellow fans of him here!!!

    • @Lechatbleu-dd1wp
      @Lechatbleu-dd1wp 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@erikascholl3061 Through our the years I’ve done extensive research on him as well. When the pandemic is over, I plan to pay him my respects. The impact that his work has had on me is so powerful, that it pulled me out of my depression four years ago
      , and keeps me going till this day. If I hadn’t found such an interesting and bright mind of Schrödinger’s, I would have been dead. I was on the brink of suicide, and I he inspired me, to keep moving forward even when things become extremely difficult. I am extremely grateful to have “met” him, and I almost feel as if I owe him something.

  • @nickbros
    @nickbros 4 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    It is a gift to hear the man himself. I'm beating myself for not finding this sooner.

  • @davidschroeder3272
    @davidschroeder3272 2 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Erwin Schrodinger's command of English was perfect. I'm always amazed as an American how Europeans are so multi-lingual, many speaking multiple languages. He's definitely one of my top science heroes, among all the early pioneers. It's amazing to hear his actual voice.

  • @operazionetrasparenza5297
    @operazionetrasparenza5297 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Thank you very very much for letting us have this document

  • @JH-le4sd
    @JH-le4sd 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Always love when I get to hear an incredibly creative and intelligent mind tell me that minds don't exist and thinking is an illusion, and that he knows this because he thought it through very thoroughly.

  • @davidjstreader
    @davidjstreader 8 ปีที่แล้ว +24

    I'm more surprised at a European speaking such natural English :)
    Just looked it up, his grandmother was British.

    • @tomdrowry
      @tomdrowry 7 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Wouldn't call it natural English

    • @davidjstreader
      @davidjstreader 7 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      Thomas Drowry haha well the man was a genius and spoke old-timey, but natural as in I can't hear any German accent.

    • @voyagersa22
      @voyagersa22 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      I agree. And yet in his little book “what is life” which is fantastic btw, he says he was afraid of being using English cse his “natural “ language was german and that natural language is like a custom made suit: “you can try others but none suits you so well “

    • @BH-hx5ij
      @BH-hx5ij 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      He has only a slight accent, and his vocabulary and command of the language are superb

    • @carrotsandcucumbers8214
      @carrotsandcucumbers8214 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      My grandfather is British as well. He and I have a lot in common

  • @radiotv624
    @radiotv624 7 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    He brings up such a good point, very philosophical

  • @ravindraguravannavar5834
    @ravindraguravannavar5834 9 ปีที่แล้ว +12

    Thanks for this. His book "My View of the World" is awesome!

  • @adude9882
    @adude9882 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    We need these people so much.

  • @notanormie2161
    @notanormie2161 2 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Rest In Peace Mr. Erwin Shrodinger. You will be and are deeply missed

  • @capitanmission
    @capitanmission 9 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    wow, thanks for sharing this. too little of the master in youtube

  • @hg4875
    @hg4875 3 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    If i dont sounds like this when I'm older I'm tapping out

  • @lastfreegeneration984
    @lastfreegeneration984 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    He missed one possibility, that the statistical laws of quantum need not be broken by an unusual result, it just means that it has to be compensated for by a skewing of the other results at a later time...in other words, the statistical nature of quantum DOES allow for external interference into the operation of nature, whereas the deterministic and mechanical view absolutely does not.

    • @60FPSDoraemon
      @60FPSDoraemon ปีที่แล้ว

      Bro he died in 1961 so how can he have an understanding on modern quantum mechanics

  • @reganross3608
    @reganross3608 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thank you so much for sharing this!

  • @NHindel
    @NHindel ปีที่แล้ว +1

    a speech for eternity above all atoms

  • @60FPSDoraemon
    @60FPSDoraemon ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I cannot understand everything he said but still the things he said left me too think .and i felt a kind of uneasiness that how the hell these uncertain things make the world certain

  • @andersbjorkman8666
    @andersbjorkman8666 5 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    I cry when I hear this.

    • @andersbjorkman8666
      @andersbjorkman8666 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      @@ripper_0997 Man this comment is what is wrong with humanity, unless you are ironic, in which case it's quite fun

    • @harleyspeedthrust4013
      @harleyspeedthrust4013 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@andersbjorkman8666 Right? We all come to hear Schrodinger speak, and this guy comes to insult people

  • @briansalzano4657
    @briansalzano4657 6 ปีที่แล้ว +9

    Step 1 Assume humans are merely physical objects. Step 2 Ask if neurons have agency. Step 3 conclude that electrons think. Considering that physics has demonstrated the universe is immaterial, I find it hard to believe such a brilliant man wouldn't give up materialism. His thought experiment suggested that all that exists is mental yet he has a contradictory view.

