Lecture 1 | Quantum Entanglements, Part 1 (Stanford)

[@MasterPredator93]

In these days, if one is willing, he can find these kinds of precious material right in youtube. This is one of the best gifts our time's technology has given to us. Thanks for sharing!

[@tristanandersen4105]

Francesco Zeno Ceccarini the internet is full of these resources, in fact it’s what it was created for. Humans connecting human-built networks of information to other humans. It was only once sizable interests in entertainment and communication became involved that these things became harder to find. The algorithms you most commonly encounter cater (unsurprisingly) to the most common user of the internet. If you follow your recommendations and KZbin’s trending tab, you probably won’t encounter too many new creators or content. Go back to the roots of the internet and build a network of people. I only found this video because another physics enthusiast on KZbin linked it in a comment on a video I searched for.

[@giornogiovanna1446]

m

[@giornogiovanna1446]

M.

[@giornogiovanna1446]

M.

[@giornogiovanna1446]

M.

[@EugeneKhutoryansky]

Thanks for posting this lecture series online.

[@yasararafath4941]

Physics Videos by Eugene Khutoryansky thanks for your video on your channel...I get more intuition from yours...

[@ramunasgrabauskas1227]

This lecturer proves that it is actually eminently possible to describe concepts of reality which has been used by classical notions of reality which can loosely be called the Newtonian way of understanding the real world in a manner which can be logically understood without falling into using an advanced code or shorthand ways of describing things. Frequently physicists constantly use the evolved tools which speeds up the complications or descriptions of this way of describing reality which is impenetrable if one doesn’t know the all of the specific terminologies or short hand language which advanced physicists normally fall into using when practitioners are communications to each other. This lecturer doesn’t assume that the people watching this lecture has acquired the shortcut methodologies which have been developed for practioners to communicate to each other. On the contrary this lecturer doesn’t assume that the viewer knows such ways of communicating and as such describes the subject matter using basic logic which is utterly understandable to the non expert individual. This is an excellent example of a lecturer who doesn’t dis-include non specialists from comprehending the principles being discussed. An extraordinary accessible manner of giving non specialists a much richer comprehension of the subject matter being explained. Absolute perfect example of a lecturer who doesn’t simply fall into talking to themselves due to assuming the enquirer has a vast comprehension of the language physicist have evolved to talk to each other. Brilliant! This lecturer really takes the time to ensure ordinary language is used to explain things respectfully and informatively to people who are otherwise excluded from having any chance of comprehending what is being discussed due to using a language which is not familiar to the majority. Excellent!!

[@novousuarionaoidentificado]

Well, and thanks for your videos, they're very helpful for people that aren't well versed in mathematics

[@melvsjy]

@@ramunasgrabauskas1227 gi88😥🥶😥🥶😥😥🇰🇷😰

[@GoodVibes-pj9wd]

Quantum physics is the truth of universe and lie of human consciousness saying that it does not need any observer or audience it knows its nature and truth it is just we were not present at the origin we just explaining things in middle of something Specially in quantum entanglement universe is constant it knows what is up or down so where ever the particles go their nature is pre determined its just us making it complicated by knowing it after so many years of evolution Ther is no need of observation or observer

[@jerrypolverino6025]

For this old retired pilot, with a deep love for physics these lectures enable me to sit home in my underwear and learn things about which I have wondered about since I first read about Relativity in the 8th grade. I have never lost my passion. I never dreamed I would have the opportunity to sit through lectures such as these. THANK YOU

[@t.o.d.9190]

Now we all know you have underwear. God, where the world is rolling to?...

[@martinda7446]

You can sit through a complete MIT course in your underpants. I agree it is wonderful. My favourite professor has a course on acoustics. Dr. Amar Bose (Yes, that Bose).. He has unfortunately passed away but his brilliant teachings are I believe still online.

[@hugohoffmann2228]

@@martinda7446 really ? If you need 47minutes to get the point across, that you might lose information (since not a closed loop), imo the complete lesson is an utter waste of time., and should have been done in way less time. then again ... this is just stanford ...

[@Alexander-mw1ek]

I owe professor Susskind for helping me pull myself up from the rock bottom of my physical chemistry class and eventually pass it. Ever since then, I've been trying to watch all of the lectures. His method of teaching is perfect for my way of thinking

[@waggawaggaful]

Best Stanford lecturer I've seen yet by far. So natural and down to earth and he uses words, analogies and metaphors that are accessible to everyone. Not trying to sound like an egghead. I'm finally able to wrap my head around most of these concepts for the first time. Thank you!!!

