Quantum Physics 101 with Neil deGrasse Tyson

[@StarTalk]

Which concept in Quantum Physics are you most intrigued by?

[@ChristopherFlaten]

What problems might a theory of Quantum Gravity actually solve?

[@michaelccopelandsr7120]

I've figured out how to change the stars by stopping hurricanes. Don't worry, I've technically already done the easy part and changed the stars. My parents were teachers and for almost 2 decades, they taught their students my constellation. Those kids will teach their kids. So on and so on. See, stars changed. I just need help to make it legit and with the rest. We need to get to Willie Nelson's house ASAP. No, I'm not kidding. Yes, I'm serious. I get 7 things and remember, crazy is a compliment. Will you please help?

[@MawDaws]

@Jose Moises Ramos Gomez “which concept in quantum physics are you most intrigued by?” “Thank you”

[@x_capt_x9584]

I have a hard time accepting quantum tunneling

[@jcjammer8972]

Super-position makes my brain explode 🤯 … but in a good way.

[@Thinkingaroundthebox]

I always love hearing Neil talk about science. He makes it fun and easy to understand The problem that many professors have in colleges is that they have a tendency to think that everyone in the room has the same level of knowledge as them Neil doesn't talk over peoples heads. He talks on a level that makes it easy to understand and seems to enjoy doing it

[@OtaBengaBokongo]

his high concentrations of melanin makes him more intelligent and closer to the origins of mankind

[@DodgyDaveGTX]

Well if they had the same level of knowledge as the professor, his job would be redundant

[@shakeesangwenya4927]

Exactly!!! 😄😄😄 In fact, when/if i come across some scientific material/discussion that hasn't been demystified well to me, i search for Neil's work or thoughts on the same subject on the internet knowing that he will make matters easy for me.

[@1loveorosco206]

Thanks! Keep up these great videos going

[@PlagueDoctorscp049]

Man I love these two. I’m learning more than they ever taught us in school. These two are legends love you guys so much amazing shows

[@PlagueDoctorscp049]

Your book astrophysics for people in a hurry just arrived and I’m loving it Neil!!! Do you have any advice on other amazing books either from urself or others. Became a huge fan

[@larrybeach9815]

quantum tunneling

[@mikemondano3624]

Anyone who relies on "what they were taught in school" is likely too dumb to be worth the trouble. "Graduate" doesn't mean you're done. It means you have gone to the next level of self-education.

[@MaddenDoctor]

Well your school didn’t even succeed in teaching you to spell simple words… how would you expect them to teach you quantum physics?

[@PlagueDoctorscp049]

@@MaddenDoctor because my phone autocorrected in to is?

[@rich068]

I loved watching this progress with Chuck. Chuck is quick whitted and brilliant in his own way as most comedians are. But the best part is watching him after a series of just open conversations (not lectures, not seminars, but conversations) begin to have a deeper understanding of the universe.

[@FudgeCOD]

I wish all science teachers were like Neil DeGrasse Tyson! My science teachers were unenthusiastic and dull. I'm now 30 years of age and learning so much more about our world and universe with such an insatiable appetite for knowledge. I thank you for expanding my knowledge and understanding.

[@DrDipsh1t]

As a 31 yr old, I'm so sorry that was your experience 😔mine were amazing and fostered environments of curiosity that left me wanting to learn more. My physics teacher in high school for example basically related everything to ancient War machines (trebuchet, catapults, etc) and drag racing. My biology teachers took us on great field trips to see the biology we learned in action. I get excited thinking about those days as a teaching assistant now doing my best to make learning engaging and fun for the students I have as I want them to remain hungry so to speak and to seek to understand the world around them.

[@antoniojones5340]

When you "sit around alone at home", that's the Pity-particle. Not very well-known, in more ways than one.

