@@isaacturnercreativeideas that is something that *must* happen. We just need some top scientists and blood samples from mosquitoes preserved in amber.
"So do I!" That's it, Joe. You are now officially one of my favorite people to watch on TH-cam! You're smart, concise and easy to listen to all at once. It's a rare combination.
@@carpathianhermit7228 Oh, that's kind of theory that can explain everything without explaining anything. How would "simulation" solve the fact that the first pair of photons end up being polarized because their counterparts are polarized, which prevents interference? No, of course, we can speculate, that there's probably an algorithm that calculates the universe infinite time ahead on each step of Plank's time for each particle, but don't you think it's too much to ask?
I'm a filmmaker and a few years ago while shooting a documentary I used the analogy of the uncertainty principle to describe how you can't film someone without affecting their behavior. I feel even better about it knowing that you use it too!
TRUE FACTS ! 📽 📸 people definitely behave differently when they know they're being filmed [even security surveillance has proven that fact 😅] I'm a Photographer & Videographer, mainly been doing Event Photography at raves for the past 14 years, and because of the fact that people act differently when in front of a camera, I became a "self-proclaimed Master" of Candid Photography ! Because catching people in the element is my favoriteeee ! 😻
@@SuperLusername Are they really being 'filmed' ? People are using digital format for quite awhile now. They are being 'recorded'. It's a video, not film. It's a recording, not footage. Just saying.
Humans should not keep pets. It is essentially slavery of a lower lifeform. The animal has no choice, often no balls, no true freedom and is trained to please.
I'm sort of comfortable these days with quantum physics not making sense, I just recognise that the human brain only understands linear time and three dimensional reality, which is likely not the whole picture, so we need mathematical hacks to translate actual reality. Also if I understand correctly, photons don't even experience time, they subjectively experience all of their existence at once, so time travel and cause/effect are irrelevant for them. Not that they think a great deal about time travel.
Finemann actually suggest once that there might be only one photon in existance going back and forth through time. Turned out to be wrong but still... :)
Problem is, the delayed choice quantum eraser should work in this way also if You consider quantum particles with mass and that therefore actually "experience" time...
I'm not sure but this might have been tested with other particles like electrons too. I think it applies to any particles in a superposition and entangled state. Electrons, protons and atoms certainly don't travel at the speed of light so they do experience time in the traditional sense. So in theory, anything in a superposition would experience this bizarre effect, even macroscopic objects, assuming you can set them into a superposition.
“Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.” ― Rick Cook
"I bet 10% of you right now have your hand on your pants watching this." Actually waving a plastic pipe around pretending it's a sword. But, yeah, fair enough.
Hey Joe... somewhere in the past couple of years I heard a story of photons from distant stars being incorporated into the double slit or quantum eraser experiment. That light traveled light years to get to earth and still changed due to observation. Could you research that and maybe do a video on that? This is fascinating stuff! Thank you for hard work!
Simple. All particles and all matter exist as a waveform before the fact of observation by a human. The fact of observation makes it a particle. Animals can not do it, by the way. It's been tried, actually.
@@sd789sd so... whoever is observing has to be aware that they are observing, and that they are observing the way the light will react? Like, what about say... a 3 yr old child that doesnt know what they're supposed to do?
@@SeeMeRolling Nope. It is a fact of observation itself. Has to be a human though. 3 years old will do if we somehow make 3 years old interested enough to watch. )) it is our attention that manifests energy as matter. If you serious, there are couple books you can read. )
Contemplating my 1st tattoo for 15 years now. The interference pattern seems timeless and beautiful in a simple way. Turns out having my son a year ago put this image on my body. Naturally. They’re called stretch marks 😁
@Sticky Steve Mine are just from when I grew fat as a kid, not much honor in that other than honoring all those who came before us who gave us something close to abundance I guess.
@@texasdeeslinglead2401 Stretch marks absolutely destroyed my wife's self esteem after our first child. It still bothers her badly to this day but there's nothing I can do to help her feel any better about it. Just have to wait until we have the technology to erase them I guess.
Ok, just stick with me a minute and hear me out.... "Dancers With Joe" Twice weekly youtube channel where Joe gives pro tips for all the latest dance moves. Total winner. It sells itself.
Hi Joe. Hi everyone else. I want to say thank you. Thanks for you, and for what you are doing here (with all your work). To share, to educate, to encourage, to be creative, to entertain, to boldly embrace your gifts and make this such an impassioned vocation... to care. To me, this very certainly is purposeful. Your life is purposeful Joe, and you are an inspiration. I may not be remembering well, but do I have it right that your wife is a teacher? If so, thanks for her giftedness as well. I mentioned you being an encourager because you are, and I have always believed that is one of the very most important things humans can be for one another. You mention “ love you guys” at the end of these videos, and I know you do. Again, thank you. I love learning!!!
He says that he used to enjoy the idea that human consciousness can effect the universe but then attempts to debunk that theory (despite there actually being much more evidence than he addresses to support the concept, like groups of people meditating to effect a random number generator consistently). Even going so far as calling it "woo", as if to say it's ridiculous and unintelligent to believe after his supposed debunking. In which, he says that it's the act of measuring that is causing the collapse of the wave function and that consciousness isn't required, despite never actually providing any information that would prove that. He even shows recognition that he can't prove it in the process of debunking.
Shouting at a lake causes things to happen, even if it’s just scaring fish into moving, which alters the state of the lake, and by extension, would alter whatever measurement you get if you measured the lake as a whole. Consciousness, not just in humans, but as a fundamental force, may very well affect the quantum world in a similar way, such that it doesn’t directly effect the macro world, but does so indirectly.
@@ismayonnaiseaninstrument8700 Sadly we weren't talking about shouting at a lake. We were talking about the effect of our thoughts, which science keeps showing more and more actually do effect our surroundings. But he was denying this evidence's validity. Just try the rice experiment and tell me thoughts and emotions have no effect on anything outside our body.
I think you are absolutely correct. Only render it when someone is focused on it, otherwise just use an approximation and you can cut down on the computation load.
... those legs are a quantum thing ..he does and doesn't have them ..or, they could be the property of StreXcorp ..or, as the most biggest thinker would say ..there's no way to know, nobody knows *chuckle *chuckle
The Quantum Eraser is definitely one of those phenomenon that cues "The Twilight Zone" music in your mind as you try to wrap your head around it. A great description of it can be found in Dr. Brian Greene's "The Fabric of the Cosmos", especially pages 191-199. (Unfortunately, it wasn't covered at all in the Nova movie of his book.). Great stuff!!
Some would say say information has no weight. It's just a pattern. What if light, just like information isn't a things, just a pattern. Or maybe I'm overthinking it... :-)
I never do this for TH-cam videos but I have come back to this one so many times just due to the crazy nature of the video and how well you present the information I’ve heard many people on this site explain this experiment but in my opinion none have executed it to this level
Sadly, he got it wrong, so you are pointing people to bad information. The pattern on the screen does NOT change depending on what happens to the entangled partner. Their states are entangled and you can see correlation when you measure everything later, but it doesn't work like he described here.
I can't tell you enough how much I enjoy your videos! I think I watch some of your content every day. I find that the casual conversational tone and humor combined with the layman like yet very informed way you present all sorts of topics is refreshing and enjoyable to watch. Well done, Sir.
Finally a confirmation that when you observe the particle going through the slit (collapsing the wave function) you need to hit it with another particle to observe it. I've asked this question dozens of times and nobody (even the "experts") confirm that yes you are disturbing the particle, they always gave me another complex explanation that made no sense (probably because they didn't understand it well enough). One of the biggest problems with the double slit experiment is the experiment itself not being explained properly (e.g. how the detector works). Well done, thanks! It all makes more sense - a particle will behave as a wave of probability until it interacts with another particle (and the information of the interaction is maintained!...)
I don't see a question there. It's a little difficult to answer a question that hasn't been asked. Both Relativity and Quantum Mechanics require that in order to exist, an object must interact with the universe. It must engage in one or more of the four fundamental physical interactions: Strong Nuclear Force, Weal Nuclear Force, EM, and Gravity, or it just is not real. An object comes into existence when it is realized, for example, in a Hawking interaction at the event horizon of a black hole. Let's think of perspective, for a moment. We are creatures of electrons and mass, so to us the universe, although quite sparse, is alive with gravity, chemistry, and light. Consider the perspective of a Neutrino, though. To it, Gravity is almost non-existent. It only feels the effects of Gravity to any noticeable affect near a Neutron Star or Black Hole. Light doesn't exist at all, and we humans, even the entire Earth are so ghostly as to be almost imaginary phantoms. Stars are a bit like fluffy clouds: definitely there and not totally insubstantial, but more like a low density foam than a massive object. Our aforementioned friends the Neutron Stars are definitely quite solid, and while a black hole probably can't tear a Neutrino apart the way it can a human body, or even an atom, it is still a daunting object. To exist, then, is to be affected by some force. A force, however, is taken to be an exchange of Gauge Bosons. When one charged particle passes another, its path is altered by their electric and magnetic field interactions, mediated by virtual photons. We can infer the position and momentum of the charged particle by observing the particle's effect on the other particles near it. In doing so, however, we alter the very things we wish to measure, since the object not only affects the test particles, but the test particles also affect the object in question. In this scenario, we are not observing the object directly, but rather through its affect on other objects. The point is, whether the interaction we observe is direct or indirect, the fact the object exists means it not only affects the universe, but it is also affected by the universe at each and every interaction. The fact is there is no such thing as a direct observation, but If we want to observe the object a bit more directly than inferring its properties from the effects on the rest of the universe, we can employ a real Vector Boson, rather than a virtual one. (We can, of course, also employ collisions with non-gauge particles, but we can set that aside for now.) Any Vector Boson might be employed, depending upon the nature of the object, but let's just talk about light. If we want to know the position of a particle, we can send out a barrage of photons and see which one bounces back, pinpointing the particle. That, or if the particle is self-luminescent, we can just wait for it to emit a photon, and see from where the photon came. There are two problems, however. The first is the photon has a finite spatial extent quantified by its wavelength. We can only pinpoint the particle's position at the time it emitted / reflected the photon with an accuracy no better than the wavelength of the photon. If the photon has a wavelength of 1000nm, then we only know the position of the particle to within 1000nm. In order to nail down the particle's position better than that, we must employ a photon of shorter wavelength. Practical matters may intervene, but theoretically there is no finite limit to how accurately we can measure the position of the particle. That brings up the second problem. Even if the particle was at rest when it emitted / reflected the photon, it isn't any longer. By conservation of momentum, we know the particle's momentum must change after interacting with the photon. What's more, the amount of change in momentum depends upon the momentum of the photon. The greater the momentum of the photon, the greater the change in the particle's momentum. Since the particle's position cannot be known precisely, this also means the momentum cannot be known precisely. Furthermore, the shorter the wavelength of the photon, the greater the uncertainty of the momentum of the particle. This leads directly to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, but the point here is the observational limits are not just an empirical hardship, but are in fact the fundamental nature of the universe, and of space-time itself. In the very deepest sense, reality *IS* observation.