[@shenshankodowntroddenpeasa7012]

Suskind was plumber apprentice before brain-e-ack. Was called Suskind the Plumber.. He is common man but he beat Hawking in battle about black holes and conservation of information, a basic law of thermal dynamics.

[@TheCursedHonestTruth]

I love his explanations. He takes you along without talking down to you or over your head.

[@AussieMuffin]

At the moment i haven't enough money to go to university so watching these lectures in full and learning for them is beneficial to me.

[@LifeIsWonder786]

Agree

[@nathanronin2933]

Instablaster.

[@harimsn]

@@LifeIsWonder786 கோரேஆஏநகஙஹஷ ற

[@justin01144]

@@terabyte3763 girl... wtf are you talking about?

[@terabyte3763]

@@justin01144 I have no clue. O.o I must have fell asleep on my phone and predictive text kicked in. I don't even remember watching this video.

[@laurentiubucur9586]

The best ever proffessing teacher of physics! Ever ever, brilliant and very generous to share us his deep knowledge!

[@helicalactual]

more importantly his understanding wisdom and experience.

[@raymondlai5]

Dear Stanford =) I would like to say, thank you, for taking the time and effort to both upload and share this video with the youtube family =). I hope you have a nice day, Stanford! =) Kind Regards Raymond Lai (Member of the Physics Family)

[@t0kt0k]

More brilliant L. Susskind lectures! I'm so proud of Standford for making these available to the world. You guys are awesome.

[@ObserversParadox]

A good teacher always makes things sound so simple. Susskind is great!

[@dianamartin8887]

Thank you for sharing your lectures online. I have always loved physics, but spent 30 years in IT with little extra time. Now I have switched to a less intensive and less demanding career that allows me to refocus some time on learning physics.

[@michellesartori6695]

It's wonderful what one can find on You Tube nowadays. These online lectures are as close as I'm going to get to Stanford! Regardless, they are much appreciated.

[@foreropa]

Thank you Stanford University for giving people this honor to see such a brilliant mind explain this topics. Thats what I love about the internet, it can bring together this kind of genius and show them to the world, not just a few people, thank you!!!!

[@rodrigoalejandrocardonaqui8330]

Thanks for this videos and the free knowledge, I am learn english in internet because in my country the education is bad. This videos are oportunity for my personal development.

[@Smonjirez]

Praise the Internet for making self-education possible in countries with bad education ^^.

[@johnmorgan7459]

this is the video you chose to learn english from? go watch family guy or something

[@shippyshiphead]

Where are you from ?

[@TheNick279]

***** So he should watch Beavis and Butthead. A lot of that is set in a school.

[@seandafny]

Rodrigo Alejandro Cardona Quinterolmao

[@remymartinxo999]

What a fucking mastermind Professor Susskind is.

[@mikefuller6959]

+remymartinxo999 He is but I am NOT! I am not good with words or physics! I tried to read a book called Exploring The Earth an Moon by Patrick Moore ( 1923 - 2012 ) but I forgot the information I had read immediately after I had read it! When the moon explodes and becomes a black hole will the Earth get stuck to it like a tennis ball in the plughole of a bath when the water is drained away? The Patrick Moore book had lovely juicy pictures in it! My favourite Beatles' album is Please, Please Me from 1963. I understand Aristotle's ( 384bc - 322bc ) that heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones, in a vacuum they do anyway!

[@anthonyruda2021]

Professor Susskind, you say in this lecture that "Physics is information." True. I never formally studied physics. I studied music and economics. But listening to you, I always walk away with the thought that physics is about life. This is true on so many levels. While I have not heard all of your lectures, I'll bet that at some point you have talked about this. Thank you for making complicated concepts accessible to regular people.

[@stumbling]

This one lecture was more useful than 2 years of linear algebra!

[@medievalmusiclover]

My deep respect for such as wonderful lectures Professor Susskind. Thank You.

[@riley4037]

Keep in mind this is not a course to learn the actual mathematical proofs of Quantum Mechanics, but to understand it intuitively. It’s an open course for us that have no true mathematical background.

[@ukenbreker]

It is great that lectures such as these are available to the public for free.

[@truthcrackers]

Thankyou for making this publically available.