[@flashpoint5200]

Ah, I am very well acquainted with the pity-particle

[@patrickcallahan9599]

That makes 2 of us

[@1981misa1]

Lol

[@samuelpoche-mercedes2352]

oop

[@georgeleos8219]

Here is 1 for ya. What is alive? Being conscious of one’s existence or the energy a particle absorbs or retracts. Real q. 12:43 in. In a man with no legs. Encounters ants feeding. Who wins. Now if said man encounters an ant pile and cannot escape. A single organisms can accumulate mass and consume on a hive mind mentality. Now if said man was covered in toxic chemicals that killed the hive mind how manny would die before the positional awareness of the organism be calibrated. This is the basic experiment I got from ya so far. Also. My Leo theory. Which is that some particles are so small and so fast that we cannot quantify them. How ever their impact is seen throughout the universe. Take a wave length and a particle traveling through. Now in a infinite space and self propelled energy. A particle can manipulate the obstacle in a invariable route of known positional reappearance.

[@mrgreatbigmoose]

Thank you for explaining a bit more about Higgs Boson. I have taken a few university courses on quantum mechanics so I only have a tiny familiarity on what is really a Masters or PhD level of knowledge. But your one line about a field that affects mass begins to make me realize where this is going and why science really wants to explore this particle.

[@altortugas5979]

I actually thought that was one of the worst explanations in this video, the variation on the celebrity at a party analogy. The image is like, average Joe walks through the party without slowing down (which is ironically a better analogy to inertia) while the celebrity gets mobbed by fans and slows down, and that’s just not a very good picture of how the Higgs field works. Instead, think of it like this: the Higgs field is the population, mass is the measure of your celebrity, and the greater your celebrity the more people from the population get assigned to your entourage by the Higgs mechanism. Now think about people with different celebrity trying to get into a party. The greater the celebrity (energy), the larger the entourage (mass), the less the bouncer will be able to slow you down on the way into the party (inertia). Cuz if we’re going to talk about parties and celebrities, I think that’s a much better way to understand mass, the Higgs mechanism, and inertia.

[@StarTalk]

Glad the explanation was helpful!

[@mrgreatbigmoose]

@@altortugas5979, thank you! Even better! Much appreciated!

[@nmarbletoe8210]

The Higgs mechanism uses a sorta infinite uncertainty. It's wild. Have you seen Susskind's lecture on it?

[@Notthatguy23]

Imagine hitchhikers guide to the galaxy but the guide is startalk explaining everything

[@jamessmith-cr6ph]

Thanks!

[@oceanblue2386]

Neil and Chuck are the best!

[@zakzeus.shuufHunaak]

100% plausible 51% the original afro80s frfrfrfresh as so fresh ' Beavis and butthead ' 🤣🤣🤣💗💗💗😉

[@KexiGina]

Amazing chemistry!

[@aprylvanryn5898]

It was fun to see a part of that interview with Brian again. This was fun. Thanks

[@StarTalk]

Thanks for your comment!

[@NGC0Music]

Omg, I was watching a video about the Higgs Boson today, and thought “It would be amazing if StarTalk made an episode talking about it”. Few hours later… I learned earlier today that the Higgs Boson is responsible for barely 2% of our mass, is that true? I hope you talked about it on this video. ❤️❤️❤️❤️

[@peterwale6821]

Like Schrodinger's cat... Would StarTalk have uploaded this video, if you had not watched the video about the Higgs Boson earlier today???

[@thelightcycle]

Had the same happen but for quantum physics lol

[@GamerbyDesign]

This episode is new but the content is not. They had made that one before.

[@vansdan.]

the Higgs Boson is NOT related to our mass. Its field is the culprit. The boson is just a spot with a lot of energy in one spot in the field is manifesting as a particle. It's the interaction particles have with the field that grants mass. also, related, EM waves do not interact with Higgs field, that's why they're massless

[@damyr]

@@vansdan. So, the Higgs Boson is not actually a particle, it's an energy field acting like a particle?