I don't see a question there. It's a little difficult to answer a question that hasn't been asked. Both Relativity and Quantum Mechanics require that in order to exist, an object must interact with the universe. It must engage in one or more of the four fundamental physical interactions: Strong Nuclear Force, Weal Nuclear Force, EM, and Gravity, or it just is not real. An object comes into existence when it is realized, for example, in a Hawking interaction at the event horizon of a black hole. Let's think of perspective, for a moment. We are creatures of electrons and mass, so to us the universe, although quite sparse, is alive with gravity, chemistry, and light. Consider the perspective of a Neutrino, though. To it, Gravity is almost non-existent. It only feels the effects of Gravity to any noticeable affect near a Neutron Star or Black Hole. Light doesn't exist at all, and we humans, even the entire Earth are so ghostly as to be almost imaginary phantoms. Stars are a bit like fluffy clouds: definitely there and not totally insubstantial, but more like a low density foam than a massive object. Our aforementioned friends the Neutron Stars are definitely quite solid, and while a black hole probably can't tear a Neutrino apart the way it can a human body, or even an atom, it is still a daunting object. To exist, then, is to be affected by some force. A force, however, is taken to be an exchange of Gauge Bosons. When one charged particle passes another, its path is altered by their electric and magnetic field interactions, mediated by virtual photons. We can infer the position and momentum of the charged particle by observing the particle's effect on the other particles near it. In doing so, however, we alter the very things we wish to measure, since the object not only affects the test particles, but the test particles also affect the object in question. In this scenario, we are not observing the object directly, but rather through its affect on other objects. The point is, whether the interaction we observe is direct or indirect, the fact the object exists means it not only affects the universe, but it is also affected by the universe at each and every interaction. The fact is there is no such thing as a direct observation, but If we want to observe the object a bit more directly than inferring its properties from the effects on the rest of the universe, we can employ a real Vector Boson, rather than a virtual one. (We can, of course, also employ collisions with non-gauge particles, but we can set that aside for now.) Any Vector Boson might be employed, depending upon the nature of the object, but let's just talk about light. If we want to know the position of a particle, we can send out a barrage of photons and see which one bounces back, pinpointing the particle. That, or if the particle is self-luminescent, we can just wait for it to emit a photon, and see from where the photon came. There are two problems, however. The first is the photon has a finite spatial extent quantified by its wavelength. We can only pinpoint the particle's position at the time it emitted / reflected the photon with an accuracy no better than the wavelength of the photon. If the photon has a wavelength of 1000nm, then we only know the position of the particle to within 1000nm. In order to nail down the particle's position better than that, we must employ a photon of shorter wavelength. Practical matters may intervene, but theoretically there is no finite limit to how accurately we can measure the position of the particle. That brings up the second problem. Even if the particle was at rest when it emitted / reflected the photon, it isn't any longer. By conservation of momentum, we know the particle's momentum must change after interacting with the photon. What's more, the amount of change in momentum depends upon the momentum of the photon. The greater the momentum of the photon, the greater the change in the particle's momentum. Since the particle's position cannot be known precisely, this also means the momentum cannot be known precisely. Furthermore, the shorter the wavelength of the photon, the greater the uncertainty of the momentum of the particle. This leads directly to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, but the point here is the observational limits are not just an empirical hardship, but are in fact the fundamental nature of the universe, and of space-time itself. In the very deepest sense, reality *IS* observation.
Thank you for this comment. I was confused. By "observe", I thought he meant "to look", but the sensors were actually interacting with the beam of light in order to measure it. Now, it makes sense that it would behave differently under "observation".
Interference while measurement doesn’t explain or account for the strange behavior that occurs during the experiments that measure and then “forget” the measurements. Though measured and interfered with, the light particles somehow reacquire superposition, which is plain nuts.
if an entangled particle can affect the other instantly through space it makes sense it can do it through time - time is another dimension much like space, we just seem to be moving at c through it.
Did they try the experiment where they split the beams but also without the cameras, so they'd be able to see if it was the splitting itself causing the collapse? That would have been really helpful.
Q. What's the difference between an automobile mechanic and a quantum mechanic? A. A quantum mechanic can get his car into the garage without opening the door.
Even if consciousness has no special role, it is the last step in the process. And as you say, effect determines cause. So how could it not be affecting the outcome, unless you think consciousness is not a physical system...
Actually he is thinking, "I was going to tell him the answer to Quantum Physics if he took me for a walk like he promised but oh no, he just had to start recording a video again. Welp thats it, I am instead going to share it with the cat, not that the cat cares really".
Not a smart guy here, but I think since splitting the entangled particles failed they had to split it a couples more to change the point of origin. Splitting one entangled particle will not technically separate them as they act like they share the same WiFi signal. But detecting half of the particle on the measuring device does not give them any new result since the other half is still reacting no different. Kind of like someone pretending to be 2 different people on 4chan but in the end they're just using the same ip address and you can see that. So why not he use his computer with his WiFi. Pull out his tablet and pair it with his neighbors WiFi and then on top of that use his phone with its mobile data. It looks like multiple people are sh!t posting but little do I know, it's all synced up to one device. I would not know that so I would go on arguing with 3 people not ever knowing its just one.
When I was small, grandma told me, *Matter is just an illusion* Then I studied science and it seemed like its only matter that matters. Then I heard about Quantum physics. Then I knew grandma was right.
@@informitas0117 There is a theory that on the bell-curve of human intellectual evolution; the minority of people who are most highly developed will most likely be found in mental institutions. Well, that was back when mental institutions existed. Now they might be in prisons.
I learned two things: 1) wave form collapse has nothing to do with observer (consciousness) and is entirely a byproduct of measuring. 2) when we erase the information after measuring wave form doesn't collapse and interference pattern remains intact. All crystal clear now.
It is not actually accurate. There's an element missing. Look up The Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Debunked by Sabine Hossenfelder video. She explains the wave patterns from each side when combined produces the full scattering appearance because they're slightly apart. The "no interference pattern" is actually two interference patterns combined together, slightly offset, to produce a full field. That's something Joe and many others missed.
coffee didn't help me at all, And I didn't think the segue worked, it was incredibly clumsy. And I hate BigMacs. we're so totally different. It's like you're a particle and I'm a waveform. (BTW Segway is the two wheeled electric scooter. Segue is the word for a transition in presentations)
@@diyeana No problem. Understandable mistake. The segway is something you ride. The company that makes it used the off spelling as a play on words. A segue takes you from one subject to another. The Segway takes you from one place to another.
@@etahydri That's assuming that subjective experience CAN be "rendered". Maybe it's not possible to simulate consciousness, or it's extremely hard to do so. Anyway even if possible, this would still be prohibitively expensive to compute.. I mean, to simulate a single experience of a human in 2019 you would have to go through the evolution of the whole observable universe up until that point. So what would be the difference from the "real thing"? None.
@@crownspecialties there's absolutely no way to prove or disprove it without the "aliens" actually interfering from outside. I'm not sure why you find it laughable. You have no evidence to disprove it, and that fact should make it a little humbling. What if the Bible (Either Hebrew scriptures or New Testament, take your pick) might be about beings coming to interfere in our simulation. Almost any religion can be re-interpreted this way. Think about it.
Cuvtixo D Believe in any crazy thing besides the obvious, that we and the universe were created by god. Of course I can’t disprove aliens and I never said they don’t exist. If Aliens do exist on some other planet who started saying that they were the ones that created us, that’s so far-fetched. And why do we need to live in a computer simulation, this is real life you’re talking about a movie. We have zero proof that Aliens exist and tons and tons of proof beyond common sense that we were created by something intelligent. We have the Bible!! The Word of God. We are a design. This universe is a design. It didn’t just happen accidentally. Something intelligent planned this out then meet us. And that something is the God of the Bible. But most people don’t like what the Bible says most people just want to be their own guards and seek sinful pleasures to obtain temporary happiness.
Yeah... I love the smell of melted brain in the morning! First lesson, when jumping in pools, make sure it’s the deep end! Wait...what? Everyone get the hell out of the pool, it’s time to drain the magical water...going back to bed, my brain hurts.
I think another good way to understand how measurement affects the properties of a quantum particle is by remembering that these particles are waves, and all of our methods of measurement use some sort of wave in order to detect the particle (like an electromagnetic wave) so there is guaranteed to be some kind of interference between the measurement wave and the particles "wave". The issue is understanding that the "waving" motion of the particle is actually a probability wave, not anything that actually propagates through space.