[@peterkay7458]

Thank you Dr. S for making these lectures available to us average non students. Much much appreciated.

[@MikeRoePhonicsMusic]

Thank you Leonard, for making these available for free!

[@mmiaxx2002]

So I transitioned to a new mindset that looks at reality much differently now. This is so liberating!

[@ParisTheofanidis]

I never really had any interest in physics until I encountered Quantum Entanglement. In some sense it is what can give a reasonable explanation to any "magic" and/or wonders, not to mention it's the most obvious way to understand the there's a dimension in place that we simply can't conceive (yet). If I was still in student age, I'd love to have people like Leonard Susskind to learn from! Might had even chosen a different profession!

[@FriaGram]

The only thing that stops you from learning is death.

[@abdulkaderalsalhi557]

I chose this video to learn something about 'Quantum Entanglement' as the title of the video suggests so. But after listening for 95 minutes I was still getting concepts of classical mechanics, and linear algebra, .. One needs to be patient with Prof. Susskind.... Nonetheless, Prof. Leonard Sussking is a great professor, he wants to make sure that one understands the topic from its roots!! Bravo Prof. Susskind, God bless you. And if you are an atheist then I may say 'nature' bless you and people bless you!

[@eugenesong8357]

George Carlin knows a lot more about Quantum Mechanics then I gave him credit for! Guess I shouldn't stereotype people like that!

[@Jakebb69]

Carlin was a very intelligent man. And funny!

[@Psyttila1111]

Eugene Song Than*

[@pegatrisedmice]

Why would you think he doesn't after his famous quote: "a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed"

[@peterkay7458]

@@pegatrisedmice VERY CLEVER sorry about the caps

[@Bestofchatgpt]

Eugene Song this guy is Awesome. I learned all my physics stuff from him. Free education

[@BurkeLCH]

It's clear to me that humanity is in for big change. Who would've had access to such knowledge in the past? Thank you Stanford and KZbin. In the future education will be open source.

[@TomekSamcik69]

He is not only a great physicist, but a great lecturer too, which is rather rare.

[@KeithWhittingham]

In my experience, someone who really understands what he's talking about finds it easy to explain it and comes across as a good speaker. The reverse often holds true; if I have trouble understanding someone, it's often that the speaker only understands what they are talking about superficially.

[@TomekSamcik69]

Lucky Stanford students !

[@owenpeter3]

Great? Oh Yes! However, it might be said that part of his endearing (non-quarklike) charm is that on one or two occasions he can tie himself in knots (not allied to string theory of course)!

[@jakejakeboom]

One of the few who belongs in the same sentence with Feynman.

[@LuciFeric137]

Every lecture i hear from professor i understand a little more. Thank you.

[@jopaki]

Love listening to these lectures! Thank you again.

[@tomason33]

He's an engaging speaker and an excellent professor. A real pioneer. I felt cerebral musculature come into use that never got exercised before.

[@punkfluff64]

"I dunno, what's log6 base 2 , some stoopid irrational number" 😂 Susskind is gold.

[@tonybarry787]

I must admit I got lost at that point. When he switches to the die, surely number of states switches to log in base 6, I don’t get how he stayed in base 2 there?!

[@jamestiotio]

@@tonybarry787 Hi, I might be late to the party, but to answer your question in case you are curious, we are using base 2 to represent the "amount" of information that a die roll has. In this case, the unit that Susskind is using is "bits" (in the classical sense, of course). Think about it this way: all 6 possible states that the die might roll on can be "encoded"/"represented" in just "log 6 base 2" bits, minimally. Of course, since it's practically not possible for us to have a "fraction" of bits, we usually just round it up to the next whole number/integer. In this particular example, we can hence use 3 bits to capture all the possible states of said die. Of course, we are assuming that all 6 states are "equally likely" in this case (since the "amount" of information might change if they are not). Think about in the case whereby the die can only roll on the number "1" 100% of the time, you can imagine that the amount of information that such a system would have/contain would be "less" than if all 6 numbers are equally likely. In an intuitive handwavy way, there are less variations and so it's less interesting, hence it contains less information for us. Hope this makes it clearer. :D

[@brookefossum8634]

If you can't explain something simply you don't understand it well enough, Einstein said this. This man definitely made this easy to understand with bonus humor, he's an absolute genius

[@JamesStorey09]

This man is a legend, There are so many clever, amazing people in physics, and we are just scratching the surface. It's crazy amazing, and why physics is the only subject that keeps my attention. Because it is just..... There is no way to sum up physics :S. It's everything!