[@Interestwat2024]

i'm 13 and i've been reading and learning QP,so thanks for making the concept more understandable or in a way one is to comprehend the concept of quantum physics,on my birthday no-less

[@lidarman2]

@11:43 I like that she alludes to coherence, which entanglement depends on and is almost impossible to maintain over more than a short time. There is not enough emphasis of this aspect in most general talk about entanglement but is is critical that the wave function have this for it to all work.

[@krishnabhutada3983]

Enjoyed every bit of this episode....Fantastic

[@StarTalk]

So glad to hear it!

[@jroc721]

The most disrespectful thing you can tell someone is that they’re a neutron

[@Raucow]

Okay jimmy

[@Kirestial]

Rip jimmy neutron

[@jamesonvparker]

Hmm. Question about the tunneling. Do we accept that the particle jumped from one side to the other? Or did it traverse the distance/space faster than the speed of light? Did it jump from A to B instantly or did it travel from one to the other faster than the speed of light? I hope my question makes sense. Thanks!

[@zakzeus.shuufHunaak]

Uranium 35.9

[@jelteschulten9688]

I'm no scientist, but this is what I think. Information cannot travel faster then the speed of light, but since the wave function of that very particle already exists on the other side of that "hill" (or any other body of mass if you will), information does not travel faster then the speed of light. That's why I think the electron makes the jump instantaneously.

[@vadimZ1000]

It’s like it’s been there the whole time

[@speedingneutrino2490]

A part of the particle's wavefunction always existed outside the barrier. When you ask whether the particle travelled across the barrier or jumped across instantaneously, you're assuming the particle was on one side of the barrier before it was measured on the other side which isn't valid in quantum mechanics. You cannot say anything about the 'history' of the particle upon making a measurement in quantum mechanics. You can only say something about the particle at the time of measurement.

[@thecharlie1827]

Im pretty sure it’s wave function assigns a probability for it be in many different locations and once you observe it, you disrupt its superposition of being in any one of those places and it assumes one of the positions. This occures instantaneously so you’re not making it travel faster than light you’re basically just forcing it to make a decision on where it wants to be found , that being any one of the positions that are on its wave function.

[@Unlockingparadoxes]

Much love and respect to you and your channel. I hope that all is well for you and your family and friends.

[@StarTalk]

Thank you, same to you!

[@Unlockingparadoxes]

@@StarTalk I'm a huge fan of you and science as a whole. I really appreciate and respect what you do and I would love to get some books on quantum physics and astrophysics soon. Any suggestions for good reads?

[@EvaOzeta9]

Love watching these guys. Wish they were around when I was in school. :-)

[@TheDude21519]

I learn something every time I watch this channel...we all working on having a degree in Science and Neil is our Professor, thanks Neil! Salute Chuck, you two make a great duo!

[@StarTalk]

Noooo, we’re not teaching Scientology!

[@TheDude21519]

@@StarTalk Smartphone not so smart, hehe!

[@brianp6682]

I'm a computer programmer, and what i find extremely interesting about quantum physics is that while the rules make no sense, all of them match with a bug in computer hardware or software. you can describe the double slit experiment, spooky action at a distance, causality breakdown, etc., all in terms of bugs or issues with computer software and hardware. they happen all the time. its almost like the base of reality is a powerful computer and we are seeing the bugs.

[@jwmmitch]

I love the last piece about "tweaking theories" As an ex-christian I run into people occasionally saying stuff like "science changes its mind all the time" and they just don't get what's happening. Like newton's understanding of physics worked just fine to an extent, but Einstein's theory of relativity explained it better and worked in some instances where Newton's didn't quite work. But we're definitely still learning and tweaking. It's not like we throw out everything Newton figured out because of the next thing

[@mikeymad]

Great set of clips - thanks.

[@rotaxsryx7038]

Keep up wor Neil and Chuck! We love it

[@Alan-fx3wr]

the motion of quantum phyiscs is like a magic trick, that you'll never guess how it was done. But when you do figure it out, it changes your understanding about everything, beautiful!

[@tonyaustin4629]

See 2:38-moment: Don't laugh at panpsychism. It is demonstrable that consciousness arises through electrochemical processes in the brain. Thus, it is not ignorant to presume that consciousness arises from electrons communicating within a network.

