Are Photons & Electrons Particles or Waves? Make up your mind god!

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ม.ค. 2025

ความคิดเห็น • 2.1K

  • @ArvinAsh
    @ArvinAsh  3 ปีที่แล้ว +64

    Background videos:
    Wave collapse and decoherence: th-cam.com/video/wXJ9eQ7qTQk/w-d-xo.html
    Intro to quantum fields: th-cam.com/video/jlEovwE1oHI/w-d-xo.html
    Wave "collapse" interpretations - Copenhagen vs. Many Worlds: th-cam.com/video/OjrEudqgZ1M/w-d-xo.html

    • @anon-san2830
      @anon-san2830 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Seriously man, way too early to post a premier in subscription feed.... Few hours are fine at max. Just pointlessly occupying my feed... Annoying. I guess nice video and will watch it but this is super annoying

    • @sblovalbe1
      @sblovalbe1 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Thank you! I can't wait for the next one :) We need more videos, and even longer if possible.

    • @timkbirchico8542
      @timkbirchico8542 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      excellent vid. we are density focus points in this field of energy . DNA and consciousness is an expression of this field of energy which we call spacetime .

    • @babyoda1973
      @babyoda1973 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      I love it it makes my brain all fuzzy

    • @Blackmark52
      @Blackmark52 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Wouldn't it be simpler to explain that probability defines existence? A point in the quantum field that meets a certain probability manifests a particle, -any- all proximal probabilities are multiplied. A grain of sand doesn't blink in and out of existence because it is the product of an infinite number of high probabilities in the quantum field.

  • @eugenebrown5827
    @eugenebrown5827 3 ปีที่แล้ว +582

    I asked whether light is a particle or a wave to my high school physics teacher. She just said both and moved on. I finally got a satisfactory explanation 32 years later. Thank you because your video satisfied my curiosity.

    • @marian-gabriel9518
      @marian-gabriel9518 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Here you go: th-cam.com/video/SDtAh9IwG-I/w-d-xo.html

    • @jonathancamp7190
      @jonathancamp7190 3 ปีที่แล้ว +25

      Unfortunately, I received the same type of answers when asking questions in the U.S. public school system. A good teacher, when asked these types of questions, should say, I don't know, but I'll find out for you. Or at least point you in the right direction to find the answer for yourself.

    • @charlesgallagher1376
      @charlesgallagher1376 3 ปีที่แล้ว +11

      That’s as much as the teacher knew. Do your own research should have been her answer.

    • @onedayapp3534
      @onedayapp3534 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Refuses to elaborate further. Leaves

    • @mikemcknight1295
      @mikemcknight1295 3 ปีที่แล้ว +14

      And that's why she's just a high school teacher :)

  • @Tyletoful
    @Tyletoful 3 ปีที่แล้ว +88

    I mean this in the most positive way. I've been putting on your videos at night to fall asleep to and they put me right to sleep. I love the education I get as I drift off into dreamland. Thanks for your hard work!

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  3 ปีที่แล้ว +34

      Wonderful! I do the same with some of my favorite YT channels as well.

    • @tim40gabby25
      @tim40gabby25 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @senor quak illogical conclusion.. like physics, jokes are most satisfying when they obey logical rules. Imho. Just saying :)

    • @krshna77
      @krshna77 2 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      If you are still doing the selfschooling-before-sleep, please do pay attention to your dreams.
      The brain seems indeed to keep an eye on the last subject matter, and you may end up with very interesting 'revelations' as time goes on.
      I tend to doze off in my chair as I watch quality tubes like this one, and I've had many episodes where, as I'm sliding into the abyss, I get to visualize things in ways I would not normally be able to; or I suddenly make very visual, very easy connections between concepts, or come up with representations and permutations which I would never have thought of at wake time. It is often enraging a few seconds later, when I realize I can't really put into coherent words all the things I just "saw", and the harder I try to, the more I lose memory of the entire thing... But it's an amazing experience regardless :)

    • @jeremiahclay6602
      @jeremiahclay6602 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@krshna77 the explanation for why this happens is almost as bizarre and interesting as quantum mechanics itself! As you enter in to the first stages of sleep, your brain starts lighting up and doing what you could consider an Italian tune up. Fire on all cylinders! Once you hit a deep sleep, your brain dumps a chemical Joe Rogan talks about a lot. Your brain is physically connecting itself in the most abstract of ways that our conscious brain would struggle to do, so it finds ways to solve problems and make connections that are, no pun intended, mind blowing. I play music, and I always stress to people to practice right before they go to sleep. This is 100% why

    • @bri405
      @bri405 ปีที่แล้ว

      Omg same. I love this channel and have been falling asleep to it and then rewatch when I wake up. Glad to know I’m not the only one!

  • @tomaaron6187
    @tomaaron6187 3 ปีที่แล้ว +44

    Top notch. A great presentation of information without any dumbing down.
    I’ve been in the sciences for almost a half century. A thousand articles and video later, I still find the quantum world (reality) more fascinating than anything in fiction.

    • @The1stDukeDroklar
      @The1stDukeDroklar ปีที่แล้ว

      That's because it is fiction

    • @WJV9
      @WJV9 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@The1stDukeDroklar - Hardly fiction when LEDs, integrated circuits, cell phones, laptops, etc. all use quantum mechanics to accurately design and manufacture all the microelectronics we use every day.

    • @YOTUBE8848
      @YOTUBE8848 ปีที่แล้ว

      *deBroglie's wavelength cannot be applied to large objects. It's only for quantum scale particles. You can't find deBroglie wavelength of a basketball like he did in the video.*

  • @antonyjohnson4489
    @antonyjohnson4489 3 ปีที่แล้ว +122

    Every time I watch a video like this, I feel like I'm dreaming that I'm entering an alternative universe. Then, I wake up and realise it is actually describing our very own. Very intriguing as always, thankyou Arvin.

    • @whatistruth560
      @whatistruth560 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      U ever think that a Creator made these waves or our reality this way and holds all things together by the things not seen?

    • @athariqokazakiichiro5714
      @athariqokazakiichiro5714 ปีที่แล้ว

      Yes​@@whatistruth560

    • @coachhannah2403
      @coachhannah2403 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      No, he is describing an alternate universe, the world beyond our experience. We try to make sense by by using visual/mathematical ideas we already have, but that world is just different.

  • @clintdesmond754
    @clintdesmond754 3 ปีที่แล้ว +17

    I've been aware of the double-slit experiment for about 15 years. I never really understood it. And when I would read/hear about the act of measuring something could affect the way a wave/particle behaves never really made any sense to me. Arvin's style of presenting is beautiful to watch. After discovering him today on TH-cam, I'm excited again about persuing a career in Physics.

  • @quantumbytes9815
    @quantumbytes9815 3 ปีที่แล้ว +33

    I have recommended this channel to many of my friends. Arvin Ash sir really explains the things in simple and interesting ways. I do not miss any video from this channel. Really appreciable

  • @primajump
    @primajump 3 ปีที่แล้ว +37

    All I can say is, “Wow!”. Arvin, you are the best hands down when it comes to explain stuff with such elegance and clarity. Thank you.

