The Quantum Experiment that ALMOST broke Locality

Electric and magnetic fields were considered the end-all-be-all of electromagnetism. However, in 1959, two physicists (Aharonov and Bohm) proposed a quantum mechanical experiment that shows electric and magnetic potentials are actually more real.
________________________________
VIDEO ANNOTATIONS/CARDS
Quantum Wave Functions:
• Quantum Wave Functions...
Solar System Model:
• The Craziest Solar Sys...
What the HECK are Magnets?
• What the HECK are Magn...
How Special Relativity Fixed Electromagnetism:
• How Special Relativity...
________________________________
SUPPORT THE SCIENCE ASYLUM
Patreon:
/ scienceasylum
Advanced Theoretical Physics (Paperback):
www.lulu.com/shop/nick-lucid/a...
Advanced Theoretical Physics (eBook):
gumroad.com/l/ubSc
Merchandise:
shop.spreadshirt.com/scienceas...
________________________________
HUGE THANK YOU TO THESE PATRONS
Warden of the Asylum:
YDT
Asylum Counselors:
Matthew O'Connor
Asylum Orderlies:
Daniel Bahr, William Morton, LT MarshMan
Einsteinium Crazies:
Albert B. Cannon, Wacky, Ken Davis, Ilya Yashin, Eoin O'Sullivan
Plutonium Crazies:
JKLMN Anderson, Al Davis, Kevin MacLean
Platinum Crazies:
Rick Dinning, Eugene Boone, Fletch, Felipe Cruz, Vittorio Monaco, Stephen Blinn, Mikayla Eckel Cifrese
________________________________
OTHER SOURCES
www.feynmanlectures.caltech.ed...
journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/...
journals.aps.org/prl/abstract...
journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/...
iopscience.iop.org/article/10...
________________________________
LINKS TO COMMENTS
• Quantum Wave Functions...
________________________________
IMAGE CREDITS
Honey Badger:
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...

[@RupertFear]

Nick, The Science Asylum should be as big as Vsause, or Veritasium, or Scishow. The world NEEDS educators like you!

[@Jwine95]

He deserves every bit of it. Hes one of the best as far as explaining very unintuitive things clearly. I personally like Matt over at PBS spacetime too, though he spills a little more math than Nick. (Even though im a physics phd student Im a math geek so i get off on that stuff)

[@popaandrei4422]

@@Jwine95 pbs is more on the hard part of things. This channel explain it in a easy fashion. Pbs is for those who want more complex answers this is for those who cannot quite understand those complex answers. BOTH are good 😁✌

[@seanreese3314]

My go-to physics channels are Veritasium, Minute Physics, Physics Girl, and of course Science Asylum. Although the others all have more subscribers, Science Asylum is every bit as good as them. Personally, I'm not a fan of VSauce because he's just a guy that makes science videos; he doesn't have a formal physics background like Derek, Henry, Dianna, and I'm assuming Nick.

[@playgroundchooser]

I'm almost positive that Hank Green has tweeted about Nick's videos. 🤔 May have even been how I came to the Asylum. 😁

[@geraldhoxha]

I agree with you bro

[@Orsan_]

I literally was going to comment the quantum entaglement thing when I heard the clone say it at the end hahaha.

[@PushVOD]

Same lol hilarious

[@feynstein1004]

Lmao me too

[@shayanmoosavi9139]

Same😂😂😂

[@lukewright5544]

better than the comment of the clone was the reaction of the "original" XD - "oh sh..." this episode is already one of my favorites!

[@shubhsharma150]

dude same

[@popaandrei4422]

The "Ah sh.." part was exactly my reaction 😂

[@shayanmoosavi9139]

Same😂😂

[@subscribefornoreason7390]

Here we go again.

[@theeiszeitmann928]

spooky action at a distance.

[@sciverzero8197]

Was my first thought.

[@AlexNukem]

Ah shit, I'm sorry.

[@SlimThrull]

And then we discovered quantum entanglement and broke locality into itty bitty pieces.

[@monad_tcp]

what if you just introduce more dimensions and then do some rotations on them, its not action at a distance, its just a rotation in a dimension you can't see.

[@kuboteusz]

@Dan Kiplagat Kibiwott We observe quantum entanglement because entangled particles are part of a single wave, just like the whole universe for that matter. Locality is preserved.

[@kbbeats3099]

Last time I was this early, the universe was filled with quark gluon plasma

[@ScienceAsylum]

You got the first comment too!

