The SIMPLEST Explanation of QUANTUM MECHANICS in the Universe!

[@SabineHossenfelder]

The more of Arvin's videos you watch, the more intuitive you'll find it :)

[@hyperduality2838]

Two state vectors related by a complex phase (a photon) are said to be in the same quantum state -- duality! SINE is dual to COSINE -- the word 'co' means mutual and implies duality. Waves are dual. Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry. Point particles are dual -- Generalization is dual to localization, wholes are dual to parts -- holons. Waves are dual to particles -- quantum duality. Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Space is dual to time -- Einstein. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.

[@YayComity]

Yes! No gobbledegook here.

[@YayComity]

It might just be my ignorance or poor attention but no one seems to mention "re-coherence" or whatever it would be called. In principle couldn't a photon that was measured be sent back through a double slit somehow and exhibit wave properties again? Or even be entangled with another? What would happen to its spin? And if it decohered again would it be the same photon (or electron) and have the same spin it had? If spin is conserved, it must have had it as a wave and after the wave collapses and after the wave spreads out again. If recoherence is a thing, couldn't that be used to get a grasp on the measurement problem? Might it not be easier to experimentally determine when a previously measured decohered particle recoheres than vice versa? Sorry for gobbledegooking it all back up :)

[@croozerdog]

was watching your vids and got linked here by youtube, very nice (:

[@croozerdog]

@@lavkmr1 yes darling?

[@sol_mental]

This was indeed very clarifying. The quantization of the universe is like "pixels in a screen". There's never signal in-between two pixels, the light is either coming from one or the other. But put together enough pixels on a small enough area and you won't even notice it's pixelated, you'll start to form other patterns that your brain will use to understand what's going on. This is just FANTASTIC! Thanks a lot for the video!!

[@thedeemon]

Note: in the maths of QM position is not quantized in the sense of being discrete, space is continuous, the set of eigenvalues of position operator is continuous, so it's not really about "pixels". We see interactions at certain locations mainly because it's interactions with atoms and atoms are localised.

[@sol_mental]

@@thedeemon yeah, that was just a comparison to make better sense of what's going on. I'm not saying space is a great big tv with undetectable pixels xD but thinking it is helps (me) a lot to understand quantization and the different states in general. But as philosophy always says: don't seriously generalize everything into one basket, it'll get full and almost nothing will fit your description.

[@DavidPysnik]

@@thedeemon Yes, the math is done in continuous spaces with great accuracy, but, at a fundamental level, it is still an open question as to whether what we call space in reality is truly continuous in the same manner as various mathematical spaces. For all we know, there may be a "pixelation" to space and time that we have not yet detected, and some scientific theories have postulated this and are even attempting to detect if this exists.

[@Maltiez]

Not measurements make particle-like behaviors, but its wavy behavior itself that somewhat resembles (not quite, but still) standing waves. There is clear distinction between measurement part of QM and wave function part (just take unitary evolution operator and non-unitary measurement operators for example). Actually if we consider QM as methodology and actual models like Schrödinger equation like distinct theories or models, that it will make much more sense, and QM become just a methodology of measuring wave functions, with which we can build different models like Schrödinger equation, Pauli equation e.t.c. "No one can explain how wave collapse occurs" - actually not, there is an explanation, and quite correct one: wave function (that representing all our knowledge about system, by definition) collapse is just a process of bayesian update of that knowledge, that results in collapse. Collapse is not a physical process, it is artifact of scientific method, and it appear in every developed enough field of science, but it so pronounced only in specific fields, like QM. The Measurement problem is actually, as it seems to me, more educational problem, and it is more deep that it seems, and it apllies to whole science including mathematics (where there is a debate about proper definition of probability as limit of consecutive measurements (classical one) or measure of our ignorance/knowledge (bayesian one)). What can be deeper than equation? Model? May be model is deeper, but I think that author is not talking about whole model, but instead about not scientific but philosophical... things. 11:34 - Wrong, its wave function (or more precisely whole atom wave function) is evolved in smooth continuous way despite of discrete nature of its basis in given set of physical quantities. And then we take a measurement and collapse it in one of particular basis state. Actually nature of QM is continuous due continuity nature of wave function. Discreteness is emerged from continuity in specific cases (simplest one: just any potential well). Otherwise this video is quite good. Not mathematical and correct enough for me, but I'm just some nerd and not target audience. And stuff mentioned above has not been fully settled down yet even in theoretical physics community.

[@deepghetto8968]

You're a credit to scientific community Arvin. As an intellectual not in this field, your explanations are an incredible resource.

[@paulbizard3493]

Well sais. I too am an intellectual not in this field, not in any field btw.

[@hyperduality2838]

SINE is dual to COSINE -- the word 'co' means mutual and implies duality. Waves are dual. Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry. Point particles are dual -- Generalization is dual to localization, wholes are dual to parts -- holons. Waves are dual to particles -- quantum duality. Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Space is dual to time -- Einstein. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.

[@paulbizard3493]

@hyperduality2838 Repent! As a representative of the true quantum dogma, I urge you to Repent!

[@FryMonkey23]

​@@hyperduality2838 Crazy is dual to sane

[@hyperduality2838]

@@FryMonkey23 Subgroups are dual to subfields -- the Galois correspondence! "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Galois was actually killed in a duel (dual). Integration (summations, syntropy, synergy) is dual to differentiation (differences, entropy, energy). Syntropy is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics! Synergy is dual to energy -- the 5th law of thermodynamics! Energy is duality, duality is energy. Duality (energy) is being conserved! Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy -- gravitational energy is dual. There are new laws of physics.

[@timothycwinn5993]

Thanks Arvin! This was one of the best and most succinct intuitive “explanations” of “quantum mechanics”. It helps understand what it is and what it isn’t. It seems like a mathematic equation(s) verses an intuitive understanding of reality. The intuitive answers remain hidden within the equations that are used for quantum mechanics. It was very helpful as I try to generate more intuitive theories of my own.

[@oremazz3754]

@@marcosolo6491 Since 2022 there has been a new interpretation that gives an intuitive understanding of quantum mechanics, even more, it proposes how to join it with the other core theory of modern physics (Relativity). In amazon, there is a short book that describes it (Space, main actor of quantum and relativistic theories). The clue is in understanding space as one step forward of Einstein's proposal; a dynamic space existence in oscillation (Schrodinger's wavefunction). From the intuitive concept that existence is a combination of stuff and media, the stuff is the elementary particles of the standard model and the media is the wavy space whose presence in 3D is intermittent. Two entities that coexist together! not one entity that sometimes is a particle, and another is a wave; so the particle will be present in 3D meanwhile its space is... no duality issue! it's simple as that. This oscillatory presence is the reason why energy is discrete (Planck's great contribution). On each new cycle, the particle will assume aleatorily only one of its many valid solutions; this is the reason why on all the measurements/observations there is only one valid solution present (name as collapse). For example, in a hydrogen atom, the space oscillates at a frequency of about 10^24, so if an observation of 1 femtosecond (10^-15) is done, the electron has been present 1 billion times; i.e., 10^9 eigenstates; this is why the math considers the superposition of solutions... at last! nothing weird about the measurement. This short explanation shows that modern physics can be intuitive... all the historic problem comes because the old interpretations were partially successful, leaving quantum theory with many unsolved questions... hope you will like it, regards

[@oremazz3754]

@@marcosolo6491 You are right, this theory has a scientific paper. For a general person, I refer the Amazon booking that explain it in a simple language than a research paper. Nethertheless, what is important is the reasoning giren withan intuitive view. As any New theory, it will have people that will not accept and others that the will do.... an expirement it also proponed in another paper to verified this theory... veré interesting, hope you will lote it, regards

[@MichaelQShaw]

If you say so

[@hyperduality2838]

SINE is dual to COSINE -- the word 'co' means mutual and implies duality. Waves are dual. Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry. Point particles are dual -- Generalization is dual to localization, wholes are dual to parts -- holons. Waves are dual to particles -- quantum duality. Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Space is dual to time -- Einstein. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.

[@freefall9832]

Misuse of mathematics. No mechanic involved.