  • @johnp1
    @johnp1 3 ปีที่แล้ว +25

    Good video. I've watched many videos about this subject but I still learn something new in this video.

  • @epelly3
    @epelly3 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    I’ve seen visualizations for the double slit experiments many times before but the way you organized this video and it’s sequence has allowed me to finally understand the information and weirdness in a way I can grasp. Even if it’s a simplification this video is awesome

  • @potawatomi100
    @potawatomi100 2 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Arvin Ash is exemplary of an individual that has a deep understanding of the subject matter because his talent at explaining it in simple terms is unsurpassed. I admire your achievements in astrophysics Arvin, and I’m a devoted follower.

  • @Gamer-xb1eo
    @Gamer-xb1eo 3 ปีที่แล้ว +88

    When Arvin says That's coming right now and the music comes i am like doing a headbang

    • @nerdexproject
      @nerdexproject 3 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      I headbang every time during the intro too xD

    • @YathishShamaraj
      @YathishShamaraj 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      🙄

    • @bobchelsy163
      @bobchelsy163 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      love Arvin he’s chill asf

    • @ferretappreciator
      @ferretappreciator 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Yeah the intro music is a banger, honestly

    • @IemonIime
      @IemonIime 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      \,,/(>.

  • @bpr1de
    @bpr1de 3 ปีที่แล้ว +50

    Your videos redeem what the Internet was originally conceived to be - an equal medium for the exchange of knowledge. Keep it up!

    • @charlesgallagher1376
      @charlesgallagher1376 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      The internet is what you make it. It’s a tool that can be useful or a social nightmare.

    • @nadamuchu
      @nadamuchu 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      this is highest and most well deserved praise I've ever seen on a video like this!
      Arvins videos have continued to improve leaps and bounds with each upload and I can't wait the next one. Thank you Arvin for making amazing videos that teach so much - and for ALWAYS having closed cations.

  • @ElDJReturn
    @ElDJReturn 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    The way you push us to think deeper about science and physics is better than any other on youtube. I love how you explain some deep and complex topics in such easy to comprehend ways.

  • @siddharthshekhar909
    @siddharthshekhar909 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Excellent video ,Arvin. You touched upon everything. The double slit experiment . Everything explained simply , succinctly and beautifully. I studied physics in college and Quantum mechanics and schrodinger's equation made me and many others break out in cold sweat . Why didn't I have a physics teacher like you? Great job 👍

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Glad you liked it!

  • @rockinrobin9093
    @rockinrobin9093 3 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    Yes! I love how you’re not afraid to show some maths as to how these conclusions are deduced.

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      This doesn't come from math but from observation. All science comes from observation.

  • @zeropain9319
    @zeropain9319 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Great video. I like when you recap some basic concepts like the double slit and add in some new things like de Broglie. I'm looking forward to the next video.

  • @pieterpost3606
    @pieterpost3606 3 ปีที่แล้ว +13

    This is way back to the basics. Ive seen much more vids from you about the more developped science, but these simple ones about the very bare essentials i allways like the most. Altough i (think i) allready know everything you told, theys still interesting. Love it. Thanks👍

  • @EKDupre
    @EKDupre 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Just ANOTHER *very* well-done video on one of thee coooolest topics ever! Thank you for being you, Arvin Ash!

  • @mkjaiswal11
    @mkjaiswal11 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Wow this video was completely a mind blower. Really enjoyed it and keep up with the great work

  • @theanalyzer1972
    @theanalyzer1972 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    That's really great explanation sir. Thanks for sharing such knowledge with us. God bless you always. 👍👍

  • @istvansipos9940
    @istvansipos9940 3 ปีที่แล้ว +28

    "in the end, it ISN'T even matter" (as Linkin Park would say these days)

    • @thesoundsmith
      @thesoundsmith 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      I studied there: Whatsamatter U...

    • @nnikocarre-smith5633
      @nnikocarre-smith5633 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Okay that was pretty damn good, ngl lmao.

  • @randywa
    @randywa 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    I remember watching a video on the quantum eraser experiment. If I understood that correctly, the wave function doesn’t just collapse upon measurement, it also stops behaving like a wave if at any point in the future, it’s path will be known. As if the particle is reading the future and then deciding whether or not to act like a wave

    • @XEinstein
      @XEinstein 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      In essence that's how it does seem to work. However, one really has to contemplate what time is on a quantum scale and quite frankly, physics has no idea what time is. Or even if time is anything at all. We derive time from entropy and the fact that it always increases. Yet entropy and time only emerge as physical properties from large sets of interactions. A single particle travelling through space will never experience anything at all happening if it never interacts with anything, so what does time mean for that particle?
      So in the quantum eraser experiment time may pass for the observer, but since for the particle nothing much happens between being emitted, passing the slits and being measured by the eraser one really has to wonder how time factors in to that experiment.

    • @kidzbop38isstraightfire92
      @kidzbop38isstraightfire92 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      I know that physics can be unintuitive, but I really really doubt that particles are reading the future..or that they are aware of our intentions. I believe that either the wave and particle are different things (like Pilot-Wave theory), or we are not accounting for something.

    • @jasonbrady3606
      @jasonbrady3606 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@kidzbop38isstraightfire92 I think Sean Carrol is onto something where there isn't a collapse of the wave function but a branch of realities. Thing is I believe our reality is tied to something deeper than the wave function of of free electrons. Meaning there's only so many realities that manifest with that deeper connection of time and history and continuance and only so many branches at any given node will exist. The infinite branches are there, but only some of those branches will be able to adhere to a reality that is tied to the beginning. Them other realities in affect lead nowhere, so we wouldn't see them. These things are deeper and are similiar to the electrons but tied up and compactified in other dimensions or scales that they themselves are tied up in ever deeper scales, only allowing certain infinities to occur. These quarks and subatomics are more steady and constant because the energies involved with them is much higher. Nucleus of atoms carry a high column force and do not change easily. Once they do change...suns, and all I nds of things looking for stability through the firmament. . Otherwise charging of nucleuses' are expressed through electrons and photons. These are the backdrop, black board that the electrons in our makeup flow with. The nucleus of atoms quarks, weak force, subatomics. When released they create photons and electrons... In this upper reality. With their many more multitudes of realities then as electrons and photons. Like aberrations of electron focal optical view. So I agree with Sean on this but I also think there's more to it, as I've said.

    • @thedeemon
      @thedeemon 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Once you measure the position of a particle and its wave function "collapses" to a spikey one (delta function as an eigenfunction of the position operator), its momentum becomes maximally uncertain and if you run it further through the Schrodinger equation you'll find the wave function quickly widening to a bigger and bigger cloud. Such momentatily localized particle doesn't stay localized for more than a moment. (and it can't, of course, or you would know both its position and momentum with certainty).

    • @jasonbrady3606
      @jasonbrady3606 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@thedeemon once it collapses? How did you see it before it collapsed? Only thing being seen is the spike and the probability.

  • @hallek728
    @hallek728 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Excellent video, I loved the fact that you showed the relationship between formulas to explain , experiments, and a bit of history. Great novel you made.. wow.

