A side note for those interested in the math: We don't use sine and cosine just because "they look wavy." We use them because there's a piece of mathematical machinery called the Fourier transform which let's us write _any_ periodic (aka wave) function as the sum of sine and cosine functions. It's incredibly convenient to be able to represent _any_ possible wave function in terms of just two relatively simple functions, so that's why we use them. 3blue1brown did a video explaining how the Fourier transform works for anyone who wants to know the details: th-cam.com/video/spUNpyF58BY/w-d-xo.html
Discrete Fourier transformations in signal processing has to be the hardest maths I’ve had to do in university. Typically I tend to be able to make a mental image of what I’m doing in maths and make my own way of understanding it, but my mind couldn’t make sense of these, I had to stupidly learn these by heart.
@@ankitaaarya "Learn by heart" is an English 'idiom' that means "rote learning"... It's like navigating in a city in a foreign country where you cannot read ("understand") street signs, but learn to get around "mechanically" from memory. That's your fish feed for the day. (A reference to another English idiom that begins: "Give a man a fish; you feed him for...") The "fishing lesson for your lifetime" gift is to point out to you that you are connected to the World Wide Web, and can search out answers to questions like this for yourself... Happy fishing!! :-)
A side-side note for those who are really interested: Sine and cosine may be particularly nice functions with this property, but there are an infinite number of alternative bases that can look arbitrarily weird which all have an analog to the fourier transform. Picking sine and cosine is exactly analogous to the choice of basis in finite dimensional vector spaces, that is to say entirely arbitrary and without consequences. So to be perfectly correct, we use sine and cosine entirely because we like sine and cosine. For some people that might be because "they look wavy".
It can also be explained by the fact that all waves can be simplified into an infinite series of right triangles, in the same way a line is an infinite series of points, hence the sudden appearance of trigonometry.
Michael Price This is a technically correct answer. The actual question that shows the weirdness of quantum mechanics is: "Did you turn left and right?" "Yes."
@@donwald3436 Computer scientist does both and tells you which one you did....unless there was a loop, and he blows his stack instead...unless Win95, in which case, BSOD.
Which goes to show, people who haven't taken a class about them and think complex numbers are a hoax are putting Descartes before the course. ... I'll show myself out....
this is what I like about these videos. Even if you don't learn anything profoundly new sometimes, when you see a good animation changing from one aspect to another, two previously separate things get connected and it clicks. A new level of understanding!
In more lay-terms: What happens to a quantum particle is completely up to probability; it might be here or there, it might be going this fast or this slow. That probability is set in stone, which means we can tell what the probability is if we measure. We can always tell what a quantum particle might be doing, we can never predict what it will actually do. (Kinda like a crazy relative. You know what they CAN do, you never know what they WILL do.)
probability of a event of a wave to occur at sea surface is 1, but to know exactly when and where is deterministic. not sure of that example fits the above statement
@@gordonlawrence1448 if I understand correctly, having to approximate any kind of integral out of discrete bits is gonna resemble a riemann sum like that.
This is the most intuitive explanation I've seen so far for laypersons like me. I've seen so many videos say, basically, "You get the probability by squaring the wave function." OK, so what exactly _is_ the wave function? "It's a probability thing." Which doesn't feel very helpful.
Tom, You should know there is more to this story. Intelligent people have long ago figured out that Quantum theory is all BS. Same with everything that the so called "genius" Einstein said. All total BS. Keep that in the back of your mind when things seem weird, this is the reason.
@@xiaoxiao-kg5np classical (pre-Einsten and pre-Quantum) models do not explain observed phenomena. Is there a different model you can offer, or is this just filed under "who knows?"
Not only did this help me understand quantum mechanics better, it helped me understand probability and statistics better, or gave me ideas for how to convey it to others. There's a lot of power in the term "skinny rectangles" especially for helping students transition from discrete probability distributions to continuous ones.
This is the best explanation of quantum wave functions that I ever seen. I've seen a lot of videos from a lot of TH-camrs and this is the only one that is actually understandable by non physicians. Great work!
Underrated moment in this video was when Nick made sense of why we use sine and cosine: they make shapes that look like waves. Like, you need something to look wavy? Here, use this. Doesn't matter what that wavy thing is, but this will get you a pretty good picture of it on your graph, bud. Thanks.
Yeah, that's basically it. A more calculus-based perspective on this (which is the math we use to calculate these wave functions in quantum mechanics) is that a sine or cosine wave is "proportional to its own second derivative." Basically, they are curviest at their own peaks, in a very precise way.
@@ScienceAsylum A probability distribution is just another way of saying "We don't know what happens on a smaller scale". We have to be humble & say "I don't know what the constituents of this wave is, or if any", & continue doing science. I wish you would have added this in your video, physicist need to be more honest about the data to avoid confusion... sometimes "I don't know" is the right answer.