[@devilskinn]

I was watching "Only Lovers Left Alive" yesterday and they very briefly explained quantum entanglement. I loved the idea that we can give physics a romantic twist.

[@Slimm2240]

I have zero background in physics but Leonardo makes this stuff easy to understand. He talks my language.

[@davidkmc2786]

Thank you so much he is an amazing instructor so clear to understand

[@ebindanjan]

In all honesty, I find the lectures of Prof Leonard Susskind very excellent, I learned a lot from him. In fact, physicists should follow his example in sharing knowledge. So, far he is the best professor I have ever encountered in physics. We should thank KZbin and Stanford for these videos. However, he is one of the keepers. If we really want to move to the next higher stage of the intellectual struggle it is imperative that we uphold the real central issue of survival and not creation.

[@MrPoutsesMple]

What a great teacher.

[@tehyonglip9203]

ΣΚΡΟΥΤΖ ΜΑΚ ΝΤΑΚ of course! He is the theoretical physicist who dares to defy Stephen hawking

[@MrPoutsesMple]

Stephen Hawking might be the most popular theoretical (astro)physicist. But I personally respect more Ed Witten for building bridges between abstract maths and theoretical physics. What you said simply gave me the feeling that you think of Stephen as the Feynman of his generation...

[@2serveand2protect]

...yyuuup!...

[@pedroakjr2371]

The "What's your name" question is so relatable. I can't count how many times I spent months with professors I never bothered to ask the name. His reaction was priceless.

[@Dannydawson537]

I love these lectures probably would bore the life out of most people but I just find them so interesting

[@brookefossum8634]

Only the ignorant haha

[@Dannydawson537]

@@brookefossum8634 that’s true also Brooke

[@BeardedDragonMan1997]

I use these to go to sleep.

[@brookefossum8634]

@@BeardedDragonMan1997 I regret to inform you... that you are indeed retar- haha totally kidding, I fall asleep to physics documentaries too sometimes, I'll pray for you if you have insomnia or anxiety which is making it difficult, let me know if you want that. Maybe then we can prove to you through an answered prayer that Christians are real. Random sorry haha. The offer stands.

[@NondescriptMammal]

@@BeardedDragonMan1997 He does ramble a lot and has trouble staying on point for any length of time

[@gaiashift3514]

This lecture by Leonard Susskind is very clear. Thank you Dr. Susskind.

[@Duckoo1]

40:30 flip-flop motion/case: day and night. night always becomes day, day always becomes night.

[@laurencrom]

You are the best speaker that I've ever heard! Great job!

[@isadoralavina-macleod8432]

I feel like Alice following Susskind down the rabbit hole. Reality is _so_ weird.

[@arete7884]

What's so wierd about it

[@dragonjake6968]

believe it reality is much more bend than what we are taught

[@patriciocastro710]

A genius, but over that, the profesor, carefully dissteliry ideas, and explained, iin the most brillant way, that we can understand. I happilly take this lectures, with him in Stanford.

[@ketuwonder5118]

finally at 6:54 he sips his coffee.

[@pelimies1818]

It is a coffee cup, yes; but I think it contains only four dimensional matrices or inner products of such entities..

[@thePokeNed]

damnt...

[@saminatariq561]

Ketu Wonder the atoms in the coffee are vibrating and jiggling very fast partially because that's atoms like and partially because the coffee is hot. Inside the atom,electrons and protons are jiggling and so are the quarks and eventually the strings are vibrating. Their energy is higher than ususal because the coffee is hot. When susskind sips his cup of coffee,he exerts a kind of vaccuum force on the strings and they try to escape into other dimension. But thwy actually go in his stomach. So what if other dimensions exist inside his stomach lol...

[@tjn0110]

so if the coffee was made 15 minutes prior to the video, what would the approximate temperature (above absolute zero) be upon first sip, in 35 places to base 2 be?

[@Luculencia]

That was killing me to watch him pick it up and put it down so many times without drinking it.

[@TheBassamassad]

Lonard is the Best Lecturer I have ever met in net.

[@robinkonway631]

People pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for this lecture from a well resoected university...and i get to hear it for free :)

[@jekonimus]

well. They pay for their grade to be entered into a system and a nice diploma for their parents wall :)

[@epicswirl]

They also pay to do the work to make them a good computer scientist or physicist

[@tattah96]

you realize these lectures aren't taught in degree courses right? these are special lectures for anyone willing to learn about it, it's not actually a course, with exams etc. A real course on QIT and such a topic is much more rigorous and intense. In general, these are for the average enthusiast.