  • @arshadbasha488
    @arshadbasha488 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    this video is mind blowing(so are your other videos, of course). but the thing that fascinates me more is how u explain everything so smoothly that i am truly able to understand and comprehend rather than be riddled with more doubts. its truly a satisfying watch.😍😍🤩🤩

  • @r.m.renfield4541
    @r.m.renfield4541 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    What a great video. Looking forward to the next one.

  • @LQhristian
    @LQhristian 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Another great video!! It is so counter intuitive that the larger the object, the smaller the wavelength!? Interestingly, if the mass was not the denominator in the equation, with lambda=mv/h, then the results would be consistent with what we see in the macro world (bigger objects having lower resonance). Just a thought!

    • @yourguard4
      @yourguard4 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      dont confound "size" with "mass" :P

    • @LQhristian
      @LQhristian 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@yourguard4 Thx! I don't think I am. However, there does need to be a distinction between particle mass (energy) vs Macro object mass (gravity influenced).

  • @AmitKumar-nq7wk
    @AmitKumar-nq7wk 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    From γ = h/mv if a body is at rest then it will make the denominator zero since its velocity would be zero. Doesnt it makes the wavelength infinite? And if it does, what does it mean?
    The same could be said for massleess particles like photon.

    • @GamesBond.007
      @GamesBond.007 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      It means that body is NOT a wave. And that quantum duality is illogical. And that Broglie guy got a nobel for being illogical and equating 2 energies which are not of the same kind: one is a wave energy, and the other is a particle energy ! He illogically assumes that waves and particles are the same thing and equivalates their energies. This is illogical, its like adding apples with snakes.

    • @tanayshukla9883
      @tanayshukla9883 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @Amit Kumar you cannot tell if anything is at rest without taking relativity into account. We should remember that motion is relative. And the body that you are considering at rest seems to be a macroscopic object as there is always some uncertainty in measuring the position and the momentum of "quantum objects" (see, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle).
      Coming onto the case of photons we take their *Rest mass =0* but since photons are never at rest they always have some mass given by de Broglie's relation E = hf.

    • @davidrandell2224
      @davidrandell2224 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      “The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy “,Mark McCutcheon.

    • @AmitKumar-nq7wk
      @AmitKumar-nq7wk 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@tanayshukla9883 I got the answer from google. But thanks for your reply 😊

    • @frede1905
      @frede1905 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@AmitKumar-nq7wk Yes, if a massive particle has a well-defined momentum (ie. it's not in a superposition of several different momenta), then using the equation a=h/(gamma•m•v), you get that the wavelength blows up to infinity if the velocity goes to zero. (a=wavelength, gamma=gamma factor, m=mass, v=velocity, h=Planck's constant). But then the question arises of how you'd make the velocity go to zero in the first place. Note also that the velocity here is the group velocity, not the phase velocity of the wave itself.

  • @jack.d7873
    @jack.d7873 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Absolutely brilliant combination of visuals and dialogue Arvin 👏. I don't have formal training but I explore reliable sources to acquire a greater understanding of reality, and you certainly help with that. So, thank you!

  • @protoword10
    @protoword10 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    You don’t know how much you are good in explaining things! If people want to know about nature, they should really stick to your chanell! Thanks, you are great Mr. Ash!

  • @rod3134
    @rod3134 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    OUTSTANDING Explanation 👍🏽 👍🏽 👍🏽 All is energy/light... We exist in a vast sea of energy. We are energy! So depending on your relative observation it is BOTH a wave and a particle.

  • @reallywicked1
    @reallywicked1 3 ปีที่แล้ว +9

    What a fantastic presentation of a subtle concept even a non mathamatician can understand .Great job!

    • @ioannisimansola7115
      @ioannisimansola7115 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Nothing to do with mathematics , it is only the isufficiency of the human brain , a modern know-it-all considering its power above God.

  • @ojonasar
    @ojonasar 3 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    Our general ‘difficulty’ with grasping things at the microscopic level stems from our usual view of the world at the macro level. An object to us appears solid but that is because we are looking at it at the large scale - the interactions at the quantum level aren’t normally visible. We may think of an atom of iron, for example, as being solid (as a small ball) because that is how we experience it at the large scale, but it is only ‘solid’ because the interactions with the forces at the quantum level prevent us from poking our hand into a block of metal.
    As I understand, everything is energy. It it has mass, it has inertia and to change its velocity, it needs energy to do so, which also gives it extra mass.

    • @Thumper770
      @Thumper770 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      The only problem I have wiht this is the extra mass part. You can't have "extra" mass. If energy can neither be created nor destroyed, neither can mass. Mass and energy, despite being proportional, are equal according to Einstein. Equal means equal, If you can't create or destroy one, the same is true for the other. They are interchangeable and transferrable, but never gianed or lost. You can't have "extra" mass....or energy for that.....well.....matter. You don't so much gain one and lose the other. One is changed into the other. Mass becomes kenetic energy and potential energy becomes mass. The more massive you are, the less kenetic energy you'll have. The more kinetically energetic you are, the less massive you'll be....relatively speaking, of corse. The proton contains VAST amounts of potential energy but, almost no mass. While planets contain VAST amounts of mass but, very little kentic energy.

    • @ojonasar
      @ojonasar 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Thumper770It is our perception of what mass is that gets in the way; mass is just a manifestation of energy. We experience mass as something that resists change in its momentum. If I’m jump starting someone’s car, I have to apply a lot of energy to the car to get it moving; as I do so, I am giving it extra energy and also mass. The velocity change and hence mass change is very small, compared to the speed of light.

    • @ojonasar
      @ojonasar 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Thumper770 Planets have plenty of kinetic energy, given the speed and mass they have.

    • @Thumper770
      @Thumper770 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@ojonasar the point I was trying to illustrate but, failed to, miserably, was that potential energy + kinetic Energy / c squared = mass. There is no room for extra mass or energy. Mass is inversely proportional to its energy at any given speed less than the speed of light. The speed of light threshold demands that matter becomes energy 100%. We know that matter can not travel faster than light and still be matter. But what happens when all motion stops and there is no energy but, ONLY matter? Hmmm........

    • @ojonasar
      @ojonasar 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Thumper770 All matter is energy; it’s our day to day perceptions that trip is up. When my older brother went to college to do electronics, I remember him saying later that in one of the years, they were taught how things seemed to be. The following year, they were then taught that what they were taught the previous year wasn’t how it actually was, and were then taught how things were (or at least closer to the way things actually are.) This doesn’t mean that the previous years teaching was wasted; far from it, it was needed so they would better understand the second years teachings.

  • @Circuit7Active
    @Circuit7Active 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Quite possibly your best video. Great explanation of something that is tough to get your mind around. Kudos

  • @jjrmm7
    @jjrmm7 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Those 30 first seconds really blew my mind, thanks for that Arvin!