Waaait, what? Yesterday i was searching something on this topic and meanwhile i was thinking "man, i really hope the science asylum will release a video on this". Nice
@@ScienceAsylum can you do a video explaining how the waves of two (or more) separate particles can interact with each other? I understand the nature of the quantum wave, but how can the waves from different particles interact to create the interference pattern, especially when they are separated by time like in the double slits experiment?
That was a great description of the QWF. The graphs really clicked the issue into my mind. I love the humour and general presentation of the video. Keep up the excellent work, videos like this should be compulsory in all physics courses. Cheers
As Richard Feynman said, "The prize is in the pleasure of finding the thing out, the kick in the discover"... Ya this video gives that required kick....
This madman is teaching about the basic idea of integration without letting the people watching the video know (which is probably good since you are trying to explain quantum wave functions in a simple way at the same time). Also, I finally noticed that 3Blue1Brown plushie on your shelf, nice!
Excellent explanation of what professors try to teach to students. A few interesting things to contemplate: Calling i "imaginary" causes confusion. A real vector times i simply rotates the real vector by 90 degrees. A real vector times e^ib simply rotates the real vector by b degrees. A wave function in the x direction = Re^ib where b = kx+wt This is a wave of amplitude R wavelength = 2(pi)/k wave frequency = w/2(pi) wave velocity = wavelength * wave frequency = (2(pi)/k)(w/2(pi)) = w/k momentum = h/wavelength = hk/2(pi) where h = Planck's constant It's not easy to wrap our minds around all these rotations.
I love the fact that he literally said that he hate Quantum mechanics but still trying throughout the lecture to maintain interest on topic. that's the motivation I need to pursue my study 😅😅😅
Max Born is one of the unsung heroes in science, 'cause his interpretation in 1926 of wave function as a probability function was groundbreaking at that times!
Maybe it's because I've learned complex nos before unlike many things you talk about, but you explained this topic extremely well. In my opinion, this is one of your best videos yet! I love your, hmmm, "energetic" style 😂
Isn't the square of the amplitude of a mechanical wave (or even EM wave) its energy? Is there an energy - probability equivalence? I remember Noether said energy and time have a symmetry, etc. But I don't remember the details. These quantum probabilities aren't just from functions of time (?) .. anyway, just rambling. Good observation.
@@NoActuallyGo-KCUF-Yourself You're right that the square of the amplitude is the energy, but that only applies for physical waves. Wave functions are basically mathematical constructs used to describe probabilities, not actual physical properties like displacement or field strength.
3:32 “[A quantum wave function] shows dependence between two measurements, that has some kind of back-and-forth pattern, and is about tiny particles.” A good definition makes something understandable to the intended audience. Thanks Nick.
I think I've watched about every video on the wave function. This is the first or at least best I've found in showing how it actually works-what is actually does. I know how F=MA works, and I knew the wave function is the quantum analog of the F=MA, but I could not understand how the wave function predicted the future state. I did not until now understand about the different inputs for each property. I would like to more about what those inputs actually are so I can understand how it operates better. But this video advanced my non-math physics learning quite a bit. Thank you.
I have to say, I watch a lot of physics videos on TH-cam. Yours are great but the thing I like the most about them is that somehow you manage to figure out exactly the question I have, title the video as i would, and cover exactly what I needed to know to feel like I got my answer. Well done! At least for me, which may mean nobody else gets any of it. Hmmm. Well, I luv ya, so you have that!
Quantum Mechanics has always seemed to be really strange... but you make it sound much simpler than I made it out to be. Thank you for showing the connections between probabilities, complex numbers, and integration to understand how those functions work. Awesome job! Although Quantum Mechanics will almost certainly still be a challenge, you made it seem less terrifying. So thank you for that.
The _math_ of QM isn't actually that hard to understand -- it's all just calculus, linear algebra, linear differential equations, and basic probability theory. And, while those can certainly be challenging when you're first learning them, it's all standard math that's covered in a typical undergrad math or physics degree and is nothing specific to QM in particular. The truly challenging part is distinguishing between and relating the math, the experimental results, and the various interpretations. It's figuring out what, _if anything,_ the math actually tells out about individual particles that's so hard.
wow just found this channel today, goldmine! Its been hard being stupid but interested in what smart people are interested in, i've seen a few of your videos now and been able to follow everything, gotta say thats a first after many years of youtube, well done man! (And you're funny, 5:47) They say you dont really understand something until you can explain it easily, so you must *really* understand what you're talking about! unlike most other youtubers!
I've said this before, but the thing I really love about your videos is that I always learn at least one new thing! This time, it was that the square involved in the Born rule is a *complex* square. I've seen many people write about the Born rule informally in comments here and there, but not ONE person has ever made that clear. Thank you!