[@SadgeZoomer]

YOu CAn MaKE a rElIgion OuT of thiS

[@kbbeats3099]

@@ScienceAsylum Most honored my good man! Lol

[@insearchofpeace2151]

@@kbbeats3099 How was Thorsday?

[@snowthemegaabsol6819]

But did you have only 1 fundamental interaction?

[@RogerTerrill]

I absolutely love how Nick uncovers concepts like locality - seemingly obvious, yet underpinning so much!

[@altortugas5979]

The irony of this comment is that the Nobel prize last year (when this comment posted) was given for proof of quantum non-locality, demonstrating a clear need for this topic to be revisited.

[@P0LARice]

Two Electrons go 'round the outside 'Round the outside, 'round the outside Two Electrons go 'round the outside 'Round the outside, 'round the outside

[@dalfireasha]

LOL. Was looking for this comment.

[@anteconfig5391]

You have created a monster.

[@juliorojas2788]

I was actually expecting Nick to play into this, too haha

[@feynstein1004]

Guess who's back, back again?

[@kacpernurnberg6322]

I watch your films for about a year now but just now when I started a class about quantum physics in chemistry I can see how much knowledge you have presented to me in easy form :) Keep them coming Nick and have nice day.

[@GeeTrieste]

Teachers teach thing in far different ways than they internally learned them. They learned them by hook or by crook, heuristically, then recreated the model they understand, and teach from that mental model, ignoring the actual way they learned it in the first place. That is why quantum physics is hard to learn.

[@EM-bs4kt]

A maxwellian field is not a good hypothesis in this regard. I believe he was stating it as an analogy for something much more complicated. Electric and magnetic field have to be derived in quantum field theory before you can discuss field phenomena as in the Feynman diagram sense. A vector potential has degrees of freedom that would further mystify this effect. I’m

[@lakshaygupta9061]

Although this was uploaded at night in my region, it still made my day

[@feynstein1004]

They're minerals, mate ;)

[@shayanmoosavi9139]

@@feynstein1004 nice breaking bad reference. I was confused at first but then looked at his name and I suddenly got it

[@goutham94]

You seriously deserve a million subs for the videos you do mate!!!

[@Jwine95]

I was literally thinking about quantum entanglement and the end of the video made me laugh out loud in public. 😅😅😅😅

[@dreggory82]

The abbreviation would be LOLIP, hmm, I like it.

[@TheAdziK]

I even wrote out a comment and then I saw yours. Made me watch the end :)

[@ScienceAsylum]

This post... is now clean! Appropriate person has been banned and new words have been added to my comment filters. You're welcome. (In the future, DO NOT ENGAGE.)

[@Jwine95]

Thanks Nick, it made me feel incredibly awkward

[@memeier9894]

@@ScienceAsylum I was posing another side to the arguement in case someone who had no knowledge of the subject came along. I didn't want a thread full of pro you know what, and no dissenting opinion. Either way you did the right thing by deleting it.

[@davewilson13]

I miss teaching in the same building as you. Your channel has come a long way, grats!

[@ScienceAsylum]

Thanks! It's a full-time job now, which is weird.

[@giuseppebosa9806]

Hey Nick, i just wanted to say thank you for the hard work you put in these videos, because thanks to people like you and Matt from PBS I am now an actual physics student. Every time my motivation falls down for any reason, seeing you uploaded a video instantly raises my desire to know and motivates me to study harder. Keep it going bro, with this content you are not only spreading culture. You are creating new scientists. And this is awesome.

[@ScienceAsylum]

That's wonderful to hear! I'm sure Matt feels the same way getting comments like this.

[@pwinsider007]

@@ScienceAsylum does quantum entanglement break the principle of locality?

[@jeffreystone8974]

I love how he asks the questions I would be asking, but then he answers them with "don't get hung up on the unimportant details", and the rest of his explanation is so good and so knowledgeable that honestly I just trust I don't need to worry about those details, I can't say that about every science KZbinr

[@gary_dslr2615]

As always nick, perfect balance of education and humour 😀 love the animations, and I wore my science asylum t-shirt to a visit to the London science museum to show support ! Well done mate.

[@ScienceAsylum]

It's still weird knowing other people are wearing my shirts... a good weird 😊

[@PushVOD]

so what about quantum entanglement?? lmao as im typing this the clone at the end asks it lol I love your videos bro

[@ShauriePvs]

@Adymn Sani ya jokes aside, but I really want to know what about it?

[@santhoshwagle9857]

what about it??

[@daemon1143]

was just about to type something similar when I saw your comment then the final clone :)

[@jamestheotherone742]

@@daemon1143 Perhaps you and Alex are entangled?