  • @tanjohnny6511
    @tanjohnny6511 3 ปีที่แล้ว +13

    So i started to wave to everyone i meet because they are waving at me in the quantum level.😄

  • @carloscarrizo6355
    @carloscarrizo6355 3 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    Felicitaciones Arvin, muy claro en tus conceptos, saludos desde Argentina

    • @mikhailbaalberith
      @mikhailbaalberith 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Decime que se siente 🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆

  • @cattailer1077
    @cattailer1077 3 ปีที่แล้ว +10

    I know nothing about quantum, yet this explained to me how my focusing on things I prefer in my life over what I do not prefer, actually happens every second of every minute of every hour of every day. How I manifest my life...the good and the bad! Thanyou. I'm on a healing quest to create a cancer free body and this is a great help!♥️🥰

    • @djayjp
      @djayjp 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      This doesn't have to do with that, regardless hope you get better soon.

    • @sidj2810
      @sidj2810 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      I think you’re spot on. Cause as Arvind also concluded.. there no particle.. it’s all wave..Meaning thereby reality manifests only on measurement/observation ie. how you visualise.

    • @cattailer1077
      @cattailer1077 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      This has everything to do with it. It's not wishful the thinking, it is reality creating explained thru quantum and it is amazing.🥰

    • @cattailer1077
      @cattailer1077 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@sidj2810 ..exactly👍🏽

    • @sidj2810
      @sidj2810 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Yes..I suppose the brain activities are in quantum realm..also the reason we’ve learnt so little on brain upto now.

  • @samsen3965
    @samsen3965 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    0:07 That is not Pixel. what you show is essential color illuminators and not pixels.

  • @gabrielfois9781
    @gabrielfois9781 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I really think that you are one of the best scientific popularizers in the world. The way you explain, combined with clarifying videos is spectacular.
    I'm an engineer, but you manage to get me excited about ALL your videos.
    congratulations!
    Regards from Argentina.

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Glad to hear that! Thank you.

  • @ajoebo9095
    @ajoebo9095 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Time and time again Ash manages to teach on complex subjects in a way that becomes understandable to a layman interested in the subject.

  • @paulg444
    @paulg444 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    the cap is a game changer !!.. Arv is communicating profound street cred !!.. We love you Arv !

  • @calvingrondahl1011
    @calvingrondahl1011 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    “A wave packet”... I have not heard that before, thank you.

  • @lifesrealityis
    @lifesrealityis 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Amazing explaination! I'm in awe of how great this was. Several things just clicked. Thanks!

  • @KP_Oz
    @KP_Oz 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Arvin Ash is a genius. Coz only someone who understands this concept inside out can explain it with such simplicity! This one is your best yet and where can I find the next one that you teased us with?

  • @avadhutd1403
    @avadhutd1403 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Hello Arvin
    Thanks for another amazing video
    If all quantum state are same other than upward and downward spin of two practice ,is that mean they are entangled?
    And do you think at time of big bang all quantum state are same
    If two practice are entangled is that mean time and space act same on that object although they are away from each other?

  • @markallinson8350
    @markallinson8350 3 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    Alan Watts answered this question decades ago - they are wavicles.

  • @steelersgoingfor7in2024
    @steelersgoingfor7in2024 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    So the first deep thought most of us had at 12 years old turns out to be kind of true..
    Me at 12, "Dad, if I turn around or close my eyes, does everything disappear until I look?" So the universe seemingly behaves as if it were just a quantum ocean of possibility where any and every possible outcome is possible..

    • @ReptilesEat
      @ReptilesEat 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Lots of things we thought when we were younger was true, we just got conditioned to reject that thinking

  • @Krish-jm6ve
    @Krish-jm6ve ปีที่แล้ว

    best explanation, best graphics !! Nice Arvin. Keep doing the good work.

  • @jjhhandk3974
    @jjhhandk3974 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    The only thing that matters to me is the measurement problem. It clearly shows we’re missing something. Just like no one can explain the results of the quantum eraser experiment. If you measure the results the interference pattern disappears. Many try to say it’s because in order to measure the psrticle you collapse the function, but if you erase the measured results the interference pattern magically reappears, so that explanation is clearly inadequate.

    • @chetanpatil1654
      @chetanpatil1654 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Exactly. It seems like a Simulation

  • @cleverclever2317
    @cleverclever2317 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    I have a question , what happens when the particle wave length gets smaller than Planck length ?
    Does this break physics or the is particle wave length unmeasurable in this case ?

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      One would form microscopic black holes. But this is theory. We don't know if the Planck scale even exists. My bet would be that it doesn't.

    • @ezigwe
      @ezigwe 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Basketball wave length is unmeasurable so suspect your particle will simply be unmeasurable too (and not break any law of physics)

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@ezigwe Why would something like that be unmeasurable? Microscopic black holes decay differently from other quanta, the signature in an accelerator experiment would be quite unique (if boring).

    • @ezigwe
      @ezigwe 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@schmetterling4477 Not sure what you're saying. Basketball wavelength can be calculated but no tool that i know of exists to measure that length. Immeasurable

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@ezigwe A wavelength is not a property that belongs to a single quantum, to begin with. If that is what you are after, then you don't understand the physics, at all.

  • @devinfaux6987
    @devinfaux6987 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Something I've started wondering about the wave-function, and the way it's "smeared" across space -- what if it occupies all of that space, and the probability of "finding" it is more like the probability of interacting with it?
    Imagine trying to track the location of slippery soap bubbles floating through the air, but the only tool you have is a pin, and it can only detect where the head of the pin is when it successfully pops a soap bubble. And maybe the bubbles are slippery, and if you poke them in the wrong way the pin may just slide by them without popping them. It doesn't *always* do this; sometimes it gets lucky and can pop the bubble with a glancing hit. But you can't tell the difference between that and popping it from a poke directly towards the center of the bubble. When you "detect" the bubble as you pop it, you don't know how it was oriented towards the pin; you only know where one point on intersected with the pin. So after a while, and popping enough bubbles, you can plot out the probability of detecting them... but this is really a map of where on the bubble it is easiest or hardest to pop it with the pin. And once you've popped it, the bubble isn't floating through the air anymore.

