This math trick revolutionized physics

[@jakubstawarczyk]

Great new video! I'm slowly watching older videos... it's a real gold mine 😁

[@jkzero]

I cannot thank you enough for your continuous support. The only way, I guess, is by keeping the videos coming. Thank you so much!

[@RainerNase-b3q]

@@jkzero Are you open minded to answer on my contribution regarding quantization of energy as the observable of the quantum of action?

[@RainerNase-b3q]

@bivingtons ok, thanks for your kindness, I'll redraw

[@letshangout6359]

Pl ​@@jkzero

[@sliderule5891]

Professor, today I visited the newly constructed K25 Gaseous Diffusion Plant visitor center. Awesome. All the diffusion process buildings have removed. Sad but necessary. I did sever tours of duty at that site. One very interesting artifact was the miniature criticality response fire truck complete with water cannon on display. It’s water tank contain borated water to stop a criticality accident. Years back I use to talk with a guy, who as a young scientist actually canned the uranium slugs for Enrico Fermi CP 1 pile in Chicago. They sent him to Oak Ridge fuel and start up the X 10 Graphite pile. The public can visit that pile on a tour. I use to have an office in the original chemical process building attached to the pile building. They separated the first gram quantity’s of Pu during the MP and sent it to Los Alamos. Sliderule.

[@wdecay]

Amazing content. As a physicist myself, I knew the story, but I've never seen it presented in such a coherent and logical manner.

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked the video. I had the same issue, as an undergrad I was simply told "...and Planck appeared and solved it after he quantized energy," which is quite unsatisfactory. I decided to dig deeper, read some of the original papers, and I thought I had to share this fascinating story. The follow-up with Einstein and others is coming soon.

[@Mike-zf4xg]

do you live under a rock?

[@nichendrix]

​@@Mike-zf4xgprobably not, I'm also a Physicist and I've also never seen how Plank's black body radiation spectrum equation being derived in chronological order, showing the challenges on the processes and with each step tied to specific experiments and previous theoretical results. We are taught it on thee order that nowadays makes more sense, but it is a product of reorganizing the content in view of Quantum Mechanics as a full fledged theory, which isn't how it was understood and seen by those that lived in that time. At the time they didn't even had realiser the complete concept of an atom, let alone its basic structure, which actualy makes Plank's contribution far more interesting than what we are taught on textbooks.

[@novakonstant]

This was a masterclass. I appreciate the shoutout to the experimentalist and contextualize how quanta came into being. Those two aspects are an important on the evolution of physics as they give ground to interpretations via how we perceive the universe. I like Plancks result because it gave us the quanta out of necessity, and thus, a more useful and truer result. As we are getting closer and closer to fundamental results, it becomes more important to reconsider human experience, and even the way we interact with the universe, when developing new theories. Space and time are so intertwined that its hard to say if there is a truer reality, but if there is, human perception is out of its equation.

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked the video. I was trained as a theoretical physicists but my PhD advisor always taught me to value the work of experimentalists. Without them theoretical physics is just arid and quite useless. I was lucky to work closely with experimentalist while I did the calculations. Good times. As an undergrad I was simply told "...and Planck appeared and solved it after he quantized energy," which is quite unsatisfactory. I decided to dig deeper and I thought I had to share this fascinating story. The follow-up is also quite interesting. Coming soon.

[@ValidatingUsername]

I think every single undergrads should have to take a course on quantization to make sure they really grasp the epicentre concept.

[@johncourtneidge]

Yes!

[@johncourtneidge]

@@jkzero the groundwork is the Greek question, 'If you break a stick in half and the half in half again, etc, can that go on infinitely?' The energy equivalent is the relationship between a set of stairs and a ski slope. The answer may have something to do with the lower energy/entropy boundary of absolute zero. Which implies, perhaps, a maximum maximum? Or not!

[@johncourtneidge]

@@ValidatingUsername i used to teach this in the first week of my A Level class at Eltham Green: in order, in part, to get the brightest kids to a) be humble and b) get them thinking deeply. Happy times!

[@blacklistnr1]

14:56 So crazy to think that it took so many years among different people for the fine-tuned equivalent of x^3/(e^x-1) while I as a 2024 noob with no data, but access to desmos could guesstimate it for fun to x^2/e^(0.5x) in a minute of trial & error I really wonder what some of these people could have achieved with access to a computer/internet

[@jkzero]

you are right, these days you can just import a symbolic regression library and recover (rediscover?) the correct formula in a few lines of Python code.