Great video as always. Measurables go in, probability comes out, with Hizenberg limitations on certainty. No need for observers, or consciousness, or any woo whatsoever.
The understanding of the behavior of the quantum particle as a probability without any understanding of where it comes from is derived from the quantum wave function. This is true and no need for any speculation to assert that. However, where does the quantum particle arise from? Or perhaps another question would be what is the nature of the quantum particle? Not what is the behavior of the quantum particle but what is it actually made up of? We called a wave but what does that mean as being defined in terms of its make up. Not advocating for woo here but it still doesn’t answer some important questions.
@@lopezjraul My opinion is that a quantum particle is best understood as a discrete deposit of energy into a quantum field. This is pretty far down the philosophy of science rabbit hole, but the only remaining undefined term is ‘energy’ and that is both basic, yet does not have a formal definition. If we accept ‘energy’ then the definition is also acceptable. All my opinions.
One comment i would make is to show an example of a textbook picture of the cos and the isin and relate to the actual rotating wave function. Other than that, this is one of the best explanations I've encountered as to what the wave function "means"
Look at that smile @6:12. This is a dude that loves his job. No ego, no self entitlement, none of that bad stuff we so often see in engineers / programmers / "super smart" people. This dude is an example to us all. Hes freaking happy to share what he enjoys, thats all.
Using the Hydrogen Atom example for position & motion really shows how fundamental the Wave Function is! I never thought of it like that! Well done! 5:39 That "Complex Joke" reminder XD And then going all the way to a "Flashback Cam" : That's some Nerdy joke delivery! Bravo!
I really love how you animated the electron as trying to be at every position at the same time, but still keeping it as a particle. That is the best visual representation of a wave particle duality I ever saw.
Thank you for reinforcing that this is a mathematical function and not a physical property. No one has put it in those words and that is the concept I have struggled to grasp
I've been watching your videos for about 2 years and yeah I have really learnt a lot And till now I've been ''crazy'' so far🤪🤪🤪🤪 👍👍👍👍👍for ur channel Okay I still do have the following questions; 1. Where the heck does the energy come from in the process of nuclear fission and fusion???????😰😰 Mass defect or nuclear binding energy???? 2. Nothing.... that's all 3..........''let's all be craz😜😜🤪🤪🤯🤯🤯
Yes, the energy released during fission and fusion is nuclear binding energy... sort of. Technically, nuclear binding energy is negative (a loss). A bond is loss of energy that traps particles together. Here are a few videos explaining that if you haven't seen them: Nuclear Fusion Explained: th-cam.com/video/LKUPAk5049M/w-d-xo.html What EXACTLY is a Bond? th-cam.com/video/mFKCW_D2oE4/w-d-xo.html Bonds Do NOT Have Energy! th-cam.com/video/g39nwNm0Xfw/w-d-xo.html
2:11 It's amazing how many students don't know what a function actually is. I've had lots of precalc students come to the tutoring center at my school for help with "finding the domain" problems. The first thing I always ask them is "What is a function?" Many have no idea how to define it. This is how I explain it: a function is mapping between 2 sets of objects - usually numbers but they could technically be anything. So if we have have 2 sets, the function just tells you how to get from the first set, the inputs, to the second set, the outputs. I really wish I had your animation to show them though. I may just have to show them that part of this video.
Sir I must say this has been simultaneously the most intuitive and concrete explanation of this subject I've found so far and the most agitating delivery of the concept. The quantum brick road joke made me want to rip my hair out each time it came up. Overall 10/10
There is very less Probability that someone do not like your video. Its not so Complex task to subscribe and share your videos. Its time to get Real and start understanding the physics from this channel.
Before watching, gonna go with probability as my answer to the title question. Let's see if uni has taught me anything worthwhile... Edit: Got confirmation within the first minute. Guess I should keep paying tuition.
I just love your thought process and sense of humor, makes learning so much more engaging and fun! Although I got lost at complex square so going to research more about that, if you can do a video on how quantum wave function relates to quantum entanglement I will love to know more!
@@joaquinel yes indeed. I like the figurative. And the winking emoticon at the end of my statement. I like using them because they convey the tone in which the text was delivered. Mmm symbols
@@arthurmee winking... On purpose? I thought it was just a blink, now the comment makes sense! I already got that, I should have used one too. Love to play. Specially after a brainhurting video. It gets worse after PBS space time.
Nick, You mean you are not just going through the science experiments books and do another video that 50 other youtubers are doing over and over? I do love your fresh view on things. Keep it up. You have insights that are worthy.
4:58 Nick: We can't know anything exactly in quantum mechanics. Pilot - Wave formulation: Walks into the room ;-) On a more serious note though, I actually quite appreciate your being explicitly about the probabilistic nature of standard QM. Two many pop - sci and even actual textbook explanations totally gloss over just how _statistics-based_ quantum mechanics actually is. They talk as if we actually know _anything_ about individual particles with reasonable certainty when all we really know are the patterns that show up when we do the same experiment repeatedly.