[@markmoore5222]

Arvin, why would you use a visual of the Bohr orbital electron model to illustrate the discrete change of energy from 3.4eV to 13.6eV (time code 11:09)? Wouldn't it have been better to show the probability cloud changing instantaneously?

[@ArvinAsh]

That's a nice suggestion. I agree that would be better.

[@jdbrinton]

You are extremely skilled at explaining concepts! Could I recommend a video on vector spaces? A lot of these explainers just glance over the vector space and I think it's key to understanding how "everything possibility happens at the same time" in QM.

[@brothermine2292]

Detection does NOT necessarily imply "particle." (1:22) An alternative explanation is that the rest of the wave jumped to the detection point, even though some of the wave may have been far away a moment earlier. This behavior violates the Locality assumption, but not enough is known about the fundamental nature of spacetime to have confidence in Locality, particularly given other "spooky action at a distance" phenomena such as entanglement and wavefunction collapse. There's plenty of evidence to support the conclusion that matter travels as waves, not particles... interference in particular.

[@paulc96]

Thanks Arvin, for another great video on QM. Since it is a subject you have covered many times, explaining many different aspects of QM, have you ever considered making a video including more about the Philosophy of QM ? Without getting too technical, I mean the difference between what is actually "Real" (Ontology) and what we think we "Know" (Epistemology), might make for a different and interesting video. Thanks again Arvin and Best Wishes from Wales.

[@ArvinAsh]

yes, it is a good idea.

[@hyperduality2838]

Two state vectors related by a complex phase (a photon) are said to be in the same quantum state -- duality! SINE is dual to COSINE -- the word 'co' means mutual and implies duality. Waves are dual. Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry. Point particles are dual -- Generalization is dual to localization, wholes are dual to parts -- holons. Waves are dual to particles -- quantum duality. Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Space is dual to time -- Einstein. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.

[@Tomas.Malina]

Nice explanation, now you can naturally continue to mention coherences and virtual particles, as there actually are intermediate steps when a particle changes states. And also, that the quantized states only apply to bound particles, not to free ones - a nice concept to illustrate is the Dirac sea (and maybe expand on its importance in some of the less known GUTs) 🙂

[@juggyfreak622]

This is actually the first quantum mechanics video that I could follow until the end ... nice explanation !

[@Murtie85]

Super video, I've watched lots of your videos and I'd been trying so hard to understand it better that I watched other channels and read some articles, I should have known you'd help me fill in the blanks eventually :)

[@waqaraliabbasikalhoro5955]

Thanks sir,you're really doing tremendous sort of work .students like us are very thankful teacher like you .🙏

[@iggyzane]

Wow, beautiful Arvin Ash 🧡Thank you!

[@anywallsocket]

Einstein did not think entanglement was spooky in of itself, he thought the instantaneous 'effect' of measuring one entangled pair on the other was spooky. And the measurement problem is still unresolved, so nature remains spooky.

[@shethtejas104]

Hello Arvin, how are you. Am returning to your vids after a while. Right now I am enjoying northern lights in far north of Finland. The folklore in lapland goes that the aurora is a princess who is dancing! Thank you for yet another marvellous video on a topic so complex that great physicists also find it hard at times. My question to you is this : Do you agree with the approach taken by most schools across the world where children are still taught Neil Bohr's model as an introduction to atomic theory? Shouldn't it be the probability model which is more accurate?

[@ArvinAsh]

yes, I agree that the probability model would be more accurate. The Bohr model however is useful in chemistry and as a stepping stone, but I do think that we underestimate what young students are capable of understanding.

[@paulmichaelfreedman8334]

@@ArvinAsh The bohr model describes the collapsed wave function if you'd ask me. What we see and measure. Our seeming reality.

[@shethtejas104]

​@@ArvinAsh Thank you for your time in answering my question. Your last line is profound and I agree with it. Young minds these days process a lot more information than we did in our youth. May be a supplementary chapter could be suffixed to physics textbooks of teenagers which would not be a part of exams (exams suck anyway), but would be there for purely voluntary reading. So for example, in the same text book where Netonian gravity is introduced, there could be a brief chapter at the end that would delve into how Einstein viewed gravity. Or, there could be a supplementary chapter on quantum mechanics. Schools are doing a very bad job on an average at stoking critical questioning and thinking. This could change. I am ranting so much because there are many things that I found out about physics/maths after I graduated purely because I had curiosity and there was google. Example : no body told me in school that a perfect circle doesn't exist. Or, the laws of physics are called laws not because someone derived them using maths but because we have observed something over and over and then formulated it into a law. Laws of Thermodynamics could well be violated but no one is yet to observe them. Give more chances to young minds to dare challenge what exists in maths/physics. 100% agreed.

[@ooggabooga9348]

So true. Our class lectures in chemistry stopped at Neil Bohr's model and anything beyond it was never discussed even in higher classes. I am finding all about it from Arvin's videos. Also why it is included in chemistry?? Chemistry has limited use of this subject like explaining valency and chemical reactions and periodic table. This should be included in Physics so that younger people are better able to decide if they want to pursue this as higher studies.

[@grajalessuarez8272]

Awesome, beautifoul, im Chymestry farmacology student and this videos are very help me in chemystry. Please, relize more videos about chymestry and physics, or quantum mecanics and biology, I LOVE YOU SO MUCH, SALUDOS DESDE MEXICO WEY

[@florincoter1988]

Laws of classical mechanics deal in mathematical points. Is this intuitive? Is the moment of inertia tensor an intuitive notion? Every medicine in the wrong quantity and treatment can become a deadly affair.

[@nearspaceresearch]

Great job! I love your videos in part because you refuse to conflate the fascinating fundamentals of physics with a personal pet hypothesis or philosophy. Though you are willing to express opinions, you don't disguise them or hype them. And you clearly acknowledges the limits of what we currently know. Indeed, a simple straightforward explanation of the basics. I'll be sharing this with my QM classes!

[@schmetterling4477]

You are sharing internet nonsense with other students? Dude, there goes everybody's respect for you. ;-)

[@anthonycarbone3826]

I had to watch this video twice. I wanted to watch it the day it came out but I did not have the time on the day it came out. It seems to touch on the answer but covers so much it leaves a mind bewildered. I have a feeling physicists have to realize that everything being in motion through the various universal energy fields is part of the solution. A fixed fully controlled experiment on earth concerning the quantum realm just does not exist. When a computer can compute the relative motion of particles through the universe energy fields than the answer might be possible. I am currently under the impression that humans do not even know all the various energy fields involved. On a side note I have heard one wild speculation that there might only exist one electron wave that pervades all of space and time.

[@Baka_Komuso]

Arvin! Never a misfluency. And such perfect writing. Leaves me speechless but always enlightened.

[@steviejd5803]

Dear Arvin, your content and presentation are first class, thank you so much for taking your precious time and educating us, I feel so lucky to have found you.

[@ArvinAsh]

I appreciate that! Glad it was helpful.

[@mrtienphysics666]

@@ArvinAsh these videos will inspire a new generation of physics students and potential physicists. Good job!

[@b7781]

Fantastic explanation. Thank you for bringing complex concepts to the realm of simplicity.

[@NoActuallyGo-KCUF-Yourself]

[Holds Arvin's beer] [Watches video] Sorry, your beer was in a superposition of full and empty.

[@hyperduality2838]

Full is dual to empty. Two state vectors related by a complex phase (a photon) are said to be in the same quantum state -- duality! SINE is dual to COSINE -- the word 'co' means mutual and implies duality. Waves are dual. Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry. Point particles are dual -- Generalization is dual to localization, wholes are dual to parts -- holons. Waves are dual to particles -- quantum duality. Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Space is dual to time -- Einstein. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.

[@dukenikos]

This is the best video I 've ever seen. I would like someday to discuss with you some ideas I have about the universe, the time and the possible virtual futures of it.

[@zeropain9319]

Nice video! I always like the basics. Funny, you show the electron orbit analogy is wrong, and then a minute later you show an electron orbiting a nucleus? I like videos like this, the basics are so important.