[@alans172]

@user-ky5dy5hl4d I disagree. Planck's trick is not like i at all. i always was and always will be the "imaginary" number that needs no physical interpretation. Planck's requirement for steps in energy not to tend to zero is much more complex.

[@mastershooter64]

@@alans172 i, isn't any more or any less imaginary than 3.7 -your friendly neighborhood math major

[@alans172]

@@mastershooter64 oh yeah? Compare buying 3.7 kg of potatoes with buying i kg of potatoes !!

[@georgesamaras2922]

@@alans172 Try cutting a potato in 3. 1/3 is imaginary. Natural numbers are the only thing existing. And don't get me starting with negative potatoes.

[@florafeldner]

I love your approach of bringing together historical timelines, parallel development of different ideas of the time and a dive into the actual mathematical formulae and derivations. great channel!

[@jkzero]

Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks, I am glad you liked the video and your appreciation for the effort to show the human side of scientific development. I am curious to know what brings viewers to the channel, were you searching for something in particular or did the 'mighty algorithm' find you?

[@LastStar007]

@@jkzero It's something I find lacking in a lot of textbooks/curricula. Usually, it's just "Planck discovered this formula", and if we're lucky, "while he was studying blackbody radiation". If one doesn't follow the train of developments that led up to a discovery, including all the dead ends, then how can one discover anything new?

[@jkzero]

I am with you. As a physics student I was simply told "...there was a problem, but Planck appeared, quantized energy, and solved the problem." But how?! I remember that the lack of context and details was quite unsatisfactory. I decided to dig deeper, read parts of the original papers, and I decided to share the details and get the record straight. I think that the story gets even more fascinating. The follow-up is also quite interesting. Coming soon.

[@florafeldner]

yea, this very interesting and praxis-side part of science rarely gets taught at university. as to your first question, the mighty algorithm suggested it. I recently watched quite a bit of maths and compsci related channels, so that mightve been it.

[@jkzero]

Thanks for sharing and I am glad the algorithm is working, I hope you find the other videos of interest too and welcome to the channel.

[@ErikRyde]

This channel is fantastic. Thank you for this

[@jkzero]

Glad you enjoy it!

[@cristianoborges2466]

This is the first time I donate and comment an youtube video, but I felt obligated to do so. I have just one thing to say: BRAVO !

[@jkzero]

Thanks so much for supporting me to keep making these videos! Make sure to check the others and more coming soon. Thanks again for your generous support.

[@JumpingCow]

This is a fine video! When I learned basic quantum mechanics many years ago, we were taught that Planck postulated quanta, and then derived his black body equation. You are telling a different story, which is basically the opposite, and it is fascinating.

[@neilreynolds3858]

That was how it was told to me too. I had no idea that he did it to rescue thermodynamics. It should be taught this way.

[@jkzero]

Same here, everything was presented to me and classmates as a brilliant idea out of the blue and I totally disliked it. After pressing one of my undergrad QM teachers he shared a bit more on the blackbody radiation story but in the end his version fell back to the narrative "...and Planck solved it after he quantized energy," which is quite unsatisfactory. Then as time went by I followed the "shut up and calculate" approach but all this is even before the QM postulates are introduced. Anyway, I decided to dig deeper and I thought I had to share this story before the standard narrative keeps propagating. I am glad you liked the video, make sure to check the others in the channel.

[@chalkchalkson5639]

@@jkzero it's really interesting. the book my prof used basically started from rayleigh jean's instead of wien's. It managed to also set it up as an integration trick though, turning a divergent integral into a sum which allowed for the recovery of planck's formula. It's really neat how you can recover the same physics from many different angles and end up with quite similar stories.

[@jkzero]

@@chalkchalkson5639 yes, there is the version of the cut-off for the integration. In the next video I will show another way to recover Planck's formula using a different conceptual approach, stay tuned.

[@evaristegutierrez8260]

Can you share a little bit of about that "dig deeper" research process?@@jkzero

[@DeepSeeker2809]

Excellent story-telling. As a researcher myself, I didn't know the story of Planck going through all these steps to get to his famous law. That R quantity is really interesting to me.