    • @tensorguy
      @tensorguy 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      He is criticizing Quantum theory using the Brain as analogy not making a statement about conciousness.

    • @harleyspeedthrust4013
      @harleyspeedthrust4013 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      ??? How is he materialistic? He only says that quantum mechanics cannot explain free will; he never says that free will is an illusion as you imply.

    • @briansalzano4657
      @briansalzano4657 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@harleyspeedthrust4013 "About ten years later (that is about twenty years ago from today) the disbelief in strict causation became part and parcel of you might call the new creed now adopted by most physicists and called Quantum Mechanics." And he's actually wrong about his historical narrative. Aristotle and later Hume defined causality as having 1) Temporal priority 2) Contiguity and 3) Necessary Cause. They got rid of Aristotle's notion of any intelligent causation. Later, Newton showed the materialist's notion of causality to be untenable. This came WAY before qm, and we all know Einstein, like Schrodinger had a bias against anything that hinted at indeterminacy. By the way, your question wasn't a negation of my assertion and whether or not qm can explain free will is a red herring.

  • @ayushdhingra855
    @ayushdhingra855 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thanks for giving this

  • @lastfreegeneration984
    @lastfreegeneration984 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    This answered exactly the question I had been thinking about recently. Thank you TH-cam, thank you Mr Schrodinger!

  • @ThePrimordialBeing
    @ThePrimordialBeing 10 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    I need the transcript of this talk, does anyone have any idea where it could be found?? I can't use the manuscript... Thak you.

    • @snarky77005
      @snarky77005 10 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      If you want a typed version of his talk go to this page:
      fedora.phaidra.univie.ac.at/fedora/get/o:168238/bdef:Asset/view
      Skip to page 10.
      I hope that helps

    • @ThePrimordialBeing
      @ThePrimordialBeing 10 ปีที่แล้ว

      snarky77005 that much I could find myself and the link is provided with the YT video. I wanted a document that could be read....

    • @snarky77005
      @snarky77005 10 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      3R1〈 ST3V3NS Here's what you do:
      1. Go to the website to page 10.
      2. Right click on the picture.
      3. Save it on your computer.
      4. Resize it
      5. Print it.
      It's that simple. This does work. I was trying to help you out because I wasn't sure that you knew the typed text begins on page 10. I hope that helps. If that's not what you need I guess you'll just have to type the damn thing manually. I'm out.

    • @ThePrimordialBeing
      @ThePrimordialBeing 10 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      snarky77005 Oh, that... I wasn't aware of. Thanks very much for your help, man, really appreciate this.

  • @harleyspeedthrust4013
    @harleyspeedthrust4013 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    11:38 this is very interesting, only 1 year later quantum entanglement was discovered

  • @aum3.146
    @aum3.146 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    It is not that we don't have free will. Physical predetermination
    exists, (in the common framework), because the past present and future simultaneously exist . This is not a paradox or contradiction it is a matter of point of observation issue . Depending on observing from within the flow of space time, versus observing from a dimension without it.

  • @SilvioZanin
    @SilvioZanin 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    He had a great diction.

  • @marcodiscendenti4059
    @marcodiscendenti4059 8 ปีที่แล้ว +9

    So what is the answer? Do they think or not?

    • @voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885
      @voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885 6 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      Ask Basil J. Hiley or Bernard d'Espagnat - they had to figure out how to do spin properly to find the answer: Yes electrons think. It's called proto-consciousness.

    • @kostantinos2297
      @kostantinos2297 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Marco Discendenti
      No, they don't. That is what he was explaining, later described as "patently absurd".

