5 Lesser Known (But Fascinating) Facts about Quantum Mechanics

[@ignitionfrn2223]

0:30 - Chapter 1 - Virtual particles 3:40 - Chapter 2 - No cloning theorem 6:30 - Chapter 3 - Wave particle duality 9:40 - Chapter 4 - Quantum tunneling 12:50 - Chapter 5 - It's all probability

[@DJDaveParks]

As Simon gets old with beard long and grey, they should give him a fireplace background, rocking chair, slippers and a pipe.

[@protatoplaysgames6918]

That's gorgeous a new channel

[@mini-carnage7540]

​@@protatoplaysgames6918I'd watch "Uncle Simon's, fireplace blaze's"

[@TheDopekitty]

I picture him like a bald Gandalf

[@manolingz]

I would love a Santa Claus Simon 💚

[@_andrewvia]

I want to know what's behind the door. Is it Schroedinger's door - open and closed at the same time?

[@simtexa]

One important thing I learned regarding quantum physics that had confused me for a very long time is that "observation" does not refer specifically to conscious observation but rather to _measurement_ of a quantum system, and the reason this tends to lead to various effects is less to do with the quantum system somehow knowing it's being watched, but rather a side effect of the interaction with the system required to observe it.

[@bubbathedm]

Clarke’s First Law: When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.

[@simonmeadows7961]

One of my favourite pairs of facts about quantum theory is that: 1) JJ Thomson won the 1906 Nobel Prize for Physics for proving the electron was a particle. 2) In 1937, his son, George Thomson, won the Nobel Prize for Physics for proving the electron was a wave. The one point my A level physics teacher said "You've got it" to me was when I said that an electron will be what an electron will be and that when we just look at from one perspective, it appears as a particle and from another perspective it appears to be a wave, but you cannot look at both perspectives simultaneously.

[@jeffdroog]

Your A level physics teacher should have just you to give up lol Sounds like "you've got it" couldn't be further from the truth,and also might be the only compliment you've ever received.Sorry your parents didn't love you.

[@meldamo]

Disregard the other wanker. Story sounds lovely and that's a good handle on it for a teen.

[@GeekGamer666]

@@meldamo Especially since that sentence doesn't actually make any sense. The punctuation alone is a hot mess. The only positive thing is the correct usage of "you've" and "your" which are typically mangled in situations like this one.

[@raduapreotesei9458]

@@jeffdroog You, on the other hand, must have been spoiled with love, seeing how you take time to spread love to absolute strangers in KZbin comment sections.

[@jeffdroog]

@raduapreotesei9458 I actually left home at the age of 14,and was homeless until I could get steady work at the age of 18.I was just also smarter,and tougher than this moron lol

[@NorthernXY]

I've taken a year of quantum physics. It's like those old ads in the 90s. This is your brain (show normal egg) this is your brain on quantum physics (show broken egg).

[@kruksog]

Here's the thing about quantum physics... All I need to decide whether I will listen to what someone says about it or not is whether they can do the math. The only way to talk about the quantum world (really) is via mathematics. Anyone who wants to talk quantum, but hasn't passed a calc course is someone I can disregard out of hand. Sounds mean, but it's really true. It's honestly true of a lot of physics. Physics would be philosophy without math.

[@andrewhodgson9750]

i keep thinkin they will announce"magic was real and this science proves it " yes i am that stupid

[@OldtimerOfSweden]

When me and my class mate at university were studying for our exam in quantum physics, we got so bored at one point that we started to calculate the probability for my eraser to tunnel through his kitchen wall into the living room on the other side. Fun fact - it was very small. And after that refreshing interlude we continued with our studies. That is how twisted quantum physics can make your brain. 😄

[@mikezappulla4092]

@@kruksoganyone who says you have to know the math, and calculus is absolutely not enough, I write off because they clearly don’t have conceptual insight. A PhD in advanced and theoretical mathematics could easily learn and solve much of the math used in quantum physics, but that doesn’t mean they have any better understanding about QP. Quantum physics is counter-intuitive, math is the opposite and designed to solve problems with precision and consistency, although sometimes with abstract methods, which is at complete odds with the fundamental physical phenomena it is describing in quantum physics.