[@nmarbletoe8210]

pan is psyched at this remark

[@slushrr3430]

This makes perfect sense. Thank you so much!!!

[@michaelrose93]

*"How does that Higgs boson work? It creates a field"* < 0:40 It's the opposite actually, the Higgs boson is a _manifestation_ of the Higgs field.

[@SpaceCat_try2]

This is a very educational video.

[@kindu812]

I want to ask if for example with quantum entanglement when the particles state collapses would they definetly be in that collapsed state or will they get in super position again and are they then able to collapse again in the other state they could be ?

[@macwinter7101]

Yes, a quantum particle can enter a state of superposition an indefinite amount of times after collapsing. The reason we know this is because, when we measure a specific quantum particle or entangled particles, each successive measurement will record the particle in different states. The reason this particle is able to be measured in different states despite repeated measurements is because it enters a state of superposition and then collapses again during each measurement. If a particle only collapsed one time from superposition, after which it remained indefinitely in the manifested state, you would always measure it in that same state. Think about Schrödinger's cat: once you opened the box and observed a dead cat, you could close the box again and reopen it, and you would sometimes observe an alive cat and sometimes a dead cat. It's not the case that the cat is always dead once you open the box and notice it is dead. So how does the cat vacillate from being dead and alive after repeated measurements? It is able to switch because it reenters a state of superposition between measurements. Particles, and entangled particles, are only able to change states by reentering superposition. Besides, if particles were unable to enter a state of superposition after having collapsed, by this point in time, there probably wouldn't even exist particles in superposition. Superposition is fragile, and after existing in a universe that is billions of years old, chances are low that there would still exist particles that hadn't yet collapsed. But obviously there are many particles that exist in superposition, and that's because they are able to enter that state even after collapsing.

[@abrahamsatinger265]

Hi, I'm not a professional physicist, but what's a virtual particle? An electron, a proton, a packet of energy? There is something about if borrow energy and pay it back fast enough, it's ok. But for a virtual particle to exist it has to get separated from it counterpart like what happens at the event horizon of a black hole? What about the inside of a black hole, does those a virtual particle exist? Doesn't that qualify as a big bang? Size is relative and so is time. And never mind the fact that a photon isn't keeping track of time nor aware of it.

[@keenanbrowne3307]

This StarTalk video was a collage of all the very crucial information of other videos having to do with talking about quantum physics quantum physics is really awesome and to answer the question about which subject was my favorite my favorite was actually a couple different subjects quantum entanglement and I actually had a theory about controlling the aperture of wormholes using quantum entanglement what if you could use a particle which triggers off the opening of a worm hole and you could put the particle anywhere using quantum entanglement then you can dial your room hole anywhere I don’t know enough about science to know whether or not this is a viable theory but I will continue to become more educated thank you StarTalk for helping me become a scientist

[@scottmatthews1039]

Keenan Browne, if just a little punctuation is beyond your grasp, I think quantum physics may prove an insurmountable challenge.

[@keenanbrowne3307]

@@scottmatthews1039 you got me I was getting lazy on dictate had my phone write it all for me and therefore that is why you found no punctuations I am dictating this message to you as well it’s the laziness of the future you’ll see more people not using punctuations or you’ll see dictate get better

[@WingZeroDuality]

This quantum tunneling explanation was one of the best sum ups I have heard!

[@linkingwithnaz1295]

But it has nothing to do with the original question

[@WingZeroDuality]

@@linkingwithnaz1295 thats the most insightful part. What is one to do, then?

[@linkingwithnaz1295]

@@WingZeroDuality I really don't think so. Quantum entanglement describes how measurements of physical properties of entangled particles is perfectly correlated, no matter the distance between them, and it seemingly violates general relativity on the face of it. The solutions offered are: many worlds interpretation which maintains realism and free will, superdeterminism of not just the particle but the people testing it, or alternatively that general relativity is wrong at least when it comes to the micro quantum scale. I think as that this is far more interesting implications than the quantum tunneling effect. As far as I understand, most scientists don't believe that general relativity is wrong, that leaves us with many worlds interpretation which I feel like is a very clunky solution, and superdeterminism which I think has some very alarming implications.