  • @bma1955alimarber
    @bma1955alimarber ปีที่แล้ว

    If I could samerise this interesting intervention by Pr.Werner Heisenberg, I would say that:
    In macroscopic level; classical physics based on the assumption of the causation concept is sufficent to understand the world. However at microscopic level . The correlation and uncertainty principle should apply.
    But I didn't understand why he was talking about the freewill?
    FinalyThe world's history is governed by arbitrariness, chance and stochastic laws

  • @tomfreemanorourke1519
    @tomfreemanorourke1519 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    If I may.
    The atom is a conscious physical memory of function and experience, therefore the single cell, being of an atom(ic) construct is also a conscious physical memory of function and experience, ergo all existence, being and life is conscious physical memory of function and experience, unbeginning unending beginnings and endings, perpetual motion, perpetually incomplete, perpetually indeterminate, perpetually uncertain beginnings and endings.
    Therefore all quantum and general relativity is by definition a conscious existence of function and experience in perpetuity and has no thought but memory, it has to have memory or physical life would not be.
    On the other hand, thinking, thought, "cogitor ergo sum" " I am thought therefore I am " conscious meta-phisical memory of function and experience is along with being/ existence, the conscious physical and meta-phisical memory of function and experience, in and of perpetual motion unbeginning unending beginnings and endings.
    Tom O'Rourke 1953....?....love always

  • @cupwithhandles
    @cupwithhandles 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    1:23 "Are we automatons"? Sam Harris "yes".

  • @masterbrick6282
    @masterbrick6282 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Is that Schrödinger’s voice?

  • @SomethingWithZ
    @SomethingWithZ 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I wonder if he knew if spongebob was dead or alive until he watched inside the box?

  • @dr.satishsharma9794
    @dr.satishsharma9794 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Excellent..... thanks 🙏.

  • @david-joeklotz9558
    @david-joeklotz9558 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    Both Einstein and Schrodinger [today Aug 12 was his birthdate] lost the PR battle. They were "defeated" because they stood on the unshakable foundations of physics: the epistemology of reason and the metaphysics of reality, which is objective. They were not prepared to just accept and "shut up and calculate". They asked what is still unanswered. Why is there entanglement and why is the result never predictable and, why does observation trigger decoherence or the "collapse of the wave function" or entanglement with one of the electrons. Rebels are not ordinarily welcomed

    • @david-joeklotz9558
      @david-joeklotz9558 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @Px Coffee No. Feynman was onside with Schrödinger and Einstein. Their stance was not popular because they said that quantum mechanics can never be complete until it is understood. Schrödinger’s equation works, but he criticized the Copenhagen explanation and saw all explanations as ridiculous. His cat thought experiment did that. The measurement problem remains unresolved

  • @tongucyavuzer2130
    @tongucyavuzer2130 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    We see the electron's rotation around the nucleus as space and perceive it as time.
    Prof. Dr. Haydar BAŞ
    Elektronun çekirdek etrafında dönmesini mekan olarak görüyor zaman olarak algılıyoruz .
    Prof.Dr.Haydar BAŞ
    Wir betrachten die Rotation des Elektrons um den Kern als Raum und nehmen sie als Zeit wahr.
    Prof. Dr. Haydar BAŞ

  • @nupraptorthementalist3306
    @nupraptorthementalist3306 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Are they really particles, or more like "ripples"?

  • @houseofblues9016
    @houseofblues9016 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    i was searching just a bit on this man and all there is some robotic voices vids with ai generated images moving like crazy ready to give you epilepsy what is this world man .just 9 years ago this guy uploaded a vid with the man itself with the year of the speech and the source he found it from .what happened to this world why everyone got so fkn rtrted

  • @tongucyavuzer2130
    @tongucyavuzer2130 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Schrödinger Dalga Denklemleri ( 31,205-+0,009 ) Cantigrad koşullarında çalışmaz . istisna kuralı sınar istisna kuralı iptal eder .
    Schrödinger-Wellengleichungen (31.205-+0.009) funktionieren unter Cantigrade-Bedingungen nicht. Die Ausnahme testet die Regel, die Ausnahme hebt die Regel auf.
    Schrödinger Wave Equations (31.205-+0.009) do not work in Cantigrade conditions. The exception tests the rule, the exception cancels the rule.

  • @ARBB1
    @ARBB1 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    The great Schrodinger.

  • @mohammedshabbirahmed4391
    @mohammedshabbirahmed4391 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    where is the rest of it?

  • @genvacartel3296
    @genvacartel3296 10 ปีที่แล้ว

    great doctumentery on erwin science theroy of electrons
    do they have the ablity to think ? will also enjoy more on
    etwin scrohdinger thr very best sciencetist.

  • @saulorocha3755
    @saulorocha3755 ปีที่แล้ว

    “This is absurd!” Indeed it is, but many figures in science believe in this absurd (hopefully not all tough).

  • @namita6580
    @namita6580 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Why 14 numbers disliked thums down?

    • @Nicker000
      @Nicker000 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      sorry, I am from the future, what is a thumbs-down.