[@kruksog]

@@mikezappulla4092 woah woah woah, calm your shit. I'm not saying calc is important. You need way way more than calculus to talk quantum. I'm saying if you haven't passed a calculus course, but start talking voodoo quantum metaphysical bullshit, I don't even need to think about it. I know you're full of shit. You literally cannot discuss quantum mechanics without math. You just can't. You can sort of do basic conceptual stuff. Like, I can teach a fifth grader about Schrodinger's cat, but I'm going to have to wave my hands when I talk about wave function collapse... because to get in depth and actually do the "physics..." You need math. The kind of insight you're talking about, without the ability to do the math is extremely rare. It may exist, but for 99.999% of people, that may as well not be the case.

[@johnburnside7828]

"When these fields get excited they vibrate, and when they vibrate they create particles". Sounds sexy!

[@steffenbendel6031]

No, the vibration does not create the particles, the vibrations are the particles.

[@michaelcordes]

Hey baby do you want to create some particles? I'm going to try that chat up line if I ever meet a bird that does science

[@steffenbendel6031]

@@michaelcordes But I hope you only refer to Photons. It needs to be really hot to create electron-positron pairs.

[@keithwalmsley1830]

First time I've heard human reproduction described this way!!! 🤣

[@danielprimern932]

​@@steffenbendel6031Trust me. It's just that hot.

[@jaymac6041]

Have a fantastic weekend everybody!

[@BarneySm0kesCrak]

You too

[@gentnerOG]

Don't tell me what to do.... lol jkjk

[@johnreinard]

“Are you just adding quantum before you say anything?” Antman Scott Lang

[@ardellolnes5663]

Honey, can you pick me up a quantum of milk, don't forget to put quantum gas in the uncertainty vehicle, and I need some quantum tums 😂😂😂😂

[@mycrazylife1111]

Morty: "What is it? The quantum carburetor?" Rick: "Quantum carburetor? Jesus Morty, you can't just add a sci-fi word to a car word and hope it means something... Looks like something's wrong with the micro-verse battery."

[@kaintshine]

Simon's layman terms go along with the professors and scientists I watch on KZbin, all increasing my understanding of the universe. Thanks Simon, keep adding wrinkles to my brain.

[@lemaygaming6952]

“If you think you understand Quantum Physics, you don’t understand Quantum Physics” - Some Science Dude (probably)

[@jamesleatherwood5125]

Maybe! But i CAN tell you how Star Trek's Heisenberg Compensator works. :) lolol

[@ClutchCargo001]

“I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics." - Richard Feynman, noted Science Dude

[@jamesleatherwood5125]

@@ClutchCargo001 maybe as a whole. But we are chipping away at that cloud of uncertainty. (Pun intended)

[@flyon9694]

Its like i understand the individual words but when combined i have to say its like another language lol

[@giselematthews7949]

That is a famous saying about Quatum Physics. I can't remember who said it. I remember de Grasse making that comment as a joke.

[@MattCombs-ge7ki]

He blinded me with science!

[@oldmandice2731]

Now I have that song in my head, thanks.

[@dannycolorado5875]

Science....SCIENCE...N. SCIENCE, I Say!!!!!😂😅

[@ThatNeilDude]

He blinded me with acid!

[@NetanelZZZ]

YES! I love new stuff 😂 Most latest videos are kinda common knowledge, but there have been several as of late, that are actually much more interesting and contain less-common knowledge. Thanks guys!

[@DullyDust]

Big agree! Another channel that I can highly recommend is the History of the Universe ^^ much longer episodes but comprehensive explanations of stuff like this

[@Mister_GOD.]