Watched this video today and I agree that you do have an authentic feel and it feels like I'm listening to a friend explain things in a easy to understand way. I love to watch your videos while I do my makeup, eat, and relax. I always learn something new!
You exist, it existed to you the moment your pretty little eyes viewed it and inevitably measured it. Now it exists to me as well, have a wonderful day ❤
3 years ago, i commented on a video of joe's.. back then he literally had no subscribers.. i acturally did a quick search, and i found my old comment.. back then i commented this: Keep making videos.. you got this shit figured out.. professional videos, im pretty sure this channel will get alot of subscribers.. (multiple hundred thousands, if not millions) And look now.. he has over half a million subs.. i have a feeling that in a year, he will have like 2-3 million, cause once you get to some hundreds of thousands of subs, things only pick up.. then, somewhere between 3-12 million, it will come to almost a complete stop, depending on the channel theme and such.. i could see this channel ending up around 5-6, and then slowing down dramatically.. but in the end, what counts the most is views.. although views are also somewhat based on subscriber count (more subs = more relevance in the algorythm = bigger chance of being in the recommended - Although subs are only part of the equation) This is a link to my old comment btw: th-cam.com/video/BROT8qar8QY/w-d-xo.html&lc=UgjeTcacBK0DtngCoAEC
All the confusion and “woo woo” has to do with interpretation of what’s happening. This is why Schrodinger’s cat examples so great it’s not an explanation he was taking a shot at the ridiculousness of the interpretation
Well, what's your interpretation? The particles more or less take similar paths, the only difference being that in some cases we can't tell which was path was taken and in some, we can. The physical systems in both cases are basically the same, so what actually changes from the perspective of the photon that makes it act differently?
From the photons perspective the interaction with the physical experiment and the physical means of the observer detecting the photon. In general what I’m saying is that we don’t “know” squat. The theory is either incomplete or wrong.
Even more generally, just because the maths work doesn’t mean it’s right in describing what’s happening in our physical world. If a math equation doesn’t have a corresponding physical explanation that can be pointed at then I am automatically skeptical. ( constants and other non physical values)
@@calebstone22 In engineering, the same concept is referred to as blackboxing (reproducing the output of an unknown system without the fundamental understanding of the underlying logic) as opposed to whiteboxing (reproducing the logic of a system by its design document or a description of its logic).
@Alpha Centauri totally agree with everything you said. Even though I was 96.4% joking, simulation theory is still fascinating, and arguably mathematically probable, so "ugh, the last universe took HOURS to simulate, turn quantum certainty off for this run and we can knock one more out before we go home for the day" would be an elegant, Occam-approved, and amusing explanation. Not remotely close to "proof" of course ;)
@@maxine_q Something that isn't technological at all. It might be explained by science, sure, but if it has a purely biological source, it's not technology.
@@Nanokarp no it's still technology. Living creatures are technically machines. Just biological ones. Also if science can explain it's mechanism then it's still science and still natural. Magic would have to fall outside of the natural universe. It couldn't be explained in any way.
@@anand.suralkar The momentum the light carries doesn't mean it has mass, it means it has energy. Even though mass and energy are somewhat interchangeable, it's not accurate in this case because in order to move at the speed of light you need to have either no mass or infinite energy.
@@armchairgravy5148 energy doesn't have mass. What book are you reading lol There's a few specific reasons a photon in a mirrored box seems to weigh something vs. a photon in an unbound state. The main reason is relativistic mass vs. rest mass. However even photons with zero net momentum still seem to weigh something in a mirrored box despite not having any real mass.
Yes, some kinks of quantum physics do sound like cashing or other approximations we do to simplify our own computer calculation. The Problem is that this idea is contrary to the mentioned non-temporality. If you like in other answer descirbed, used the approximations for un observed objects, you should get an interference pattern for the delayed choice experiment. Except this simulation somehow isn't simulated one a linear timeline and is able to influence it's own past.
The act of measuring collapses the waveform, therefore consciousness observation is collapsing the waveform. Measurement doesn't exist without a consciousness to create it. The act of measuring is a conscious act.
Believing the universe acts weird when it acts outside our expectations places too much value on the expectations we have formed in our tiny, tiny existence. That which u r doing now, is what we have been doing for centuries, which is to fill in what we don't know with what we have experienced (we know about computers and programs, ancient man knew about hammers, and the sound hammers made. Thunder also made a loud sound, therefore thunder was a giant human (a god) with a giant hammer. But there are no hammers in the sky. And chances are there are none of the things mankind has dreamed up underlying reality.)
I would love to see the quantum eraser result stored encrypted on a computer then auto deleted, does it generate an interference pattern ? since no one can dycrypt it before it's erased
How about a simple anology like "When you measure of charge of a battery you take charge away from it to do so thus altering the state of the battery."
Didn't you notice? The dog (what's his name?) existed in this clip BOTH forward AND back in time, with no canine entropy (cantropy) differential!!! Only looking at the dog, you cannot determine whether the film moved forward, backwards or was stationary!
Be careful, interference patterns observed at D0 are not the same, they are shifted at position x. If you add both data you would have the clumping pattern observed at D3. The clue is that entangled photons at BBO are phase opposite, which will give at 4 combinations arriving at D0 (25% each: up-up, up-down, down-up, down-down); basically, 50% of that "red path" photon will have the same phase of the "blue path" and 50% chance opposite phase between them. That is the reason why interference patterns are shifted in x, 50% of the data will show one interference and 50% of the other data will interfere on the other position x; the high frequency of one interference coincides with the low frequency of the other; and vice versa. Now, on D3 or D4 there is no selection between phases, so the pattern observed is the addition of the two shifted interference pattern shifted on x, so... the interference will be mixed and the clumping pattern is expected. In D1 and D2 the difference or equality of phase will give only one detector for the same phase interference and the other detector for the opposite phase situation. So, on D1 and D2 interference patterns are independently observed. NO delay choice and quantum eraser from the future to the present !!
Ok... But how you explain the experiment at 8.41 with two detectors A and B that can be far away but you will always obtain no interference pattern in the screen if they are on. Seems like information goes back in time.
So when do we get to read your entire paper? And surely you have a theory on how to prove this without variables with the act of the observation removed? Let me know please. I think you may be on to something.🇺🇸💪🇺🇦🖕🇷🇺
Yes watch Sabine , the delayed choice quantum eraser was debunked 2 years ago by her and this tricked a lot of smart physicists. Even PBS Spacetime and Arvin Ash did a video about how he was wrong. Sabine does a video explaining it. When I watched it on Space time 7 years ago , I didn't really believe it and since the distances are relative , you could make the longer distance shorter by moving very fast and make the events happen before or after the particles hit the screen. There would be a way to send information back in time , which is not allowed.
One of the reasons that many do not "understand" quantum mechanics is that they cannot reconcile it with their "common sense" or "intuitive" view of the world. This has been a common problem with new insights in physics since the renaissance when physics started to over throw the Aristotelian physics that prevailed up until that time. Aristotelian physics was essentially based on common sense logical explanations of observations made with unaugmented human senses. For example, the heliocentric model of the solar system established by the work of Copernicus, Brahe, Kepler, and Galileo with a rotating and revolving moving earth defied one's every day observations which indicate that the earth is stationary, and were considered initially to be counterintuitive and impossible to reconcile with common sense and experience. Newton introduced field theory with his work on gravity, and this concept was later applied to electricity and magnetism, and is now an accepted cornerstone of classical physics. However, during the initial few hundred years of its development, field theory was widely viewed as a convenient, but non-physical and counterintuitive, mathematical description. As this Wikipedia article en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_philosophy_of_field_theory states "Despite the success of these theories in making accurate numerical predictions of a wide range of phenomena, they were generally seen as deficient as natural philosophies of mechanics, since they were all essentially action-at-a-distance mechanisms. In the context of the development of field theory, the fact that a function could be written to give the force per unit mass, charge, or current for each point in space was just a mathematical construct. It was seen as untenable on metaphysical grounds[2][3] that a force be exerted across empty space, and hence these force laws were assumed to be merely descriptive and not explanatory." Hmmm, seems very similar to the criticisms leveled at quantum theory. Another reason that quantum theory is misunderstood by many is that the popular treatments tend to promulgate erroneous conceptions that are not a part of quantum theory. For example, the illustration of the experiments portrayed in Joe Scott's video shows little balls moving in straight lines through the apparatus to represent photons propagating through the apparatus. This is not at all in accordance with quantum theory. In quantum theory, everything (photons, neutrons, protons, electrons, neutrinos, muons, etc.) propagates as probability amplitude waves in accordance with the Dirac equation (i.e., the relativistic generalization of the Schrodinger equation). There are no hard little particles streaming on defined trajectories at any time through the apparatus. According to quantum theory, particles exist only as the results of measurements. It is this false conception of particles streaming through space on defined trajectories that leads to the confusion and misunderstanding expressed in such seemingly paradoxical questions as how can a particle interfere with itself or with another particle that was emitted long before or after it. The other aspect of quantum waves that is not often in presentations for public consumption is that they are infinitely extended in spacetime which together with linear superposition of these spatially and temporally nonlocal waves leads naturally in the mathematics of quantum theory to entanglement. The linear superposition of quantum waves which are nonlocal in spacetime completely explains the delayed choice with quantum eraser experiment, but with one posited, but unexplained phenomenon which is the physical collapse of the wave function to a particle as the result of a measurement. The mechanism of the wave function collapse resulting from a measurement is the fundamental phenomenon in quantum mechanics, if it actually exists, that no one yet has sufficiently explained nor understood. Also, the use of quantum waves travelling backwards in time and the concept of retrocausality has a long history in quantum theory. The most well-known example may be Feynman's model of antimatter particles as normal matter particles moving backwards in time. There are, however, other major examples of retrocausality used in quantum theory as discussed at this link: plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-retrocausality/ Notice how the following excerpt from this link is eerily similar to the excerpt about initial criticisms of classical field theory above: "Quantum theory provides a framework for modern theoretical physics that enjoys enormous predictive and explanatory success. Yet, in view of the so-called “measurement problem”, there is no consensus on how physical reality can possibly be such that this framework has this success. The theory is thus an extremely well-functioning algorithm to predict and explain the results of observations, but no consensus on which kind of objective reality might plausibly underlie these observations." All of this is quite understandable to physicists who have studied quantum theory, but it is shocking to most people's (including to many physicist's) common sense and intuition. That is why Bohr's statement quoted in Joe's video is correct, whereas the possibly apocryphal Feynman quote is not. I submit that this is, however, no different from the same shock to common sense engendered by previous revolutionary ideas in physics at their inception such as the heliocentric model with a moving earth, classical field theory, and Einstein's theories of special and general relativity.