[@juliavixen176]

The animations and pictures used in "Popular Science" style presentations like this one are extremely misleading, and do not communicate what is actually happening physically or mathematically. I don't know why they don't use better diagrams... oh actually I do know why: that would require actual time and effort, rather than licensing some cheep stock footage that looks cool, while the voice narration contains the actual information. There are much better videos on KZbin that teach actual Quantum Mechanics. For example, @PhysicsExplainedVideos is really good. "Atoms and Sporks" @atomsandsporks6760 is really good. "Huygens Optics" is really good, and actually does real, physical, experiments; it's not all just math. There's lots more... um, "ScienceClic English" is good... "Looking Glass Universe"... "Simulating Physics" has some good videos of wave diffraction stuff... "Zap Physics" is good... there's a bunch, including full college course lectures.

[@zeropain9319]

@@juliavixen176 thanks, that's a nice list of channels.

[@hyperduality2838]

Certainty is dual to uncertainty -- the Heisenberg certainty/uncertainty principle. Two state vectors related by a complex phase (a photon) are said to be in the same quantum state -- duality! SINE is dual to COSINE -- the word 'co' means mutual and implies duality. Waves are dual. Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry. Point particles are dual -- Generalization is dual to localization, wholes are dual to parts -- holons. Waves are dual to particles -- quantum duality. Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Space is dual to time -- Einstein. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.

[@quixotic7460]

I feel so much smarter after watching this... I feel like I understood something fundamental about the world

[@stephenzhao5809]

Thanks a lot! 3:12 The problem is that we only observe particles, or at least particle-like behavior whenever we detect these quantum objects. This phenomenon can be seen in places like a cloud chamber and particle accelerators. The subatomic objects seem to behave like particles, not waves. So to incorporate this into our quantum mechanics theory, the concepts of measurement was introduced. So, you'll hear phyiscists say, at least in the most common interpretation of quantum mechanics, that whenever a measuement is made, the wave collapses and becomes a very localized wave, which effectively makes it look and behave like a particle. Measurement means an interaction, and interactionofthe quantum object with some kind of measuring device, more specifically an irreversible exchangeof energy somewhere in the measurement process. 4:07 This seems nice and clean. But there is a huge problem. 4:09 No one can explain how or why this so called "wave collapse" occurs throught measuement. This is called the "measurement problem" in quantum mechanics. And since all our information comes from a measurement of some kind, we can never directly see or touch this quantum world. Everything we observe must go through this measueing process that seems to results in the conversion of quantum objects into particles like the classical world we are familiar with. So how this wave evolves according the Schrodinger equation, while highly accurate in making predictions, is never actually seen. 4:44 Like I showed two videos ago, ultimately quantum theory boils down to a theory of interacting harmonic oscilators combined with a measurement postulate. 4:59 But no one can explain how the interactions of the harmonic oscilators are different than the interaction of the measurement device. If we really want to understand reality, this is a fundamental problem that we need to resolve. Now, having said all this, let me add, 5:17 that not resolving the measurement problem, has not prevented us from predicting and measuring outcomes from these equations. There is a philosophy called, "just shut up and calculate " - meaning, don't worry about what's really going on. If the bottom line is that all our equations work, and are highly accurate, that's all we should care about. 5:38 👍I don't subscribe to this kind of thinking myself because I think that the purpose of scientists, particularly physicists is to explain the inner workings of the universe, not simply create equation that make predictions without a deep understanding. 5:53 In 5:59 In Quantum mechanics, objects have wave-like behavior. They are more specifically described by wave functions, which are abstract mathematical solutions to the Schrodinger equation. These waves aren't localized but instead take up all of space. 6:15 🙏It isn't until you look for a particle that it becomes what appears to be a particle; before that, the particle is a collection of probability waves that theoretically extend out to the entire universe. 6:26 Now, this has some pretty profound consequences. 9:04 wavelength equals Planck's constant divided by momentum. But for large objects, the momentum is so much bigger than the Planck's constant, that their wavelenths are an undetectable fraction of their physical size - so we can never notice their quantum mechanical properties. For example, the wavelength of something the size of a tennis ball moving 10 meters / second, is 10^-33 m. This is less than the width of a proton. So we would never notice it. 9:31 A second consequene of wave-like behavior is nonlocality. A wave exists over multple regions of space. This nonlocality explains interference, but it also means that waves can add together to give complex interference patterns. So waves of multiple particles can add together to give a single wavefunction corresponding to multiple particles. This givesriseto a strange correlations between such particles, in a phenomenon called "Entanglement." 9:58 Einstain called this, "Spooky action at a distance" because it appears to indicate instant communication between distant objects at faster than the speed of light, which is forbidden by Relativity theory. 10:11 But while two or more objects are correlated, no communication is acutally happening. Correlation does not mean communication. The wave behavior of electrons are mans that the concepts of circular orbits of electrons around the nucleus of atoms, that you commonly see everyhwere when an atom is depicted, is wrong. 10:36 A better picture is that they exist in a well-defined probability cloud around the nucleus that might look more like this.

[@kapilshekhar]

If only you had been my teacher in school and college ! Profound Thanks Arvin

[@najummushtaq3391]

Superb, Arvin. Just wondering where does Dirac's equation fit into this picture? Doesn't it bring together Schrodinger's equation and Heisenberg's matrices and makes them compatible with Special Relativity? Why is this aspect of quantum mechanics usually left out of such discussions?

[@ArvinAsh]

Schrodinger's equation is non-relativistic. This is where Dirac's equation fills some gaps. But it is much more esoteric and imo is not necessary to understand the overall picture of quantum mechanics in an intuitive way.

[@thedeemon]

Dirac's equation is a big step from QM towards Quantum Field Theory which is much harder to understand intuitively and explain.

[@Tejas-zx7ie]

At 7:39 I didn't understand - why we need to add more waves to the electron wave to find its position?

[@mikkel715]

The Measurement problem is indeed both fascinating and in some ways little scaring.

[@hyperduality2838]

Two state vectors related by a complex phase (a photon) are said to be in the same quantum state -- duality! SINE is dual to COSINE -- the word 'co' means mutual and implies duality. Waves are dual. Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry. Point particles are dual -- Generalization is dual to localization, wholes are dual to parts -- holons. Waves are dual to particles -- quantum duality. Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Space is dual to time -- Einstein. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.

[@David.b.nimble]

@@hyperduality2838 Except for God who is Three that are One.

[@hyperduality2838]

@@David.b.nimble The concept of God is actually dual. Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy -- gravitational energy is dual. Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality. Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein. Dark energy is dual to dark matter. Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry. Curvature or gravitation is dual. Entropy is dual to evolution (syntropy) -- Janna Levin, cosmologist:- kzbin.info/www/bejne/iYOuhIiEoKabp7s Randomness (chance, entropy) is dual to order (predictability, syntropy). "The association of ideas" -- David Hume on syntropy. Syntropy is the integration, union, convergence of ideas to form optimized predictions, expectations. Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non-teleological physics (entropy). Objective randomness, natural selection, genetic mutation is the same and equal for all observers it therefore conforms to a principle of objective democracy. The lack of a target (randomness) conforms to objective democracy (a target) -- duality. Symmetry is dual to conservation -- the duality of Noether's theorem. Duality is being conserved -- the 5th law of thermodynamics! Energy is duality, duality is energy. Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy. Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence, duality. There are new laws of physics! Being is dual to not being creates becoming -- Plato's cat. Alive is dual to not alive -- Schrodinger's cat. Thesis (alive, being) is dual to anti-thesis (not alive, non being) creates the converging thesis or synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic or Hegel's cat. Schrodinger's cat is based upon Hegel's cat and he stole it from Plato (Socrates). Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. God (thesis) is dual to the Christ consciousness (anti-thesis) synthesizes the holy spirit or the mind/soul.

[@CarlosElio82]

Can the apparatus used in double slit experiment detect waves? It seems designed to detect particles only. In QM the measurements are produced both by the event you are trying to measure and the measurement apparatus. Something does not seem correct with the double slit as a way of deciding between waves or particles. What am I missing?

[@Phoenixspin]

I told my math teacher once, "Just shut up and calculate." I was promptly escorted to the Principal's office.