[@cewkins721]

A great video once again, i love this type of content that goes in depth about how the idea was shaped considering that most of the time we get the short version that includes a handful of people and leaves out many details about the immense time, effort and collaboration that it took to bring these intricate ideas together, thanks for taking the time to explain the math as well!

[@jkzero]

Glad to have you back. This was a little experiment, exploring other areas and people seems to like it, despite the lack of explosions. More coming, this one ended in a cliffhanger.

[@jmcsquared18]

Teaching my modern physics students quantum mechanics next. My background is mathematical physics, so I don't know as much about the history of the development of some of these ideas, especially from the experimental side of things. I enjoyed this video bc it shows just how much early observations in thermo motivated the difficult thought processes that eventually gave birth to old quantum theory. Thank you, and I look forward to more from your channel!

[@jkzero]

I am also a theoretical physicist and it bothers me that I was not told this story when I was a student; there is a need to quickly go over the postulates of QM and the "shut up and calculate" approach that leaves out a lot of richness of the story. I am glad you liked the video and make sure to check the other videos.

[@jmcsquared18]

@@jkzero dodging the historical development of quantum mechanics just to get to the postulates is a cardinal sin in my book lol. I also detest the "shut up and calculate" approach to teaching a theory that to this day we still don't understand. Feels like a disservice to students who are going to be confused regardlesss.

[@jmcsquared18]

@user-ky5dy5hl4d nothing "causes" the speed of light. That's a peculiar question imo. Light moves at the same speed regardless of your relative motion. That is simply a fact about our universe. How one defines time depends on the conceptual framework one is working with and what assumptions one is maing about their physical system.

[@jmcsquared18]

@user-ky5dy5hl4d I don't know what your point in commenting this is supposed to be because, when going to the general theory, relativity is not flawed - we know general relativity is correct. Special relativity only applies in a special case, which is for constant velocity motion, but in that specific situation, it also works. "Or what is the process of the photon detachment form the source?" Something about the word "detachment" I don't quite relish there. Are you asking how is it that photons can be emitted in particle interaction in the first place?

[@hedgehog3180]

@user-ky5dy5hl4d Using an elastic sheet and a bowling ball to illustrate the curvature of space time is just an illustration, it's not what's actually going on. If you want to learn what's actually going on you first need to learn some linear algebra. Also the answer to your question about photons would come from learning some of the basic theory behind electro magnetism since you seem to have a fundamentally flawed conception of what a photon is.

[@Basidio]

It would be interesting then, to learn about how the other physicists started to wrestle with the idea of quanta and discretization not only as a math trick, but a testable, real phenomena! Great video, subscribed

[@jkzero]

that is definitely coming, that was the purpose of the cliffhanger... although Einstein is always portrayed as "anti-quantum" he was the one that took Planck's math trick and promoted it to a physical rule of nature.

[@relapse7545]

​@@jkzero Looking forward to those future videos, keep up the great work!

[@chalkchalkson5639]

You should look into the photoelectric effect. Einstein managed to explain that, by quantising light energy and - surprise - it came in quanta of h nu. Those were two of the most important open problems at the time. Imagine how much weight it'd have to have both of those solved by simply asserting that light came in discrete energy chunks.

[@zubinbharucha6686]

This is what I always hated about high school physics. They said Plank said E=hv. And we simply had to accept it at face value. The Why? was never explained, or how did he come about it, never explained.

[@jkzero]

As an undergrad I was simply told "...and Planck appeared, quantized energy, and solved the problem." But how?! It was quite unsatisfactory. I decided to dig deeper and I thought I had to share this fascinating story. The follow-up is also quite interesting. Coming soon.

[@tmviberater3405]

i feel this topic would be way too in depth for a highschool clas

[@angelmendez-rivera351]

@@tmviberater3405 If so, then that means the education system needs to be restructured completely. There is objectively no reason why this topic should be considered "too in-depth."

[@mikefinucane6687]

@@angelmendez-rivera351 I was about to disagree, maths was hard enough as it was - but then I thought, you know, if we were run through this stuff, to see how it solved real problems, how it was applied, and what it meant, then maths would have been more interesting, and I would have learned it better.

[@angelmendez-rivera351]

@@mikefinucane6687 That's exactly it.

