ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 มี.ค. 2013
- Last part of the lectures.
All parts of the lectures can be found in this playlist
• Quantum Mechanical Vie...
Richard Feynman explains Quantum Electrodynamics, the theory for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize, in a workshop at Esalen.
I DO NOT OWN THIS MATERIAL. IF IT VIOLATES COPYRIGHT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, I WILL REMOVE IT IF I AM NOTIFIED OF SUCH A VIOLATION. - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
I adore his laid-back style. And as someone mentioned, finding these full lectures is like finding a precious treasure. I laughed at and enjoyed his comment at 38:36 on the convention of whether an interval is described to be timelike, spacelike, or lightlike. After having gone quite a bit through relativity and seeing authors make everything as formalized as possible, I can appreciate how Feynman just cuts through the jargon to make his point clear. Phenomenal teaching.
Thanks for posting these videos. They're like finding the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
wondering what smoking a pot of gold feels like
I adore this man! A real genius soooo handsome great sense of humour He must have been so frustrated dealing with mere humansNo one compares to him
just like to give my take on Richard P feynman .... he is a true genius of our time ❤❤ is all
he really wants to share his knowledge and enthusiasm and doing so shows genius and humanity
crazy that a TF2 player happens to upload Feynman lectures. either way lol, nice, thank you.
so damn cool.....2nd only to Einstein and/or Newton ....imo....I guess that last lectured was never recorded?....shame....but quite grateful for these
This is brilliant.
thank you very much for uploading these videos. I really enjoyed them.
you are most welcome, I am glad you benefited from them.
that Roger Penrose is/was a extremly skilled mathematician ❤❤
After seeing PBS Spacetime explain Feynman Diagrams and perturbation theory, it is much easier to appreciate these videos along with the genius of Feynman.
Additionally his skill as a lecturer.
Conservation of Spatial Curvature (both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature)
Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension?
What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Fixing the Standard Model with more particles is like trying to mend a torn fishing net with small rubber balls, instead of a piece of twisted twine.
Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules:
“We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr
(lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957-8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958)
The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose, and the work of Eric Weinstein on “Geometric Unity”? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics?
When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks. (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Charge" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry.
Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Mesons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other.
Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change.
Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons?
Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension?
Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons
. Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The production of the torus may help explain the “Symmetry Violation” in Beta Decay, because one end of the broken tube section is connected to the other end of the tube produced, like a snake eating its tail. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process, which is also found in DNA molecules.
Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves.
The “Electric Charge” of electrons or positrons would be the result of one twist cycle being displayed at the 3D-4D surface interface of the particle. The physical entanglement of twisted tubes in quarks within protons and neutrons and mesons displays an overall external surface charge of an integer number. Because the neutrinos do not have open tube ends, (They are a twisted torus.) they have no overall electric charge.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms. We know there is an unequal distribution of electrical charge within each atom because the positive charge is concentrated within the nucleus, even though the overall electrical charge of the atom is balanced by equal positive and negative charge.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137.
1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface
137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted.
The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist producing a twisted 3D/4D membrane. The model grew out of that simple idea.
I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles.
.
Thanks for uploading this! Is the next part not available? ;(
Where can I find the 5th lecture? It sounds very interesting what he is going to do in that final lecture.
Now I understand how maddening my inane questions in Sabine Hossenfelders comment section must be
Thanks a lot!
Well, thanks again.
Did you attend this event? Deep gratitude for these lectures.
47:22 et seq.: How cool is that? Before mass gets involved, the equation is _scale invariant,_ which is precisely the condition (according to Roger Penrose's CCC hypothesis) at the end of one aeon and the beginning of the next aeon, when there is nothing but photons...i.e., no annoying mass. Indeed, mass (nucleons, electrons) doesn't come into being until enough cooling (expansion) has happened after the Big Bang to allow particles with a non-zero rest mass to exist.
Wish one could hear the questions from the students.
That's like saying every game of chess is exactly the same. The pieces are the same. However, the multiplicative possibilities of each game emerges from the rules of the game. How much more complicated are human beings? We made be made from the same stuff, but that is superficial. What really makes us different is a sort of chaotic butterfly effect of events shaping who we are over time.
1:21:08 a few weeks for the best mainframes, back in 83 =) today there are apps for it! imagine when quantum computers will be doing it
1:08:46 can't we say that the first two diagrams are different events because the energies of electrons at the point 2 and 4 are dependent whether they've exchanged photons or not ? the Electron that ends up at 2 must have less energy if it spits out a photon at point 5. I must have a misconception. Can someone help?
Quantum mechanics is energy (momentum/angular momentum) conserving. When you solve the actual complex integrals, all the contributions that are off-shell (aka "virtual particles") cancel out in that sense. Whatever energy/momentum/angular momentum goes into the diagram comes out.