[@daemon1143]

@@jamestheotherone742 That's what Alex was thinking too :)

[@marloc2019]

You explain complex (even though non-immaginary, ok couldn't resist...) things with a smile and the ability to keep your spectators curious and absorbed ... You might be a little crazy; you're definitely a great teacher!

[@ScienceAsylum]

Thanks!

[@i-v-l9335]

The tools are: an interferometer , an electron beam, a solenoid and a detector screen. The electron beam is not a photon emitter, but the interometer itself will treat it the same way. Thats a dang cool experiment and easier to understand with a bit more specificity. Basically the Electron Beam gets displaced out of phase due purely to the stationary, perpendicular magnetic field inside the solenoid. The Electron Beam basicaly ignores the material of the solenoid and answers directly to the magnetic field as, since the electron flow causes the magnetism then, electrons will react to other magnetic fields. In a simple format, the electron beam hits the lateral side of the magnetic field, accelerates slightly as electrons actually move slower than light, move to the center of the magnetic field and then release the momentum on the other side. The phase invariance has to do with the incoming position of the two electron beams and will then deflect differently through the magnetic field mainly due to direction. So while one beam may be hitting straight on, the second beam regardless of position will always go out of position phase due to angular deflection, even if the beams are tight together. In order to regain a phase on the other side of the solenoid you'd have to equilateral triangle the focus of the two beams at the solenoid rather than have them run parallel. Basically, this experiment has more of a newtonian style answer than do most of them. BUT that is only if the electron beams are set up parallel. IF they are triangulated against the solenoid and still give that phase invariance then that is definitely a humdinger, imo. If you want to get slightly more technical, this is a different take on the double slit, but with the slit giving a tangential phase difference rather than an measurement choice causing direction of observation Hopefully that was digestable. Edit- The base gist is that since the two beams are phased together, the particles themselves will still deflect differently because they are from 2 different sources, and basically hit each other because of the phase at the converged magnetic field center of the solenoid which causes a minute loss of charge potential in one beam, and the one with slightly less charge gets deflected onto another magnetic line. So the loss of charge potential on one beam causes the apparent refraction because it hit a medium and that medium is the clash of the electrons in the magnetic field center of the solenoid. This happens because of the mass of the electrons hitting each other, whereas the photon superimposes due to no mass, and the emitted photons on the detector screen are just a remission of the electron beams. Whatever the crazy mechanics, the answer points to just the fact that the electron masses hitting off each other and interaction with the magnetic field via the lorentz mechanics. This thought process hurt my head, and it still can't quite figure it out.

[@phonglove6767]

nice

[@aacc8466]

this channel is freaking awsome and I am not ashamed to admit that I have binge watched and rewatched episode after episode!

[@mickeyg.c.1654]

3 years behind and another awesome video! Thanks for uploading

[@stefaniasmanio859]

You are my Hero!!! Thank you!! Never heard about this experiment before... 🙄🤔😲🤗👍 Wonderful explanation and very clear animations! 👍🤗

[@calicoesblue4703]

Aharonov-Bohm effect

[@user-ye7wk7tp4x]

That just illustrates perfectly, like once upon a time ideal solenoid was ungracefully introduced in a way, that it contains magnetic field inside (what is meant here under magnetic field ). That's just a forward part of a flux, and it's more mathematical, than real. And they always tend to mix-up physical fields (something physically changed in space) with vector fields or other mathematical objects, due to the common word "field". People should give more respect to philosophy and scientific language or suffer from misunderstandings.

[@guillemvidal1958]

I love your videos, keep up with the work!

[@deepvybes]

Amazing work Nick! Can't wait for the quantum entanglement video next :D

[@jeffwads]

Half the comments in here are entangled with the clone at the end.

[@deconfinedQPT]

We say the magnetic field is zero outside an idealised solenoid (infinite in length). However with a finite length solenoid there would magnetic field lines emanating from both ends of the solenoid, however weak it might be. How do we know that the cause of the phase difference is due to the vector potential but not the "weak" magnetic field coming from the inside of the finite length solenoid?

[@Miguel_Noether]

The experiment was improved some years later using superconductors. journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.56.792

[@ScienceAsylum]

Doing the calculation with the weak magnetic field doesn't give us the result we see in the experiment. The magnetic _potential_ does.

[@frankgiancola7]

Great video as usual and you deserve a like as usual....I look forward to your next

[@jameswilson8270]

Thank you for making this video. This type of information could end out being helpful.

[@pukkandan]

I like how the 'clone' mentions entanglement. Maybe you'll do a video on EPR Paradox next?