[@DrakeLarson-js9px]

A+ for technical physics tied to math manipulation. (Entropy per Planck and Boltzman, minute 20 is a great summary of the Boltzman-Planck mindset. Where entropy veered off the 'uniform temperature end-goal'; and is transformed into an exceptionally complicated equations by Planck-Boltzmann; with no mention of inverted physics!) An arguably complicated 'rabbit hole' similar to Dirac's imaginary number, which Feynman critiqued in 1966 as slightly off the mark...

[@douglasstrother6584]

That was a blast! A paper titled "Planck’s Route to the Black Body Radiation Formula and Quantization" by Michael Fowler (7/25/2008) gives a nice discussion. "Theoretical Concepts in Physics: An Alternative View of Theoretical Reasoning in Physics" (1984) by Malcolm S. Longair contains more details.

[@jkzero]

Thanks for sharing, I was not aware of these articles.

[@douglasstrother6584]

@@jkzero I think you will enjoy them.

[@DaliborKnis]

Thank you. I rarely encounter such a competent, at the same time inspiring video. Had I been taught physics this way, I would not have left the field of science.

[@jkzero]

Thank you so much for your kind support, I am grateful for the appreciation, which drives me to keep making these videos. I am glad that liked the video and the style. More fascinating stories and historic calculations coming soon. Thanks again!

[@warrenjohnson8124]

Wonderful exposition of how all our understanding of the physical world relies on new and better and more precise fundamental experiments that contradict some part of the old theories, so require the invention of new theories that can fit all of the data, old and new. Bravo.

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked the video. This was only the first on this ongoing series, make sure to check the others kzbin.info/aero/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH

[@djmips]

It's very cool that you are able to generate in the listener the most intense feelings of awe as if we are there to witness first hand the signficance of these groundbreaking discoveries. Keep it up!

[@jkzero]

I really appreciate your comment. The feeling that you describe is what I feel when I talk about these things and I am glad that I can transmit it in a video

[@g4rrett73]

3:41 A good memory I have from my physics class - When we were learning this stuff, we were given a problem: A blackbody's temperature is increased from 900k to 2300k. By what factor does the total power radiated per unit area increase? It was question 19a from the book: modern physics for scientists and engineers 4th ed. by Stephen thorton and andrew rex. We had to read all of chapter 3 (from pages 84 to 121), then answer a bunch of questions. This wasn't our only homework, and we were exhausted from all the work we had to do that day beforehand, so we looked for the answer in the back of the book. The book said 42.7. We did not remember what formula to use, but we knew the increase in power was somehow related to the ratio of the two temperatures. (2300/900) ~ 2.55. Looking at the number for a few minutes, I remember I tried squaring 2.55 in my previous attempts which is about 6.5. It connected in my brain that 6.5^2 is almost equal to the answer in the back. I did (2300/900)^4, and was excited to find out it was proportional to T^4. We then looked for T^4 and reread that part of the chapter to learn it better, but we were so excited that i just randomly came up with 42.7 is approximately equal to 2.55^4, and saved us a lot of stress lol. P.S. When writing this comment, I actually remembered that T was 2.55 from the problem, and that 2.55^4 was 42 point something. I had the class around 8 years ago and still remembered it. I went to my closet to get the book to refresh my memory and write this comment more accurately though. Also, "we" is referring to my friend and I. We were working and going through the problems together, but attempting the problems individually first

[@jkzero]

Thanks for sharing your story. I am curious to know what brings viewers to the channel, were you searching for something in particular or did the 'mighty algorithm' find you?

[@g4rrett73]

@@jkzero The algorithm recommended this video. I was searching for videos on category theory earlier (can't find and good videos on it though lol). This video was probably recommended because of my math related searches.

[@jkzero]

@@g4rrett73 Thanks for sharing and I am glad the algorithm is working, I hope you find the other videos of interest too and welcome to the channel.

[@sphakamisozondi]

Wow, I've never heard this story before. I thought Planck worked in isolation, then BOOM!, he solved the UV catastrophe problem. I hv learned something new today

[@jkzero]

We are used to hear the stories but sometimes we want to know the details, how is that an idea evolved to the final form that we find in textbooks? I am trying to fill those gaps.