I've been trying to wrap my head around quantum mechanics for years and I find it wilder than sci-fi ever could be.

[@rubenyoungblood3167]

"The Universe insists on being slightly more complicated than that." Truer words of wisdom have never been spoken.

[@michael-4k4000]

Hahaha, sounds like a quote from Terrance Howard himself

[@jamesleatherwood5125]

In response to chapter 5. Yes. We have uncertainty at a quantum level, but somewhere between the quantum level and the atomic level this uncertainty turns into a certainty. After all, jupiter doesnt suddenly jump from place to place, and neither do atoms. But the things atoms are made of, even thier individual particles (well at least the electron) can. So somewhere between the size and energy of an electron and the size and energy of a proton (not talking charge which seems to be related to how a particle interacts with the electromagnetic field, independant of mass and total energy, though its hard to say that since the mass of individual atomic parts doesnt really change and neither does the charge) there is a physics rule we dont know yet that causes uncertainty to become certainty.

[@sheikyerbouti39]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure it's "measurement". By which measurement in quantum physics just means interacting with other particles. So an individual particle exhibits uncertainty, but in macroscopic objects (such as Jupiter) that are composed of many, many particles interacting (or being "measured") the wavefunction for each individual particle is forced to collapse to one of its many "certain" possibilities. Which is why you don't see macroscopic objects as a single entity exhibit uncertainty. Someone else please step in if I'm missing something!

[@jamesleatherwood5125]

@@sheikyerbouti39 i agree that thats the mechanism. But what counts as measurment, what counts as an observer, and what counts as uncertainty. Because even when you know an electrons location, even vaguely such as it starts here and theres a barrier in the way, even when you know the electron source and destination, you can, if you measure at the right time, find the electron on the other side of tge barrier. So its more than just "measurement" as in its more than "i have measured it here". Someone explained it to me this way. If you have measured a definite location of a particle, then it can only be the individual part of the wave. And because u picked a definite coordinate in space to measure, you cant know what the shape or frequency of the wave is. It wpuld be like picking one water molecule out of a wave and isolating it. You could say for sure where that water molecule is, but all by itself, it couldnt tell you if it was in a trough, on top of a peak or somewhere in between. Likewise from the other angle, if you measured the entire wave, from trough to peak, that information by itself could not tell you how many water molecules make up the wave or where any of the individual water molecules specifically were. In quantum mechanics its the same, just applied quantumly. If you are aware of the entire wave, you can use the wavelength to determine momentum. But you cant determine exact location bevause you are literally measuring whole of the space where the physical partical can be. It would be like trying to specify where an individual water drop is by measuring the volume of the fishtank its in. So the more you know about where a partical COULD BE, the less you know where it actually is. And the more you know and zoom in on an individual partical, the less you are certain of where it might otherwise be. And since you need to know possible locations to be able to determine momentum, you cant measure both momentum and location.

[@sheikyerbouti39]

@@jamesleatherwood5125 Yes but you're taking "measurement" and "observation" by their everyday definition, not how those terms are used in quantum mechanics. They're a bit misleading terms, but to "observe" or "measure" doesn't necessarily mean by a human observer. Any time a particle reacts or encounters another particle, it is being "observed" or "measured" and the wavefunction collapses to "choose" one of it's possible states. So measurement is any interaction with another particle, in which case that other particle would be the "observer" I guess. This is where people misunderstand, and where you start hearing things like "Quantum mechanics tells us nothing exists until it is observed. So you as an individual are creating your reality around you" and other vague, pseudoscientific things. If you're this interested and my explanations aren't answering your questions in a satisfying way, I HIGHLY recommend checking out the channel PBS Space Time. You can search "PBS Space Time Quantum Mechanics" and the first thing should be a 22 video playlist. They're roughly 10-20 minute videos, and they do a great job giving a solid explanation of these questions you're asking. Certainly much better than I can over text in comments haha! And there is much, MUCH more quality physics/cosmology content on that channel!