    • @shukracharya_
      @shukracharya_ ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Christians

  • @jeffwads
    @jeffwads 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    I would guess that he was having fun with the notion of “free-will”. He knew everything in the universe is an automaton.

  • @djelalhassan7631
    @djelalhassan7631 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Erwin Schrödinger is my favorite Physicist

  • @1123aka
    @1123aka 8 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    This voice isn't of Schrodinger, is it?

    • @njits789
      @njits789 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      It IS his voice. Compare with other audio available here.

  • @talktodayusa
    @talktodayusa 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    In simple terms, Schrödinger stated that if you place a thumb and something that could upset the thumb (a crap video) in a box and sealed it, you would not know if the thumb was 'down' or 'up' until you opened the box, so that until the box was opened, the thumb was (in a sense) both "down and up".

    • @harleyspeedthrust4013
      @harleyspeedthrust4013 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      that's not what the video is about lol. schrodinger is talking about the widely-held belief that the world is completely deterministic, i.e., that every event is a direct consequence of prior events. this naturally gives rise to the possibility of predicting the future, provided we had enough computational power to do so and that we knew the entire state of the universe at any given time. this would violate the idea of free will. now around this time in physics, schrodinger formulated his equation which described the position of a particle as a wave. Specifically, if you squared his wavefunction, you would get the probability distribution for the position of a particle. Furthermore, if you observe the behavior of individual particles in identical conditions, you will see that this wavefunction completely determines the behavior of the particles, regardless of the initial conditions for any one particle. (Example: shooting photons at glass. The photon may have a 10% chance of reflecting off the glass, and a 90% chance of passing through. What determines the path it takes?)
      It would seem that there is true randomness in nature, and the world is not completely deterministic as many once thought. Schrodinger explores this idea and argues that it does not provide an accurate explanation of free will.

  • @tongucyavuzer2130
    @tongucyavuzer2130 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The eye sees objects that have electromagnetic waves within 1/6 of a second.
    Prof. Dr. Haydar BAŞ
    Göz , 1/6 saniye içindeki elektromagnetik dalgaya sahip olan cisimleri görüyor .
    Prof.Dr.Haydar BAŞ
    Das Auge sieht Objekte, die elektromagnetische Wellen haben, innerhalb einer Sechstelsekunde.
    Prof. Dr. Haydar BAŞ

  • @paulr.5571
    @paulr.5571 10 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Has anyone else came into Schrödinger through Schopenhauer?

    • @RichardCorral
      @RichardCorral 10 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Yes, I think they are both influenced by Vedanta philosophy

    • @mpicos100
      @mpicos100 10 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      RichardCorral
      you're right. I recommend the Walter Moore biography of Schrödinger

    • @RichardCorral
      @RichardCorral 10 ปีที่แล้ว

      thanks, I'll check it out

    • @paulr.5571
      @paulr.5571 10 ปีที่แล้ว

      RichardCorral Yes, but Schopenhauer came to his similar conclusions with Indian thought, before actually having been aware of them; that's why he was so taken with it, and probably Schrödinger was made aware of it through Schopenhauer. Both great men.

    • @paulr.5571
      @paulr.5571 9 ปีที่แล้ว

      At above (it isn't properly copying your name for me, Richie Whitehead) . . . Similar story, only I started with Nietzsche.
      No worries about the late reply, I do that a lot too . . . but say, appreciate Schopenhauer likewise, but certainly wouldn't consider my own self a nerd.
      Maybe this is a coincidence, but I wondered if you took your name after Alfred North Whitehead?
      Cheers back.

  • @jakethemistakeRulez
    @jakethemistakeRulez 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Is this him speaking or is it someone reading his writing?

    • @QuantenPhysik1
      @QuantenPhysik1  3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      It is an original recording of his talk.

  • @tongucyavuzer2130
    @tongucyavuzer2130 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    tek bir fotonun frekansı 0,0018 hertzdir
    tek bir elektronun frekansı ise bazen 0,018 hertz bazen 0,00018 hertz olur
    Die Frequenz eines einzelnen Photons beträgt 0,0018 Hertz
    Die Frequenz eines einzelnen Elektrons beträgt manchmal 0,018 Hertz und manchmal 0,00018 Hertz.
    The frequency of a single photon is 0.0018 hertz
    The frequency of a single electron is sometimes 0.018 hertz and sometimes 0.00018 hertz.