[@tattah96]

@Lovely Douche yes I understand that perspective, but there was a comparison being made between the paid degree courses and this one, perhaps unintentionally. I agree it's fantastic, Susskind provides great insight since he is not focusing on the rigor but rather the ideas, therefore anyone no matter what level will benefit from them. And I was replying to the initial comment made by Robin. He assumed this is the course a postgraduate or undergraduate would take, he is clearly mistaken.

[@shamanisis9601]

I wish this level of skilled teaching were available to everyone.

[@greivor]

"Any Questions?" "What's your name" I laughed

[@jasonbennett2194]

greivor HAHAHA can you give a time stamp??

[@daemon7777]

@@jasonbennett2194 1:31:12

[@septembermorgen1690]

@@daemon7777 7 years later, I did also laugh... a gem ...

[@wow-gv9nx]

@@daemon7777 thanku

[@Thundralight]

Maybe we just perceive things as being separate from each other. Could it be that they are not separate or entangled things but just different aspects of the same thing, kind of like filming something from different angles so when one thing turns a certain way the other part always turns a corresponding way.

[@Souraneel]

I wish I studied physics at university, but thanks to the plethora of knowledge on the internet I can feed my appetite for learning the elementary constitution of nature

[@ShreyasSkandan]

Ridiculously good lecture.

[@beingnonbeing]

Listening to these lectures hurts so good!

[@VeilerDark]

46:02 so we loose information in Black Holes, Susskind doesn't like that, but is what he teaches, and it is correct Susskind's lectures are more accurate than his ideas

[@belkyhernandez8281]

I think he is making the distinction between actually losing the information versus not having a tool to retrieve the information. I think what he is saying is that the information is there to be retrieved? I don't understand enough to have an opinion one way or the other but that's what it sounded like to me.

[@JoaoBR85]

Very consistent introduction, this teacher looks very experienced.

[@pepsico815]

Since all matter originated from a single point, is all matter in the universe entangled together?

[@csgstormer]

yes, this is evidence for the Unified Field Theory.

[@AnilKumar-mz8dj]

Chase Gielda suppose i am going to have a measurement for polarization of photon emitted from sun. and i changed it little bit.does it mean that all the photons will get changed out side and inside the sun? and what will be the effects on whole system i.e sun.

[@csgstormer]

Anil chauhan No. Unless for what ever reason the observer observed the Universe in that way. There are no simple answers and I sure as hell don't claim to have any of them. haha ;P

[@gleibert]

Chase Gielda but how can it be evidence of the unified theory if the fact that the universe originated from one point is itself a theory, a theory can be evidence for another theory?

[@csgstormer]

Sure. Our present model of physics is multi-faceted and incomplete, filled with theories that compliment each other, maybe some laws... we still know so little about the the true nature of the Universe compared to the infinite possibilities that lay in the quantum.

[@MuggsMcGinnis]

Susskind's lectures are excellent. My two wishes/suggestions would be that the questions be presented as subtitles and that the camera be positioned WRT the lighting so that what he writes on the whiteboard is not lost in glare. He's a brilliant man and an excellent teacher... these lectures are an invaluable gift to the world.

[@lsbrother]

With a multiplicity of series of lectures - each lecture about 1.5 hours - has Lenny got the record for longest total time on KZbin?

[@glueee2621]

+lsbrother No, there are multiple 10 hour long videos on the site that usually are meant to be watched ironically.

[@lsbrother]

+Marcus Godiali "watched ironically" ?! Not sure what you mean - are these videos all continuously of the same person? - could you give a link to an example.

[@stvia]

@@lsbrother he means looped stuff like "10 hours of Star Wars Cantina music"

[@simplelife1021]

I LOVE KZbin's new feature. Now I can rewind Leonard just a little bit, on the rare occasion that he moves too quickly.

[@5375moli]

1:30 Now I can't stop thinking about that poor neanderthal pulling his back trying to move that boulder, with no acces to Percocet, muscle relaxants, or a good chiropractor. 😪😪

[@simoncrase5360]

But they did have mammoth fat to rub it with.

[@thegreatreverendx]

It’s refreshing to see that one of the world’s leading physicists gets as mixed-up multiplying matrices as anyone else.