[@ArvinAsh]

Haha. I was escorted to the principle's office myself from my HS math class for saying much less.

[@YayComity]

I never meant to be rude or disrespectful but I got in trouble for reading a newspaper during a college lecture by a very prestigious 70 yo physics professor who spoke far too slow to occupy my full attention. Got top grades but I also learned things from those newspapers. Nowadays I could multitask watching youtube without offending anyone.

[@ssgssvegeta6599]

What are the music soundtracks you're using? They give quantum mechanics an even more visceral feeling love it!

[@magnushorus5670]

This is by far the best explanation Ive ever seen, thank you

[@GoblinMode3004]

Another great explanatory video, thank you, Arvin!

[@elwing07]

This is incredible. It suggests the world around is constantly uncertain until it isn't, and doing anything involves getting in alignment with what could be before we experience it.

[@paulheinrich7645]

Ok, we, as outside observers, see either a particle or a wave, but what or how would the inside observer - the particle/wave - see itself as being?

[@Wabbelpaddel]

What does that even mean? For measurement you need an external mechanism to interact with its field, which funny enough amounts to verification. Inside it there is no such frame of reference.

[@henriquewaxman8957]

Same thing, it's not that we see it as particle or wave, it IS a particle/wave until it interacts with anything(even a massless photon)

[@paulheinrich7645]

@@Wabbelpaddel I just figure a tennis ball would know it’s a tennis ball, but wonder if a particle would know it was a particle or if it somehow knew it only might be.

[@anywallsocket]

@@uptrade8507 that is a leading theory -- see emergent gravity

[@juliavixen176]

This really really depends on exactly which of the two dozen fundamental "particles" you are asking the question for. So... first of all, in Quantum Field Theory, particles are not really a "thing" that exist at one location in space and time. Each fundamental field exists everywhere in space, and what we call, in English, a "particle" is where the field is "perturbed" with a higher potential energy than the "vacuum" (where the field is at its lowest energy). That's why every electron in the universe appears to be identical... because they're all just lumps in the same electron field that fills the entire universe. (And... also, believe it or not, but whether or not a particle is detected by one moving observer or another is observer dependent. Particles don't really have an objective physical existence.) Anyway, that being said... to answer your question, particles "quote particles" with zero rest mass do not experience time or space. The instant they are emitted and the instant they are absorbed are exactly the same instant from their point of view. So, "photons" and "gluons", and at extremely high temperatures (above 8000000000°C) most of the other particles too. A so-called "photon" is a small chunk of the electromagnetic force field that fills the entire universe, that piece we gave a name to, because you can filter it that piece with the electron in your favorite atom. (Or a gamma ray with the nucleus.) Just like you can use a long wire as a radio antenna... for "photons" with a wavelength from a centimeter to hundreds of meters in length... The electromagnetic field is like water waves in the middle of the ocean... mostly random and all different sizes and directions. A small boat and a big boat will get rocked back and forth by different amounts, from waves of different sizes... just like an electron or proton does by electromagnetic waves. Because, what an electromagnetic wave *is*, is the time delayed electric force of one charged thingy, viewed by another charged thingy. That's it... Let's say you have an electron and proton at rest, some distance apart (not in orbit or anything, just floating free in space). They feel an attractive force between them. Grab the proton, and vigorously shake it back and forth. The electron sees the proton move, and starts to follow it (with some time delay). Congratulations, you've created light! An electromagnetic wave that transferred momentum from your wiggily proton, to your distant electron floating around somewhere far away. Anyway, so a "photon" is a useful calculation tool, but it's not a physically real thing that exists by itself... Like, you can listen to music, and say: "That note's pitch is middle C#", but musical notes are not actually a real "thing", it's a way to communicate about a small part of a large waveform. So is a photon. Now... for "particles" with mass, there is a lot more going on. Most mass comes from confinement, but you can't confine anything if it's just going to wizz off at the speed of light. The tiny amount of mass to get things to slow down comes from "right handed particles" interacting (via Weak Force) with the Higgs Field. (Right handedness is observer dependent, by the way.) So... they get inertial from smacking into more of the Higgs field going in one direction than the other. Remember: inertia is resistance to acceleration. (Velocity has no resistance to movement... yeah, think about it for a bit, inertia is weird.) (I'm trying to say, it's completely different from friction or viscosity-- those things are functions of velocity. Inertia is a function of acceleration, not velocity.) You know it's 01:30 in the morning here and I should sleep rather than explain the origins of mass, and spacetime, and why things travel slower than light... anyway, particles with mass are constantly interacting with other particles quintillions of times per second... and they're kinda like a little wave bouncing back and forth and back and forth and back and forth, etc. in a small area, very quickly... and only half of the time they are interacting, and the other half of the time they are not, so they can actually make some forward progress on moving. (And aren't stuck in one place.) It's all waves.

[@jamesbra4410]

Double slit experiment is the field induced by a moving charge that creates a field and then it reduces to how the field conforms to a two equally spaced rectangle “slit”… atoms are ideally equally e=p so if then some charges move unbound and they can exhibit some field geometry or some relativity with the universe… wavefuctions oscillate you can take an object in matter in the same periodicity with the wave and it resonates

[@meet560]

Arvin, thanks again for this wonderful piece of knowledge. I feel like nowadays we are not advancing at that speed which was around 19th Or 20 th century. I mean like there has not been much breakthroughs in science recently. We're not getting more brains like Einstein, newton, tesla etc. It would be great that we prioritize it again

[@douglasstrother6584]

A Faraday & a Maxwell

[@paulmichaelfreedman8334]

Progress often comes in leaps and bounds. What these guys put together 100 years ago was enough to keep us busy right up to the here and now and into the foreseeable future. What they put forth were theories, that needed to be proven. Not so long ago, there finally was proof of time dilation in a gravitational field, and it took a while to prove lorentz contraction too. All predicted by Einstein's Theory of General and Special relativity. QM predicted a bunch of particles, and it took over 60 years to prove 80% of them. The final one, the Higgs boson, postulated in 1964, was finally confirmed in 2012 by the LHC. Not until these theories have been proven or disproven, and understood, can there be new progress. It's called standing on the shoulders of giants. And there's probably tons more to be discovered on levels we haven't dreamed of yet.

[@ArvinAsh]

It might seem like we haven't but we actually have had quite a few breakthroughs. For example, the Higgs boson, discovery of Dark Energy are two of the most significant. The JWST will probably make other significant contributions.

[@douglasstrother6584]

@@ArvinAsh I suspect that the James Webb Space Telescope will give us data/observations, in conjuction with Hubble (Old 'Scopes Rule!) that will revolutionize Cosmology comparable to "The Ultraviolet Catastrophe".

[@hyperduality2838]

Certainty is dual to uncertainty -- the Heisenberg certainty/uncertainty principle. Two state vectors related by a complex phase (a photon) are said to be in the same quantum state -- duality! SINE is dual to COSINE -- the word 'co' means mutual and implies duality. Waves are dual. Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry. Point particles are dual -- Generalization is dual to localization, wholes are dual to parts -- holons. Waves are dual to particles -- quantum duality. Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Space is dual to time -- Einstein. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.

[@seanspartan2023]

I'd be very interested in your view of the two new papers published in the Astronomical Journal on SMBH Cosmological Coupling and the possibility that dark energy could be explained by vacuum energy being accumulated by SMBHs. Also the implications that blackholes wouldn't necessarily evaporate due to Hawking radiation, but could be sustained by this process of vacuum energy (and hence mass) accumulation.

[@ArvinAsh]

I am making a video on that. Stay tuned.

[@MichaelVLang]

We are objects made of particles. Thinking of that can be existential and kinda weird. Thanks for all you do.

[@ro1nash810]

Ummm we are objects made of WAVES which act as PARTICLES.

[@MichaelVLang]

@@ro1nash810 Ummm thanks for the feedback!

[@MicahOffman-artandmusic]

One of the more enjoyable episodes of "Complex Question Explained Simply"

[@captainzappbrannagan]

Great vid Arvin! I agree equations are the backbone but how we interpret them gives us the usefulness of the equations. It's imprecise but that means they are always available for improvement! Only religion and Sith speak in certainties.