  • @elisevallee8914
    @elisevallee8914 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    All men aren’t intelligent ? He said seriously « some intellectuality « . He is a beauriful and brilliant man who thought he should stay in the darkness so his father won’t be gone in the dark. I hope

  • @tongucyavuzer2130
    @tongucyavuzer2130 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    three ( 3 ) formulas is ok seven ( 7 ) formulas is missing

  • @mrnarason
    @mrnarason 7 ปีที่แล้ว

    This is his voice?

    • @flippert0
      @flippert0 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      It must be him, same voice as in German: th-cam.com/video/hPyUFbKRwq0/w-d-xo.html

  • @fntime
    @fntime 8 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Do 'humans' think or are they biorobots?

    • @Forgetit2697
      @Forgetit2697 8 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Paraphrase ?

    • @mpcc2022
      @mpcc2022 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      What do you consider thought?

  • @davidgumm2603
    @davidgumm2603 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Edward ?

  • @tongucyavuzer2130
    @tongucyavuzer2130 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Criticism of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
    Under the sign of 8.2 volts 17 hertz Ac, the atom behaves undefined according to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. 1/3 of the atom obeys the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, 2/3 does not. same situation with 22.2volt 15 hertz Ac signal 1/5 fits 4/5 does not. They behave like celestial bodies orbiting a star in space. It's as if some of them are night and some are day. A part of a mole of atoms or a molecule may be obvious and some may be indeterminate. Kritik am Heisenbergschen Unsicherheitsprinzip
    Unter dem Vorzeichen von 8,2 Volt 17 Hertz Ac verhält sich das Atom nach dem Heisenbergschen Unschärfeprinzip undefiniert. 1/3 des Atoms gehorcht dem Heisenbergschen Unsicherheitsprinzip, 2/3 nicht. gleiche Situation mit 22,2 Volt 15 Hertz Ac-Signal 1/5 passt 4/5 nicht. Sie verhalten sich wie Himmelskörper, die einen Stern im Weltraum umkreisen. Es ist, als wären einige von ihnen Nacht und andere Tag. Ein Teil eines Mols von Atomen oder eines Moleküls kann offensichtlich sein und einige können unbestimmt sein. Heisenberg Belirsizlik ilkesine eleştiri
    8,2 volt 17 hertz Ac işaret altında Atom Heisenberg Belirsizlik İlkesine göre tanımlı olmayan bir davranış gösterir. Atomun 1/3 'ü Heisenberg Belirsizlik ilkesine uyar 2/3'ü uymaz . aynı durum 22,2volt 15 hertz Ac işaret ile 1/5'i uyar 4/5'i uymaz . tıpkı uzaydaki bir yıldız etrafında yörüngesinde dönen gökcisimleri gibi davranırlar . sanki bir kısımları gece bir kısımları gündüz gibi . bir mol atom veya molekülün bir kısmı belirgin bir kısmı belirsiz olabilir . zerre ne ise kürre odur .

  • @seditt5146
    @seditt5146 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    This man would roll over in his grave if he knew what modern science has done to quantum theory. Using his name to explain the absurdities of the standard model of particle physics.

  • @abhaybhardwaj2029
    @abhaybhardwaj2029 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Is this a real voice of Schrodinger ??! 🤔

    • @njits789
      @njits789 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Yes, it is.

  • @onefodderunit
    @onefodderunit 10 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    How tedious. Does he conclude that consciousness is being created by subatomic particles, or spirit?

    • @j9312
      @j9312 10 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      neither.

    • @onefodderunit
      @onefodderunit 10 ปีที่แล้ว

      j9312 What does S-dinger conclude to be the creator of consciousness?

    • @j9312
      @j9312 10 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      He doesn't conclude anything of the sorts. He simply remarks on how the indeterministic nature of subatomic particles does not manifest in the macroscopic structures that make consciousness possible. I recommend giving it a listen, its an interesting point of view from a physicist/philosopher/biologist, on a topic heavily intwined in all three of his lifelong pursuits.

    • @onefodderunit
      @onefodderunit 10 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      j9312 It's clear to me that the atom is materialized by intent, not by chance, therefore mind must precede matter, not arise from it. No material structure is required for the existence of consciousness. Consciousness is required for the existence of matter. Photons, electrons are electric. The physical world is an electric hologram being deciphered within our energetic minds.

    • @j9312
      @j9312 10 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      sure.

  • @johns9110
    @johns9110 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    expensive words..