  • @stevoofd
    @stevoofd 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Once again, a very comprehensive video!
    A couple of thoughts. Are the pattern varations in the double slit experiment not a result of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle? After all, without the detector, we get a wavelike pattern and can infer information about momentum, since we gain info about wavelength. When a detector is being used, the particles interact with the detector and we gain info about location, which comes at a sacrifice of info about momentum.
    Another thought this video raised is when you mentioned that the universe is essentially discrete, that it exists of discrete energetic quanta. Framing this in the concept of spacetime, I cannot help but think that it is exactly these discrete energetic interactions that make time and space emerge as a phenomenon. If we would assume that the entire universe is 1 discrete event, it would appear continuous within itself, no?
    A had a discussion a while ago about how everything we appear to see in realtime, and our brain interprets as a sense of now, is an illusion if we look at the quantum world. Light needs to travel a certain way to reach our retina’s, and then the translated electrical signal has a distance to cross to the occipital lobe in our brains. So our sense of now is built on information that is essentially always a perspective on how whatever we look at was a certain moment in the past, dependent on its proximity etc.
    Now, whether it is sunlight bouncing from a basketball to reach our eyes, or bouncing from hydrogen clouds hundreds of thousands of lighyears away, the event where the photon hits the retina is the only real event that matters. That is to say, it is the first contact of that photon from the time of its emission to its absorption by a cone or rod at the other side of the retina. The entire route from the moment it was emitted to the moment it is absorbed is a continuous path, and its alpha and omega are the only discrete endpoints of that continuous path. So in essence, the sense of time emerges exactly in discrete energy transferrences, the moment inbetween is experienced as a ‘timeless’ continuous state. We know there is a relation between mass and the experience of time passing, and that a photon experiences no time passing during its travel from emission to absorption. Extrapolate that to all known particles and you could state that any discrete ‘particle’ behavior is the result of an intersection between continuous ‘waves’ of energy, where a certain energetic treshold is reached creating a discrete moment of spacetime in which the timelike behavior of momentum crystallizes in spacelike behavior of location.
    I don’t know if I’m making much sense. But the TLDR or take away is that I feel like discrete interactions are what generates a sense of time, or at least a difference and relativistic contrast between mathematical regions where a lot of discrete interactions are packed close together (massive objects), versus mathematical regions that are much less densely packed (the vacuüm) where energy experiences spatial topography as close to 0, and temporal topography as close to 1.

  • @lambda4931
    @lambda4931 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    You always do a good job on theses videos. Thank u!

  • @rwarren58
    @rwarren58 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I wish I had a clever comment or even a decent question but my mind has been blown. Thanks Arvin!

  • @ReadTheShrill
    @ReadTheShrill 3 ปีที่แล้ว +10

    Easy to answer: Photons and electrons aren't particles or waves, they are photons and electrons. Comparing them to particles or waves is an analogy, and analogies are never perfect.

    • @pinchopaxtonsgreatestminds9591
      @pinchopaxtonsgreatestminds9591 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      You have no physics for the words however.

    • @hyperduality2838
      @hyperduality2838 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Certainty is dual to uncertainty -- the Heisenberg certainty/uncertainty principle.
      Waves are dual to particles -- pure energy is dual, potential energy is dual to kinetic energy or gravitational energy is dual.
      Spin statistics theorem:- Symmetric wave functions (Bosons, waves) are dual to anti-symmetric wave functions (Fermions, particles) -- wave/particle or quantum duality.
      Bosons are dual to Fermions -- matter or atomic duality.
      Electro is dual to magnetic -- electro-magnetic energy is dual.
      The Schrodinger representation is dual to the Heisenberg representation -- quantum mechanics.
      The colour black is dual to the colour white -- all colours (light, spectrum) are dual.
      All colours are made from the same substance namely energy but have differing frequencies, same is dual to different. The lack of colour (black) is still treated as a colour by the human visual system.
      Lacking is dual to non-lacking.
      Being is dual to non-being creates becoming -- Plato.
      Everything is made from the same substance or energy but comes in differing forms -- duality!
      Duality: two equivalent descriptions of the same thing -- Leonard Susskind, physicist.
      Two sides of the same coin (heads, tails) -- duality.
      Monads are units of force -- Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz.
      Attraction is dual to repulsion, push is dual to pull -- forces are dual.
      Action is dual to reaction -- Sir Isaac Newton (the duality of forces).
      Cause is dual to effect -- correlation implies forces!
      Thesis (cause) is dual to anti-thesis (effect) creates the converging thesis or synthesis (forces) -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic.
      Forces are synthesized from the duality or correlation of cause and effect.
      Absolute truth is dual to relative truth -- Hume's fork.
      Monads are units of force which are dual -- monads are dual.
      "May the force (duality) be with you" -- Jedi teaching.
      "The force (duality) is strong in this one" -- Jedi teaching.
      "Always two there are" -- Yoda.
      Duality (energy) creates reality.

    • @pinchopaxtonsgreatestminds9591
      @pinchopaxtonsgreatestminds9591 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@hyperduality2838 Duality is just hole/filler physics.

    • @hyperduality2838
      @hyperduality2838 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@pinchopaxtonsgreatestminds9591 Syntropy (prediction, projection) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics!
      Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non-teleological physics (entropy).
      Mind (the internal soul, syntropy) is dual to matter (the external soul, entropy) -- Descartes.
      According to Descartes your soul is dual!
      Making predictions to track targets is a syntropic process -- teleological.
      Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
      According to Kant your mind/soul is dual.
      Noumenal (mind, rational) is dual to phenomenal (matter, science, empirical) -- Immanuel Kant.
      Metaphysics is dual to physics.

    • @pinchopaxtonsgreatestminds9591
      @pinchopaxtonsgreatestminds9591 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@hyperduality2838 So? Your duality has no physics.. hole/filler has physics 1 + -1 = 0. To build the universe from nothing you use holes, and fillers. That's the point of the theory of everything to build the universe from nothing.

  • @Mermaider
    @Mermaider 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Dude! Much better than pbs space, for me!
    Perfect level 👍

  • @fourkings7897
    @fourkings7897 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    This is what i keep thinking about.. There is no electron. Can't wait for the next video

    • @Mic_Glow
      @Mic_Glow 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      our consciousness is just a bunch of waves interacting with other waves
      also the universe might be a holograph on black hole surface

  • @TheLazyLarryShow
    @TheLazyLarryShow 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Hi Arvin. If there is no time in the subatomic world, then the photons might appear to be fired through the slits one at a time but, as time does not exist at this level, they are, in effect, passing through simultaneously, hence the interference. Equally, when you measure and identify a particle, it could be that you are simply capturing a 'snapshot' of that timeless wave in time, i.e. our classical, macro time.

  • @qs2668
    @qs2668 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    2:47 THIS is so mindblowing, I imagine everyone jumping out of their seats and howling like sports fans when a goal is scored
    Seriously though, it's so logical and obvious, why wasn't it me who figured that out!!

  • @Peasmouldia
    @Peasmouldia 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Wasn't it Niels Bohr who told Einstein, "Don't tell God what to do!"?
    Ta.

    • @jasonbrady3606
      @jasonbrady3606 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Just looking at that name Neil's Bohr. Made me think Neil's women lost a hair extension and Neil had to come up with something quick. Cannot know don't know so anything is possible, if/thou it dose not make sense, thou it has driven people crazy.
      I want to know why the model where photons are a disturbance in spacetime? Where the positive peak of the wave is more than nothing and the trough is less than nothing, as in the entirety of the photon is these countering canceling virtual particles with a little more that propagates it into space. Essentially identical to gravity waves. I think the debate whether the wave is a disturbance of nothing or something is more relevant, whether there's a field, or just the zero virtual field particles of nothing.
      And an electron and its mass is a geometric topological affect that occurs as these virtual particles encircle themselves. So an electron is simply x-ray wave length of light twisted upon itself. That topological structure warps spAcetime, and the warping of spacetime is the angluliar momentum of that structure, directed and focused to the center of the electron, and dispersed throughout the periphery of the structure. The difference of angluliar momentum of any point on the periphery of the structure to the focused point of the center is its mass. We cannot see it's as a spin, but rather like a seesaw where the center fulcrum is the center of the electron. I think it's important as the root

  • @GururajBN
    @GururajBN 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    For the first time, I have heard that even macro objects have wave function, though it is immesurably small. That is a revelation. There is a lingering doubt. Unlike electrons, photona or muons etc, a basket ball is made up of trillions of atoms. Each of them must have their own quantum behaviour. Is the quantum behaviour of the basket ball sum total of these trillion particles, or is the quantum behaviour of the basket ball independent of the particles making up the ball?