Yes, it did help somewhat. The graphics make it more comprehensible. The humor helps too. The man has a talent for lucidity, reaching those who do not have a math or physics background, but who are interested in applying quantum ideas to other studies. Thanks!
This was a fantastic video. I've been studying machine learning lately, and this actually helped with understanding some of the underlying mathematical concepts there, as well.
A side note for those interested in the math: We don't use sine and cosine just because "they look wavy." We use them because there's a piece of mathematical machinery called the Fourier transform which let's us write _any_ periodic (aka wave) function as the sum of sine and cosine functions. It's incredibly convenient to be able to represent _any_ possible wave function in terms of just two relatively simple functions, so that's why we use them. 3blue1brown did a video explaining how the Fourier transform works for anyone who wants to know the details: th-cam.com/video/spUNpyF58BY/w-d-xo.html
Discrete Fourier transformations in signal processing has to be the hardest maths I’ve had to do in university. Typically I tend to be able to make a mental image of what I’m doing in maths and make my own way of understanding it, but my mind couldn’t make sense of these, I had to stupidly learn these by heart.
@@cedmelancon that totally sucks.
what learning by heart means?
@@ankitaaarya
"Learn by heart" is an English 'idiom' that means "rote learning"...
It's like navigating in a city in a foreign country where you cannot read ("understand") street signs, but learn to get around "mechanically" from memory.
That's your fish feed for the day. (A reference to another English idiom that begins: "Give a man a fish; you feed him for...")
The "fishing lesson for your lifetime" gift is to point out to you that you are connected to the World Wide Web, and can search out answers to questions like this for yourself...
Happy fishing!! :-)
A side-side note for those who are really interested: Sine and cosine may be particularly nice functions with this property, but there are an infinite number of alternative bases that can look arbitrarily weird which all have an analog to the fourier transform.
Picking sine and cosine is exactly analogous to the choice of basis in finite dimensional vector spaces, that is to say entirely arbitrary and without consequences. So to be perfectly correct, we use sine and cosine entirely because we like sine and cosine. For some people that might be because "they look wavy".
It can also be explained by the fact that all waves can be simplified into an infinite series of right triangles, in the same way a line is an infinite series of points, hence the sudden appearance of trigonometry.
Taking the quantum brick road.
"Do I turn right or left here?"
"Yes."
Michael Price
This is a technically correct answer. The actual question that shows the weirdness of quantum mechanics is:
"Did you turn left and right?"
"Yes."
Same answer if you ask a computer scientist.
It depends, do you have a Heseinberg license? Lol.
wow never noticed that meme is a superposition but yes it is
@@donwald3436 Computer scientist does both and tells you which one you did....unless there was a loop, and he blows his stack instead...unless Win95, in which case, BSOD.
Descartes is at fault here, he was the one who coined "imaginary numbers" as a derogatory term. Gauss knew better and named them lateral numbers.
Yeah, I mean, technically speaking, all numbers are imaginary... but these are the names they have now. We're stuck.
Which goes to show, people who haven't taken a class about them and think complex numbers are a hoax are putting Descartes before the course.
... I'll show myself out....
How "real" are real numbers, anyway?
Descartes also had that pesky duality problem. Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia asked him some good questions about it.
@@ScienceAsylum natural numbers are real. the others... i'd say not...
your skills on teaching are the most outstanding qualities a person can have.
this is what I like about these videos. Even if you don't learn anything profoundly new sometimes, when you see a good animation changing from one aspect to another, two previously separate things get connected and it clicks. A new level of understanding!
Static diagrams just aren’t enough sometimes.
_“The events are probabilistic. The probabilities are deterministic.“_
Oh, I like that! Where is that from?
The Science Asylum My old QM professor from college. 1974.
I'm stealing it.
In more lay-terms: What happens to a quantum particle is completely up to probability; it might be here or there, it might be going this fast or this slow. That probability is set in stone, which means we can tell what the probability is if we measure.
We can always tell what a quantum particle might be doing, we can never predict what it will actually do. (Kinda like a crazy relative. You know what they CAN do, you never know what they WILL do.)
probability of a event of a wave to occur at sea surface is 1, but to know exactly when and where is deterministic. not sure of that example fits the above statement
Skinny rectangles = Calculus by stealth. Nice job Nick :)
Archimedes was pulling that trick thousands of years ago.
I read that this is an old concept, known as infinitesimals, mathematicians just didn't like it very much because it wasn't very rigorous.
Skinny rectangle infinitecimals are beginners beliefs. Calculas outgrown a lot from this now a days.