[@semaj_5022]

​@sheikyerbouti39 I think the terms "measurement" and observation" are part kf what throws everybody off when it comes to things like quantum uncertainty and wave function collapse. Those words already have a defined meaning in most of our minds, so that's what we'll imagine when we hear them, even if the alternate definition is provided. Unfortunately it is very difficult to describe quantum events both accurately and simply. PBS Spacetime does come as close as it gets, but they get pretty high level at times too. Still, a great channel and I also recommend them to anyone who's interested in this stuff or astronomy.

[@jamesleatherwood5125]

@@semaj_5022 see though. I Its not that simple though. You have to define the terms. And if every particle acts like an "observer" to every other particle there wouldnt be quantum uncertainty at all. Lets use the example fr9m the video and talk about the sun. The density of the core of the sun can be said to have quantum particles so close together there is a slew of particles observong other particles. If the "every particle can be an observer to another" thing is right, considering you need quantum uncertainty to allow tunneling for fusion, and considering that "observing" is a form of measurement as far as quantum mechanics goes, and considering that observation and measurement both collapse the wave function, to observe a particle is to measure/observe it, is to collapse the wave, is to get rid of uncertainty, is to prevent quantum tunneling. And to the double slit experiment, where putting a camera before the slits still allows the wave function, but putting a camera after the slits produces a double line in the fashion of particles. Why does a camera count as an observer, but the atoms on the back side of the material the slits are in, and for that matter the detector itself, which is literally measuring the location of the photon, are not considered observers, quantumly, since if the detector WAS considered an observer, the wave function would collapse and you would never produce a wave pattern. So measurement and observation cannot be the same thing, quantumly. And while measuring most quantum things requires observing it in order to apply a measurement and will collapse the wave function, in an instance where you can take a measurement without observation, rare as that is, the wave function does not collapse. Si it has to be more complicated than "all particles can observe themselves" and measurement must not always mean observation in the same way that observation can happen with measurement (think about the last wildflower you saw, and can you say with certain measurement how far away it was from you? Its relative size to its surroundings? Its absolute size? How many cells it has? How tall? Etc etc) And measurement does not collapse the wave function, only observation. No matter how you define it. PS after re reading that, i realized the last few paragraphs kind of counter some of the arguments i was making in the first paragraph, but this was an instance where as i typed out the logic (that particles do not affect other particles in such a way as to collapse the wave function, otherwise quantum uncertainty wouldnt even exist was sound logic and right, how i tried to explain WHY particles do not intertact with each other in such a way as to collapse the waver function was completely wrong. What i should have said to describe my point was that even if particles could count as observers, they would function as observers who arent measuring) i realized my earlier logic about the why was wrong. Either way my points stand about other partticles not affecting the wave function the way a measurement does.

[@edhart9409]

12-20-2008 Waken from sleep around 3am, I opened my eyes and saw three human like silhouettes walking past the foot of my bed. Frozen in fear, I watched as the first two walked through the wall. Figuring the worst to happen was to be killed, I sat up and ask “How’d they do that?” He paused and turned to me saying, “Its easy. We use tri-germeric recycling. Changing the harmonics of cellular structures, in order to pass through solid objects.” Then he turned and walked through the wall. I laid back down, then sat up and wrote down what happened. In the morning I had no recollection of the event, until I saw the note. Then it all came back.

[@michaelcordes]

Small, short lived and unpredictable. You gave an incredibly accurate description of me.

[@DullyDust]

Big mood! Same here

[@Bubbaist]

BTW The first scientist to theorize that light is made up of particles rather than waves was Ibn Sina in the 11th century. His contemporaries thought it was crazy, and it would be another six centuries before Newton came up with the same idea.

[@johnelliott7850]

I've read innumerable books on quantum physics, most reassuring me that it's all rather straightforward. Yeah.