[@sphakamisozondi]

When Nick uploads, it makes me day complete.

[@ditmarvanbelle1061]

Dude, this channel is seriously awesome. For once you're even talking about stuff I understand LOL -- that's nice for a change. Keep up the amazing work!

[@shohamsen8986]

dude u are too underrated. All your material is really good, its a shame that you are not as popular as the other science KZbinrs.

[@infinitedegreesoffreedom584]

This channel is a godsend

[@tatjanagobold2810]

Really enjoyed that explanation! When I first learned about the vector potential it was in relation to one of Maxwell's equations, ensuring that no magnetic monopoles exist. Seemed a bit artificial at first, but who could have imagined that the vector potential "comes to life" in a quantum mechanical experiment?:D

[@ScienceAsylum]

Yep! The potentials were around during Maxwell's time, but they didn't seem all that important then. In quantum mechanics, they're _necessary._

[@seanreese3314]

Agreed! I distinctly remember magnetic vector potential being mention in Griffith's Electrodynamics text, only for him to dismiss it as not that important to the scope of the course.

[@potatofieldsforever4089]

I forgot the details but the magnetic vector potential is used to calculate the E and H field from a given current density distribution.

[@flannn6]

Thank you so much, Nick. You're awesome!

[@RocaSeba]

Great video!! I've been impatient since your tweet last night 😅

[@ScienceAsylum]

I fixed the glitch!

[@TheoWerewolf]

"WHAT ABOUT QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT???" Thank you - that was literally the question going through my head through out this entire video. :) Doesn't Bell's Inequality and the Alain Aspect experiment refute absolute locality? (And yes, I know what's coming: it doesn't because it doesn't carry any information the experimenter can influence, so it's not really alocality in any meaningful sense... but that always feels like a cop out...)

[@Resomius]

ah just let us slap a field onto the problem until we know more... jk I would realy love a.follow up Video to that question

[@cyberfunk3793]

It's locality breaking even if we can't use it to send signals, people just don't wish to admit the obvious so they can keep telling themselves it doesn't contradict relativity. The only excuse that I know of would be superdeterminism, but I find that explanation fairly absurd and unconvincing.

[@EM-bs4kt]

@@Resomius to be fair qft demands you build your field from scratch while swallowing the notion that these points have their independent degree of freedom (uncoupled in a sense)

[@EM-bs4kt]

@@cyberfunk3793 I don’t actually. I think we need a more complete picture of “freedom” and “random”. But yeah the field that is relevant is studied in qft. A classical e-field which he seems to be deriving unless I’m mistaken, can only propagate according to a speed limit. The speed of probability, it would seem, is much much faster

[@timw1971]

Can't wait to see the entanglement video. I guess locality is preserved because entangled particles have to be on the same location to begin their entangled state.

[@trucid2]

Physicists had trouble reconciling entanglement with locality so they redefined what they meant by locality and continue to claim their theories obey it.

[@ionenpariertesschnauglerbr8887]

I watched a ton of youtubers. But seriousely, you are with a big distance my favorite KZbinr ;;)) I had soooo many teachers where I didnt learn anything but here,, I learned so fast Im loving it. You teach so great I watch the video and I understand it. Beside that the content You make is so interesting, I just want to learn more from you. You are the first KZbinr I really want to support with Patreon. Sorry for the bad english but thank you so much.

[@ScienceAsylum]

Glad you like it 😊

[@schitlipz]

Very good. You always give me some good laughs. Thanks.

[@thetntsheep4075]

So what about measuring entangled particles? Edit: saw the end of the video xD *I still want to knowww*

[@sup2069]

Same here!!

[@dugger0]

The entangled particles are part of the same wave function. In essence they don't need to send anything between them because they are just two halves of a whole, in a sense.

[@muninrob]

Thak you patreon patrons for supporting one of my favorite channels

[@davidellismartin9619]

Excellent delivery!

[@alexandterfst6532]

best explanations of the Aharonov-Bohm effect i found. thx you !

[@ScienceAsylum]

You're welcome! 🤓

[@grapy83]

This channel is a real gem. I wish I could make it more well known and more viewed.

[@stevemaurer8120]

Even in quantum experiments? Entangled particles, spooky action at a distance (a perfect Halloween topic), and the quantum eraser might want to have a word with your clone. A better way to teach this is that *information* is local. But in that timeless inbetween of quantum coherence, all possibilities and positions are not just theoretically possible but in their own special way actually there.