You have to do the "skinny boxes" method for mathematical models if you are using a spreadsheet EG calculating the voltage on an analogue integrator.
@@gordonlawrence1448 if I understand correctly, having to approximate any kind of integral out of discrete bits is gonna resemble a riemann sum like that.
This is the most intuitive explanation I've seen so far for laypersons like me. I've seen so many videos say, basically, "You get the probability by squaring the wave function." OK, so what exactly _is_ the wave function? "It's a probability thing." Which doesn't feel very helpful.
@Fuert Neigt He's got a ton of really amazing videos. Don't forget to subscribe!
@Fuert Neigt _anything_ you say? hmm...
How was his answer any different? He did expand on it more but his final answer was of course the same, that it's a probability thing
Tom, You should know there is more to this story. Intelligent people have long ago figured out that Quantum theory is all BS. Same with everything that the so called "genius" Einstein said. All total BS. Keep that in the back of your mind when things seem weird, this is the reason.
@@xiaoxiao-kg5np classical (pre-Einsten and pre-Quantum) models do not explain observed phenomena. Is there a different model you can offer, or is this just filed under "who knows?"
Not only did this help me understand quantum mechanics better, it helped me understand probability and statistics better, or gave me ideas for how to convey it to others. There's a lot of power in the term "skinny rectangles" especially for helping students transition from discrete probability distributions to continuous ones.
Those skinny rectangles are one of the most basic concept in calculus 👀. Adding them all up is how integrals work 😁.
This is the best explanation of quantum wave functions that I ever seen. I've seen a lot of videos from a lot of TH-camrs and this is the only one that is actually understandable by non physicians. Great work!
totally agree with you
You mean "physicists" ... (physicians are medical practitioners) ..
@@88feji no, only doctors understand wave functions
@@kylecesar6347 😂😂
Underrated moment in this video was when Nick made sense of why we use sine and cosine: they make shapes that look like waves. Like, you need something to look wavy? Here, use this. Doesn't matter what that wavy thing is, but this will get you a pretty good picture of it on your graph, bud. Thanks.
You're welcome :-)
Fourier to the rescue!
Yeah, that's basically it. A more calculus-based perspective on this (which is the math we use to calculate these wave functions in quantum mechanics) is that a sine or cosine wave is "proportional to its own second derivative." Basically, they are curviest at their own peaks, in a very precise way.
This was a great explanation. It's all gradience, until it isn't.
@@ScienceAsylum A probability distribution is just another way of saying "We don't know what happens on a smaller scale". We have to be humble & say "I don't know what the constituents of this wave is, or if any", & continue doing science. I wish you would have added this in your video, physicist need to be more honest about the data to avoid confusion... sometimes "I don't know" is the right answer.
Waaait, what? Yesterday i was searching something on this topic and meanwhile i was thinking "man, i really hope the science asylum will release a video on this". Nice
Glad I could deliver :-)
@@ScienceAsylum can you do a video explaining how the waves of two (or more) separate particles can interact with each other? I understand the nature of the quantum wave, but how can the waves from different particles interact to create the interference pattern, especially when they are separated by time like in the double slits experiment?
You're his clone you, just don't know it.
I clicked on the video for science and stayed for ..........
SCIENCE!!!!!
Your explanation is amazing !!!
This might be the best layperson-accessible video on quantum mechanics I've ever seen
That was a great description of the QWF. The graphs really clicked the issue into my mind. I love the humour and general presentation of the video. Keep up the excellent work, videos like this should be compulsory in all physics courses. Cheers
for me , this is your best video..... quantum mechanics looked simple in this
I felt so.
As Richard Feynman said, "The prize is in the pleasure of finding the thing out, the kick in the discover"... Ya this video gives that required kick....
He also said...
If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics.
- Richard P. Feynman
@@jcf20010 stupid quote
@Jerry Perry I under stand it. The quote works on different levels. Kind of like this one:
"You can observe a lot by just watching."
-- Yogi Berra
You're a lsegend for that one fam.
You answered all my questions.
Thanks brodaaa 🤜🤛
This madman is teaching about the basic idea of integration without letting the people watching the video know (which is probably good since you are trying to explain quantum wave functions in a simple way at the same time). Also, I finally noticed that 3Blue1Brown plushie on your shelf, nice!
[bernhard riemann, stroking his beard in begrudging acknowledgement like a kung-fu master]
@@nibblrrr7124 lol
Excellent explanation of what professors try to teach to students.
A few interesting things to contemplate:
Calling i "imaginary" causes confusion.
A real vector times i simply rotates the real vector by 90 degrees.
A real vector times e^ib simply rotates the real vector by b degrees.