There is an important implication for philosophy from the discussion he had about particles being identical. He's talking about the Pauli Exclusion Principal from Wolfgang Pauli, which shows that under certain conditions not only are particles identical, but they are not numerically distinct. The concept of "identical but numerically distinct" is very common in philosophy. However, as Pauli proved, if two things are identical, truly identical down to the smallest scale, then they cannot be numerically distinct. Rather they are aspects of a single inseparable system. This fundamentally invalidates many schools of thought in philosophy. I wrote about it in a paper in college.
+Sam - I don't get what you mean: "... they are aspects of a single inseparable system."
Assume there are 2 electrons that are identical (same spin, etc), they are "identical and numerically not distinct". One of the electrons is in an Argon atom in Denver. The other electron is in a Helium atom in Boston.
How are they part of a single inseparable system?
Keep in mind, Feynman KNEW Pauli, personally, during the Manhatten Project and has given lecture in front/with him.
This has nothing to do with Feynman or Pauli or anything philosophical. All formulas of quantum field theory must be invariant under Lorentz transformations, i.e. they are representations of the Lorentz-group. One can derive the so called spin-statistics theorem rigorously, but the technical details are non-trivial. They also depend on the spatial dimensions. The simple boson/fermion case requires three spatial dimensions. In two dimensions so called anyons become possible and then there is the complication of topological states in complex bound systems. These have already been experimentally verified in solid state systems and there are people who think that quarks in nucleons may be better understood as a topological state than as fundamental entities.
I am not an expert on free will. But I think you can use an apple to say the existence of orange. I'd account the probabilistic measure to the things we are yet to figure it out.
Does anyone know the significance of "3.6 times ten to the minus 11 cm" that he mentions. For instance, does this number have a name?
***** What about the Kasimir effect; distance of the 2 metal plates??
Adam Mangler Wait, what about the size of the slit in the 2 slits exeriments?
Adam Mangler Oh - just woke up!
What was the question -??
Maybe I should go back to Leonard Susskinds notes..
Adam Mangler Ah looks like the Stark effect maybe:-
ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19870011460
and so my only sadness really is that ime not be alaive to see "the unified field theory" or something like it (not sick that i know only not gone live forever)
This video won't play.
I wish I could have been there. What a bright mind. Could you imagine Feynman, Dirac and Einstein bull-shitting over a pint.
So the photon we see in the detector is not the photon from the source But both are entangled by the information they contain.
Not even that. A thermal source won't even let us count the number of photons. Quantum field theory is complicated if we take the general case. One can, of course, construct simplified scenarios where photons seem to behave like classical particles (what goes in is exactly the same that comes out), however, that's a trivialization of the actual physics of the electromagnetic field and even that leads to severe conceptual problems as soon as people start asking for e.g. "paths" of photons. My suggestion would be to forget the semi-classical picture altogether. It's not helpful.
i can almost see what he draws on the white board
Momentum from photons?
Photons have momentum, yes. "p=mv" is a low-energy/Newtonian approximation. You can look up "4-momentum" for the whole shebang, or just take that the momentum of a photon is given by the Planck constant over its wavelength.
this must have been hard work for the prof.
Not that I know of, I'm afraid.
c = 0.85
The man isn’t wearing shoes or socks! Surely, you’re joking, Mr. Feynman?!
Except I'm not convinced that it is an illusion. There's a lot of conjecture about that, but so far I'm not convinced.
He’s like your dad explaining nature to you 😀
the common notion of free will is an illusion
+helberg - Thank you for making these lecture videos available. Do you know anything about the fifth (final) lecture in this series? Is it available anywhere?
he sounds just like the ant from the 70's pink panther cartoons
me too....though i was the only 1 that does that
realcygnus
Every night - reg'lar as clockwork!
When he says all photons are identical apart from polarisation- couldn't sources producing different colors allow the experimenter to know which photon came from which source? If so, since all real sources will produce slightly different colors, and are hence in theory distingishable, why do we ever see interference between the two sources in this way?
He said (perhaps in other parts of this lecture series) basically, that he is concentrating on light sources that produce monochromatic (one color) light.
Shoes ? Is he wearing shoes?
dogs out for quantum mechanics
So Gravity is already incorporated into Quantum Mechanics.
No.
Hes not waring shoes... lol... looks like just socks, if any look 1:24:30
Barefoot quantum physics
dogs out for quantum mechanics
I was not born at the time, so unfortunately no.
One of these days I'll work out a way of saying *_time_* and *distance* as well as *time* and *_distance_*.
0:14:26 The photons are identical therefore at the base of all we are all identical and only the "free will" will make us more beautiful? Just a guess..
illiterate to literate
I don't believe how incoherent this is...