[@monad_tcp]

So it's like a cache in a computer getting desynchronized for a moment, the program can't see the results of it, but it can experience the time difference, all results are always applied local. The difference of time would be difference of space in reality. (in a real computer, the difference of the real space where the information was stored, but it could be stored anywhere in the computer and the program would only see coherently the final result, locality is always preserved, always) Action at a distance is a phantom effect caused by time desynchonization from an information perspective.

[@stevemaurer8120]

@@monad_tcp Locality of >>information

[@altrag]

@@stevemaurer8120 Except its not entirely. You can entangle two particles and give one to your friend. You both sync your clocks up sufficiently that you can absolutely guarantee that no (subluminal) information can be exchanged, and then you and your friend each independently measure the particles at exactly the same time. They measurements will still come out as predicted by entanglement, even though the particles had no way to know the exact instant you would measure them, and you guaranteed they could not exchange information during the measurement. You _both_ have the same piece of information (well, opposite pieces but effectively equivalent) without any information transfer. That means one of three possibilities: a) The particles carry "something" with them that makes their state time-dependent rather than truly random as quantum mechanics predicts. That's the hidden variables idea and is mostly considered to not be real (though I don't think it's actually be fully disproven -- Bell's theorem places extremely strict limitations on it but as far as I know it's not 100% dead.) b) Superluminal information transfer is possible in certain situations. Nobody really likes to think about this one due to its consequences for causality. c) Locality is broken in certain situations. We still don't really like to think about this one, but its better than considering faster-than-light information (at least for actual science. Science fiction certainly loves superluminal travel!) Of course there's a fourth possibility -- quantum mechanics is wrong. Obviously its very, very close to right but we already know its incomplete since it fundamentally breaks down past the Planck scale. And whatever we find down there -- assuming we ever managed to generate the energy needed to probe that scale -- is probably something so bizarre that we haven't even dreamed of it yet. Even if string theory or loop quantum gravity or whatever end up being on the right track, chance are they won't be exactly correct. Sub-Planck scale is likely to be as different from quantum scale as quantum is from classical.

[@stevemaurer8120]

@@altrag The Bell Experiment disproves a), there has never been any evidence for b) (as quantum decoherence isn't considered information), and we already know quantum mechanics is "wrong" (incomplete) but a more complete theory still have to subsume the evidence for it. That really leaves only c).

[@altrag]

@@stevemaurer8120 Yeah, but QM could still be wrong in a way that doesn't violate c) either. String theory already gives us extra spacial dimensions for example where information could travel "locally," even though it may appear non-local in 3 dimensions. The recent neutron star collision observation puts some strong limitations on how extra (extended) dimensions can affect gravity, but it doesn't rule out for example extra dimensions that affect some yet-unseen force that hangs out somewhere below our current energy levels (that is, its very weak -- but still potentially capable of carrying information.) The possibilities are endless, and its entirely likely, maybe even probably, that we haven't come close to the true answer yet. We may even be overlooking evidence of the true answer because it "doesn't make sense" similar to how scientists in the 1800s were often neglecting evidence that didn't make sense under the formulations of classical mechanics -- writing them off as experimental errors, until someone stopped doing that. How much information has the LHC produced that we're ignoring because its "not interesting" in the context of what we _expect_ to find, yet may in actuality be evidence of some real phenomena that we simply weren't expecting and therefore didn't know we should be looking for?

[@adamsmith1300]

Like always, sound effects are perfect.

[@joeycook6526]

I had to watch this a couple times before it clicked, but I'm glad I did. Also, the backdrop behind Big Deal Clone sold the whole thing - hysterical!

[@crispypickles8466]

🎶Two crazy little electrons go round me outside, round me outside. 🎶

[@lsgreger2645]

I was confused until you used the "honey badger" meme, then it all made sense!

[@ScienceAsylum]

😂😂

[@MsSonali1980]

My Asperger's mind was, but how did they do it, how works this apparatus, but x, y, z. And he stone cold "it doesn't matter!" xD

[@HassanOmariprofile]

thanks for the great videos you do

[@Ferragusplaton]

Great video (as always) about an amazing experiment! However, you could add something regarding the gauge freedom in the electromagnetic potentials. In my first contact with the AB effect this blew my mind!

[@ScienceAsylum]

That's an aspect I'm saving for a separate video.

[@plainmainaccount5554]

Why did it take so long to find a channel that actually does a good job explaining hard science stuff?

[@Kveldrunari]

I love that your wearing the Mongol "we're the exception shirt" from crashcourse XD

[@vidhanp482]

This was the best explanation of the aharonov-bohm effect

[@DRATER469]

Such great content and well explained. Editing does feel a little loose though and is probably holding back the channel.