[@timecode37]

Amazing insight into the past. Never seen it so detailed

[@jkzero]

I really wanted to know the details of the story instead of the classic "yeah, Planck solved it" I always asked... "yeah but how?!" I am glad you enjoyed it, I had a blast making this video.

[@davidrobertson2826]

Channels like these that are hidden gems and clearly passion projects rather than desperate ploys for clicks are the best…I loved math in school, and the industry I work in requires a lot of math (but very basic bond math). So nice to be able to come home and get my real math fix with a dash of history, and, of course, as a red-blooded male, the videos of enormous explosions are the cherry on top 😂

[@jkzero]

Thanks for your positive feedback and I am glad that the effort to make these videos is appreciated. What kind of "bonds" are you referring to? Of the chemical or financial type?

[@johnbarbuto5387]

In my opinion this offers a type of insight rarely discussed: the mental path of genius. So often we celebrate contributors for their outcomes (such as Planck and the others discussed herein), but we don't really understand the mental processes they had to go through for those outcomes. Here, by contrast, the mental journey of Planck - and the circumstances upon which it depended - are explored. Further, this video dramatically emphasizes the difference between a scientist versus those who prefer emotional preference over analysis. The fantastic electronic tools of this era (and all of their derived experiential opportunities) do not owe their development to religion or the comforts of emotional preference. If we were relegated to reliance on what they say we would still be living in the era of push-carts and plows. Instead, in this era we have the opportunity to celebrate those humans willing to grapple with objective analysis, such as all of the minds discussed in this video. It is from their minds, and penchant for discovering how the world really works, that we now live in an era where wonderful people across the planet, such as Dr. Diaz, may offer their insights in order to teach us how genius makes it contributions.

[@jkzero]

Thank you so much for your kind words, I am glad that you found the video so valuable. I am totally with you; when I was a physics student I learned the solutions to the problems of the time but I remember that the lack of context and details was quite unsatisfactory. I find most accounts of these stories to focus on the final result but I find the problems, the struggles, and the wild guesses fascinating, so I decided to share them here. Glad to find so many people moved by these stories and that don't shy away from some taste of the math behind. This video was just the kick-off of this video series so make sure to check the rest in this playlist: kzbin.info/aero/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH

[@jonathanlister5644]

Thanks so much for this, I too am a physicist and was only taught about the theorists who developed the quantization, no mention was made of them taking the data from experimentalists to fit their theory around. Great work in producing this!

[@jkzero]

Glad it was helpful! As an undergrad I was simply told "...and Planck appeared, quantized energy, and solved the problem." But how?! I remember that the lack of context and details was quite unsatisfactory. I decided to dig deeper, read parts of the original papers, and I thought I had to share this fascinating story, including the crucial role of experimentalists that are usually forgotten in the narratives. The follow-up is also quite interesting. Coming soon.

[@nanamacapagal8342]

First time discovering your channel, love all the little insights, as well as the whole "untold story" theme That said, 16:37 is actually perfectly solvable using the product log (or the Lambert W function), the inverse of x*e^x. The function does have many branches, but the answer here is 3 + W0(-3/e^3) (using W-1 would lead to an answer of 0 and using any other branch would return a complex number)

[@jkzero]

The trivial solution is x=0, which is also clear from the plot, but there is another real solution. Do you get the same result (x=2.82) using your method?

[@nanamacapagal8342]

@@jkzero yep! W0(-3/e^3) is about -0.178, so 3 - W0(-3/e^3) is roughly 2.822, just as the solver and graph predict!

[@jkzero]

@@nanamacapagal8342 nice! That's brilliant. I mean, it is math so the result has to be the same but it is still cool to learn about totally different method. Thanks for sharing.

[@gabitheancient7664]

I love your channel so much it definitely fulfils my curiosity with the more gory details of some scientific things that happened

[@jkzero]

Glad you enjoy it! This kind of feedback really motivates me to keep making these videos, which I also really enjoy making.

[@marcelma]

Great presentation. This is the first time that I met a narrative that leads the audience through the actual historical process, - giving credit to those who prepared the ground and those who picked up the shards - instead of viewing everything from today's perspective. It makes everything sooo much more plausible. One of the very rare "1st time encountered, immediately subscribed" channels.