[@hyperduality2838]

"Sith lords come in pairs (duals)" -- Obi Wan Kenobi. Two state vectors related by a complex phase (a photon) are said to be in the same quantum state -- duality! SINE is dual to COSINE -- the word 'co' means mutual and implies duality. Waves are dual. Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry. Point particles are dual -- Generalization is dual to localization, wholes are dual to parts -- holons. Waves are dual to particles -- quantum duality. Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Space is dual to time -- Einstein. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.

[@David.b.nimble]

@@hyperduality2838 like the 12 sons of Israel and their counterpart in the new covenant, the 12 apostles

[@captainzappbrannagan]

@@hyperduality2838 Symmetry in the universe is not total but almost total. Must be some fundamental force / energy reason.

[@hyperduality2838]

@@David.b.nimble The council of Nicaea in 325 AD was set up to answer the question, "Is the Christ consciousness the same substance as God or different?". Same is dual to different, homo is dual to hetero. Perpendicularity, orthogonality = duality, sine is perpendicular to cosine. The Christian cross is composed of two perpendicular lines. Christians have been worshipping duality for thousands of years. The Catholic church is based upon the council of Nicaea.

[@hyperduality2838]

@@captainzappbrannagan Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy -- gravitational energy is dual. Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality. Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein. Dark energy is dual to dark matter. Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry. Curvature or gravitation is dual. Entropy is dual to evolution (syntropy) -- Janna Levin, cosmologist:- kzbin.info/www/bejne/iYOuhIiEoKabp7s Randomness (chance, entropy) is dual to order (predictability, syntropy). "The association of ideas" -- David Hume on syntropy. Syntropy is the integration, union, convergence of ideas to form optimized predictions, expectations. Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non-teleological physics (entropy). Objective randomness, natural selection, genetic mutation is the same and equal for all observers it therefore conforms to a principle of objective democracy. The lack of a target (randomness) conforms to objective democracy (a target) -- duality. Symmetry is dual to conservation -- the duality of Noether's theorem. Duality is being conserved -- the 5th law of thermodynamics! Energy is duality, duality is energy. Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy. Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence, duality. There are new laws of physics! Being is dual to not being creates becoming -- Plato's cat. Alive is dual to not alive -- Schrodinger's cat. Thesis (alive, being) is dual to anti-thesis (not alive, non being) creates the converging thesis or synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic or Hegel's cat. Schrodinger's cat is based upon Hegel's cat and he stole it from Plato (Socrates). Symmetric matrices (real eigenvalues) are dual to anti-symmetric matrices (complex eigenvalues). Symmetric wave functions (waves, Bosons) are dual to anti-symmetric wave functions (particles, Fermions) -- quantum duality. Bosons are dual to Fermions --atomic duality.

[@sameersharma99]

I coudn't understand the part at 1:24, that why if electron and all other particles show wave natures, then how it led to the probablity concept, what/

[@christyshultz6443]

No the theory goes that everything you see, smell hear, touch, taste everything is in waves. The problem is by the time we can measure something it is measured as a particle. Because it has to slow down or collapse or whatever to be measured and even then it's measured in a particle accelerator. Even particles are too small for people to measure most of the time we don't see them we just know where they are when they slam into something. Everything everywhere.. the probability is that it could be anywhere in space. Well until it slams into you as a particle of light or into a particle accelerator and getting measured. 😅 I know it sounds complicated but it really isn't and yet it's probably the most complicated thing in all of the universe as weird as that sounds.

[@schmetterling4477]

For starters, there are no particles. There are only quanta of energy, momentum angular momentum and charge. Measuring a quantum means that we have to absorb its energy. Where this energy shows up can have "wave-like features" due to the boundary conditions of the experiments that we are performing, but those features are caused by the boundary conditions and NOT by some built in property of quanta. Admittedly, it takes a lot of intuition into both the theory and experimental phenomenology to "grok" that.

[@sadderwhiskeymann]

Your style, mannerisms,"aura" etc are that of a teacher ?i mean it in the most positive way. Are you, by any chance, a teacher? Ps: great vid, as always 💙

[@ArvinAsh]

Yes, I like to think I am a YT teacher.

[@sadderwhiskeymann]

@@ArvinAsh ohh you're more than that!! Still, you remind me of the good teachers i had in high school 👍

[@andrew12bravo21]

So Non-locality is intuitive? Love your videos!! I just don't see how current experiments back up that statement!! Didn't they just split and entangled photon four ways, and effed with one and the other three behaved exactly as expected as entangled particles? I'm definitely not a physicist so I have to take the word of those running these experiments but I thought that's where we're at. Would love some enlightenment!! Thanks much!!

[@gwentchamp8720]

Perhaps the explanation for the Heisenberg uncertainty is that the amount of information in the universe is fixed. If more information is "extracted" in one part, it has to be "subtracted" somewhere else. Well, this is my way of thinking about it but it might be complete B.S. 😜

[@ArvinAsh]

I don't think that is the case. The amount of information is increasing - this is part of the increasing entropy that we observe in the universe. Take your brain for example, as you gain more memories, the amount of information increases.

[@allgood1710]

Increasing information in relation to intelligence implies decreasing entropy because that information becomes more organized.

[@alexolas1246]

An opinion I have: Quantum mechanics would probably make more sense if we started using the word “quantum” (plural: “quanta”) as a noun itself, because that word doesn’t compel you to think of quanta as always discrete particles or should-be-divisible waves. Like, a quantum is any object that exhibits quantum mechanics (wave-particle duality, does that weird thing with the double-slit experiment, etc.) Electrons, photons, quarks, protons, atoms, and molecules are all quanta. Some are elementary quanta (the quanta of the standard model), and others are composite quanta (nucleons, atoms, molecules).

[@TheElectra5000]

-Do you understand quantum physics? -Yes -That means you don't!

[@photon434]

Best case scenario, "If you know you're ignorant, you're not stupid."

[@JavedAli-pm9nt]

Arvin sir! You are one of my best professor, thank you so much, I would like to ask a couple of questions if you could answer me

[@Kazedor]

Come on, Ash. You know you don't drink.

[@ArvinAsh]

Haha. I actually enjoy beer quite a bit!

[@morten3219]

so in the double slit experient when the electron has a position or particle behavior on the screen, is it then still having wave like behavior, but just much much less as it appears to be a particle (just like macro objects) or is it 100% particle and no more wavelike behavior? And another question, is it because it gets entangled with the enviroment(the screen) it collapses. Like is that due to it getting entangled with the particles of the screen? or does this have nothing to do with entanglement

[@KiloDeltaOneSierra]

I've done the double slit experiment using a laser.

[@lmaolpha_male]

could you explain how you did that ?

[@KiloDeltaOneSierra]

@@lmaolpha_male yeah its easy. Lay pencil leads leaving two slits. Shine laser at this and you'll see a wave interference pattern emerge

[@ArvinAsh]

Good for you!

[@joebob4579]

I think this is my favorite video on qm!

[@tc871comments]

Our minds collapse the wave

[@ArvinAsh]

That's an interesting thought, but wave collapse occurs whether a mind is involved or not.

[@GoblinMode3004]

Wrong, incorrect. Observers are simply anything that causes an interaction, conciousness/monkey brains have nothing, absolutely zero to do with it. The universe would exist without you specifically looking at it as long as *something* is interacting.

[@tc871comments]

@@ArvinAsh and what is your proof that the wave collapses regardless?