  • @doncourtreporter
    @doncourtreporter 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    No, they don't.

  • @dougg1075
    @dougg1075 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    He loved some cat

    • @MM-dg7vp
      @MM-dg7vp 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Or may be hated it???

  • @GoodbyeMrChips-do2fl
    @GoodbyeMrChips-do2fl 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    the more science advances, the more people start to understand what the indians said in VEDAS ( Upanishads in particular ) 5000 years ago!

    • @ksv314
      @ksv314 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Indians or India did not even exist 5000 years ago, just a bunch of independently ruled kingdoms. Please, just stop.

  • @nicholas_eras
    @nicholas_eras 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Bioshock memories

  • @tongucyavuzer2130
    @tongucyavuzer2130 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    ich brang zurück der 8 , 9 , 9 , 8 wissenschaft

  • @Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time
    @Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time 8 ปีที่แล้ว

    Could the future be unfolding photon by photon with the wave particle duality of light and matter in the form of electrons forming a blank canvas that we can interact with forming the possible into the actual?

    • @pieroreynolds8865
      @pieroreynolds8865 7 ปีที่แล้ว

      Light and matter are physical whereas by 'we' I take it you mean conscious thought which is not obviously physical-for example you cannot measure consciousness objectively i.e a consciousnessometer does not exist. Therefore there is a philosophical problem of how the not physical interact with the physical since they are of two totally different natures.

  • @cykrr
    @cykrr 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Edo Tensei

  • @elisevallee8914
    @elisevallee8914 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    1# 1 ?

  • @ThreatRed
    @ThreatRed 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    To develop his Wave Equation, Erwin sought the solitude of the mountains, escaped to a cabin with four "maids". His wife was not assumed. Yet, after two weeks, he returned with his equation in his hot little hands....

  • @ripper_0997
    @ripper_0997 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Are ghost just electrons??

  • @ab3ki84hayate
    @ab3ki84hayate 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    I'm make krabber patterys

  • @tongucyavuzer2130
    @tongucyavuzer2130 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    happens, happens, happens, happens, happens, happens, happens, happens
    olur , olur , olur , olur , olur , olur , olur , olur
    passiert, passiert, passiert, passiert, passiert, passiert, passiert, passiert

  • @michaelfullerton8267
    @michaelfullerton8267 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    So humans think but the particles composing us, whose interactions produce our thought, don't think. Our ability to think magically arises out of nowhere at some arbitrary point? Talk about patently absurd.

    • @gr00veh0lmes
      @gr00veh0lmes 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Almost as absurd as point particles arising from wave behaviour.

    • @harleyspeedthrust4013
      @harleyspeedthrust4013 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      So many are misinterpreting his words. He never said or implied that our ability to think "arises magically out of nowhere at some arbitrary point!" He only said that the randomness of quantum mechanics does not explain free will.

    • @michaelfullerton8267
      @michaelfullerton8267 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@harleyspeedthrust4013 "To think that such a particle can think is so absurd". He clearly proclaimed that electrons can't think. That implies that thought magically arises somehow from nowhere when enough particles swirl around each other in just the right magical way.

    • @harleyspeedthrust4013
      @harleyspeedthrust4013 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@michaelfullerton8267 How does it imply this? There's always the possibility that free will can be explained by some physics that we do not yet understand. We already know of phenomena that cannot be explained by our current knowledge of physics. For example: why is it that two lovers can seemingly read each others' minds, even at a distance? Why do some people get premonitions about the death or illness of another? I have experienced both of these, and more - but there is no physics that can explain them.
      Schrodinger is examining the notion that randomness in a particle's state is the seed of free will. I do not think he is implying that this is the only possible explanation for free will.

  • @قتقبتقتقيت
    @قتقبتقتقيت 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    the way that they go in electronic way_whit +in the there way and our body we have a lot of electronnics but when we making sports or do the prayer in particule the Muslims in their prayer this electronic go in soil that the meaning.

  • @genvacartel3296
    @genvacartel3296 10 ปีที่แล้ว

    great doctumentery on erwin science theroy of electrons
    do they have the ablity to think ? will also enjoy more on
    etwin scrohdinger thr very best sciencetist.

  • @tongucyavuzer2130
    @tongucyavuzer2130 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    happens, happens, happens, happens, happens, happens, happens, happens
    olur , olur , olur , olur , olur , olur , olur , olur
    passiert, passiert, passiert, passiert, passiert, passiert, passiert, passiert