[@tiagomiotto1067]

Oh man how I wish I had a brain to comprehend 1%of what Simon just explain 🤯🤯

[@kylestanley4734]

You can witness quantum tunneling in your kitchen. Get a clear glass, fill it with water, look down into rhe glass an note that you can no longer see theough the glass, press your fingers hard on the outer surface and they appear as light is able to tunnel through the reflective interface.

[@MSjackiesaunders]

I'll be honest; I have no knowledge about quantum mechanics. And at 74, I think my outmoded understanding of physics, as minimal as it is, means I am totally lost. 😂

[@ShreddyMacFunTits]

Welcome to the club

[@FrazerBoorman]

This is the best explanation I’ve heard :)

[@nancyhope2205]

Thanks for this excellent presentation.

[@Strype13]

"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics." - Richard Feynman

[@chrisreilly1290]

11:13 This makes some inherit sense if you were to hit a wall with a ball, some momentum would transfer from the ball to the wall and then from the wall to the other side. Really strange that this could happen on an atomic scale though

[@gordonbrinkmann]

I'm glad you said the (A+B)² = A²+B² term was a simple notation, otherwise it has a very trivial solution making it possible: if either A or B or both are 0, this is true. But if the premise were both had to be different from 0, then the equation could not be true.

[@isabelwhite3999]

There's a theory (in The Self Aware Universe by Amit Goswami) that quantum mechanics represents thought/consciousness. I watched this thinking of quantum particles as thoughts; and it kind of makes sense. Got thinking about the small percentage that get's through

[@ericthompson3982]

I've always loved the notion that if I run fast enough at a wall enough times, I might just... appear on the other side of the wall. I'd likely annihilate myself in the attempt, but the possibility exists. And that's just neat.

[@jfbeam]

I love how when talking about the double slit experiment, no one ever talks about how things interact with the matter of the slit itself. The casimir experiment fails to account for man's inability to make a _perfectly_ flat plate (much less two), hold them nearly one electron apart... in a perfect vacuum, and then measure the force between them. At that scale there's multiple things at play.

[@wadegraham9071]

9:49 If you know where that tennis ball clip comes from i hope you just had a good laugh like i did.

[@grantsmith2218]

Helps me forget about my cancer

[@danielniklas1766]

Inside that empty vacuum you so aptly described space, exists what we call dark energy which is responsible for the expansion of the universe, also dark matter exists which makes up about 2/3 of the observable universe. Dark matter creates ripples in the space-time continuum, this is akin to black holes where Einstein's theory of general relativity and Newton's law of physics start to break down. There is also a central conflict with general relativity and the quantum theory of gravity.

[@Spiritus_Invictus]

my head hurts already just 2min in the vid. and I had to listen to everything and now just laying in my bed contemplating

[@aremoreequal]

12:24 How do they know it's the same electron on the other side and not one of the electrons from the barrier being knocked out (and maybe replaced by an electron from the wave side)? Also, isn't everything at least slightly porous on the quantum level? I mean, it's an electron. Everything that the wall is made out of to stop the electron or wave of electrons has electrons, and they're constantly orbiting around atoms and such, isn't it mathematically possible that an electron manages to pass through part of the wall where all of the electrons in the barrier are moving out of the way like street lights flipping green just as you're about to have to slow down but now instead you can just keep going? If the electron doesn't collide with anything in the barrier, then nothing stops it. If it does collide with something in the barrier, another electron, it could cause a chain reaction like a bunch of billiard balls and an electron ends up getting knocked out the other side. Or many electrons in the case of effervescence.

[@pleasethink4789]

The wall is not a physical wall but an energy barrier. The energy required to traverse the energy barrier is greater than the energy available to the electron. As an analogy, imagine you have a bb gun that you're using to fire a bb straight up into the air perpendicularto the ground. Say, the bb gun strictly has only enough power to fire the bb 100 feet vertically, without variation in its power. The 100 ft maximum height traveled by the bb is similar to the energy barrier. Quantum tunneling is like the bb appearing at 120ft height.