[@tc871comments]

@@GoblinMode3004 First not all acts of observation are Interactive. 2nd wave function and it's data remain as a wave function superposition until the data has been reviewed by a conscious mind. So when you use the word SOMETHING... that something must have a conscious mind. One of my favorite sci-fi analogies for the double slit experiment is the Star Trek episode Measure of a Man where data is trying to convince everyone that he is alive and has consciousness. I used to think that data could answer this question for himself by performing a double slit experiment. But because the nature of quantum wave functions not only Traverse infinite distances but also run backwards in time. This means that data could never divulge his findings to another life-form with a conscious mind otherwise whatever he observed from his experiment would not be his own theoretical consciousness that rendered the results but rather whoever it is that he is divulging the data to. This understanding of quantum wave function would seem to be reinforced by the "Delayed Choice Quantum eraser" phenomenon. If as you allege any form of quantification would cause a wave function to irreversibly collapse, then erasure of the data would not be able to turn the detected pattern back into a wave function. 3rd... my own ego plays absolutely no part in my analysis of quantum mechanics. I'm very well aware that the Universe existed before me and will continue to exist after I'm gone. But judging by the way you speak with such definitive conviction perhaps you should practice a little humility yourself.

[@GoblinMode3004]

@TC871 COMMENTS man literally wrote a whole novel detailing how he's fundamentally misunderstanding several interpretations of QM at once 💀

[@srathinam1]

Arvin, you are giving great explanations. Keep up your great work and I have learnt so much from your videos, so thank you. I have some questions about quantum mechanics which I am not sure i understand. If you can explain whenever you get a chance that would be great. You made a comment that Newtons laws are in the realm of quantum mechanics which basically then implies quantum mechanics is more fundamental. I am not sure about that statement. From what I understand, you can derive newtons laws but I have seen only derivations for conservative forces. Friction and nonconservative forces play a central role in mechanics which cannot be swept under the rug. Also, I am not sure if turbulence and chaos can be explained by quantum mechanics. My another comment is the following which seems people are overstating than necessary: The comment is that quantum mechanics is the most useful theory with several applications, or there are numerous devices that currently use quantum mechanical principles. Can you clarify on this? From what I understand, if Schrondingers equation like Newtons laws is at the heart of quantum mechanics, then how many devices currently use Schrodingers equation in day to day life? There are quantum computers and cryptography that people are working on, but it is still under research. If these devices use the discrete energy levels of electrons, then maybe that is what should be said....anyways pardon me if i made any mistakes. Thank you for reading.

[@jacob_90s]

9:20 Question for you Arvin. How would you calculate the momentum of a stationary object? (ignoring frames of reference). Would you have to calculate the average velocity of the atoms in the object at it's current temperature, or would it be something else?

[@DrDeuteron]

the average value of the (mass weighted) velocities, read: momentum, is zero, and the average value of the (mass weights) squared speed (i.e. kinetic energy) is the temperature (both with some constant factors).

[@anywallsocket]

you cannot ignore frames of reference, they are necessary to describe the state, and the one you're describing has zero momentum -- hence perfect position.

[@douglasstrother6584]

The Uncertainty Principle is a general consequence of wave packets, not just QM. The "shut up & calculate" has practical merit (Atomic Physics, Condensed Matter, Chemistry, etc.), but, indeed, this view begs the question of truly understanding a theory that seems to be correct.

[@eriknelson2559]

If you added an interaction with the virtual particle-antiparticle background, such that a virtual antiparticle cancelled out all of the "collapsed" part of the wavefunction, whilst the corresponding virtual particle "augmented" and "reinforced" the actualized "measured" part of the wavefunction, then you could explain "measurement collapse" via "creation / annihilation" interactions with the virtual particle-antiparticle background

[@overlook4923]

This is th best simplified explanation of quantum physics I have heard

[@Antoinette540]

Arvin you are the best science teacher I’ve ever had!

[@الباحثالعلميوالقران-ك1ق]

استاذ ماعلاقة البحث عن جسيم اولي بالمتغير العشوائي بالبيئة بالاطرابات بنقل الجسيم الحار الى منطقة اقل حرار

[@rxbracho]

Just a comment. According to Sabine Hossenfelder, Einstein did not name a "spooky action at a distance" to the apparent communication between entangled particles, but to the fact that the entangled particles' functions would collapse simultaneously when each was merrily progressing in time, and even separated by large distances. At least that's what she interpreted from the original paper where the phrase appeared (in German).

[@ebehdzikraa3855]

Wave function is a rendering code. Particel is a rendered pixel. Measurement is the active player playing the game. Now everything will be way easier to understood

[@alfadog67]

Outstanding, Professor Ash! I missed this last month, or your next video would have sunk in better. Just like photons ejected by atoms are a copy of the original light, electrons moving about nuclei are also copies. I wonder if these changes in energy state cause a gravity wave as well as a light wave.

[@arnesbeganovic]

Could it be that wave is not collapsing to particle, it's just us detecting that specific part of wave when we measure? THe rest of wave continues it's "journey" with slightly less energy that we took while measuring. And probability distribution just tell us which part of wave we are most likely to detect. I wander, is it possible to create experiment where we can measure same wave with two different measuring devices. Could it be that we emit proton and when we detect it with one device, it takes out energy from that wave which ends up with some other particle. THe rest of wave is other particle now. It's the same energy/mass but we give it different names. Like, if we can detect somehow number 5 from a set of numbers (3,5,5,7,9). Our detector has it's own set of numbers tuned to nr 5 (5,5,5,5,5). This particular wave has two nr 5 in it and there is a probability of 2/5 to detect them. Other wave (2,5,6,4,12) has nr 5 in it but it's 1/5 probability to have nr 5 in it. The sum of both sets is 29, which we see as a "proton" (2+5+6+4+12) but we can detect only part of it (5). Now, when we kick out 5 from both sets, they will show in double slit experiment on different locations because they have different probabilities, but we will end up with two sets (3,7,9) = 19 and (2,6,4,12)=24 which are now other "particles". THe rest energy of detection. THey both can not interact because they do not share any number in set so they continue their journey independently. I am not physicist but I like to watch all these explanations and as far as I can remember, we never talk about our measurement devices. THey could have some change in them as well. What if our measuring set has to be negative (-5,-5,-5,-5,-5). When we detect first set we end up with (-5,-5,-5). It 's not same state in our measurement device after detection. We see it as collapse of wave function, bur maybe it's just result of interaction.

[@amitchavan3651]

Thank you Arvin , great explanation. One query, what happens after the measurement? Does the quantum particle regain wave characteristics post measurement or the particle is simply annihilated post measurement..

[@ArvinAsh]

no, it's an irreversible process.

[@punditgi]

Nicely done!

[@foxbat888]

When I was studying physics at university almost 40 years ago there were no resources such as yours, if there had been the outcome might have been completely different!

[@anthonycarbone3826]

There are many probability distributions. I think it is remarkable that the wave equations follow a normal distribution pattern to predict where the particle exists.

[@seaprobecaptain]

Fantastic explanation Arvin! Many "explainers" try to make quantum mechanics sound mysterious by describing the behavior of waves, all the while depicting the "particles" as colored balls or marbles. Of course that makes it seem complex, unintuitive, and confounding. Once we start thinking and visualizing waves, that leaves really one major confounding aspect… the measurement problem.

[@hyperduality2838]

Certainty is dual to uncertainty -- the Heisenberg certainty/uncertainty principle. Two state vectors related by a complex phase (a photon) are said to be in the same quantum state -- duality! SINE is dual to COSINE -- the word 'co' means mutual and implies duality. Waves are dual. Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry. Point particles are dual -- Generalization is dual to localization, wholes are dual to parts -- holons. Waves are dual to particles -- quantum duality. Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Space is dual to time -- Einstein. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.

[@JohnWinquist]

Lookin good Arvin! Thanks for another great video!

[@StephenJohnson-jb7xe]

I wanted to say that perhaps the wave doesn't collapse because it is observed. Perhaps the wave like propagation can only be observed when a certain threshold is reached much like when waves interact, their peaks can combine. This might (in the double slit experiment, for example) give the appearance of a particle being observed, but there is no actual particle present. Then you showed the trails in the bubble chamber, and my idea of thresholds couldn't explain it.