A wave function in the x direction = Re^ib where b = kx+wt
This is a wave of amplitude R
wavelength = 2(pi)/k
wave frequency = w/2(pi)
wave velocity = wavelength * wave frequency = (2(pi)/k)(w/2(pi)) = w/k
momentum = h/wavelength = hk/2(pi) where h = Planck's constant
It's not easy to wrap our minds around all these rotations.
Very happy to see you after a long time explaining Quantum wave function. Your explanation is absolutely amazing.
damn, that boxxy reference brought ME down to memory lane.
Ah yes queen boxxy
@@addajjalsonofallah6217 aaand it's 2008 again!
Oh my god .... It's probability of being helpful is really high.....
Helped me with deeper understandings...
I love the fact that he literally said that he hate Quantum mechanics but still trying throughout the lecture to maintain interest on topic. that's the motivation I need to pursue my study 😅😅😅
Max Born is one of the unsung heroes in science, 'cause his interpretation in 1926 of wave function as a probability function was groundbreaking at that times!
Surely his greatest contribution is Olivia Newton John.
he did get a nobel prize for that. there is no unsung here. if you want to know about an unsung hero then look for S.N Bose.
Wait - Max Born or Max Bohr? Oh, it’s Neils Bohr…oops
@@GeokinkladzeWait..what? I don’t get the connection…?
I looked it up - she’s his granddaughter from his daughter Irene. Well, I’ll be damned - definitely his most important contribution to humanity!!! 😂
Maybe it's because I've learned complex nos before unlike many things you talk about, but you explained this topic extremely well.
In my opinion, this is one of your best videos yet! I love your, hmmm, "energetic" style 😂
Shit has started to become real on this channel , you are getting sponsors . Finally!!
Mind totally blown this is what everyone means when they say it's the square of the wave function that gives any meaning to a quantum state
Exactly.
Isn't the square of the amplitude of a mechanical wave (or even EM wave) its energy?
Is there an energy - probability equivalence?
I remember Noether said energy and time have a symmetry, etc. But I don't remember the details.
These quantum probabilities aren't just from functions of time (?)
.. anyway, just rambling. Good observation.
@@NoActuallyGo-KCUF-Yourself You're right that the square of the amplitude is the energy, but that only applies for physical waves.
Wave functions are basically mathematical constructs used to describe probabilities, not actual physical properties like displacement or field strength.
This is the greatest quantum video ever explored in youtube video or any platform. You just hit it. Thank u thank you so much Nick.
3:32 “[A quantum wave function] shows dependence between two measurements, that has some kind of back-and-forth pattern, and is about tiny particles.” A good definition makes something understandable to the intended audience. Thanks Nick.
Really this channel is so underrated! It deserved more subscribers. Let's make it popular!
I think I've watched about every video on the wave function. This is the first or at least best I've found in showing how it actually works-what is actually does. I know how F=MA works, and I knew the wave function is the quantum analog of the F=MA, but I could not understand how the wave function predicted the future state. I did not until now understand about the different inputs for each property. I would like to more about what those inputs actually are so I can understand how it operates better. But this video advanced my non-math physics learning quite a bit. Thank you.
The imputs are displacement, time and frequency
Android Robot kicking the "i" - LOL !
lol.. yeah
Kicked that i right in its a.
What else should it do? :D use it? Come on...
cheeky
1:37 that boxxy reference made me so happy
I have to say, I watch a lot of physics videos on TH-cam. Yours are great but the thing I like the most about them is that somehow you manage to figure out exactly the question I have, title the video as i would, and cover exactly what I needed to know to feel like I got my answer. Well done! At least for me, which may mean nobody else gets any of it. Hmmm. Well, I luv ya, so you have that!
Quantum Mechanics has always seemed to be really strange... but you make it sound much simpler than I made it out to be. Thank you for showing the connections between probabilities, complex numbers, and integration to understand how those functions work. Awesome job! Although Quantum Mechanics will almost certainly still be a challenge, you made it seem less terrifying. So thank you for that.
You're welcome 😊 Glad I could help
The _math_ of QM isn't actually that hard to understand -- it's all just calculus, linear algebra, linear differential equations, and basic probability theory. And, while those can certainly be challenging when you're first learning them, it's all standard math that's covered in a typical undergrad math or physics degree and is nothing specific to QM in particular. The truly challenging part is distinguishing between and relating the math, the experimental results, and the various interpretations. It's figuring out what, _if anything,_ the math actually tells out about individual particles that's so hard.
This man just casually explained the entirety of high school level maths in a single 11 minute video.
Awesome work yet again Nick - thank you!
My god you are the best explainer among TH-cam 😌😌
Thanks that was one of the most comprehensive explanations I have heard.