[@playgroundchooser]

Did Big Deal Clone just become my favorite clone?? 😂😂😎

[@MsSonali1980]

He's so cool xD 8-)

[@Anamnesia]

... and a "Kyle's Mom" (South Park) reference at 5:34 ... 😂

[@seffundoos]

Some incredibly useful descriptions of some complex (to say the least) issues in physics. The way you seamlessly integrate the mathematics in your visuals is impeccable. There would be people completely unaware that they are learning mathematical relationships while watching. Will join when google stops throwing me the error 'An unexpected error has occurred. Please try again later. [OR-IEH-01] ' 🤦🏻‍♂️

[@thehighshow]

LMAO 8:13, HE DID THE NOISE!! LMMFFAAOO you are awesome!!!

[@SteveAAF]

8:23 Ok, I understand. So what'd the deal with entanglement then? Never mind, because I just finished the rest of the video and assume there's an explanation to that question coming soon...

[@firdacz]

I hope there will.... because I have trillion questions. The main is: Is the field changed in an instant? I suppose not, otherwise it would be replacing locality with a perfectly crafted lie. So no, the field is influenced by something by some rules, one of them being the speed of light. Right? ....and that is before I even start about entanglement.

[@IronLotus15]

@@firdacz You are correct. Changes in the gravitational field propagate at the speed of light. Changes in the electro-magnetic field also propagate at the speed of light.

[@firdacz]

@@IronLotus15 Yes, then locality appears to mean "cannot influence/change at greater speed than the speed of light". But then you have the quantum effects, real experiments (Bell's theorem) proving that that exactly that is either not true, or the world is inherently (somehow) random, but even that randomness has its rules (entanglement). Crazy. I suppose that I have to wait for another video from Nick :)

[@francislong5114]

Sounds like my first wife's concept of fidelity.

[@washizukanorico]

You mean your second wife let you have sex outside your marriage...what a wise woman ...

[@francislong5114]

@@washizukanorico , no comment. ;-).

[@Scalettadom]

Lol, except EPR... glad you mentioned that at the end!

[@constpegasus]

As usual and predicted, another great episode.

[@shubhsharma150]

did the clone dialogue mean that there would be another cool video on the entanglement breaking locality?? *fingers crossed*

[@MagnusSkiptonLLC]

Lucid, you magnificent bastard, I _bought_ your _book!_

[@AlienScientist]

Thank you for making this video! You rock! I'd love to collaborate on some stuff...

[@tirthrajsharma7221]

Great work sir ,

[@kkmspm]

lol...i was ready to ask about entaglement on 8:44 :p

[@antonnym214]

Looks like Quantum Entanglement breaks locality. It's what Einstein called "Spooky action at a distance."

[@kotsiosmetaxas4708]

Hey Nick! Could you give us an update on locality after the 2022 nobel prize in physics? Best channel in youtube for education!

[@JapaBoyJunior]

Awesome video and awesome channel! I've heard people saying that the Aharonov-Bohm effect proves that what exists is the vector potential, not the magnetic field. I think this is very weird - there's a gauge freedom related to the vector potential and in general energy/momentum are things that tell you about the relationships between things in a system, they are not THE SYSTEM ITSELF, THE THINGS. I also heard people saying that, in a full quantum theory, where everything in the the solenoid were treated quantum mechanically (the paper uses some sort of semi classical approximation, right?), there wouldn't be this weird effect. Anyway, i love this channel!

[@sarthakjain1824]

Why do schools does not teach like this physics is so interesting!

[@Lucky-df8uz]

Can we get a Joe Cool clone that just leans up against the wall and nods sometimes?

[@ThePHOTOES]

Oh yeah and he would make some remarks like'here's Joe Cool hanging out at the milky way ' That would be hilarious 🤣🤣🤣

[@johnsutter6912]

All the details are important!

[@clauarg7842]

Muy importante el diálogo del minuto 2:00. Eso es para el que cree que puede saber de física sin saber de matemáticas. Excelente video cómo siempre.

[@fabimre]

I don't get it. Intuitively I see that there MUST be a field OUTSIDE the solenoid. The Maxwell laws dictate that the magnetic Flux must describe a closed loop (aka the no-monopole rule). So unless the solenoid is enclosed in a perfect mu-metal cage (Faraday cage for magnetic Flux) there Must be Flux outside. And then, the magnetic cage will influence the probability (wave). Even a comparative layman like me sees that!