[@timothy8426]

All thermaldynamics move in frequency singularities as unification of unidirectional force of pressure in resistance to cold space itself. As the thermaldynamics pressure increases, resistance matches it in equalization. Resistance repels thermaldynamics. Pressure expands cold resistance in mass as equalization of pressure. We become the space ahead of our forward momentum in resistance and our propulsion of thermaldynamics in resistance. Pressure from all sides of mass in occupational space in resistance. Resistance is always equalization to mass. Mass is thermaldynamics in different degrees of resistance to thermaldynamics pressure. Hydrogen under extreme pressure expands cold resistance in equalization to pressure, hence helium. The greater the mass, the greater the resistance within. Mass neutralizes resistance within as outward pressure of force as weight. Density. Density can't exceed resistance within it. Thermaldynamics is inward pressure to resistance. Cold resistance is equal in and out of entanglement. Thermaldynamics is surrounded by cold resistance. Thermaldynamics neutralizes resistance within it. Redirected trajectories of thermaldynamics into cycling circulation patterns of magnetic fields is a reduction of distance. The greater the mass...the greater the resistance. Mass falls in equalization of mass and resistance. Resistance controls the fall in space. Resistance repels thermaldynamics from all sides and within. Mass is the weakest point of resistance to cold space. Spheres are equalization of resistance to mass in space. Heat is the cosmic speed limit in resistance. Conservation of maximum momentum velocity in resistance. Light is only present in atmospheres as heat in resistance. Light is absorbed as heat or refracted as light. All mass loses heat in forward momentum and interactions with other mass pressures. Only thermaldynamics can disrupt magnetic fields of forced circulation patterns of mass. Hydrogen under extreme pressure expands cold resistance into helium. More resistance to equalization of pressure. More occupational space of resistance and holding cycling circulation patterns of thermaldynamics. Thermaldynamics curves, bends, and moves. Space doesn't. It's a cold fabric of resistance. Mass circulation around space itself as space itself. Ice expands into water under pressure of thermaldynamics. More pressure exerted on mass is liquidity by thermaldynamics Resistance is stationary. As mass increases in intensity, more space itself is needed for equalization to pressure. Black holes are devoid bubbles of thermaldynamics in resistance to outside pressure. Density can't exceed resistance. Density occupies space as space itself within. Thermaldynamics moves through space as amplification of it. Multidimensional frequency vibrations in various degrees of pressure and resistance. Point to point space passes through mass. A star can't collapse space. Density can't exceed resistance. Thermaldynamics is throughout space itself. But these bubbles devoid of thermaldynamics are pure cold resistance of fabric of space. Mass is the unification of unidirectional pressure in forward momentum propulsion from resistance, repelled by cold resistance to forward maximum momentum, in resistance, as redirected trajectories reducing distances into cycling circulation patterns. It's not proven that there are electrons. Measuring force of flow and resistance to it. Gravity doesn't exist. Mass vibrates towards the weakest point of resistance. Our energy within forces us in cold repulsion to resistance towards the weakest point of resistance, which is the planet. The magnetic power field of flow is both repulsion and propulsion, always in equalization. Loss of heat is decay or aging. Forward momentum is a wave of pressure in transitioning point to point timed interactions of force changing places. Decay is reduced by stars replenishing thermaldynamics. Pressure. Force. Heat. Electricity. Tornadoes. Hurricanes. Pressure of forced equalization. All mass is heat in resistance. Heat isn't a byproduct. It is the absolute force of pressure in various degrees of resistance equalization of mass. Hydrogen under extreme pressure expands cold resistance within it to equalization of pressure as helium. Thermaldynamics circling vortex around cold space. The nucleus of the galaxies is macro. Atoms are micro galaxies. Cold space expands within mass as repulsion to pressure in equalization. Decay is heat loss. Stars decay as heat loss. The heat circling vortex around where the star was, and the repulsion of remaining thermaldynamics is repelled towards the weakest point of resistance. Making it void of thermaldynamics. A nucleus of cold space is pure. The thermal energy circulation patterns are neutralized resistance within. Making it the weakest point of resistance. When we solder, the solder follows the heat. Physics. Pressure of forced repulsion redirected trajectories of thermaldynamics. Follow the weakest point of resistance. Heat expands resistance within mass. In equalization. Only thermaldynamics can disrupt mass. Black holes theoretically can't exceed resistance within space itself as space. Heat is mass. Heat is motion. Forward momentum in resistance to cold space. Mass is thermaldynamics. How can you stop motioning to compress it? What's put in motion stays in motion? Unification of unidirectional flow cycling thermaldynamics in quantum magnetic fields of forced pressure cycling circulation patterns of mass. Distance of forward momentum is reduced by redirected trajectories. Heat is the cosmic speed limit at all times. Time is the interactions of exchanges of energy and resistance point to point interactions. Time is changing of the place, pressure, and degrees of resistance at maximum momentum velocity in resistance. Heat is the cosmic speed limit in and out of entanglement. Distance is reduced by entanglement of cycling circulation patterns of mass in magnetic fields of forced pressure cycling circulation patterns. Physics. Hydrogen expands cold space itself as helium under extreme pressure of thermaldynamics squeezing in. Forward momentum exchanges energy and resistance point to point timed interactions of change. Theoretically.

[@chrisyacoback6320]

I really enjoy your content. Thank you ❤

[@MangySquirrel]

Thanks Arvin, that was one of the best, most coherent explanations I have ever heard.

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad it was helpful!

[@ts37924]

Thanks! But could you explain why emmision of light waves would result in continuous decrease energy where as emmision of photons is resulting in discrete decrease in energy. (I know the explanation for photons and discrete energy but can't understand why if em waves were used the energy decrease would be continuous)

[@helenamcginty4920]

My best quantum story. A friend used to send me ads for woo stuff. One was from a woman who "Understood" quantum (sic) and how our bodies are regulated by it. I fast forwarded through the 10 min video and discovered she was actually selling (for 60$) a book on magic.

[@imadetheuniverse4fun]

I have a question about the quantization of all these properties. If particle position is quantized, should the wave equation not have constant sharp dips down to 0 at the locations "in-between" where the particle never moves through? so the wave would look more like a square wave? Or am I misunderstanding?

[@DrDeuteron]

bound state or propagating state?

[@anywallsocket]

the wavefunction cannot have discontinuities in its derivate

[@DrDeuteron]

@@anywallsocket I think the OP is referring to the fact that a lot of videos show only the real part of a wave packet, which has zero-crossing, and to the thoughtful viewer: that is just wrong. Arvin shows a nice complex wave packet at 3:42 ....it's really the only way to make sense of momentum as a derivative. Bound states (square well, SHO) do have zero crossings where the particle never is, but is on both sides of it....but it's not really moving back and forth if it's in an energy eigenstate. (1:32)

[@anywallsocket]

@@DrDeuteron tbh i have no idea what OP is getting at, even though i do understand your elaboration.

[@الباحثالعلميوالقران-ك1ق]

استاذ ممكن تبحث عن موجات او ترددات اختفت لم تعد موجوده عندي ذكره عن شىء حول هذا الموضوع

[@jonadabtheunsightly]

I think the standard terminology for a lot of these things is more of a hindrance than a help, at least for undergrads. Words like "particle", "orbit", and "spin" imply that subatomic phenomena are far more similar to macroscopic objects than is actually the case. People read these words and imagine that particles are itty bitty pieces of matter, with all the properties we expect matter to have: a specific well-defined size and shape (both of which are in fact emergent properties of the relative positions of large numbers of atoms or molecules), a meaningful distinction between one side of the object and the other, a very specifically defined position at each moment in time, and so on, all things that are not only untrue, but seriously misleading when it comes to subatomic phenomena. Heck, some of them don't even have a well-defined mass. The Bohr model arguably exacerbates this problem, especially when the atom is compared to a star system with planets, a disturbingly common analogy that is so seriously misleading, it can go toe to toe with flat earth. Even in your own video here, you discuss the idea that the "orbit" of electrons might "decay" as in Newtonian mechanics, as if they had an orbital velocity in the first place. This is fundamentally absurd, unless you forget that "orbit", like almost all other words in the quantum world, means something completely different from and pretty much entirely unrelated to what it would mean in classical mechanics.

[@TimeCapsuleMan]

Thanks for another great video, Arvin!! 🙏

[@nukeape3213]

A very layman and perhaps a bit silly question/observation, but are all (or a lot of) particle paths shown in the bubble chamber at 04:35 following the fibonacci sequence?