When you say at the end “Until then, it’s ok to be little crazy” I really feel very reassured. 😆
This was by far one of the best explanation of the wave function i have ever seen.
wow just found this channel today, goldmine! Its been hard being stupid but interested in what smart people are interested in, i've seen a few of your videos now and been able to follow everything, gotta say thats a first after many years of youtube, well done man! (And you're funny, 5:47) They say you dont really understand something until you can explain it easily, so you must *really* understand what you're talking about! unlike most other youtubers!
thank u so much for taking care of my curiosities so well, have just fallen in love with this channel
I've said this before, but the thing I really love about your videos is that I always learn at least one new thing! This time, it was that the square involved in the Born rule is a *complex* square. I've seen many people write about the Born rule informally in comments here and there, but not ONE person has ever made that clear. Thank you!
You're welcome 😊
Great video as always. Measurables go in, probability comes out, with Hizenberg limitations on certainty. No need for observers, or consciousness, or any woo whatsoever.
The understanding of the behavior of the quantum particle as a probability without any understanding of where it comes from is derived from the quantum wave function. This is true and no need for any speculation to assert that. However, where does the quantum particle arise from? Or perhaps another question would be what is the nature of the quantum particle? Not what is the behavior of the quantum particle but what is it actually made up of? We called a wave but what does that mean as being defined in terms of its make up. Not advocating for woo here but it still doesn’t answer some important questions.
@@lopezjraul My opinion is that a quantum particle is best understood as a discrete deposit of energy into a quantum field. This is pretty far down the philosophy of science rabbit hole, but the only remaining undefined term is ‘energy’ and that is both basic, yet does not have a formal definition. If we accept ‘energy’ then the definition is also acceptable. All my opinions.
"i" really get your joke.
Good one.
justa actually, that's about the only thing I did get. I watch his great vids for humility with a snippet of once and a while " ah ha "
underrated!
i^2 don't.
@@tiny_toilet Jay does, but he's an electrical engineer.
One comment i would make is to show an example of a textbook picture of the cos and the isin and relate to the actual rotating wave function.
Other than that, this is one of the best explanations I've encountered as to what the wave function "means"
Look at that smile @6:12. This is a dude that loves his job. No ego, no self entitlement, none of that bad stuff we so often see in engineers / programmers / "super smart" people. This dude is an example to us all. Hes freaking happy to share what he enjoys, thats all.
Using the Hydrogen Atom example for position & motion really shows how fundamental the Wave Function is!
I never thought of it like that! Well done!
5:39 That "Complex Joke" reminder XD And then going all the way to a "Flashback Cam" : That's some Nerdy joke delivery! Bravo!
Ur really best sir 💯
No one explained me quantum mechanics that deep and well
Can you use some details from this video to explain the Pauli Exclusion Principle?
I really love how you animated the electron as trying to be at every position at the same time, but still keeping it as a particle. That is the best visual representation of a wave particle duality I ever saw.
Indeed!
You are a life saver. Keep making these and adding the humor. Saved me from tears over chemistry
Thank you for reinforcing that this is a mathematical function and not a physical property. No one has put it in those words and that is the concept I have struggled to grasp
9:42 Absolutely!
I love that *transform* sequence! I imagine inserting such clip into our software at work... ;)
The whole vid is great too, of course.
It's a nod to the Adam West Batman transition 😊
Not the first one, but I'm certain I'll love it. Love from Nepal!!
Nick you're getting better and better. Just loved your video. Best explanation I've seen since learned this in 1993!
The spoonfuls of humour definitely make the medicine go down easier! Love your unique approach to the material. 👏👏
Glad you like my work!
Made my day to see a new upload from the asylum
Mine too
narrator dru ditto!
Nick: "did this help you understand quantum mechanics a little better?"
Me: LOL... like I come here for understanding 🤣
I've been watching your videos for about 2 years and yeah I have really learnt a lot
And till now I've been ''crazy'' so far🤪🤪🤪🤪
👍👍👍👍👍for ur channel
Okay
I still do have the following questions;
1. Where the heck does the energy come from in the process of nuclear fission and fusion???????😰😰 Mass defect or nuclear binding energy????
2. Nothing....
that's all
3..........''let's all be craz😜😜🤪🤪🤯🤯🤯
Yes, the energy released during fission and fusion is nuclear binding energy... sort of. Technically, nuclear binding energy is negative (a loss). A bond is loss of energy that traps particles together. Here are a few videos explaining that if you haven't seen them:
Nuclear Fusion Explained: th-cam.com/video/LKUPAk5049M/w-d-xo.html
What EXACTLY is a Bond? th-cam.com/video/mFKCW_D2oE4/w-d-xo.html
Bonds Do NOT Have Energy! th-cam.com/video/g39nwNm0Xfw/w-d-xo.html
2:11 It's amazing how many students don't know what a function actually is. I've had lots of precalc students come to the tutoring center at my school for help with "finding the domain" problems. The first thing I always ask them is "What is a function?" Many have no idea how to define it. This is how I explain it: a function is mapping between 2 sets of objects - usually numbers but they could technically be anything. So if we have have 2 sets, the function just tells you how to get from the first set, the inputs, to the second set, the outputs. I really wish I had your animation to show them though. I may just have to show them that part of this video.