Very good and true👍 Drift away from common sense and enjoy the beauty of QM. QM follow its own laws perfectly, without breaking the laws of our nature. At least not while we are looking.
Thank you. When I first started watching this video, I thought that you'd lose me along the way. But you didn't, and that counts for a lot in my books. Well done. It's a complex subject, but the humor you've thrown in simply said 'hey, I'm not here to bore you to death, after all'. Additional trivia: Feynman, when asked by a reporter to explain the work for which he got the Nobel prize, apparently retorted that if he could explain it (presumably simple and concise enough to make it into news), then he wouldn't have won it. Absolutely brilliant! He was also the one who poignantly used a piece of rubber dunked into a glass of ice cold water to demonstrate how rubber loses its elasticity in low temperatures, and thus prove the O-ring seals failure on the solid fuel boosters as the cause of the Challenger space shuttle.
For my money, Joe, do more challenging videos like this, less on the straight forward physical world. Very interesting content and not well covered on TH-cam
7:17 Gotta say, the dogs lack of reaction would suggest that this is indeed Joe's natural state.
I didn't even notice the dog until you mentioned him, that's hilarious :D
The dog is trying very hard not to notice Joe's quantum state, so Joe can get the shot on camera. Good doggy!:)
Hahahahha XD genius
@@angelarch5352 Good one son!
Some dogs are just reserved and quiet in nature. Rest assured, it still is greatly amused while looking at him.
Ooooh, I get it.
British Narrator: "He didn't, in fact, get it."
I read that as Attenborough.
Even though you said British, I still read it as Morgan Freeman lol
Morgan Attenborough
@@isaacturnercreativeideas that is something that *must* happen. We just need some top scientists and blood samples from mosquitoes preserved in amber.
This have me some Stanley Parable vibes
Tfw your hand is both in and out of your pants at the same time until Joe looks
Joetinger's Pants?
@@bagelmaster2
I am so so sorry that I can only like that once!
😂👍🏆
✋👇👖
Can the hand be inside if there are no pants?
@@rgerber
Well, yes, but then the questions become "inside what?" and "does Joe want to know enough to look?"
Schrödinger's Hand lol
"So do I!" That's it, Joe. You are now officially one of my favorite people to watch on TH-cam! You're smart, concise and easy to listen to all at once. It's a rare combination.
I love the way your dog was looking at you in "your normal state" like 'yup that's my Joe'.
Charles Uwakwe lol just noticed the puppy 🐶 ^.^
Quantum physics - that nervous feeling that you’re just ‘missing something’ super obvious
Simulation
Yup. Like measurement error.
Yes! That's exactly how I often feel.
@@carpathianhermit7228
Oh, that's kind of theory that can explain everything without explaining anything.
How would "simulation" solve the fact that the first pair of photons end up being polarized because their counterparts are polarized, which prevents interference?
No, of course, we can speculate, that there's probably an algorithm that calculates the universe infinite time ahead on each step of Plank's time for each particle, but don't you think it's too much to ask?
the secret is ... if science can not measure it, they say it does not exist. This experiment prove sciences = scienctism.
Particle conspiracy theorist: "They're watching us. Quick! Don't interfere! " LOL
😂
SPLIT UP!
Physics joke ftw
bartender says "what'll it be?"
A tachyon walks into a bar.
@@zaphodbeeblebrox2817 we are honored by your presence
I'm a filmmaker and a few years ago while shooting a documentary I used the analogy of the uncertainty principle to describe how you can't film someone without affecting their behavior. I feel even better about it knowing that you use it too!
You can if they dont know they are being filmed
@@SuperLusername lol wonderfully creepy comment haha
TRUE FACTS ! 📽 📸 people definitely behave differently when they know they're being filmed [even security surveillance has proven that fact 😅] I'm a Photographer & Videographer, mainly been doing Event Photography at raves for the past 14 years, and because of the fact that people act differently when in front of a camera, I became a "self-proclaimed Master" of Candid Photography ! Because catching people in the element is my favoriteeee ! 😻
@@SuperLusername Are they really being 'filmed' ? People are using digital format for quite awhile now. They are being 'recorded'. It's a video, not film. It's a recording, not footage. Just saying.
@@your_average_joe5781 ok average Joe
Ha, joke's on you Joe. I'm not wearing any pants.
Living your best life. Love it.
Zedds Dead Baby
Mmmmm... ok, that escalated quickly :)
As soon as i read that my pants disappeared , wth?
@@paulgodden4974 Quantum mechanics!
I mean, Uhm. MAGIC!
@@Akira-Aerins Would love to see a video on the Pribram-Bohm Hypothesis
7:17 I love how the dog is just casually watching its human, like he does this all the time
The dog is used to Scott acting nutty, in a way no sensible dog would act. Is Scott's dog smarter than Scott?
The dog is like: oh boy... my pet has its crazy day again
Noticing the dog watching makes the whole scene extra funny imho. :-)
Humans should not keep pets. It is essentially slavery of a lower lifeform. The animal has no choice, often no balls, no true freedom and is trained to please.
I take it as proof that yes, he does act like that off camera.
It's been a century and they haven't fixed this glitch in the simulation yet? Smh
Yes agent : Smith will take care of this , just as soon as he has taken care of the rebel "Neo"
Yeah the devs are really behind on updates. Like half of the players are still experience the chronic depression bug and it's soooooo annoying. 🙄
At best the devs are furloughed at this point smh
It’s in the backlog somewhere
They will unlikely fix this one. Maybe fixing it would cause more problems than it solves.
Thank you, Joe, for demonstrating how DMX is intrinsically linked to understanding quantum physics.
Lol the juxtaposition of this and the video of DMX actually using a computer.
I'm sort of comfortable these days with quantum physics not making sense, I just recognise that the human brain only understands linear time and three dimensional reality, which is likely not the whole picture, so we need mathematical hacks to translate actual reality.
Also if I understand correctly, photons don't even experience time, they subjectively experience all of their existence at once, so time travel and cause/effect are irrelevant for them. Not that they think a great deal about time travel.
Finemann actually suggest once that there might be only one photon in existance going back and forth through time. Turned out to be wrong but still... :)
Or in quantum world the time itself is subject to tunnel effect / is quantizied.
Unfortunately it still sounds crazy to tell people that you experience/sense time non-linearly.
Problem is, the delayed choice quantum eraser should work in this way also if You consider quantum particles with mass and that therefore actually "experience" time...
I'm not sure but this might have been tested with other particles like electrons too. I think it applies to any particles in a superposition and entangled state. Electrons, protons and atoms certainly don't travel at the speed of light so they do experience time in the traditional sense. So in theory, anything in a superposition would experience this bizarre effect, even macroscopic objects, assuming you can set them into a superposition.
The way his dog watching Joe when he is dancing like that is priceless!
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools."
Quote of the year
“Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.”
― Rick Cook
"No single thing abides; and all things are fucked up." - PKD
@@burningpapersun1 Other than The Dude. The Dude always abides.
Justin D. Whitehead itself a reference to this th-cam.com/video/5rlFiEe6S24/w-d-xo.html
This is my favorite Joe Scott video, it blows my mind every time I watch it. Quality content, Good Sir.
"I bet 10% of you right now have your hand on your pants watching this."
Actually waving a plastic pipe around pretending it's a sword. But, yeah, fair enough.
Hand down your pants*
THATS cool.
Lmao, I just like to drink beer and watch his videos. No hands in my pants, but I could use a shower. Lol
To be fair i was scratching my balls like a minute ago
seriously, who wears pants?
This is the best answers with joe you've ever made! I've never laughed so hard learning quantum mechanics, i almost lost my mind.
Up in here?
@@joescott up in here.
@@joescott sabine hossenfelder has a nice little video that explains the mistake everyone has been making about the quantum eraser.
"They" be like: *Lol look at these humans, trying to understand the glitch.*
😂
@@adamflores4206 lol
vibe check
But it's not a glitch. It's just something we don't understand yet.
"They," I imagine, LOL at a lot when watching us.
Hey Joe... somewhere in the past couple of years I heard a story of photons from distant stars being incorporated into the double slit or quantum eraser experiment. That light traveled light years to get to earth and still changed due to observation. Could you research that and maybe do a video on that? This is fascinating stuff! Thank you for hard work!
Simple. All particles and all matter exist as a waveform before the fact of observation by a human. The fact of observation makes it a particle. Animals can not do it, by the way. It's been tried, actually.
@@sd789sd so... whoever is observing has to be aware that they are observing, and that they are observing the way the light will react?
Like, what about say... a 3 yr old child that doesnt know what they're supposed to do?
@@SeeMeRolling Nope. It is a fact of observation itself. Has to be a human though. 3 years old will do if we somehow make 3 years old interested enough to watch. )) it is our attention that manifests energy as matter. If you serious, there are couple books you can read. )
@@sd789sd sir, what are those books?
@@sd789sd But what about animals that have the intelligence of a 5 year old human?