[@selvikmusic]

How I just watched 20 minutes of quantum entanglements on acid ill never know

[@still2weirdfoU]

Selvik Music are you learning or feeling the teaching?

[@armelix73]

It's base is the boolean logic "true or false" "1 or 0". So beautiful!!!

[@Ma7m9d]

why the F! do they cut the questions off the recording?

[@RickGuyver]

MDW Because we're here to listen to Leonard Susskind is give a lecture, and not some school children fiddle fumble around with whatever the hell they're curious about.

[@Constantinesis]

RickGuyver but those school children hwo study quantum entanglement might ask the same questions we would think of to ask. Thats the nice thing about Q & A part

[@RickGuyver]

Constantin Eugen Cozma very true, plus they might ask even better questions- which are the right ones, but even so, you are still ignoring a fundamental principle to the problem, which is: The video is titled "Lecture", and nowhere in the title does it say anything about q&a with the kiddos. Perhaps you can search along those lines, or you might also request that Stanford issue a separate video(s). Btw, if you are able to allocate those specific video clips, please send me the link or title description as I would be very interested in viewing them as well.

[@bakunin888]

RickGuyver actually it's because the sound quality is too low since the askers are too far away from the mic.

[@MrPoutsesMple]

+RickGuyver Since we listen to the replies of Leonard to the kids' questions, it'd be good to know the original question as well. And mind you, we're talking about Stanford physics students' questions. Not about any mindless kid in some shitty college.

[@foghorn51rater]

It is amazing that Stanford still has a physicist of his caliber and renowned teaching classes and making videos. He obviously has a passion for teaching as well though.

[@silfasanignacio1620]

losluma quino alegre

[@silfasanignacio1620]

los luma quino alegre

[@KayeBelgrave]

flip flop case- a beating heart of a living person. It either pulses or is about to pulse.

[@davidfuller1061]

He is more intelligent than 99.9% of the population can even comprehend, but Mr Suskind never comes off as he’s talking down to a horde of idiots Quite amazing & admirable

[@lepidoptera9337]

That's because he is not talking to a general audience. He is talking to highly intelligent students here. :-)

[@angrymeowngi]

Props to the "lion being a she" as a reflection of the more probable reality: female lions do most of the hunting.

[@nmarbletoe8210]

I wonder if that is a myth.

[@dennistu]

physics profs are the coolest people

[@WhereIComment]

I GET IT NOW

[@joabrosenberg2961]

Human evolution of intuitions; Classical bits 13:00; Configuration state and it's dynamic 35:00; Reversibility and determinism 50:00; Matrices and Vectors 1:00:00

[@Padraic54]

Worst 007 movie ever.

[@jayaybe1]

Yes, I'd heard it was good. I at least expected a couple of car chases and a gunfight or two, and what about the gadgets? ; )

[@ypey1]

I was wondering who the villain was. Is it the character with the beard or is he the good guy?

[@seandafny]

lol wut ?

[@diana.b1059]

Thank you for posting the lectures. I have been missing out physics all my life until now.

[@mikefuller6959]

I think in my notes I'd just put bollocks!

[@Chabune]

I am really wondering what the hell can be inside the mind of someone that, after having the luxury of watching this incredibly pedagogic, SUPERB lecture, by such a living legend as Susskind, is able to do that comment...

[@eidbaade378]

How the hell did watching an anime get me here

[@alwaysbored47]

Anime always leads one to the answers of the universe.

[@ORTprod]

so nice that this is online for free!

[@BorisYeltivinshki]

This guy remiends me of Mike Ermantrout.

[@RegularShow39]

yessss xd

[@ogboogerdog]

BRO I thought the same thing and was gonna comment but started scrolling instead and ..........

[@MrKorrazonCold]

Two masses are involved: One is +/-m and the other equivalent mass +Mu of Hubble universe from a distance or radius. When inward spherical wave-front's from the universe multiplies energy compressing oscillating +/-mass, like a man casting a stone in water his senses see only wave-ripples. They do not tell him those ripples are locational rings series compressing+/-decompressing expanding sphere's which are dissipating gravity in the same ratio as it is being multiplied by the falling stone.

[@blu12gaming44]

Something tells me Susskind isn't particularly fond of math.

[@tjenner2]

You would have to quantify this question. Using the vector column of 52 and apply the time it takes to learn quantum entanglement, one could deduce that the attitudes would follow an evolutionary process.