[@WingZeroDuality]

@@linkingwithnaz1295 ahh..turn to knowledge, I see. I was expecting as such.

[@Teo117]

Wonderful, along with excellent explanations.

[@NovanNation]

3:18 my theory is tachyons cant be seen because they are sound particles not light particles. we keep forgetting sound/vibrations are there in a constant bases the reason sound cant be heard in space is because its to compressed for our human ears to hear it but if you go low enough or high enough in a daw (digital audio workstation) you won't hear it. that does not mean its not their it just means its to low or high for our ears to hear it. I dont think dogs even have the proper hearing to hear it. but this is why I think that vibration/sounds should be 1 of the strings in string theory what is gravity but a wave was is a wave but a vibration what is a vibration but a sound.

[@muddadasiva6696]

Neil is the beloved Physics Teacher for me and millions of People around the globe

[@MegaSkills9]

I am proud to say that I know a lot about Physics but the "Squared" part of E=MC2 has always bothered me. I fully understood the rest of the equation. After years of study I now feel that I truly have a grasp of it. I would love Neil to see this and explain it. (Or even make a video of the specific subject in detail.) If any of you reading this, feel you know the answer feel free to explain how the Squaring fits into the equation. After reading a few of your opinions I will post my theory and compare it to yours. I go through my life craving the specific answers to conundrums. That is why I love physics. - If you read this...please feel free to comment and even speculate if you think you know the answer. A return comment from Neil deGrasse Tyson would be Fantastic. - Thank you.

[@Enkryption]

I believe it might be that the C^2 is bc you need to go past the speed of light. Once that happens you gain more Mass and therefore need more Energy to maintain the speed. I could be totally wrong.

[@antonioe.2396]

I can give you something to think about... So c is the speed of an electromagnetic wave traveling in vacuum. The generalized formula of the waves equation (d'Alemberts equation) presents (1/v^2) as the wave velocity, and it's squared because it actually describes two waves, one going forward and one coming back, each having velocity v. This has mathematical proof becuase the wave equation is a differential equation with two solutions. So you can think about the velocity being squared as the product of the velocities of each individual wave described by the equation. If we consider electromagnetic waves traveling in vaccum, the velocity v assumes the constant value c, given the proprerties of vacuum. For instance, the same electromagnetic wave, has different speed in a copper wire, but the wave equation is the same. This whole thing it's just to explain that c is just a velocity in a given medium, the highest possible velocity because there's not better medium than the vacuum. Now, let's introduce the relativistic kinetic energy K: it's true that K=E-Eo, where E=m*c^2 (energy) and Eo=mo*c^2 (resting energy). For things with little speeds (v

[@MegaSkills9]

@@Enkryption You are wrong (no offense) but I admire your ability to try and think it trough. The math in physics tells us that you can NEVER travel past the speed of light. Also if you have ANY mass at all the mass will reach infinity as you hit the speed of light. I promise I will share the correct answer with you. (Let a few more ppl guess first. It's good to think deep.) Thanks for your reply.

[@MegaSkills9]

@@antonioe.2396 No offense but that's obviously a cut and paste job. I think that you yourself don't actually know. If you are not able to brake it down to a layman's level in a simple explanation...then you don't know. If you actually do...I challenge you to do so. When this is all over you can read my explanation. I teach Science like Neil does...so all people can get it. Thanks anyway for your answer.

[@antonioe.2396]

@@MegaSkills9 why do you say it's a cut and paste job? I am a uni student so I know this Man you weird, you write like you know the deepest secrets of the universe lol (no offense) chiiill

[@Unlockingparadoxes]

I hope that everyone is having a great Summer so far this year.