Perhaps a crow, or an elephant?
Delayed release of the episode on Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser? I see you, Joe. I see you.
Jeremy Kolassa Great, you've collapsed the episode, happy ?
@@tomf3150 Nice! We can non-temporality in action
I wish I could say I was that clever. I was actually waiting for the sponsor to approve the sponsor message.
Contemplating my 1st tattoo for 15 years now. The interference pattern seems timeless and beautiful in a simple way. Turns out having my son a year ago put this image on my body. Naturally. They’re called stretch marks 😁
Get an iron and iron out the stretch marks
@Sticky Steve Mine are just from when I grew fat as a kid, not much honor in that other than honoring all those who came before us who gave us something close to abundance I guess.
😂 that's great
I wish I could truelly dive deep into this topic . It used to be a struggle for my wife . Now it's her mark maturity.
@@texasdeeslinglead2401 Stretch marks absolutely destroyed my wife's self esteem after our first child. It still bothers her badly to this day but there's nothing I can do to help her feel any better about it. Just have to wait until we have the technology to erase them I guess.
Humans: "let's measure light"
The universe: 🖕
Exactly, wise Plank
Lol love the name
All matter has particle and wave properties at the same time. You get the same results with electrons or protons in these experiments. FYI
Lmao
Hate to be old here, but what does that little block icon signify? Been seeing it around more and more.
Thanks
Ok, just stick with me a minute and hear me out....
"Dancers With Joe"
Twice weekly youtube channel where Joe gives pro tips for all the latest dance moves. Total winner. It sells itself.
Sign me in
Uh... Yes please!
Might I recommend subscribing to Lindybeige. He is full of random interestingness AND dance tips
Y'all gon' make me louse my mind!
Yes please
I didn’t understand one thing I just heard, and yet, I was thoroughly entertained 🍻.
that sums up joe :)
That means you understand it I think
I think I understand what he was saying....that doesn't mean what he said made any sense....quantum physics is *WEIRD.*
"if you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics"
That traveling back in time is my favorite!
I'm ashamed to say you were right about the hand in pants thing. It's cold in my room!
Phosphorus51 you gotta keep it warm 😄
Same here 😢
Same here, but was scratching... stuff...
10% you say 🤔
In my defense it was resting on my hip, not in my crotch.
Hi Joe. Hi everyone else. I want to say thank you. Thanks for you, and for what you are doing here (with all your work). To share, to educate, to encourage, to be creative, to entertain, to boldly embrace your gifts and make this such an impassioned vocation... to care. To me, this very certainly is purposeful. Your life is purposeful Joe, and you are an inspiration. I may not be remembering well, but do I have it right that your wife is a teacher? If so, thanks for her giftedness as well. I mentioned you being an encourager because you are, and I have always believed that is one of the very most important things humans can be for one another. You mention “ love you guys” at the end of these videos, and I know you do. Again, thank you. I love learning!!!
"I used to believe life had a purpose, but then I became a scientist." Nice...
@宇宙不思議な So you're saying that the purpose of life is science?
He says that he used to enjoy the idea that human consciousness can effect the universe but then attempts to debunk that theory (despite there actually being much more evidence than he addresses to support the concept, like groups of people meditating to effect a random number generator consistently). Even going so far as calling it "woo", as if to say it's ridiculous and unintelligent to believe after his supposed debunking. In which, he says that it's the act of measuring that is causing the collapse of the wave function and that consciousness isn't required, despite never actually providing any information that would prove that. He even shows recognition that he can't prove it in the process of debunking.
Actually life does have a purpose, we're all here to grow.
Shouting at a lake causes things to happen, even if it’s just scaring fish into moving, which alters the state of the lake, and by extension, would alter whatever measurement you get if you measured the lake as a whole.
Consciousness, not just in humans, but as a fundamental force, may very well affect the quantum world in a similar way, such that it doesn’t directly effect the macro world, but does so indirectly.
@@ismayonnaiseaninstrument8700 Sadly we weren't talking about shouting at a lake. We were talking about the effect of our thoughts, which science keeps showing more and more actually do effect our surroundings. But he was denying this evidence's validity. Just try the rice experiment and tell me thoughts and emotions have no effect on anything outside our body.
It's a "shortcut" the programmer took when he was making our simulation. We see this in videogames
Hey, that makes about as much sense as any of the leading explanations 🤷♂️
Actually very reasonable. Only calculate collapse wave functions when they matter, otherwise just use the mean value of stuff.
The simulation answer is a non-answer.
I think you are absolutely correct. Only render it when someone is focused on it, otherwise just use an approximation and you can cut down on the computation load.
Occlusion culling
In some ways this is your best post yet, Joe.
The act of meeting one neighbor automatically makes the other neighbor a stranger. Stranger is RIGHT!
"It's quantum fields, Joe! Wait! I mean it's Planck level synchronicity! You know: strings!"
@@WildBillCox13 Yeah. That's the ticket! :)
I learn best when analogies are applied and that "beach ball in a swimming pool" analogy is the best one I've heard. It really helped, thanks
I didn't know Joe had legs- - - mind BLOWN
... those legs are a quantum thing ..he does and doesn't have them ..or, they could be the property of StreXcorp ..or, as the most biggest thinker would say ..there's no way to know, nobody knows *chuckle *chuckle
There was a video about electric cars where he tried to hook up with a woman in the intro. He did have legs there
when i 1st saw that dance i was like "yup, Joe's got a few screws loose" & at the end of the video i was like "yup, Joe's remarkably restrained"
The Quantum Eraser is definitely one of those phenomenon that cues "The Twilight Zone" music in your mind as you try to wrap your head around it. A great description of it can be found in Dr. Brian Greene's "The Fabric of the Cosmos", especially pages 191-199. (Unfortunately, it wasn't covered at all in the Nova movie of his book.). Great stuff!!
I just bought that book, thanks!
Some would say say information has no weight. It's just a pattern.
What if light, just like information isn't a things, just a pattern.
Or maybe I'm overthinking it... :-)
@@autohmae If it is a pattern why does it takes the shape of a particle when measured?
@@autohmae A pattern is just another way of saying a wave form.
@@chrisfuller2069 Yeah, that's why I changed my tune at the end... I'm overthinking it.
I never do this for TH-cam videos but I have come back to this one so many times just due to the crazy nature of the video and how well you present the information I’ve heard many people on this site explain this experiment but in my opinion none have executed it to this level
Sadly, he got it wrong, so you are pointing people to bad information. The pattern on the screen does NOT change depending on what happens to the entangled partner. Their states are entangled and you can see correlation when you measure everything later, but it doesn't work like he described here.
@@Tony-dp1rl any reason I should believe you over him?
@@Tony-dp1rl also this was from a year ago are you okay ?
So what you’re telling us is...
We need to shoot comets through two slits to find Planet Nine.
Got it
got it.
Thanks, Kathy Newman.
:p
I believe this is the only thing for science should be working on
monkeygirl000
Thanks.
I low-key love myself!
Just don't observe which slit they went through.
I can't tell you enough how much I enjoy your videos! I think I watch some of your content every day. I find that the casual conversational tone and humor combined with the layman like yet very informed way you present all sorts of topics is refreshing and enjoyable to watch. Well done, Sir.
Finally a confirmation that when you observe the particle going through the slit (collapsing the wave function) you need to hit it with another particle to observe it. I've asked this question dozens of times and nobody (even the "experts") confirm that yes you are disturbing the particle, they always gave me another complex explanation that made no sense (probably because they didn't understand it well enough). One of the biggest problems with the double slit experiment is the experiment itself not being explained properly (e.g. how the detector works). Well done, thanks! It all makes more sense - a particle will behave as a wave of probability until it interacts with another particle (and the information of the interaction is maintained!...)
I don't see a question there. It's a little difficult to answer a question that hasn't been asked.
Both Relativity and Quantum Mechanics require that in order to exist, an object must interact with the universe. It must engage in one or more of the four fundamental physical interactions: Strong Nuclear Force, Weal Nuclear Force, EM, and Gravity, or it just is not real. An object comes into existence when it is realized, for example, in a Hawking interaction at the event horizon of a black hole. Let's think of perspective, for a moment. We are creatures of electrons and mass, so to us the universe, although quite sparse, is alive with gravity, chemistry, and light. Consider the perspective of a Neutrino, though. To it, Gravity is almost non-existent. It only feels the effects of Gravity to any noticeable affect near a Neutron Star or Black Hole. Light doesn't exist at all, and we humans, even the entire Earth are so ghostly as to be almost imaginary phantoms. Stars are a bit like fluffy clouds: definitely there and not totally insubstantial, but more like a low density foam than a massive object. Our aforementioned friends the Neutron Stars are definitely quite solid, and while a black hole probably can't tear a Neutrino apart the way it can a human body, or even an atom, it is still a daunting object.
To exist, then, is to be affected by some force. A force, however, is taken to be an exchange of Gauge Bosons. When one charged particle passes another, its path is altered by their electric and magnetic field interactions, mediated by virtual photons. We can infer the position and momentum of the charged particle by observing the particle's effect on the other particles near it. In doing so, however, we alter the very things we wish to measure, since the object not only affects the test particles, but the test particles also affect the object in question. In this scenario, we are not observing the object directly, but rather through its affect on other objects. The point is, whether the interaction we observe is direct or indirect, the fact the object exists means it not only affects the universe, but it is also affected by the universe at each and every interaction.