I absolutely love you man, may you live a long life. You make science exponentially easier! Thank you so very much
Quantum mechanics hurts my brain in a fun trippy way
Quantum mechanics entangles my brain a PARTICULarly fun way.
My head feels wavy 😖
Hey, just wanted to let you know that this is fucking brilliant and one of the most "intuitive" descriptions on the topic I've ever seen
"bouncing squirrels arent the only waves in nature"
i learned something today
Dude, your videos are AWESOME! Keep it up man! Greetings from Bulgaria.
Sir I must say this has been simultaneously the most intuitive and concrete explanation of this subject I've found so far and the most agitating delivery of the concept. The quantum brick road joke made me want to rip my hair out each time it came up.
Overall 10/10
So THAT's why I had to learn calculus!
No actual squirrels were harmed in this episode :-)
7:55
"Just give up"
But we all know that you won't.
There is very less Probability that someone do not like your video.
Its not so Complex task to subscribe and share your videos.
Its time to get Real and start understanding the physics from this channel.
Amazing.
how a 10 min video can explain more than phd quantum mechanics professers who took 7 years. keep going :D
*_The Born Rule_*
starring Matt Damon as - no wait, wrong Bourne
I love how you use squirrels 🐿 ❤
Before watching, gonna go with probability as my answer to the title question. Let's see if uni has taught me anything worthwhile...
Edit: Got confirmation within the first minute. Guess I should keep paying tuition.
I just love your thought process and sense of humor, makes learning so much more engaging and fun! Although I got lost at complex square so going to research more about that, if you can do a video on how quantum wave function relates to quantum entanglement I will love to know more!
Quantum Entanglement: th-cam.com/video/hiyKxhETXd8/w-d-xo.html 🤓
One of the best and beautiful explanations about quantum mechanics on the title: quantum wave function.
Nice boss👍
If quantum mechanics makes a physicist's head hurt imagine what it does to us poor civilians 😢
Civilians? Doesn't that imply that scientists are part of the military? ;)
@@arthurmee Mmm... Pedestrian? You know, metaphors...
Calm down... Everything is going to be Ok !!
@@joaquinel yes indeed. I like the figurative. And the winking emoticon at the end of my statement. I like using them because they convey the tone in which the text was delivered. Mmm symbols
@@arthurmee winking... On purpose? I thought it was just a blink, now the comment makes sense!
I already got that, I should have used one too. Love to play.
Specially after a brainhurting video.
It gets worse after PBS space time.
Everybody gangsta till the quantum waves start waving
So you never actually answer your question about what's waving.
It's one of the best videos I have ever seen..makes understanding things way simpler..thanks!
Nick, You mean you are not just going through the science experiments books and do another video that 50 other youtubers are doing over and over? I do love your fresh view on things. Keep it up. You have insights that are worthy.
If I'm not adding something new to the community, what's the point?
A function of probability. Why did it take him a sentence to explain something that other people take 4 essays to say?
"i" equals the square root of negative one.
"This is not abput the double slit expeiment."
Thank you.
4:58
Nick: We can't know anything exactly in quantum mechanics.
Pilot - Wave formulation: Walks into the room
;-)
On a more serious note though, I actually quite appreciate your being explicitly about the probabilistic nature of standard QM. Two many pop - sci and even actual textbook explanations totally gloss over just how _statistics-based_ quantum mechanics actually is. They talk as if we actually know _anything_ about individual particles with reasonable certainty when all we really know are the patterns that show up when we do the same experiment repeatedly.
Such a great video Nick. I love your vids they are always conceptually rich and plenty of good questions
1:23 #TeamAndroid
Dat Boxxy reference in 2019
Everything you though you knew about reality.
That's what waving.
Goodbye.
But why
I forcefully convinced myself that I understood the video. Thanks for your super awesome explanation. Nobody does it better than you.
Yes, it did help somewhat. The graphics make it more comprehensible. The humor helps too. The man has a talent for lucidity, reaching those who do not have a math or physics background, but who are interested in applying quantum ideas to other studies. Thanks!
You're welcome. Glad it helped. I'll take a "somewhat." This is tough material.
Still killin'it, Nick. Thanks a million.
01:39, i saw what you did there, Nick. Your *meme game* is on the same par as your scientific explainations. Love your content bro.
thank you so much. really it help me a lot. keep going on for spreading nice information like this.
This was a fantastic video. I've been studying machine learning lately, and this actually helped with understanding some of the underlying mathematical concepts there, as well.
Cool!
THIS IS AWESOME OMG IVE BEEN SO CONFUSED FOR SO LONG THANK YOU