[@Madhamz]

Is there anywhere I can listen to these individual segments in their entirety?

[@m31963]

This channel is just blowing my mind people!

[@samuelpoche-mercedes2352]

thank you very much for the informative and impartial video. 🙏🏾💗

[@TG-cm5mb]

Loving the graphics!

[@Heavenly_Heal]

Loving this new style of video

[@erikhendrickson59]

The animations of Chuck made me.......chuckle.

[@nicktepuni3916]

I actually understood a lot of that, I think 🤔, thank you.

[@sergeantbilko7070]

You two are great together.

[@LEDewey_MD]

Great compilation of previous shows! If you REALLY want to blow the minds of your viewers, how about describing and explaining the "Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment" ? (If anyone is interested, this phenomenon is described in Brian Greene's book, "The Fabric of the Cosmos", pp. 186-199). XD

[@JulieMcGuire-i8t]

I figured it out every time the particles realize who has the big piece for those two particles time rewinds

[@mansmith3035]

I cant tell you enough how much i love these !😅

[@jaynyc154]

this editing style was awesome

[@AbhishekNagarkar]

Nice new cosmic queries format with the animations. Love it.

[@jmmwangi1]

Love this format.

[@paulashcraft799]

As most, wrapping my mind around this topic is challenging, but what would be very interesting is understanding. The practical application of this.

[@billbobaggons]

I would love to see Brian Greene on StarTalk

[@StaticBlaster]

He has been on StarTalk multiple times. kzbin.info/www/bejne/pWKtaoV-g62JrqM kzbin.info/www/bejne/gnzOe2evbq5-pM0 kzbin.info/www/bejne/hYu4cqeLg9hrfc0

[@billbobaggons]

@@StaticBlaster ahh thank you I've only seen the ones we're they did it live versionwith that one guy from bobs burger, and wanted to see it be more personal with some fans question thanks again.

[@StaticBlaster]

@@billbobaggons No problem.

[@scottdearth1723]

Dr. Levin is always great but this breakdown via the wishbone and observation shattering superpositon probability & replacing it actualized reality was finally the AH-HA Moment for me understanding this! Love this conversation.

[@cee8mee]

Made sense. Just annoyed by her calling it a wishing bone. Who does that. Like she'd never heard it called a wish bone before and pulled a Jill B.

[@nickwiddows1264]

Nice one Neil!

[@IQmates]

I liked this format where it’s also visual. This is perfection 👌

[@chriskelso723]

Here's a question...If I can't know where it is after the initial measurement, then how do I really know how fast particles are?

[@nmarbletoe8210]

i suppose we could measure speed by taking low-resolution measurements of location at two locations far enough apart where the x uncertainty doesn't matter much Oh also! We could get speed by measuring impact momentum and dividing by mass.

[@frenchfried7701]

I'm not antisocial, I'm a neutron!

[@ronaldpayton4350]

Whats up Jimmy

[@OnlyHumanOnce]

I've been a fan of yours for a long time. I'd give anything to be able to have conversations with you. So many questions..

[@bilalchiiino3423]

can we get links to the fullepisodes of these smaller parts

[@Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time]

One way to think of quantum physics is that the wave particle duality of light and matter in the form of electrons is forming a blank canvas for us (atoms) to interact with; we have waves over a period of time and particles as an uncertain future unfolds. The mathematics of quantum mechanics represents the physics of time with classical physics represents processes over a ‘period of time’ as in Newton's differential equations. In this theory the mathematics of quantum mechanics represents geometry, the Planck Constant ħ=h/2π is linked to 2π circular geometry representing a two dimensional aspect of 4π spherical three-dimensional geometry. We have to square the wave function Ψ² representing the radius being squared r² because the process is relative to the two-dimensional spherical 4π surface. We then see 4π in Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle ∆×∆pᵪ≥h/4π representing our probabilistic temporal three dimensions life. The charge of the electron e² and the speed of light c² are both squared for the same geometrical reason. We have this concept because the electromagnetic force forms a continuous exchange of energy forming what we experience as time. The spontaneous absorption and emission of light photon ∆E=hf energy is forming potential photon energy into the kinetic energy of electrons. Kinetic Eₖ=½mv² energy is the energy of what is actually happening. An uncertain probabilistic future is continuously coming into existence with the exchange of photon energy.

