Richard Feynman on Electron 2 Slit Experiment, After noise reduction

Richard Feynman on Electron 2 Slit Experiment ,After noise reduction

[@DermioRG]

A criminally under-viewed video. Thanks for this incredible upload

[@michaelblankenau6598]

What should the penalty be since you say it’s criminally under- viewed ? And what statutes are you referring to ?

[@michael-4k4000]

If you think you know Quantum Machanics you don't know QM! Lol best line ever?

[@KD-xy8kq]

exactly.. these geniuses are lecturing about big science thing and could not even shoot the video in color let alone HD. 😂😂😂. also using the black board and chalk😂😂😂

[@LeeGee]

​@@michaelblankenau6598in English we use figures of speech which may be literally true. Good luck on your learning journey.

[@michaelblankenau6598]

@@LeeGee If only your comment made some sense . But it doesn’t.

[@tonyfluxman7426]

What a pleasure it is to listen to this man (audio problems notwithstanding). He doesn’t flinch from explaining the issues honestly and clearly. Compare to many other videos online on the same topic where the explanations are frustratingly unclear or incomplete.

[@shanejohns7901]

He makes learning fun. And that's not a common feature as expertise rises. There are plenty of people who know how to make basic learning fun. But by the time you get to the level of understanding that Feynman has, you lose a lot of those. Not all of them, of there wouldn't be any. But they are rare. And Feynman is one of the rare ones.

[@jaymzs]

Am I the only one that saw the title of this video and wondered why "noise" was affecting the double slit experiment ?

[@darrenskinner3711]

No…I wondered that too 😂

[@scowell]

I believe the audio was processed... that's what it's referring to.

[@jaymzs8221]

@@scowell yes…. Yes.. that is what it was referring to. Thank you for the enlightenment.

[@vincecallagher7636]

I think they are speaking of visual not audible noise.

[@ethernitcz]

Oh! I realized what's going on only after reading your comment. I was also waiting, when Feynman starts talking about the noise :)

[@javiermachin1]

“It is necessary for the very existence of science, that the same conditions always produce the same results” “Well, they don’t…”

[@LeeGee]

Very much appreciated upload.

[@user-dh6fx1ve9j]

two sheets and a lamp, and universe seems broken

[@RickarooCarew]

this may be Feynman's finest gift to us... it is applicable to all systems that are governed by random events... like economics.. or other human behavior... think about it... please 🙏

[@RickarooCarew]

it seems counter intuitive.. it's not... we have grown up with the idea that the more we can control a process the better the results are... in the case of a machine, that's true... in the case of random systems.. it's not true. because ==>> duration in a random system is brought about by positive reinforcement... negative reinforcement cancels out... if I try to measure a positive input.. value= 1 it looses energy and becomes some decimal value between 1 and zero ... and not always the same amount.. so there's no reinforcement.. it brings destructive interference... fractals occur on the border between order and chaos.. our lovely Universe is fractal it works best when we don't try to control it ✌️

[@mnojkl3217]

It's interesting to see him mildly nervious, and using notes during his presentation. Typically unusual for him, at least later in life 🙃

[@philmurphy5584]

Brilliant 👏

[@AngelinaCruz357]

When Feynman says: h₁₂=h₁+h₂, and a₁₂=a₁+a₂; is he referring to the term of sequence?

[@DrDeuteron]

Timestamp? But prob. No, he’s summing (coherently) over amplitude from slits 1 and 2

[@bgold2007]

A lot of famous quotes in the early parts

[@darkfox77]

This must be very rare. Hopefully you have an entire vault of these. If so. What would it take to get them all published?

[@zephyrandboreas]

These are Feynman's Cornell Messenger Lectures of 1964. A series of seven lectures. You will find them if you Google for them. They are each unique.

[@Nuttymeemps]

I really appreciate him saying that no one understands quantum mechanics. I have tried and tried to get my head around it for a long time and can’t. I now realize I never will. It troubles me that reality is nothing more than probabilities and potentialities.

[@shanejohns7901]

At that SCALE, it is true. Thankfully, the macro world still operates in ways where logic applies. Photons and electrons are so small that reality at that scale simply behaves differently. Rather than be daunted by this 'feature' of the reality we find ourselves a part of, we've gone well beyond and are making quantum computers. Another example of weird photon behavior shows up in the polarization. You can arrange two pieces of polarized plastic in such a way that their combination doesn't allow any light to pass through. Simple enough to explain with normal logic. But adding a third sheet of plastic, between those two, causes light to come through? That doesn't make sense at all. But it's what happens. Photons and Electrons are the kind of strange that quarks and positrons are, and they belong to that scale of 'things'.