    • @mayankbhaisora2699
      @mayankbhaisora2699 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Yess even for larger objects. They can pass through a solid surface like electrons but for that to happen the possibility of the position of all the smaller particles making up the large objects must be beyond that surface but the probability of that would be incredibly low

  • @krishg3095
    @krishg3095 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Now I know that light is a wave. I can die peacefully😌

  • @elinaoberemok1732
    @elinaoberemok1732 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Woah, this made it so much clearer, but also now I'm curious how can everything be a wave... Thanks for the video!

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 ปีที่แล้ว

      Everything is not a wave. There is also cheese. ;-)

  • @andystuart4667
    @andystuart4667 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Great video. My favourites are the quantum and space videos. Everything is a wave but the stuff we touch is of a kind of wavelength

    • @hyperduality2838
      @hyperduality2838 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Waves are dual to particles -- pure energy is dual, potential energy is dual to kinetic energy or gravitational energy is dual.
      Spin statistics theorem:- Symmetric wave functions (Bosons, waves) are dual to anti-symmetric wave functions (Fermions, particles) -- wave/particle or quantum duality.
      Bosons are dual to Fermions -- matter or atomic duality.
      Electro is dual to magnetic -- electro-magnetic energy is dual.
      The Schrodinger representation is dual to the Heisenberg representation -- quantum mechanics.
      The colour black is dual to the colour white -- all colours (light, spectrum) are dual.
      All colours are made from the same substance namely energy but have differing frequencies, same is dual to different. The lack of colour (black) is still treated as a colour by the human visual system.
      Lacking is dual to non-lacking.
      Being is dual to non-being creates becoming -- Plato.
      Everything is made from the same substance or energy but comes in differing forms -- duality!
      Duality: two equivalent descriptions of the same thing -- Leonard Susskind, physicist.
      Two sides of the same coin (heads, tails) -- duality.
      Monads are units of force -- Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz.
      Attraction is dual to repulsion, push is dual to pull -- forces are dual.
      Action is dual to reaction -- Sir Isaac Newton (the duality of forces).
      Cause is dual to effect -- correlation implies forces!
      Thesis (cause) is dual to anti-thesis (effect) creates the converging thesis or synthesis (forces) -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic.
      Forces are synthesized from the duality or correlation of cause and effect.
      Absolute truth is dual to relative truth -- Hume's fork.
      Monads are units of force which are dual -- monads are dual.
      "May the force (duality) be with you" -- Jedi teaching.
      "The force (duality) is strong in this one" -- Jedi teaching.
      "Always two there are" -- Yoda.
      Duality (energy) creates reality.

  • @sasantarom
    @sasantarom 3 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    Oops ! didn't know they're different son but I still bless myself.

  • @flatisland
    @flatisland 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    12:47 what about the Planck length, doesn't that set a limit for the wavelength of an macroscopic object?

    • @LouDeeCruz
      @LouDeeCruz 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Maths don’t set limits to the universe. Only set limits to theoreticians assumptions about the universe.

    • @LordAmerican
      @LordAmerican 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Not really. For a non-fundamental (non-quantum) object to have a de Broglie wavelength all the fundamental particles that make it up must be in coherence, and for macroscopic objects, while quantum coherence is ... not impossible ... they very quickly fall into quantum decoherence due to interactions with other objects, and so for macroscopic objects the de Broglie wavelength just doesn't really apply. Sure, it's mathematically sound, but applying it to macroscopic objects is just a means of illustrating the general idea.
      That said, the Planck length isn't actually an absolute limit to space. Not yet, anyway. It's just that in order to see anything that size and smaller, you'd have to put enough energy into it to form a black hole that size, so measuring it is pretty meaningless as far as our current understanding of physics goes. The Planck scale could very well be a fundamental limit to reality, and that would only be uncovered in a future Theory of Everything, but for now it remains solely as a limit to the meaningfulness of a measurement.

    • @LouDeeCruz
      @LouDeeCruz 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@LordAmerican Measuring is handy. But But we can’t confuse assumptions with observations. For instance we can see interference patterns. That is a direct observation of light as a wave. Particles black holes etc..these are assumptions. We don’t actually see them. For instance a pmt detector detects energy arriving at the detector screen. Its quantised , amplified and sent to a video screen. It’s a fairly accurate measurement but only an assumption that a particle did it. Far better to assume waves were quantised at the detector screen. Seeing as we already *know* light is a wave from other observations.

  • @abakanazer
    @abakanazer 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Because of your video in the past, I was able to derivate with my own conclusion that matches those at the end of this video - 14:00.
    It was obvious after diving deeply into the nature of things, but try explaining that to someone that has no clue - like me before.
    So good going for the train of thought I guess, on those elusive profound matters :)

  • @abdulm_7
    @abdulm_7 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Damn! I knew it! Your thoughts and changes in vibrations can effect the results! Thank you.

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Your thoughts will not affect the results.

  • @Robertpupo
    @Robertpupo 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Brilliant narrative Arvin - follow your videos, this one is one, top notch. I would suggest a video book, with links / portions of previous videos, organized into chapters - simply superb Arvin

  • @stevenschilizzi4104
    @stevenschilizzi4104 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Brilliant, as usual! Tops! Should be mandatory watching in science classes at school.

  • @sofnaji
    @sofnaji ปีที่แล้ว

    Your presentation is a duality of two weathers. Hat for the cold and short sleeve for the hot.

  • @Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time
    @Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    One way to think of wave particle duality of light and matter in the form of electrons is that it is forming a blank canvas for us (atoms) to interact with. We have waves over a period of time and particles as an uncertain future unfolds. The mathematics of quantum mechanics represents the physics of time with classical physics represents processes over a period of time as in Newton's differential equations.

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Wave particle duality doesn't exist. Don't be stupid. There is much more stuff in the world than waves and particles. Well, technically, there are not even particles. ;-)

  • @georgschett801
    @georgschett801 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Very good video. Personally I believe that what looks like a particle is more a location in the wave where information (energy?) is passed from one quantum field to the other. This location is random and follows the probability function (i.e. the wave function).

  • @proof6930
    @proof6930 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Particles and waves are concepts we use to explain how the math applies to things we have observed. They seem to contradict for quantum physics, because the concept does not apply for quanta.

  • @bigbangtheory1185
    @bigbangtheory1185 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I enjoy your videos Mr Ash!👍🏽 very short and informative. Keep it up!

  • @zacimusprime4865
    @zacimusprime4865 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    I’m 22 years of age and I’m only now just starting to truly understand things

    • @Spartakus68
      @Spartakus68 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Never too late !