[@juliavixen176]

No... not quite... So... you remember how an electric charge curves around into a circle when it passes through a magnetic field? Motors and Generators do this stuff... In the cloud chamber photo shown at 04:35 there is a uniform magnetic field with North and South pointing in the direction "in and out" of the plane of the photo... in the direction towards your face, and into your video screen. A small charged mass... such as an electron or proton, but really, anything with an electric charge, like an atom, or spec of dust, styrofoam bead, etc. will try to curve around an go in circles if it's already moving when it passes through your magnetic field... these trails you see are the electrically charged particle slowing down, because it's colliding with the cloud in your cloud chamber (those trails you see). And as it slows down, what would have been a nice neat circle, turns into a decaying spiral path, until the charged particle comes to rest. (stops moving) It stops making a trail then. Anyway, if you know the strength of your magnetic field, you can calculate the velocity, mass, and change of the particle that made each path, just by measuring how long the path is and how large (wide) the spiral is.

[@nukeape3213]

​@@juliavixen176 Thanks for the explanation!

[@ramaiahrayala1497]

You earned another subscriber bro :)

[@An_Attempt]

This is fantastic, I seldom subscribe after one video but this is a worthy exception.

[@bjs301]

Another excellent explanatory video.

[@vitr1916]

We may try to see this thing this way. A pro basketball shooter is throwing in practically is almost perfect, but when he is playing in real game with extremely pressure from the environment (opposing team defense, audiences…the outcome now is uncertainty like a wave function) It is same way as football kicker with 10 yards distance from the goal, he still can miss the field goal under pressure of environments. In American sniper movie, the shooter is almost collapsing when his target is a boy. We may think, nature is always about randomly like a wave a function, it may not be like your focus from your practice as from the your measurement. If you can flow with the nature, and now you can be the player who is on fire. Sometimes a singer becomes perfectly in performance when she is forgetting she is singing in front of audiences.

[@gracemember101]

Thanks for your explanation. I have watched Nova presentations. I have watched Sabine and others and didn't get it. In fact I am going to watch your explanation again.

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad it was helpful!

[@alfadog67]

The Measurement Problem seems to be related to Entanglement. A light wave transforms instantly from being a probability wave that stretches across the universe to being a point of light on my 3D+T measurement panel. It's like when I put a vibration into the EM Field, it has its own "layer" if you will of spacetime that can't be affected by the lightwaves behind it, and cannot affect the lightwaves in front of it. It has its own universe within which to travel, yet probability has lured it to collapse in that spot on our screen. And it's actually the EM Field that's doing the waving. So maybe, the Planck Length is the culprit. Maybe the wave can travel lackadaisically through spacetime as a wave in superposition, but when it's time to convert it to 3D+T, the Planck Length marshals the energy transfer. And if there's not enough of the wave there, sorry, no photon for you! Just another ramble... Sorry world 🙏

[@schmetterling4477]

There is no measurement problem. There are only people who didn't pay attention in school. ;-)

[@effectingcause5484]

What is going on in a cloud chamber on the quantum level? Has the wave function already collapsed and that’s why we see trails behind the beta and alpha particles? Do the trails mean we’re looking at definite particles or are the trails some sort of byproduct of the wave function?

[@ArvinAsh]

They are particles. But you have to remember that particles are fuzzy, localized waves.

[@schmetterling4477]

Mott gave the explanation in 1929 in a paper called "The wave mechanics of ∝-Ray tracks". The one sentence version is that the first weak localization of a high energy quantum together with the usual rule for compound probabilities (for subsequent weak measurements) forms a linear looking "particle" track. Of course, if you were to look more carefully, then you would see that it is not a straight track but a zigzag. If you would read the literature more carefully, as well, then you would learn that not all high energy quantum/matter interactions result in tracks. Many result in showers with many thousands and millions of secondary quanta. Does that mean that quanta are little Christmas trees? No. It simply means that most people don't know physics.

[@KatjaTgirl]

Hi Arvin, on (quantum) harmonic oscillators. Is it true that the only way to make a harmonic oscillator is with smaller harmonic oscillators? Does this prove that the universe is infinite when zooming in and that the strings of string theory cannot be the final word?

[@ArvinAsh]

Well, fundamental particles are harmonic oscillators and there is nothing smaller, that we know of, so it does not mean, in my view, that it's oscillators all the way down to infinity.

[@anywallsocket]

QFT has wavelengths of arbitrary size, so yes, in a sense.

[@MichaelKire]

A thing That is never really explained, which I hope you can explain Arvin, is how and when these particles jump between being waves and particles? Imagine, like you have in this video, a tennis ball that gets hit and flies through the air. The collected sum of entangled atoms flies through the air while being in a wave? Do they get converted to particles whenever they hit something? Do they get converted back to a wave when bouncing back again? What about the air atoms? Or maybe it will stay a wave until all its energy gets transferred to another medium, effectively disintegrating the ball?

[@TheMyguitarisblue]

There is no "conversion" between particles and waves. Particles are ALWAYS waves, or more accurately, they always display wavelike behavior.

[@ArvinAsh]

Lazy Paraoh is correct. In modern physics, there is a process called decoherence, which is the process of ever-expanding entanglement, which is what we now loosely refer to as the process of "wave collapse." - I made a video about it here, if you want to know more: kzbin.info/www/bejne/q5_FkKyln5aIqc0

[@sacredkinetics.lns.8352]

` 👽 Arvin: You're my favorite teacher in this fascinating subject. Thanks a bunch.

[@10thdim]

Everett insisted that there is no wavefunction collapse, there is only observation. And as the 2022 Nobel in physics confirmed, local realism is not a feature of our universe. Schrodinger was right on the money when he said “I insist upon the viewpoint that all is waves”.

[@anywallsocket]

Everett also convinced millions of people of an unfalsifiable multiverse, just so that he could try and fail to solve the measurement problem.

[@10thdim]

“ ‘Many Worlds’ has the simplest, smallest, most compact fundamental picture of reality. It’s just a wave function obeying an equation.” - Sean Carroll. “Calling Many Worlds an ‘interpretation’ of quantum mechanics is like calling dinosaurs an ‘interpretation’ of the fossil record.” - David Deutsch

[@anywallsocket]

@@10thdim Lol, imagine believing the Schodinger equation, which is just a restatement of energy conservation, is all you need to believe in the multiverse. Imagine thinking one idealized math equation like that explains basically all of reality.

[@anywallsocket]

@@10thdim imagine thinking the splitting of the universe is somehow encoded in what is essentially the heat equation for probability.

[@10thdim]

@@anywallsocket You need to imagine harder, try this: “There aren’t separate wave functions for every particle. There is only the wave function of the universe.” - Sean Carroll

[@5ty717]

Your amazing with language… find the right words to explain this in the context of historical meanings… quite a smart guy.

[@davescruton2829]

If you have an electrical charge you can get waves, but at a threshold the electricity arcs to a point the path of least resistance or the path where a higher energy can more easily go to ground. I see it as the same for the particle wave duality.

[@richardedwards9044]

Thank you for making an article on the concept of what measurement actually is :).

[@WideCuriosity]

Still seem somewhat confusing that a probability, which is simply a value, can interfere with itself. Equally so is the claim that when particles are entangled they don't instantly pass information over vast distance, since not doing so suggests they must have hidden variables and were always in the state they were; and I realise that, that has been disproved. So what is the third option ?

[@ArvinAsh]

While probability is a value, it is the square of the wave function. The wave function itself which represents the quantum object, is not just a value, it is like a fluctuating set of values in spacetime.

[@hyperduality2838]

Probability is dual, probability amplitudes are dual to probability densities -- AC is dual to DC. Certainty is dual to uncertainty -- the Heisenberg certainty/uncertainty principle. Two state vectors related by a complex phase (a photon) are said to be in the same quantum state -- duality! SINE is dual to COSINE -- the word 'co' means mutual and implies duality. Waves are dual. Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry. Point particles are dual -- Generalization is dual to localization, wholes are dual to parts -- holons. Waves are dual to particles -- quantum duality. Alive is dual to not alive -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Space is dual to time -- Einstein. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.