[@tarsembansal5752]

Beautiful task

[@brunobucciotti7198]

Chad Feynman dropping the H-bomb near the end of the lecture, basically mid cold war

[@scottmatthews1039]

Hard to get through this; just keep seeing/hearing Ed Norton from Honeymooners…

[@kingdomofcapybaras6850]

This is what genius looks like.

[@JRexRegis]

He is pretty amazing. Describes such a complex, intricate and weird phenomenon and experiment in a way anyone can understand. I love watching lectures like this, and I'm very sad that a lot of geniuses lived before audio and video could be recorded.

[@kingdomofcapybaras6850]

Yes. It's one thing to know complex information. It's another thing entirely to communicate that knowledge effectively to others. He's a born teacher.

[@KenTheoriaApophasis]

Feynman was a fool

[@twonumber22]

​@@KenTheoriaApophasis That's the single dumbest thing I've ever heard.

[@paulgardiner4336]

"After noise reduction"! How about the aspect ratio? Yes, it doesn't impinge on the physics, but - just - why not?

[@AaronBrand]

When and where was this originally recorded?

[@prof_fisher]

I believe this was recorded as part of his Messenger Lectures at Cornell, later published as "The Character of Physical Law."

[@andywong2135]

@32:58 "...Light is scattered by electrons..." really ? I've never studied this, would anyone help elaborate that ?

[@LeeGee]

I guess he made a mistake and no-one noticed

[@zephyrandboreas]

Yes. Light is scattered by the electrons. I am not a physicist, but as a biologist that is a phenomenon that is used in biology to study the structure of biomolecules.

[@aaronkaw4857]

His centre of mass is in an unstable equilibrium.

[@EricPham-gr8pg]

The universe maybe like grid points and field force open like zooming by magnifying so we see light hidden beneath and that why our thinking all sharing equally except those are toothed or cursed by sound

[@AngelinaCruz357]

Sounds make different waves of vibration.

[@werkzeugmann6224]

I was hoping we'd see the cat?

[@johnhausmann2391]

Hi explanation of hidden variables at the end was not very good. He'd have benefited greatly from Bell's ideas.

[@LeeGee]

That's why no-one remembers him

[@user-bj8js3mt3i]

Turn song on radio, and check under hood for sound vibrations through the chassis check the next pickup on the radio stations until you can hear the radio

[@aaronkaw4857]

Did he just explain that simultaneity doesn't objectively exist?

[@dickrichard626]

Well, it is an abstraction. Things do objectively happen simultaneously, but there is no real thing that is "simultaneity"

[@dickrichard626]

That and really if you set an experiment up with a hypothetical extremely precise timer that measures extremely small fractions of milliseconds, you'd find that most things apearing to happen simultaneously are actually not truly perfectly in sync and the probability for 2 things to occur at the same time is extremely low.

[@stephenbrough8132]

The noise reduction seems to have spoiled the sound so much, listening through normal speakers, I couldn;t listen to more than about 20 seconds .. I jumped ahead hoping it would improve. Having dead silence when he's not speaking makes it sound unnatural .. perhaps there's a slightly less intrusive setting ... I didn't realise there was a noise problem on the feynman lectures anyway - I've listened to them many times before without issue, but perhaps this one sounds even worse without NR. Sorry, just saying - it kinda hurts my ears a bit - a bit harsh

[@bariswheel]

Indeed, noise reduction does strange things to the audio, makes it sound unnatural and repels us from it. It's a classic bug where the engineering team fails to weigh in the nuance features that makes it human (the breathing in the voice in text to speech on ios for example)

[@jelleoving98]

i think its fins

[@tonypalmeri722]

I wonder if AI could clean-up the audio, better that other noise-reduction techniques.

[@tonymason8606]

I hope it could clean up the video too. Making it a lot more sharp.

[@NehemiahWendell-u1y]

Williams Richard Walker Helen Jackson Anthony

[@ClareBoyd-f8c]

Taylor Ruth Walker Brenda Thompson Timothy

[@shanejohns7901]

So 'comes in lumps' is just another way of saying they're 'discrete'. I guess he wouldn't be Feynman if he just said they were discrete, and been done with it. Perhaps he believed that it'll be remembered better if he says it like that, rather than using the word 'discrete'. Both Feynman and Krauss were sexually predatory. Not a good look for the profession.