  • @EdgarSoaresPT
    @EdgarSoaresPT 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Hi Arvin! You did it again! Feynman would be proud! Can't wait for 2nd video!

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Much appreciated.

    • @krzysztofciuba271
      @krzysztofciuba271 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Feynman's lecture on it esp. Einstein's equation is totally misleading and a lie! Feynman did not understand QM either as

  • @mohsendargi6220
    @mohsendargi6220 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    you are number one because produce your videos in high level of consideration, THANKS

  • @BlisterHiker
    @BlisterHiker 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Quantum field, I think, is what binds the universe together and depending on scale, also causes it to expand. In a way, it's like a landscape.
    Thank you for another fantastic presentation!

  • @kanishkvv
    @kanishkvv 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    At 06:40, why the interference pattern is disappearing? Wave function should collapse only for the detector as it is observing those particles/waves. It is as if the detector has converted the dual nature of existence of photons into particle nature.

  • @bentationfunkiloglio
    @bentationfunkiloglio 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Best description of quantum wave function I've ever seen. Length of matter's quantum wave length is inversely proportional to its mass, brilliant.

    • @benjaminkaufmann2482
      @benjaminkaufmann2482 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      The problem with this view is that the denominator also contains v (the speed of the object). That means, if the object is very slow, the wavelength becomes very large and even goes towards infinity for v->0.

  • @MultiSciGeek
    @MultiSciGeek 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I really appreciate the careful terminology like "the act of measuring the object" rather than "observing the particle". It might not make sense at first, but you won't get the wrong idea as you learn on. I regret seeing all those simplified explanations (not that this isn't simple btw) that planted wrong impressions in my mind. Great video as always!

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Measurement/observation is simply irreversible energy transfer. If you can't define it in a single sentence, then you simply don't know what you are talking about. ;-)

    • @MultiSciGeek
      @MultiSciGeek 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@schmetterling4477 You're replying to the wrong comment fam

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@MultiSciGeek You regret seeing all those simplified explanations but can't give the correct five word explanation yourself. That's all we need to know, my friend. That's all we need to know. ;-)

    • @MultiSciGeek
      @MultiSciGeek 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@schmetterling4477 Mah man, I'm literally quoting the video. So go ahead and argue with Arvin Ash himself if you have a problem. There's literally no other reason for your comments other than r/iamverysmart lmao

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@MultiSciGeek I have told him plenty. Don't worry about that. He knows me. ;-)
      I am not very smart. I simply have decades of experience with physics. Dude, I am pushing the daisies. Once you are old you don't need complicated, go eight times around the block explanations. The fun part is that you can explain some things in half a dozen words better than with an hour of lecturing. The second law of thermodynamics is like that, too. At most you need six words for that one. But that's basically Thermodynamics 101 material.

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

    The simplest explanation is that light is a wave with particle characteristics as a probabilistic future unfolds photon by photon. This idea is supported by the fact that light photon ∆E=hf energy is continuously transforming potential energy into the kinetic Eₖ=½mv² energy of matter, in the form of electrons. Kinetic energy is the energy of what is actually ‘happening’. The dynamic geometry of this process forms an uncertain ∆×∆pᵪ≥h/4π probabilistic future continuously unfolding relative to the electron probability cloud of the atoms and the wavelength of the light.

    • @Wabbelpaddel
      @Wabbelpaddel ปีที่แล้ว

      Or, the higher the frequency as per lower de Broglie wavelength, the more interacting fields poll each others impulse, leaving much less possibility for location uncertainty as per Heisenberg relation.
      Maybe that is what is behind the measurement problem.
      Perhaps this could be tested by not having a measuring device of high enough mass do the pre-double slit measurenemt, but rather let a stream of photons be diffracted and track their impulse and angle.
      If there is a random dispersion, you can be sure that frequency correlates with the degree of chaotic behavior.

  • @Ohem1
    @Ohem1 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    This is really interesting, I only started to take a more profound interest in physics and have watched numerous videos and "layman friendly" read on the wave function, and quantum tunnelling (among other things) a few weeks ago and this video more or less are affirming my intuition regarding quantum fields and the Unruh effect - meaning I get the sense there's no "dark energy" or "dark matter", just energized otherwise stable quantum fields into disparity. The ever increasing space-time distance is displacement caused by the quantum fields, and "dark matter" is merely quantized inertia. I'm sure I'm wrong on any of these assertions, it's just an impression that keeps building up the more I learn.
    To simplify what I mean is, imagine a big pot with water in a calm demeanour, it's all stable and unchanging. Place two rubber ducks in the pot at a fair distance from each other, they'll remain in the same position until something changes. Turning the heat on and letting the pot boil and the rubber ducks will start to move around, by the displacement of the water. Now replace the rubber ducks with something else that has more mass (but still floats), and you'll notice how much longer it takes to move around in the same manner. The representation is: The boiling water is the quantum fields, and the increased mass is the quantized inertia.

  • @JK-pd7jf
    @JK-pd7jf 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Great understandable explanations using everyday language and objects! Big thanks!

  • @spacetimegrid
    @spacetimegrid 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Superb Video! Keep Doing the Good Work Arvin Ash

  • @NeonVisual
    @NeonVisual 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Has anyone tried the double slit with a curved screen, like a ball? I would be interested to see if the result would be an interference pattern projected onto a spherical surface like a movie projector, or if the curve changes the interference pattern entirely, and the more distant areas of the edge of the sphere somehow retroactively change the interference pattern on the surface of the sphere nearer to the slits.

    • @hyperduality2838
      @hyperduality2838 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Double slits = dual split experiment.
      Certainty is dual to uncertainty -- the Heisenberg certainty/uncertainty principle.
      Waves are dual to particles -- pure energy is dual, potential energy is dual to kinetic energy or gravitational energy is dual.
      Spin statistics theorem:- Symmetric wave functions (Bosons, waves) are dual to anti-symmetric wave functions (Fermions, particles) -- wave/particle or quantum duality.
      Bosons are dual to Fermions -- matter or atomic duality.
      Electro is dual to magnetic -- electro-magnetic energy is dual.
      The Schrodinger representation is dual to the Heisenberg representation -- quantum mechanics.
      The colour black is dual to the colour white -- all colours (light, spectrum) are dual.
      All colours are made from the same substance namely energy but have differing frequencies, same is dual to different. The lack of colour (black) is still treated as a colour by the human visual system.
      Lacking is dual to non-lacking.
      Being is dual to non-being creates becoming -- Plato.
      Everything is made from the same substance or energy but comes in differing forms -- duality!
      Duality: two equivalent descriptions of the same thing -- Leonard Susskind, physicist.
      Two sides of the same coin (heads, tails) -- duality.
      Monads are units of force -- Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz.
      Attraction is dual to repulsion, push is dual to pull -- forces are dual.
      Action is dual to reaction -- Sir Isaac Newton (the duality of forces).
      Cause is dual to effect -- correlation implies forces!
      Thesis (cause) is dual to anti-thesis (effect) creates the converging thesis or synthesis (forces) -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic.
      Forces are synthesized from the duality or correlation of cause and effect.
      Absolute truth is dual to relative truth -- Hume's fork.
      Monads are units of force which are dual -- monads are dual.
      "May the force (duality) be with you" -- Jedi teaching.
      "The force (duality) is strong in this one" -- Jedi teaching.
      "Always two there are" -- Yoda.
      Duality (energy) creates reality.