The fact is there is no such thing as a direct observation, but If we want to observe the object a bit more directly than inferring its properties from the effects on the rest of the universe, we can employ a real Vector Boson, rather than a virtual one. (We can, of course, also employ collisions with non-gauge particles, but we can set that aside for now.) Any Vector Boson might be employed, depending upon the nature of the object, but let's just talk about light. If we want to know the position of a particle, we can send out a barrage of photons and see which one bounces back, pinpointing the particle. That, or if the particle is self-luminescent, we can just wait for it to emit a photon, and see from where the photon came. There are two problems, however. The first is the photon has a finite spatial extent quantified by its wavelength. We can only pinpoint the particle's position at the time it emitted / reflected the photon with an accuracy no better than the wavelength of the photon. If the photon has a wavelength of 1000nm, then we only know the position of the particle to within 1000nm. In order to nail down the particle's position better than that, we must employ a photon of shorter wavelength. Practical matters may intervene, but theoretically there is no finite limit to how accurately we can measure the position of the particle.
That brings up the second problem. Even if the particle was at rest when it emitted / reflected the photon, it isn't any longer. By conservation of momentum, we know the particle's momentum must change after interacting with the photon. What's more, the amount of change in momentum depends upon the momentum of the photon. The greater the momentum of the photon, the greater the change in the particle's momentum. Since the particle's position cannot be known precisely, this also means the momentum cannot be known precisely. Furthermore, the shorter the wavelength of the photon, the greater the uncertainty of the momentum of the particle. This leads directly to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, but the point here is the observational limits are not just an empirical hardship, but are in fact the fundamental nature of the universe, and of space-time itself. In the very deepest sense, reality *IS* observation.
I don't see a question there. It's a little difficult to answer a question that hasn't been asked.
Both Relativity and Quantum Mechanics require that in order to exist, an object must interact with the universe. It must engage in one or more of the four fundamental physical interactions: Strong Nuclear Force, Weal Nuclear Force, EM, and Gravity, or it just is not real. An object comes into existence when it is realized, for example, in a Hawking interaction at the event horizon of a black hole. Let's think of perspective, for a moment. We are creatures of electrons and mass, so to us the universe, although quite sparse, is alive with gravity, chemistry, and light. Consider the perspective of a Neutrino, though. To it, Gravity is almost non-existent. It only feels the effects of Gravity to any noticeable affect near a Neutron Star or Black Hole. Light doesn't exist at all, and we humans, even the entire Earth are so ghostly as to be almost imaginary phantoms. Stars are a bit like fluffy clouds: definitely there and not totally insubstantial, but more like a low density foam than a massive object. Our aforementioned friends the Neutron Stars are definitely quite solid, and while a black hole probably can't tear a Neutrino apart the way it can a human body, or even an atom, it is still a daunting object.
To exist, then, is to be affected by some force. A force, however, is taken to be an exchange of Gauge Bosons. When one charged particle passes another, its path is altered by their electric and magnetic field interactions, mediated by virtual photons. We can infer the position and momentum of the charged particle by observing the particle's effect on the other particles near it. In doing so, however, we alter the very things we wish to measure, since the object not only affects the test particles, but the test particles also affect the object in question. In this scenario, we are not observing the object directly, but rather through its affect on other objects. The point is, whether the interaction we observe is direct or indirect, the fact the object exists means it not only affects the universe, but it is also affected by the universe at each and every interaction.
The fact is there is no such thing as a direct observation, but If we want to observe the object a bit more directly than inferring its properties from the effects on the rest of the universe, we can employ a real Vector Boson, rather than a virtual one. (We can, of course, also employ collisions with non-gauge particles, but we can set that aside for now.) Any Vector Boson might be employed, depending upon the nature of the object, but let's just talk about light. If we want to know the position of a particle, we can send out a barrage of photons and see which one bounces back, pinpointing the particle. That, or if the particle is self-luminescent, we can just wait for it to emit a photon, and see from where the photon came. There are two problems, however. The first is the photon has a finite spatial extent quantified by its wavelength. We can only pinpoint the particle's position at the time it emitted / reflected the photon with an accuracy no better than the wavelength of the photon. If the photon has a wavelength of 1000nm, then we only know the position of the particle to within 1000nm. In order to nail down the particle's position better than that, we must employ a photon of shorter wavelength. Practical matters may intervene, but theoretically there is no finite limit to how accurately we can measure the position of the particle.
That brings up the second problem. Even if the particle was at rest when it emitted / reflected the photon, it isn't any longer. By conservation of momentum, we know the particle's momentum must change after interacting with the photon. What's more, the amount of change in momentum depends upon the momentum of the photon. The greater the momentum of the photon, the greater the change in the particle's momentum. Since the particle's position cannot be known precisely, this also means the momentum cannot be known precisely. Furthermore, the shorter the wavelength of the photon, the greater the uncertainty of the momentum of the particle. This leads directly to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, but the point here is the observational limits are not just an empirical hardship, but are in fact the fundamental nature of the universe, and of space-time itself. In the very deepest sense, reality *IS* observation.
Thank you for this comment. I was confused. By "observe", I thought he meant "to look", but the sensors were actually interacting with the beam of light in order to measure it. Now, it makes sense that it would behave differently under "observation".
Interference while measurement doesn’t explain or account for the strange behavior that occurs during the experiments that measure and then “forget” the measurements. Though measured and interfered with, the light particles somehow reacquire superposition, which is plain nuts.
if an entangled particle can affect the other instantly through space it makes sense it can do it through time - time is another dimension much like space, we just seem to be moving at c through it.
Did they try the experiment where they split the beams but also without the cameras, so they'd be able to see if it was the splitting itself causing the collapse? That would have been really helpful.
Yes in the delayed choice quantum eraser the particles that had their information scrambled did not collapse
@Svenson c+d did get an interference pattern due to their path not being measured. That's what was explained.
There is no "collapse" in quantum mechanics.
Q. What's the difference between an automobile mechanic and a quantum mechanic?
A. A quantum mechanic can get his car into the garage without opening the door.
....so is a convertible in a state of super symmetry or super positioned
The dog is totally unphased at how Joe is acting.
Unfazed
Joe's a freak lol
Did you think I was lying about that being my normal state?
lol. you danced for the camera as if it was operating with a quantum eraser. And does your staircase have pictures of a staircase hung on it?
Maybe because it's nothing out of the ordinary to him lol
College kid: Hey professor, I'm having problems understanding the theory of everything?
College Professor: Why, there's almost nothing to it.
Ahhhh...I see what you did there.
Even if consciousness has no special role, it is the last step in the process. And as you say, effect determines cause. So how could it not be affecting the outcome, unless you think consciousness is not a physical system...
Lmao Joe's dog just looking at him like, "He's at it again."
Actually he is thinking, "I was going to tell him the answer to Quantum Physics if he took me for a walk like he promised but oh no, he just had to start recording a video again. Welp thats it, I am instead going to share it with the cat, not that the cat cares really".
Lemar Reyes I just noticed the dog 🐕 ^.^
That dog is hysterical. His head followed his every movement, like he was studying something absolutely fascinating. I felt the same way....
lol i didnt even notice the dog
11:00 is officially when I threw my hands up and said “I’m out.”
Joe should create a separate video for this
But were they in your pants before you threw them up?
Not a smart guy here, but I think since splitting the entangled particles failed they had to split it a couples more to change the point of origin.
Splitting one entangled particle will not technically separate them as they act like they share the same WiFi signal.
But detecting half of the particle on the measuring device does not give them any new result since the other half is still reacting no different.
Kind of like someone pretending to be 2 different people on 4chan but in the end they're just using the same ip address and you can see that.
So why not he use his computer with his WiFi. Pull out his tablet and pair it with his neighbors WiFi and then on top of that use his phone with its mobile data.
It looks like multiple people are sh!t posting but little do I know, it's all synced up to one device.
I would not know that so I would go on arguing with 3 people not ever knowing its just one.
6:49 I actually had my hand down my pants at that exact moment, that Lowkey freaked me out
I bet you also have a number between 0-10(12?) fingers.
Because of Joe?
Sabine Hossenfelder just mentioned you in her last episode: The always amazing Joe Scott.
th-cam.com/video/RQv5CVELG3U/w-d-xo.html
Materialism is dead.
that dance... made me spit my tea - still crying
Omg thank you. I haven't laughed out loud in so long until seeing your "normal self" lmao I needed that
When I was small, grandma told me,
*Matter is just an illusion*
Then I studied science and it seemed like its only matter that matters.
Then I heard about Quantum physics.
Then I knew grandma was right.
ur grandmas kewl
As a schizophrenic your grandma was schizophrenic
@@informitas0117 There is a theory that on the bell-curve of human intellectual evolution; the minority of people who are most highly developed will most likely be found in mental institutions. Well, that was back when mental institutions existed. Now they might be in prisons.
@@garysutherland9706 this speaks to me
Cant like bcuz theres 69 rn
I learned two things: 1) wave form collapse has nothing to do with observer (consciousness) and is entirely a byproduct of measuring. 2) when we erase the information after measuring wave form doesn't collapse and interference pattern remains intact. All crystal clear now.
It is not actually accurate. There's an element missing. Look up The Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Debunked by Sabine Hossenfelder video. She explains the wave patterns from each side when combined produces the full scattering appearance because they're slightly apart. The "no interference pattern" is actually two interference patterns combined together, slightly offset, to produce a full field. That's something Joe and many others missed.
The .muttered "this going to be demonetised" makes it art.
Why did I watch this before drinking coffee? Not enough power to compute.
Nice segway at the end, Joe. It does work.
segue
coffee didn't help me at all, And I didn't think the segue worked, it was incredibly clumsy. And I hate BigMacs. we're so totally different. It's like you're a particle and I'm a waveform. (BTW Segway is the two wheeled electric scooter. Segue is the word for a transition in presentations)
Ohhhh, I learned a new word today too! Thank you! I don't know how I missed that one.
@@squirlmy I don't like BigMacs. It is a play on my last name. 😁
@@diyeana No problem. Understandable mistake. The segway is something you ride. The company that makes it used the off spelling as a play on words. A segue takes you from one subject to another. The Segway takes you from one place to another.