[@absalomdraconis]

Yeah, either he left out _critical_ details about the solenoid, or there _is_ a field of equal but opposite magnitude outside of the solenoid. With the insufficiency of the presented information, the only thing we can do is discard his statements on the subject, particularly since his own statements on it aren't consistent within the video.

[@ScienceAsylum]

At 5:03 I mentioned there is a magnetic field outside, it's just _extremely weak._ It's completely negligible. It's far too weak to explain the phase shift.

[@ScienceAsylum]

@Jared Maddox You're not taking the amount of space into consideration. Yes, all magnetic fields must be closed, but there's _a lot_ more space _outside_ the solenoid than there is inside. That means the magnetic field out there is spread a lot "thinner," which means it a lot weaker. That behavior is still consistent with Maxwell's equations.

[@EM-bs4kt]

@@ScienceAsylumno it means that the current in the solenoid gives a centripetal like concentration of the field inside the solenoid rather than outside of its magnetic moment. Regardless this is not a full description of phase effects and recoherence. The berry phase shows that for avoided crossing of trajectories, phase can and mostly will never recombine. The reason why physicists can conveniently ignore this phenomena in many systems is because they choose to work in one dimension and this is where the magic happens. In 1-d cavity qed (related to abranyos bohm ) , one can take the vector potential A to be zero due to gauge freedom. However doing so would result in phase effects being transferred to elsewhere due to the invariance of these effects. So long as you ignore coupling effects you can ignore phase. This incredible (trust me it is) mechanism is hot stuff in physics. You could also take the divergence of A to be zero and compute gauge dependent effects directly but one would require exact solutions or wave functions. My point is physicists would say that vector potentials weren’t physically real in that these effects were gauge dependent. I say that they aren’t what’s driving these effects rather that just show me that the burden of phase was just obscured and hidden in time dependent vector coupling effects that depend on how one chooses to transform their potentials. Any field coupling matter systems are subject and in that sense the field is real. The deeper insight is to realize this as a chaceryer of entangled systems. End rant

[@benjaminbrady2385]

What an ending 😂

[@HugoHabicht12]

Thank you crazy, it’s great stuff!

[@shantanaboraofficial7393]

Hey Nick , good work try to make a video on the Higgs Field

[@freddyacuna8829]

Jajahahhaha!! I loved that "aww, sh*t"!! XD

[@Envido32]

How can you say it's irrelevand "how we got here"?! NOW I WANT TO KNOW MOOOREEE

[@MsSonali1980]

Same :D guess we have to google it ourselves :,(

[@jonkerjooker7712]

Watch the feynman lectures. He explains a lot of the "how did they get there?" 😉

[@steveclark9934]

Wow great video thanks Subscribed

[@AUBREYTHOMAS1979]

Love these videos.

[@tarangpatil6952]

3:12 *_Vsauce would like to know your location_*

[@ScienceAsylum]

Vsauce already knows my location.

[@ThePHOTOES]

Please make a video with VSauce soon!!

[@arbaazjamadar3720]

Nobody: Quantum particles- Spooky action at a distance.

[@leonardosojli9623]

And how does locality fit in the quantum entanglement? You asked the question for fun at the end of the video but I have issues fitting those 2 things together. Thanks for your videos bro. Really. 🙏❤️

[@georgewatts9361]

Love your videos.

[@fluchschule]

Aren't space and locality concepts that depend on each other? Space without locality seems pointless.

[@stratocaster922]

Michael Radziej buh dum tssssss

[@ericddoran]

Haha, yeah, so what about quantum entanglement!? Or are they considered the same partical and that preserves locality?

[@jamestheotherone742]

No they are separate particles that share a probability/wavefunction.

[@ayoushmukherjee4949]

Seeing a T-shirt from CrashCourse being worn on The Science Asylum is the crossover we didn’t know we needed, but the world is better for it. 🤩

[@ScienceAsylum]

It's a good shirt 👍

[@bootlebeats6331]

Just enough humor to keep me laughing. Thanks to you, I'm starting to get some of this stuff without getting dizzy or a headache. (just some of it:)

[@yamahantx7005]

Bell's theorem: The Quantum Experiment that ACTUALLY broke Locality

[@fredfarquar6709]

Ahhh, but it is not an experiment, but a theorem. If true, It has four potential outcomes; only one of these has been disproven, the outcome that says the predictions of quantum mechanics are wrong. Unfortunately, this is the only outcome that thus far could possibly be proven true or untrue. Two of the other outcomes are diametrically opposed: the "many universes" idea, and the "ultra-hyper-deterministic universe" idea, neither of which is intellectually satisfying. The fourth outcome? "There is no possible logical explanation for the universe!" This is the one that's probably true. I feel the universe is based upon, and consists in its entirety of, a logical impossibility....but since we are within it, it seems real to us!😁✌️

[@Familia_nepal_nepal_do_mal12]

Well, Bell's theorem didn't disprove locality (at least in the Copenhagen interpretation), it disproved an Hidden variable + Locality theory. you can still have locality in the copehagen interpretation if you assume we can't really know anything, the universe is shit and the wave function is just a math tool to give us Physicist the illusion of calculating the probability of a result in a well controled lab experiment.