[@jadled]

Please somebody explain me this: If the wave function collapses at the instance of measurement, how the heck we can have an idea about the superposition state? How is this different than putting right and the left of a pair of gloves in two different boxes? I hear this analogy all the time, but my inference is one glove is always right, the other one is always left. How do we know they are in superposition state, if we are not allowed to look? Same with quantum computers. I had enough of "classical bits are I/O, but qubits are bla bla bla.." If we dont measure the system, how do we use it? Isn't "using" measuring? Doesn't it collapse when we look for a "result"? And for the encryption thing: It sounds like pressing all the buttons on the keyboard all at the same time and expect to solve a one letter password. Remember, I'm an idiot. Please explain accordingly.

[@jadled]

nobody has an answer?

[@iiiiiiiiijj]

You tube The EPR Paradox & Bell's inequality explained simply. Arvin ash . Good luck with understanding 👍😅😂

[@melisamusa5284]

Thank you so much! This is exactly what I have been wanting 💃❤️

[@imharjeet]

I feel like the answer to the second question at 1:55 was not relevant or complete.

[@carmengomez]

I didn’t get what you were talking about with the “wishing bone” is it the same concept as the Schroedinger cat?

[@kartikb8763]

Bring back brian Greene, I can listen to u both for hours

[@brianjohnston3707]

If I watch this 20 more times I should understand 1% of it 🤯

[@MatthewEverettGates]

Great simple overview! Thanks. What's the real (observed) analogue of "big/small" re the wishbone vs particle, I wonder?

[@alancooper4494]

I think a science joke at the end from Chuck is a good idea 💡

[@Unlockingparadoxes]

Never give up on your dreams and aspirations and remember to be kind and uplifting to each other and open minded and genuine.

[@TheSouthernSiren]

Wooow Brian Greene actually made perfect sense🤯I'm really impressed. 😆

[@ResoluteGryphon]

I've never understood how entangled particles are any different than the wishbone example. Observationally they are the same, right? How do we know that a particle was in a superposition, spinning both up and down before we measured it, and not simply determined (up or down) the moment it was split? Video links would be appreciated.

[@atf300t]

That is a very good question, and the short answer to it is the Bell's Inequality. You may want to watch this video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/jn2cqIqbetKErNE

[@grrrraffe]

why is there only two states for the wishbone? there are more than two. When the people breaking the wishbone, imagine it snapped it into 3 parts (where the 3rd part, the 'V' section, fell on the floor). When the person, from Andromeda, looks at their piece, the don't see the 'V' part, so they assume they have the smaller part. that instant knowledge doesn't affect the 2nd person's piece, which in fact could be smaller than the Andromeda one. Does the wrong assumption by the observance have no influence? if so, it doesn't matter if the cat is in a box or not. there is just one state at any time.

[@IsaiYuno]

16:36 The way Neil turned not only his head put his upper body to Chuck 😂

[@brylidan]

always great to watch

[@iamdb1990]

not sure why this video is in this style, but I like it

[@elijah1_1_1]

I love this [1:48 - Quantum Tunneling!] Thank you, God! it turns out 2:05 one of the rules of quantum physics is 2:07 that because particles are also waves 2:10 if there's a particle on this side of a 2:12 hill and it can't get across to the 2:14 other side 2:15 the wave function 2:17 does exist and actually exist in a 2:20 little bit on the other side of the hill 2:22 so the electron can disappear here and 2:24 reappear there collapsing the wave 2:26 function and the electron would have 2:28 moved from there to there instantly 2:30 basically faster than the speed of light 2:33 it's called 2:34 quantum mechanical tunneling and it 2:36 happens all the time 2:38 and it is mysterious and beautiful

[@wenchinatrenchcoat8459]

This is amazing. So was Chucks joke at the end 🤣

[@86GT11]

Quantum Physics is the physical laws of quantum.