The game only needs to render the part of the world you're in :)
Ah, but what if there's a cat inside a box, does it need to render the inside of the box, or even the cat itself?
silly humans...assuming the rendering of the universe is going forward in time
Not even that... just the moment to moment subjective experience of thinking you're in a real world.
@@etahydri That's assuming that subjective experience CAN be "rendered". Maybe it's not possible to simulate consciousness, or it's extremely hard to do so. Anyway even if possible, this would still be prohibitively expensive to compute.. I mean, to simulate a single experience of a human in 2019 you would have to go through the evolution of the whole observable universe up until that point. So what would be the difference from the "real thing"? None.
Well, and the spawn chunks
Joe Scott, videos like this are why you are with out a doubt by far my favorite TH-camr
THE ALIENS RUNNING OUR SIMULATION ARE DROWNING IN TEARS OF LAUGHTER!!!
THE DOUCHEBAG Funny cuz it’s true. True that some people actually believe that! 😂
@@crownspecialties there's absolutely no way to prove or disprove it without the "aliens" actually interfering from outside. I'm not sure why you find it laughable. You have no evidence to disprove it, and that fact should make it a little humbling. What if the Bible (Either Hebrew scriptures or New Testament, take your pick) might be about beings coming to interfere in our simulation. Almost any religion can be re-interpreted this way. Think about it.
Cuvtixo D Believe in any crazy thing besides the obvious, that we and the universe were created by god.
Of course I can’t disprove aliens and I never said they don’t exist. If Aliens do exist on some other planet who started saying that they were the ones that created us, that’s so far-fetched. And why do we need to live in a computer simulation, this is real life you’re talking about a movie. We have zero proof that Aliens exist and tons and tons of proof beyond common sense that we were created by something intelligent. We have the Bible!! The Word of God. We are a design. This universe is a design. It didn’t just happen accidentally. Something intelligent planned this out then meet us. And that something is the God of the Bible. But most people don’t like what the Bible says most people just want to be their own guards and seek sinful pleasures to obtain temporary happiness.
@@crownspecialties prove the existence of god or the bible's correctness, then we can talk.
@@crownspecialties idk bro ufos are real so like...
Yeah... I love the smell of melted brain in the morning! First lesson, when jumping in pools, make sure it’s the deep end! Wait...what? Everyone get the hell out of the pool, it’s time to drain the magical water...going back to bed, my brain hurts.
How is this 3 hours ago????
Nguyen Van : comes out early for Patreon members 🤓😉
Nguyen Van Quantum time machine
My God Joe, I'm always impressed when you put these in depth videos together! Keep them up my friend!
I think another good way to understand how measurement affects the properties of a quantum particle is by remembering that these particles are waves, and all of our methods of measurement use some sort of wave in order to detect the particle (like an electromagnetic wave) so there is guaranteed to be some kind of interference between the measurement wave and the particles "wave".
The issue is understanding that the "waving" motion of the particle is actually a probability wave, not anything that actually propagates through space.
Richard Fyneman: _"Nobody understands quantum mechanics."_
Crowd: *Laughs in stupidness*
That was not a naive audience. They laughed because they got it.
One day we will wake up and say "Ah, yes, that's how it is! So simple"
That's the problem
In the quantum universe you say
"Ah, yes, that's how it is!..... Or isn't!"
@@rogerstarkey5390Right! ... or wrong.
Duh yaaa
@@Millennium7HistoryTech It's both! At the same time!
@@Millennium7HistoryTech
Or both!
Joe you are one of the best TH-cam guys ever.
Watched this video today and I agree that you do have an authentic feel and it feels like I'm listening to a friend explain things in a easy to understand way. I love to watch your videos while I do my makeup, eat, and relax. I always learn something new!
This comment didn't exist until you looked at it.
You exist, it existed to you the moment your pretty little eyes viewed it and inevitably measured it. Now it exists to me as well, have a wonderful day ❤
Miss J oh god
@Kevin w But you thought about looking at it, remember what measuring actually is... Muahahahahahah :D
Both eyes or all eight?
Miss J - What if someone can’t read, would it still exist.. Or do we have a paradox.
Me, having a nice day, thinking I have a decent understanding of the world: Life is good.
Quantum Mechanics: *Let me introduce myself.*
This comment is underrated
For real 🤣🤣🤣
Everyone’s gangster till Quantum Eraser enters your brain 😂
It erased my brain
It’s like trying to understand quantum physics through a mirror that includes both space and time!
3 years ago, i commented on a video of joe's.. back then he literally had no subscribers.. i acturally did a quick search, and i found my old comment.. back then i commented this: Keep making videos.. you got this shit figured out.. professional videos, im pretty sure this channel will get alot of subscribers.. (multiple hundred thousands, if not millions)
And look now.. he has over half a million subs.. i have a feeling that in a year, he will have like 2-3 million, cause once you get to some hundreds of thousands of subs, things only pick up.. then, somewhere between 3-12 million, it will come to almost a complete stop, depending on the channel theme and such.. i could see this channel ending up around 5-6, and then slowing down dramatically.. but in the end, what counts the most is views.. although views are also somewhat based on subscriber count (more subs = more relevance in the algorythm = bigger chance of being in the recommended - Although subs are only part of the equation)
This is a link to my old comment btw: th-cam.com/video/BROT8qar8QY/w-d-xo.html&lc=UgjeTcacBK0DtngCoAEC
All the confusion and “woo woo” has to do with interpretation of what’s happening. This is why Schrodinger’s cat examples so great it’s not an explanation he was taking a shot at the ridiculousness of the interpretation
so many don't realize this it's insane.
Well, what's your interpretation?
The particles more or less take similar paths, the only difference being that in some cases we can't tell which was path was taken and in some, we can. The physical systems in both cases are basically the same, so what actually changes from the perspective of the photon that makes it act differently?
From the photons perspective the interaction with the physical experiment and the physical means of the observer detecting the photon.
In general what I’m saying is that we don’t “know” squat. The theory is either incomplete or wrong.
Even more generally, just because the maths work doesn’t mean it’s right in describing what’s happening in our physical world. If a math equation doesn’t have a corresponding physical explanation that can be pointed at then I am automatically skeptical. ( constants and other non physical values)
@@calebstone22 In engineering, the same concept is referred to as blackboxing (reproducing the output of an unknown system without the fundamental understanding of the underlying logic) as opposed to whiteboxing (reproducing the logic of a system by its design document or a description of its logic).
This simulation is just being run on low settings.
Its the latency in the program maaaaan.
Is that a Rick and Morty reference?
th-cam.com/video/WxGgQwYVlYY/w-d-xo.html
@@jonathanozik5442 no thats a real life reference
Powered by Intel Graphics™
@Alpha Centauri totally agree with everything you said. Even though I was 96.4% joking, simulation theory is still fascinating, and arguably mathematically probable, so "ugh, the last universe took HOURS to simulate, turn quantum certainty off for this run and we can knock one more out before we go home for the day" would be an elegant, Occam-approved, and amusing explanation. Not remotely close to "proof" of course ;)
Of all the explanstions i viewed, i found yours most elucidating. Hats off for the originality.
I would like to see the scientific society's collective face if after everything it actually turns out to be magic that causes all of it.
How would you define magic though? I mean, any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
@@maxine_q Something that isn't technological at all. It might be explained by science, sure, but if it has a purely biological source, it's not technology.
@@Nanokarp no it's still technology. Living creatures are technically machines. Just biological ones. Also if science can explain it's mechanism then it's still science and still natural. Magic would have to fall outside of the natural universe. It couldn't be explained in any way.
@@ericalbers4867 Your and my definition of magic and technology differs apparently.
@@Nanokarp I don't know how they differ since magic refers to the supernatural. The very premise of anything supernatural is right there in the word.
"how much does light weigh?"
Nothing, if left unbound. But something, if in a box.
Photons have no mass. The energy they carry does.
It actually weighs bcz light has momentum
@@anand.suralkar
The momentum the light carries doesn't mean it has mass, it means it has energy. Even though mass and energy are somewhat interchangeable, it's not accurate in this case because in order to move at the speed of light you need to have either no mass or infinite energy.
@@armchairgravy5148 energy doesn't have mass. What book are you reading lol
There's a few specific reasons a photon in a mirrored box seems to weigh something vs. a photon in an unbound state. The main reason is relativistic mass vs. rest mass. However even photons with zero net momentum still seem to weigh something in a mirrored box despite not having any real mass.
@@ericalbers4867 E=Mc2, energy has mass. It does depend a bit on what sort of mass you are talking about though.
Time to call it quits and start assuming we're in a simulation with limited processing power
Yes, some kinks of quantum physics do sound like cashing or other approximations we do to simplify our own computer calculation. The Problem is that this idea is contrary to the mentioned non-temporality. If you like in other answer descirbed, used the approximations for un observed objects, you should get an interference pattern for the delayed choice experiment. Except this simulation somehow isn't simulated one a linear timeline and is able to influence it's own past.
I've always suspected I made up this world which explains all my quantum entanglement experiences.
just had my first ad within a youtube ad. It was a standard youtube ad during your dashlane ad. magnificent
I want Joe Scott and Michael Stevens to come together for a special collab video as Michael Scott and call it “Somehow I Teach”
I actually did have my hands down my pants exactly when you said 10% probably have your hands down your pants right now..🤦😂🤦😂
Aliens visiting earth doesn’t sound so crazy when it comes to Quantum Theory
So, aliens are here and not here, until you look and see that they're not here?
Spring Bloom depends how deep you look
Thinking Aliens have visited Earth is not crazy. It's just stupid. Quantum theory is what crazy wants to be when it grows up.
Leslie Rhorer The people who witnessed the TicTac UFO might disagree😬
The act of measuring collapses the waveform, therefore consciousness observation is collapsing the waveform. Measurement doesn't exist without a consciousness to create it. The act of measuring is a conscious act.