[@matthewmcgrath8886]

I'd love to see a show dedicated to facts about Simon.

[@synapse349]

A much more tangible explanation of tunneling is how electricity can flow through a switch despite the contact surfaces having a layer of oxide on them.

[@patricialongo5870]

The story "The Long Earth" by Terry Pratchett goes into the virtual reality bit. It's also really long.

[@JohnBuckmaster-sw3wm]

Wow… Super interesting and very difficult to hang in there and consume real time… And I’ve got 18 credits in quantum theory… I’m gonna have to watch that one again

[@sam1812seal]

The joys of being a parent: teaching your offspring about wave particle duality just before their physics teacher tries to teach them that light is a wave. Finally I have my revenge on all my old physics teachers. 😈

[@Idellphany]

Thank you

[@Henpitts]

Now you need to discuss the Infinite Improbability Drive.

[@davideyres955]

“There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened.” Douglas Adams. So this is why no one understands quantum mechanics. So I feel good that this is all Greek to me because I don’t want to be responsible for ending the universe. Now I’m off the make sure I fully don’t understand by making a good brownian motion producer. A good strong hot cup of tea.

[@isoplus3513]

I just try to memorize Quantum mechanics, I gave up trying to understand the physics behind it...

[@MrAtrophy]

Bonus fact Quantum tunneling has far exceeded the speed of light or appear to by traveling instantly, depending on who you ask. edit, Mozart has been broadcast at 4.7 times the speed of light by Gunter Nimtz.

[@NeilCrouse99]

You stated that a vacuum has no energy? I've heard Lawrence Kraus state that even though it is a vacuum with presumably "Nothing" in it. There is still energy that can be measured and are "virtual particles" popping in and out of existence.

[@virt1one]

well, it has energy. then it doesn't. then it has negative energy. then it doesn't again. So on the average, it doesn't. If you want to talk about anything specific in quantum mechanics, you have to talk in terms of averages.

[@QBCPerdition]

Quantum field theory would seem, to a layman with a little QM understanding, to explain particle/wave duality. If all particles are just concentrated waves in the quantum field, then it would be no surprise they act like waves, and being concentrated, they can act as particles, too.

[@simpletruth5224]

Wow, BOOM 🤯 Mind is blown

[@kadourimdou43]

Physicists understand QM, what they know is The Measurement Problem remains unexplained. It’s why the theory has different interpretations.

[@seanehle8323]

Wave-particle duality is exactly saying that a wave is a particle and a particle is a wave. Things that are true on the quantum scale are perfectly counter-intuitive on our human (macro) scale. To wit: uncertainty isn't some fancy special thing about quantum mechanics. It's just a property of waves. A wave with 1 peak has well defined location, but poorly defined wavelength. A wave with many peaks has well defined wavelength, but poorly defined location. It's as simple as that. The weird thing is that particles are described by waves with such ridiculous precision that we just shrug our shoulders and accept that particles *are* waves.

[@dannycolorado5875]

Okay...but What??? Explain again please!😂😮😅😊

[@dominicwaghorn6459]

That was cool thsbks😊

[@denissavgir2881]

The ball behaves like an electron at the quantum level too, but with a big difference. A ball refers to to trillions of particles, including electrons, but they are still all governed by quantum mechanics. When you throw it at a wall, each particle faces a probability of quantum tunneling. However, for the ball to fully quantum tunnel through the wall, every single one of its particles would have to tunnel at the exact same time and end up perfectly aligned to recreate the ball on the other side, which is extremely unlikely. That's why a ball doesn't tunnel through the wall. Though some of its particles might. If you were to have quadrillions to the power of quadrillions of balls all being thrown at walls quadrillions of quadrillions of times per nanosecond and you do this for quadrillions of billions of trillions of years, then one of those balls just might end up flying through the wall as the probability for all of its particles to tunnel perfectly to recreate it on the other side is non-zero.