    • @NeonVisual
      @NeonVisual 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@hyperduality2838 You feeling ok mate?

    • @hyperduality2838
      @hyperduality2838 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@NeonVisual Positive charge is dual to negative charge -- electric fields.
      North poles are dual to south poles -- magnetic fields.
      Electro-magnetic energy is dual -- Maxwell's equations.
      Photons, light or pure energy is dual -- wave/particle duality.
      Spin up is dual to spin down, particles are dual to anti-particles -- the Dirac equation.
      The inner or dot product is dual to the wedge or cross product (forms) -- Maxwell's equations.
      The Einstein dualities:-
      Space is dual to time -- Einstein.
      Time dilation is dual to length contraction -- Einstein, special relativity.
      Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality).
      Gravitation is dual to acceleration -- Einstein.
      Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein.
      Dark energy is dual to dark matter -- "Always two there are" -- Yoda.
      Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry.
      Gravitation or curvature is therefore dual or gravitational energy is dual.
      Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy.
      Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality.
      There are patterns of duality hardwired into physics, mathematics & philosophy.
      In physics the question becomes what is dual to entropy?
      Syntropy (prediction, projection) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics.
      Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non-teleological physics (entropy).
      Signals are dual to noise -- the signal to noise ratio in electronics.
      Randomness (noise, entropy) is dual to order (signals, syntropy, patterns).
      Unpredictability (uncertainty, entropy) is dual to predictability (certainty, syntropy).
      Deductive inference is dual to inductive inference -- Immanuel Kant.
      Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
      Absolute truth is dual to relative truth -- Hume's fork.
      "Through imagination and reason we turn experience into foresight (prediction)" -- Spinoza describing syntropy.
      Making predictions is a syntropic process -- teleological.
      All observers make predictions to track targets and goals (objectives).
      Good news is dual to bad news.
      "Philosophy is dead" -- Stephen Hawking.
      Teleophlia is dual to teleophobia.
      Main stream physics is currently dominated by teleophobia -- philosophy or metaphysics is not allowed or is it? Questions are dual to answers.
      "May the force (duality) be with you" -- Jedi teaching.

  • @mikesafe7329
    @mikesafe7329 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    wonderful presentation, i wish i had a professor like you when i was in my engineer institute

  • @petermiesler6444
    @petermiesler6444 ปีที่แล้ว

    10:40 "the wave behavior we can see with our eyes" - it is interesting how wave patterns are everywhere I look. From the winds; to ripples of water; and the sand in a flowing creek bottom; to the waves a river's course makes through the landscape; waves upon waves on the oceans; and waves within my body. Heck I notice when walking my dog down these dirt roads and look back, my path meanders left and right.
    It's a beautiful thing, these folds within folds of constructive complexity flowing down the stream of time.
    Bless the science that helps us understand these matters ever better and for excellent communicators.
    Religion is nice and good for communion and human matters,
    but when it comes to appreciating the reality around us,
    nothing beats science and the scientists (throughout our Earth and over the generations).
    Thank you Arvin for making and offering such sweet clear lessons on deep physics, sans the philosophical woo. 👍

  • @MrEkzotic
    @MrEkzotic 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    I wasn't aware that probability waves exist, however small they might be, for macro scale objects. Thank you for expanding my knowledge.

    • @thedeemon
      @thedeemon 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      But it's just a misleading calculation. If a body consists of 2 atoms each of them having wavelength L, whatever that means, the wavelength of the whole body having wavelength L/2 doesn't really make any sense at all, both atoms with wavelengths L are still there. This total wavelength is a number without any actual meaning. In actual QM and quantum chemistry we talk about atomic orbitals, they are electrons' wavefunctions and they don't get smaller when many atoms come together, and nothing with a smaller wavefunction or shorter wave length ever appears from combining many atoms.

  • @arianarab7630
    @arianarab7630 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    @ 6:25, could you please cite an actual experiment? I found one experiment by Hamamatsu Photonics for the single-photon experiment, which resulted in the interference pattern. Still, in their experiment, they just blocked one of the slits, and the interference pattern disappeared (it will give a diffraction pattern as it should). I haven't yet found an experiment detecting photons passing through each of the slits while keeping both slits open. I am struggling to find an experiment that actually measures photons passing through slits that would result in the two bright bands.

    • @lepidoptera9337
      @lepidoptera9337 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Detecting a photon is the same as blocking it. That follows directly from energy conservation and the fact that photons are small amounts of energy. What Hamamatsu is showing there is 100% correct. That you can't find something that can't be done is a direct consequence of the fact that it can't be done. ;-)

  • @kayakMike1000
    @kayakMike1000 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    How about calling them a wavicle. Wavicles have a paricular probability field associated with their wave function, but measuring its location or energy means you can't observe it's wave like nature... And if you want to see it act like a wave... Well, you can't observe it's particle nature.

  • @PedroMerencio
    @PedroMerencio 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Considering the explanation at 10:34, how the wavelength of atoms add up to determine the behavior of macro objects?
    Like, by adding more atoms to an object, you increase its mass, so the wavelength decreases. But, how this waves interact to determine the final result?

  • @mikemcknight1295
    @mikemcknight1295 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Detecting the particles fired one by one produces 2 bands instead of the interference pattern associated with non-detection, because the energy waves coming from the detector collide with the wave-photon being fired, and break them down into more "point-like" bullet shaped projectiles, and hence two-banded array on the screen.

    • @ElectronFieldPulse
      @ElectronFieldPulse 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Yes, it causes decoherence. The detector absorbs and then re-emits the photon. When absorbing, the wavefuncrion collapses and deposits all of its energy into the atoms of the absorber, creating a "bullet like" particle being emitted towards the screen.

  • @toastboi138
    @toastboi138 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Amazingly timed video. I just started learning about QFT over the past couple of days

  • @mimArmand
    @mimArmand 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Amazing video Arvin! congrats

  • @nfc14g
    @nfc14g 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Great vid! You touch on Youngs interference and basic two split mechanics to a central maxima, but visually would it have been great to show a single split, and touch on quantum entanglement at this point?

  • @saratheyyani1428
    @saratheyyani1428 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Arvin , you did it again. Great work Man

  • @spookyaction
    @spookyaction 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    For those who didnt get the point of the video, this is saying that we have no clue about what is mass and what is a particle.

    • @chetanpatil1654
      @chetanpatil1654 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      True, it hurts the ego of materialists😂😂

    • @pavolusak2488
      @pavolusak2488 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      The concept, presented in the "World of the rings" , "The Planck view of the black hole" , on the ResearchGate, gives the idea , what is the nature of the mass and what is the elementary charge. Both derived from the dynamics and topology of the oscilating electromagnetic pulse closed persistent (non dissipative) energy flux, in the form of toroidal ring.