[@fredfarquar6709]

Renato Cara And that is because the entire universe is based on, and consists in its entirety of, the one true unknown, a logical impossibility, mathematically symbolized as the square root of -1! The universe is 'what can have existence', sandwiched between 'less than nothing' and 'more than everything', which are the two square roots....or call them yin and yang, or positive and negative, or.....👍✌️❤️

[@Familia_nepal_nepal_do_mal12]

Nope.

[@kumaran580]

Yeah what about quantum entanglement? How they change spin without being in locality ?

[@fgvcosmic6752]

They dont change spin, actually! Its just the probabilities of what spin is collapsed into a certainty. This is one way I like to think about it "X+Y=10" If we are then told that X is 3, we instantly Know that Y is 7. Its a lot like that.

[@jamestheotherone742]

His answer to the viewer question cleverly answers that question too. The entanglement is just an artifact of the uncertainty principle. The information the particles were encoded with when they were local, is the real part, the entanglement is just a shared probability.

[@giuseppebosa9806]

@@fgvcosmic6752 yes but if we measure the spin of particle A, we istantly get a result for particle B, even if we didn't interact with it to get a measurement. It means that the wave function of particle B collapses to a certain value (or at least its probability to have a certain spin, idk how the math actually works). In order to make a wave function collapse, something has to interact with it, am I right? So i dont get how locality is still valid here. Of course it's a logic principle, if spinA+spinB=0, spinA must be -spinB, but if the two particles have separate wave functions it shouldn't work because of locality

[@hckytwn3192]

Caldwell Transport Columbus, GA Nope, that’s not correct (i.e. they don’t share “encoded” information “when they were local”). Quantum Physicists, of course, thought of this possibility long ago and proved there are no local hidden variables in entangled particles. See Bells Theorem.

[@giuseppebosa9806]

@@hckytwn3192 could you give a brief explanation of why the hidden variables hypothesis has been proven wrong?

[@norbertfeurle7905]

So they found another fundamental force or momentum, from which I as a electrical engineer has never quite heard about before. That's quite fundamental.

[@user-yq6qt1mq9k]

Oh, I noticed cute Pi-toy. Nice to see this reference to 3Blue1Brown! Great video. I haven't heard about this phenomenon at all. It is a wonderful, because almost all topics of previous videos are known for me but your way of presenting information is something magnificent! Ukrainian PhD student send you greetings and good luck!

[@ScienceAsylum]

Thanks! I'm not sure why no one talks about this on KZbin. My quantum mechanics professor was obsessed with it.

[@user-yq6qt1mq9k]

@@ScienceAsylum, you're right. It doesn't seems to be from narrow branch of Quantum Physics.

[@pixelfairy]

best ending ever!

[@fidelio6311]

I WAS about to say what about quantum entanglement.

[@ALW0RLD]

" oh sh..."

[@amfvideos6810]

I was thinking it the whole time and expected Nick to explain it.

[@Scuti2]

Since the last time I watched your videos I’ve been scrolling to find you!

[@ScienceAsylum]

Did I get lost in your subscription box?

[@Scuti2]

No

[@Scuti2]

a few months ago I did not have A youtube Channel it’s because I forgot your name rehearse in the day I posted this comment I found you again

[@ARBB1]

I've read this once from a physicist (Matthew Weiner) and I think it's a very good hot take for this video : "The Aharanov-bohm phase shift is real; the canonical explanation involving quantum topological properties hasn't been experimentally demonstrated (the "effect"), and you could easily provide an explanation for the phase shift with classical velocity fields of moving electrons ." "The Aharonov-Bohm effect has nothing to do with berry phase or topology or anything, it has to do with the velocity fields of electrons penetrating even the best conductors because velocity fields don't have characteristic skin depths like radiative fields". So the phase shift is real, but the effect itself does not have enough justification to be believed to come from topological quantum effects. I really like this take because it demonstrates the classical nature of certain effects that are normally presented as purely quantum mechanical, such as the Black-body spectrum in classical stochastic electrodynamics. Thought you'd enjoy to read this Nick.