[@aloluk]

Frogs couldn't exist without quantum tunnelling either.

[@aceca5147]

Love that thumbnail

[@RCCraigoOnline]

One lesser known facts about quantum physics is that there are facts about quantum physics.

[@DennisRash]

After deep diving into quantum mechanics years back I simply stopped thinking sane. I just stopped looking into it after awhile. It will drive you insane.

[@dannycolorado5875]

Insane but happy...no?!

[@anirban7493]

Watching this while simultaneously solving for the relative probability of quantum tunneling happening through a step potential. What are the odds 😂🤣

[@danielniklas1766]

Btw when a black hole consumes antimatter, does it decrease in mass?

[@tevvya]

Another fascinating--and very common--fact about quantum mechanics is that it is critical to photosynthesis in plant leaves. Check out the videos by Jim Al-Khalili on this subject.

[@robertdalecheetham4587]

Never watch these vids right before bed!

[@chrisreilly1290]

12:07 am I incorrect in thinking the pressure from gravity is what causes stars to conduct fusion?

[@kit_horror]

What if it's less about the idea of matter particles not being created or destroyed and more about maintaining an equalibrium in the universes energy? IF one was to be destroyed, another must instantaneously be created and visa versa of an equivalent energy

[@palantir135]

There seems to be a relation between quantum tunneling and photosynthesis.

[@ryanrigley]

This was a tough one to understand, but that's probably typical.

[@XiaolinDraconis]

Evanescence... I thought she made the word up, never thought to look it up.

[@DutchObserver]

Quantum tunneling, being the reason that the sun has nuclear fusion going on at all, sounds very much like a quick fix for a bug in the simulation we're living in "Hi, how can I help you? .... Sorry, what's that? .... Yes, it definitely should shine! .... It doesn't? Are you sure? .... Have you tried turning it off and on again? .... Oh dear. Well, we'll take a look what we can do about that .... Two weeks at least I'm afraid .... By the end of the day? Noooo, that's definitely not possi... Yes, but how can we... OKAY, OKAY! Calm down! Jeez! We'll figure something out, okay? Just don't expect a stable, permanent solution!"

[@VorSaulus]

Quantum Power Taps (QPTs) when?

[@Familylawgroup]

Do the energy and mass constantly principles apply across different,ensigns? Can extra energy appear from a balanced equation in another multiverse before transformation?

[@Ray_of_Light62]

Those fourteen fields truly exists. The problem is, they interact continuously between themselves, but we can only see the end result of all interaction, in the form of different particles and sub particles all dancing in Space and following the flow of time. Problem is, both Spaced and Time are entities necessary to harmonise our perception of the Universe with our scientific measurements. This is why our Science hasn't progressed in the last eighty years...

[@Shinde425]

2:25 “Say my name”

[@keithrobshaw179]

Even in empty space if you can see stars there must be photons. So is there really such thing as “empty space “?🤷🏼

[@Sanquinity]

Even completely empty space isn't completely empty. Even when you remove all dust and all photons, there is still a little bit of energy coming from quantum fluctuations. So truly empty space doesn't, and cannot, exist within the universe.

[@toads807]

Did you say vibrations? Terrence Howard has entered the chat.

[@Sparce808]

If one understands sound, quanti make perfect sense

[@Killer_Kovacs]

Time signature makes particles different

[@debilista]

Quantum mechanics is when the difference between expectations and observations is so big that physicists have to come up with some 'dark' things because they got no idea why their calculations are so bad and they dont want to look like idiots who dont know what is going on. I make up numbers on reports very frequently as an engineer, so I am somewhat of a scientist myself like the quantum guys by that standard.

[@PhilBertran]

The good kind of weird. Not the bad kind of weird.