[@rondale9973]

Fantastic.

[@arunabhakhara1264]

I am a PhD student studying insect microbiome. However, I always had an interest in astrophysics. Therefore, can you please explain bose-einstein condensate and why we are not able to explain gravitational field at quantum level in layman's terms

[@oldcowbb]

sounds more like quantum physics than astrophysics

[@nmarbletoe8210]

BEC is when the wavelength of particles is bigger than their distance apart, so they decide to share a wave function. It is related to superconductivity, superfluid, all the super-stuffs. Ok so imagine an electron going through the two slits. Did the gravity also go through both slits? In that case gravity must be quantum, but we don't have those equations. Did the electron's gravity only go through one slit? In that case there should be no interference! But there is.

[@SteveC38]

This was nice!

[@manolomediaarts9973]

Please do a explainer on Young's double slit experiment

[@charleediaven6278]

Early in my studies of the Heisenberg Uncertainty, my teaches forced the idea that it was not the actual measurement technique but the idea that we cannot know two related results simultaneously. It was a hard idea for me to grasp. Later after a few years the effect of actually doing the measurement became apparent to me, in a more concrete way. There are learning curves, but like Neil and the others he has on his show, after many years of immersing in the counter intuitive of quantum, only the strangest ideas remain. Now I think if it is intuitive and quantum, it will be wrong. My current hyposthesis.

[@rajachinaswamy6378]

6:20 Niel: " In order to see you.... " In the movie NEXT, Cage , " Here is the thing about the future. Every time you look at, it changes, because you looked at it"

[@GRAVYTheGrimRapper]

"SO IM SMALLER THAN THE PHOTON??" that killed me!!!

[@neskowininja]

i luv the plentiful topics it’s also two smart guys doing improv / one w decades of immersion in science that’s called Sci.communication

[@raiderjohnthemadbomber8666]

The observer theory, in my mind, is similar to group dynamics. As for light and color, the colors we see are generated by the material trying to void itself of that color. As I understand it, dark matter is the material that we don't yet understand. As for worm holes, the prevailing theory is that they are black holes without an event horizon.

[@TheRabbitRonin]

3:20 Kind of like River Song from 'Doctor Who'. She Lives by moving backwards through time while everyone else moves forward through time.

[@DragonMaster-ns6mt]

You’re amazing

[@georgeleos8219]

Let me explain. 14:12. The set time line and the 9 realms are the constant in the universe. Now where the conundrum happens is that. If we have an established there is an unestablished. And that has a similar reaction. Creating alternate time lines. Ie other similar individuals. Now if u were 2 meet you in another universe how do u establish which is the Alpha. Based on presences, wealth, success, or is it who sought out the other?

[@antarcticorb9197]

So if gravity is pushing apart, or can repel, does that mean that entropy doesn't exist? Because isn't entropy when everything runs down, or loses energy? I'd love to know the reasoning here.

[@ilsennodipoi]

It seems that Janna is saying that she "observed" Neil deGrasse Tyson's "bone" at some point and found it to be small.

[@wadebanks3710]

Is there a specific line (size) where Quantum Mechanics takes over from Newtonian / Classical Physics.

[@thecharlie1827]

Is there any way to prove that two entangled particles that are separated have to be in a superposition? Why can’t the probabilities of one of the separated particles being either the big or the small one be applied to the time of separation and only when the particle is observed. The question is basically why does it have to be different than with the wishbones.

[@olic7266]

Huh?

[@AmmarAhmedEzzat]

this quantum thing is just amazing. Can any one recommend a beginner to intermidiate journy book or course

[@kazinur]

Loved it!

[@charleediaven6278]

I dig the Tachyon. Long ago when I first heard of it, I said, " That's me. "

[@brandonjamar]

4:15 Chuck does his best Joe Rogan impression 😂😂