[@antoinebachmann6253]

terrible audio

[@aragorn2730]

If thats what you have to say about it, i am happy you dont complain about it not having color.

[@AngelinaCruz357]

10:21 The holes are not even leveled!

[@steviejd5803]

Please stand still.....

[@user-bj8js3mt3i]

Uses the human as a tool for computing. AI with human intelligence.

[@budspencer2479]

never trust a theoretical physician too much, they leave out what dont fit into their calculation. (please dont get angry, is just a joke).

[@kevintruman9981]

There's no theoretical physician though 😂😅

[@EsatBargan]

Miller Matthew Clark Nancy Anderson Jessica

[@ericreiter1]

Minute 25, "You never get two clicks at the same time." I show how that is wrong and what they did wrong to make them think they were right. Find me and my website.

[@poopnach]

0:54 _see me after class_

[@golfer5636]

You’re drunk

[@user-bj8js3mt3i]

No, though a garden walking pretty in the gardens at night she shies like a nighten gail.

[@abdellahkhodja9636]

hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

[@laynemccormic9102]

Audience cringe

[@jelleoving98]

you have an audio freely available to you from one of the greatest minds of the 20th century, which somebody managed to preserve and augment to make the sound distinguisable, so your far less advanced brain gets a change to grasp a most intriguing feature of nature, and you complain

[@mrslave41]

literally nonsense 😊

[@walterbrownstone8017]

Comparing bullets to charged particles is just plain wrong. And this is the basis of the double slit. Garbage theory.

[@nabilbensafi]

What do you suggest ? I'm still trying to figure out what's so special about this experiment. Isn't observing particles the same thing as interacting with them, hence the change of their behavior ?

[@walterbrownstone8017]

@@nabilbensafi This is the system. They push probability on you as if it was a law of physics. And you either take it or you fail the course. Basic electrostatics tells you every particle has an electric field. The field passes through both slits, causing the particle to deflect accordingly. But they make it sound like some miraculous thing. But in reality is just Maxwell's work.

[@JohnSmith-if2qv]

​​@@walterbrownstone8017 Always some idiot on the internet pretending to be smart. First of all, the Feynman Double Slit Experiment has actually been done and has been proven correct. So your assertion that it's garbage is already wrong. Then you claim that "every particle has an electric field." Are you really that stupid? I suppose neutrons don't exist and have never existed. But, to further my point, I was able to find a paper where they did a double slit experiment with neutrons and lo and behold it's still probabilistic. You're just wrong. Probably someone who failed quantum and is salty they failed. Paper in question: D.M. Greenberger and A. Yasin, "Simultaneous wave and particle knowledge in a neutron interferometer" The paper does give some interesting insight into how much we can know about a particles path but it is *still* inherently probabilistic. Shocker. Some rando who failed quantum isn't smarter than one of the most influential scientists of the 20th century

[@JohnSmith-if2qv]

@@walterbrownstone8017 You're just wrong. Firstly, neutrons are electrically neutral. That's why they're called neutrons. Secondly, you are implying that this experiment would not work with neutrons. This is also completely false. Here's a nice little paper you can read, although given it is obvious you failed quantum I don't know how much you'll understand. This is basic electrostatics. D.M. Greenberger and A. Yasin, "Simultaneous wave and particle knowledge in a neutron interferometer" Shocker. One of the most influential physicists of the 20th century is smarter than a some rando in the youtube comments who is salty about failing quantum.

[@walterbrownstone8017]

@@JohnSmith-if2qv Firstly neutrons are emergent particles that are made from charged particles. Meaning they always have a presence in the field density of is local space. All particles with spin are emergent. Spin can only emerge from two charged particle fields interacting in the only why they know how, by spinning.

[@Blessingdrop]

J

[@user-gj6cw6yc8s]

😊 you're right as a spectator there is a lot of laughs and a lot of jokes outside the train tracks probably as you attend the parade It's not so funny to the security inside the train perhaps the president is inside ...😮 It's a little more serious for the security And he takes his job very seriously .. but I guess if you were holding over 200 tons of gold ...😊 Everything would be serious ..... Now you can hear the jokes from the people because of microphones .... And the insensibility ..... But yes some straight references may continue As the laughs and jokes could only get themselves an ice cream or go home 😊 Job gets f***** up around here It's not cool 😊 Because nobody likes the bleaching ... Nobody nothing licks to be bleached