[@aroncanapa5796]

i dont get why people are afraid to attempt to read or understand things they dont understand, im a computer scientist/software programmer/full stack dev, and my neighbor who always claims he cant understand a computer wont let me teach him when ive trained dozens of people that now work in the field

[@jamesharp3445]

I didnt understand QM before...and now dont understand it even more.

[@docwhogr]

if you say "a wave" my follow up questing will be "a wave of what??"

[@MasuelSkvorcov]

So the matter is basically just a form of energy which itself is some kind of a vibration. But if matter doesn’t exist does it even matter?

[@nunyadayumbusiness591]

It is an astounding amount of energy in an astoundingly small volume of space, and an astoundingly stable way to store that energy. (A 100% conversion of 1000 grams of matter into energy will release the equivalent of just over 21 Million tons of TNT)

[@aremoreequal]

The ocean is made up of particles and it has waves, so I never understood why light being a wave OF particles is difficult to comprehend. Otherwise, what would the light wave be made of? It's a wave of light particles. They are probably rubbing up against each other the same way the particles of water and salt and other things in the ocean are rubbing up against each other. I don't see how you can have a wave without particles, personally. If light was one giant particle, it wouldn't likely be able to flex and bend.

[@Nupetiet]

I strongly suggest not using "knowledge" language to describe quantum uncertainty. It took me longer than it should have to understand the concept because I kept hearing it described as an inability to precisely measure quantities, rather than these quantities being fundamentally imprecise. It's not that you can't _measure_ precise quantities at the same time-it's that the quantum object cannot _have_ precise quantities at the same time.

[@Alasdair-Morrison]

This explains why my bank account is always losing money 🧐Must be the new Quantum savings account that's been quantum tunnelling money out of my account! 😧

[@NathanMeyers-po5bp]

That A^2 B^2 etc formula works if a and b both equal 1. Therefore quantum anything's = quantum everythings = quantum nothings + 1. ... I just made that up

[@vonneely1977]

Quantum tunneling = Terrain clipping for reality 🖥

[@stevesloan6775]

When considering that particles can not come from nowhere, are we considering all the missing mass in the Universe???

[@jsackett42160]

JESUS CHRIST, watching this gave me a headache. I was watching, trying to follow along, but by the end of the video, I was just seeing unicorns and rainbows. 😂😂😂

[@haptichugs2855]

It took me a minute to realize that he was saying "error correction"...

[@TenKurVynas]

virtual particles = virtual reality. welcome to the _simuverse_

[@TenKurVynas]

though there is a high probability of the video being broadcast somewhere from the simonverse 🤭

[@josephcharles2917]

Are you refering to creating a copy of existing quantum states as in "give me a random quantum state that we know should exist" but we cant? Wouldnt we be able to copy "KNOWN" current states or is a quanrum compurer in a just abso Lutely constant quantum state? What about using the quantum computers in tandem with existing systems?

[@AustinBranson]

Hi from ky....much love..❤🤍

[@stevesloan6775]

When considering that particles can not come from nowhere, are we considering all the missing mass in the Universe??? As a universe with what we consider 7%…. We must essentially exist for very little of time from an outside absorber…yes! 🙁

[@ashproof]

Already having studied Photons made me feel smert!

[@Crioten]

Starfishes love you

[@notmyrealname1894]

Sending you the bill for the Tylenol after listening to this one.

[@drunkentriloquist9993]

Wait a second A vacuum and The Deadpool Atom empty space and VPs and 4 slices of bread in a toaster all on max..., which pops first. And witch cooks the best

[@blijebij]

I think quantum mechanics&field theory is not yet done, like we have explored only half of it.

[@josephcharles2917]

At this point im about to make nmy own atom smasher and make a quantum teleporter

[@thumpyloudfoot864]

Technically Light is a fluid... Water and Air are both fluids that have waves but are made up of individual particles....

[@keithlutman5611]

My brain hurts.

[@KyleMcClellan-yh6xr]

Back in my day when the math didn't match the observation we called it being wrong. Now they call it quantum 😂❤️