It’s almost as if the architect that built everything encrypted their source code purposefully so we can’t steal their IP ;)
Maybe "encryption" is a natural phenomenon that we were bound to "invent"
Believing the universe acts weird when it acts outside our expectations places too much value on the expectations we have formed in our tiny, tiny existence.
That which u r doing now, is what we have been doing for centuries, which is to fill in what we don't know with what we have experienced (we know about computers and programs, ancient man knew about hammers, and the sound hammers made. Thunder also made a loud sound, therefore thunder was a giant human (a god) with a giant hammer.
But there are no hammers in the sky. And chances are there are none of the things mankind has dreamed up underlying reality.)
You can't anyway, you're on the hard drive and do not have direct access to the software or hardware. Game over, existence wins.
@@TimothyFord Reboot!
@@justin.d.whitehead Mostly Linux architecture, no need for that... Muahahahah :D
I love the look your dog gives you, like "wtf is he doing now" 😂😂
The dog is just perfect :D
The way Zoe is looking at you! 🤣
_Yep, daddy has lost his mind._
...up in here.
@@joescott Hehe 😄
Zoe _is_ Joe's mind. And you're still alseep right now.
Beautifully explained. Usually all the explanations were with one figure. You explained it stage by stage and explained it well. 👍
I would love to see the quantum eraser result stored encrypted on a computer then auto deleted, does it generate an interference pattern ? since no one can dycrypt it before it's erased
I'm both impressed and outraged at the same time.
So the quantum level has occlusion culling essentially...
"No conscious required"... But how do you know the detectors don't exist in a superposition until being collasped by a conscious observer?
How about a simple anology like "When you measure of charge of a battery you take charge away from it to do so thus altering the state of the battery."
or when you check the pressure of a tire, it will lose pressure...
MisterNewOutlook That's a really good one
"He gets to be the owner" dog as u dance backwards
Didn't you notice?
The dog (what's his name?) existed in this clip BOTH forward AND back in time, with no canine entropy (cantropy) differential!!! Only looking at the dog, you cannot determine whether the film moved forward, backwards or was stationary!
@@enysuntra1347 ...that's a bit of a Dogmatic theory.....but I like it
The dog is just hoping that the whole dance thing leads to do a treat at the end.
She's totally used to it.
Be careful, interference patterns observed at D0 are not the same, they are shifted at position x. If you add both data you would have the clumping pattern observed at D3. The clue is that entangled photons at BBO are phase opposite, which will give at 4 combinations arriving at D0 (25% each: up-up, up-down, down-up, down-down); basically, 50% of that "red path" photon will have the same phase of the "blue path" and 50% chance opposite phase between them. That is the reason why interference patterns are shifted in x, 50% of the data will show one interference and 50% of the other data will interfere on the other position x; the high frequency of one interference coincides with the low frequency of the other; and vice versa. Now, on D3 or D4 there is no selection between phases, so the pattern observed is the addition of the two shifted interference pattern shifted on x, so... the interference will be mixed and the clumping pattern is expected. In D1 and D2 the difference or equality of phase will give only one detector for the same phase interference and the other detector for the opposite phase situation. So, on D1 and D2 interference patterns are independently observed. NO delay choice and quantum eraser from the future to the present !!
Ok... But how you explain the experiment at 8.41 with two detectors A and B that can be far away but you will always obtain no interference pattern in the screen if they are on. Seems like information goes back in time.
So when do we get to read your entire paper? And surely you have a theory on how to prove this without variables with the act of the observation removed? Let me know please. I think you may be on to something.🇺🇸💪🇺🇦🖕🇷🇺
Yes watch Sabine , the delayed choice quantum eraser was debunked 2 years ago by her and this tricked a lot of smart physicists. Even PBS Spacetime and Arvin Ash did a video about how he was wrong. Sabine does a video explaining it. When I watched it on Space time 7 years ago , I didn't really believe it and since the distances are relative , you could make the longer distance shorter by moving very fast and make the events happen before or after the particles hit the screen. There would be a way to send information back in time , which is not allowed.
One of the reasons that many do not "understand" quantum mechanics is that they cannot reconcile it with their "common sense" or "intuitive" view of the world. This has been a common problem with new insights in physics since the renaissance when physics started to over throw the Aristotelian physics that prevailed up until that time. Aristotelian physics was essentially based on common sense logical explanations of observations made with unaugmented human senses.
For example, the heliocentric model of the solar system established by the work of Copernicus, Brahe, Kepler, and Galileo with a rotating and revolving moving earth defied one's every day observations which indicate that the earth is stationary, and were considered initially to be counterintuitive and impossible to reconcile with common sense and experience.
Newton introduced field theory with his work on gravity, and this concept was later applied to electricity and magnetism, and is now an accepted cornerstone of classical physics. However, during the initial few hundred years of its development, field theory was widely viewed as a convenient, but non-physical and counterintuitive, mathematical description. As this Wikipedia article en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_philosophy_of_field_theory states "Despite the success of these theories in making accurate numerical predictions of a wide range of phenomena, they were generally seen as deficient as natural philosophies of mechanics, since they were all essentially action-at-a-distance mechanisms. In the context of the development of field theory, the fact that a function could be written to give the force per unit mass, charge, or current for each point in space was just a mathematical construct. It was seen as untenable on metaphysical grounds[2][3] that a force be exerted across empty space, and hence these force laws were assumed to be merely descriptive and not explanatory."
Hmmm, seems very similar to the criticisms leveled at quantum theory.
Another reason that quantum theory is misunderstood by many is that the popular treatments tend to promulgate erroneous conceptions that are not a part of quantum theory. For example, the illustration of the experiments portrayed in Joe Scott's video shows little balls moving in straight lines through the apparatus to represent photons propagating through the apparatus. This is not at all in accordance with quantum theory. In quantum theory, everything (photons, neutrons, protons, electrons, neutrinos, muons, etc.) propagates as probability amplitude waves in accordance with the Dirac equation (i.e., the relativistic generalization of the Schrodinger equation). There are no hard little particles streaming on defined trajectories at any time through the apparatus. According to quantum theory, particles exist only as the results of measurements.
It is this false conception of particles streaming through space on defined trajectories that leads to the confusion and misunderstanding expressed in such seemingly paradoxical questions as how can a particle interfere with itself or with another particle that was emitted long before or after it.
The other aspect of quantum waves that is not often in presentations for public consumption is that they are infinitely extended in spacetime which together with linear superposition of these spatially and temporally nonlocal waves leads naturally in the mathematics of quantum theory to entanglement. The linear superposition of quantum waves which are nonlocal in spacetime completely explains the delayed choice with quantum eraser experiment, but with one posited, but unexplained phenomenon which is the physical collapse of the wave function to a particle as the result of a measurement. The mechanism of the wave function collapse resulting from a measurement is the fundamental phenomenon in quantum mechanics, if it actually exists, that no one yet has sufficiently explained nor understood.
Also, the use of quantum waves travelling backwards in time and the concept of retrocausality has a long history in quantum theory. The most well-known example may be Feynman's model of antimatter particles as normal matter particles moving backwards in time. There are, however, other major examples of retrocausality used in quantum theory as discussed at this link: plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-retrocausality/ Notice how the following excerpt from this link is eerily similar to the excerpt about initial criticisms of classical field theory above: "Quantum theory provides a framework for modern theoretical physics that enjoys enormous predictive and explanatory success. Yet, in view of the so-called “measurement problem”, there is no consensus on how physical reality can possibly be such that this framework has this success. The theory is thus an extremely well-functioning algorithm to predict and explain the results of observations, but no consensus on which kind of objective reality might plausibly underlie these observations."
All of this is quite understandable to physicists who have studied quantum theory, but it is shocking to most people's (including to many physicist's) common sense and intuition. That is why Bohr's statement quoted in Joe's video is correct, whereas the possibly apocryphal Feynman quote is not. I submit that this is, however, no different from the same shock to common sense engendered by previous revolutionary ideas in physics at their inception such as the heliocentric model with a moving earth, classical field theory, and Einstein's theories of special and general relativity.
Very good and true👍
Drift away from common sense and enjoy the beauty of QM.
QM follow its own laws perfectly, without breaking the laws of our nature.
At least not while we are looking.
Wait, "rabbit hole, quantum eraser."
Wrong holiday, Joe, it's Thanksgiving this week. Why are you talking about the Eraser Bunny?
I come here to learn but always leave confused
Thank you. When I first started watching this video, I thought that you'd lose me along the way. But you didn't, and that counts for a lot in my books. Well done. It's a complex subject, but the humor you've thrown in simply said 'hey, I'm not here to bore you to death, after all'.
Additional trivia: Feynman, when asked by a reporter to explain the work for which he got the Nobel prize, apparently retorted that if he could explain it (presumably simple and concise enough to make it into news), then he wouldn't have won it. Absolutely brilliant! He was also the one who poignantly used a piece of rubber dunked into a glass of ice cold water to demonstrate how rubber loses its elasticity in low temperatures, and thus prove the O-ring seals failure on the solid fuel boosters as the cause of the Challenger space shuttle.
7:17 I don't always "Like" videos that I like, but this moment is almost enough to make me "like" every one of your videos, ever. Good show xd
Thank you Joe. My brain has become jello and trickled out of my ears. 😂 my brain hurts now.
For my money, Joe, do more challenging videos like this, less on the straight forward physical world. Very interesting content and not well covered on TH-cam
The interference patern is just a glitch in the Matrix.
@@squirlmy well the pills were not actually drugs. They were just to help locate his real body in the real world like a tracking device......
Whoowww
I fell asleep watching Joe's videos last night, and I'm going back through them now, and now it totally makes sense why I was hearing DMX in my dream.