[@rightwraith]

18:10 is a mistake. Initially, N is the total number of possible states in a system of n bits of 2 states each. If each "bit" has 6 possible states instead (with 6 possible states they would no longer be called bits), as in the case of a single die, then N = 6^n, which gives n = log base 6 of N. This is important because he says that n is some irrational number, which in his equation is correct. However, a truly discrete piece of information, like a die roll or coin toss, necessarily has an integer number of possible states. He ends up concluding that there is an irrational number of possible states, given by n, in a single die roll. In a discrete, noncontinuous analysis like this, that's complete nonsense.

[@sinisamarovic]

Yes! I thought I misunderstood what he is trying to explain but that was such an obvious error. I know it has nothing to do with this lecture, but how could a physics professor at a prestigious university make such a terrible mistake??

[@sinisamarovic]

Or was he talking about how many bits do you need to represent all the possible states of a dice? In that case the calculation is correct.

[@rightwraith]

Sinisa Marovic No, its still totally wrong. The number of bits can't be an irrational number. It must be natural

[@nembor]

www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=base+2+log+6&x=0&y=0

[@Junaid5721]

@rightwraith No, it is not a mistake. He is talking about the bits as the units of information (Entropy). Entropy is the measure of information any source is emitting (dice in the example).

[@22emporerpenguin]

This helped me out tremendously with a high school project. Thank you for posting this!

[@timmiltz2916]

BEST grading approach ever.

[@ปาริชาติแซ่ย่าง-ค4ฝ]

Best lectures for all times

[@pascale2laballe]

From what I've understood, it's not possible to use Quantum Entranglement for communication because even though both particules are correlated, the state of the 1st particule is totally random. So you have no control on it. Practicle uses of Quantum Entranglement would be teleportation and cryptography.

[@PHYSICSwithNecatiCelik]

Leonard Susskind is one of my favorite physicists

[@razamadaz3417]

I love this guy, he has such wisdom and knowledge.I especially like how he breaks things down into bite size pieces that are easier to understand and digest.

[@organikness]

Science is getting so close to merging with what many beliefs/religious/spiritual systems have been, mostly in part, saying for thousands of years in our recent history

[@elifonkonsolakis2521]

Thank you Mr. Susskind, you are inspiring me sooo much!

[@soccom8341576]

I think physics concepts that seem to contradict intuition may simply be based on another kind of intuition of the logical kind. We have that too, and that is what some built Physics on. He puts it better than a few physics lecturers I've seen, when he compares physics to information.

[@juanlizarazo2307]

Dear Dr. Susskind, thank you for making this video. I have a question regarding fields that I hope you could address. In QFT a particle is a wave-like perturbation on a field, the speed of a wave is determined by the media, but the speed of a particle is determined by the source. How these two are reconciled in QFT. QFT reconstructs the particle-like behavior by adding an infinite number of planar waves. However, in experiments we can have a particle traveling with any speed we like (less than c). On the other hand, it is known of waves that their speed is determined by the media on which they travel. I couldn't have a wave on the surface of a pond travel at any speed I like. The speed is determined by the characteristics of the pond. So, how these two are reconciled in QFT. Any pointers of where to find the answer are highly appreciated. Thank you very much, Juan.

[@nicolasblackburnca]

This man seems like an amazing teacher. Toward the end, at 1h31m26s, hilarious question.

[@maitri1000]

I think sirbflean really NEEDS to get his mind together before posting comments. Remember pearls before swine? guess your silence in this case may be really GOLDEN. the lecture was excellent. He has it in his head, silly, only needs the notes to check for detail. How could you be so graceless and ungrateful? This lecture, no, the course has been offered freely for free. Great generosity. Deserves appreciation.

[@MrKorrazonCold]

There are only two combinations of these spherical sine wave-front's, they have opposite vector's, and spin forming the positron input +0/1- output electron. Whilst electron-wave's are relative to their source. The infinite Cardinals, inward spherical sine-wave's of future probability cascading down, are relative to every observable radius out-to-infinite space. Thus, the antimatter counterparts are relative to all other matter's out-wave's spherically distributed around them positron input +0 !

[@Fetrovsky]

in 20-30 a few times he talks about "decimal positions" when talking about quantities in the "binary" system.

[@jaymesonb]

Very understandable. He explains everything very well in simple language that anyone can understand.