[@jkzero]

Thanks for your comment, and thanks for the appreciation of the content. When I was a physics student I learned the solutions to the problems of the time but I remember that the lack of context and details was quite unsatisfactory. Now that I have time, I decided to dig deeper, read the original papers, and I decided to share the details and found that the stories get even more fascinating. Thanks for subscribing and welcome to the channel.

[@GoutamDAS-ls1wb]

Immensely illumination and entertaining. I never ever chanced upon such detailed account of the history behind Planck's groundbreaking formula.

[@jkzero]

Thanks for your feedback, I am glad you liked the video. This was the kick-off of the video series on quantum physics, make sure to check the follow-up videos kzbin.info/aero/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH

[@alexkuzma]

With such great content this channel will grow in no time! It definitely deserves at least a million subscribers!

[@jkzero]

Thanks for the vote of confidence and the good wishes. You can help by liking so that the videos can discovered by the mighty algorithm

[@paulthompson9668]

@@jkzero I agree. I just have one favor to ask you. Do post-production sound editing to make sure that your volume levels are at the same level as the ads. I have to turn my volume all the way up to listen to your video, and then when the ads come on, they blow my speakers.

[@jkzero]

@@paulthompson9668 thanks for the constructive feedback. I attempted a new audio editing process in my last video, do you thing it is any better?

[@paulthompson9668]

@@jkzero I think it's better, but there's still quite a ways to go. lol I'm pretty sure the sound editors for the ads redline the volume (i.e., make it the maximum possible), so I think you either have to put your microphone gain on maximum, or raise the volume levels to maximum for your speaking range (e.g., 100-200Hz).

[@jkzero]

@@paulthompson9668 thanks for getting back with feedback; I spent a few hours yesterday reading about audio levels on KZbin and learned about their automatic normalization factors for what they call "content loudness." They tune down the volume automatically over a threshold and apparently finding the threshold is an art, which is only clear after a video is uploaded. I should have searched for this earlier, I am still learning. I ran some experiments adjusting the gain of my mic so I hope to have better audio in the next video, if still bad for some reason please keep pocking me on this, the feedback to make the content and the experience for the viewers more pleasant is highly appreciated. Thanks again.

[@TheOneAndOnlyNeuromod]

These videos are the best and most thorough explanation of many different physical phenomena that I’ve seen. I really appreciate the effort put into explaining the various equations that describe these relations - and how they are derived. Great work, and thank you!

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you found the content of interest and thanks for the appreciation to the work that goes into making these videos. I am curious to know what brings viewers to the channel, were you searching for something in particular or did the 'mighty algorithm' find you?

[@TheOneAndOnlyNeuromod]

@@jkzero I was brought to your videos when looking for critical mass videos, and then saw your videos on calculating explosive yield by images. After that, I subscribed. I like when you include history and derivation of equations describing the phenomena - it gives a clear picture of what physicists were facing in context as they were approaching the problems, how they solved them, and how it expands beyond that. I appreciate that you share various knowledge levels of the mathematical physics and you don’t hand-wave it away. You start out broad, and keep building at ever-increasing detail, not leaving me wondering anything else other than asking questions as to further applications.

[@jkzero]

@@TheOneAndOnlyNeuromod Thanks for sharing and I am glad the algorithm is working, I hope you find the other videos of interest too and welcome to the channel

[@HaroldGil]

That was cool. I always wondered about that. Thanks for recognizing it and weaving together this fascinating story and justification.

[@jkzero]

I also find these stories fun and illuminating, they give a more human perspective. Textbooks present the protagonists as a collection of geniuses with one brilliant idea after another but their struggles and, in hindsight, silly ideas and mistakes were real. These stories deserve to be shared

[@topdog5252]

Some more great physics history. I love the history of physics (and mathematics).

[@jkzero]

how about some classical physics next?

[@pauldirc..]

​@@jkzeroyeah

[@mastershooter64]

This was absolutely amazing! Please do more of these physics history videos with actual calculations

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked the video. The follow-up is also quite interesting. Coming soon. I am curious to know what brings viewers to the channel, were you searching for something in particular or did the 'mighty algorithm' find you?

[@RohitRaj-q2v9p]

This video is very informative for me as I'm studying blackbody radiation. Thank you

[@jkzero]

perfect timing!

[@natesgarage]

Thanks! So much information!

[@jkzero]

Thanks so much for your generous support. I hope that the 'so much information' comment is a good thing.

[@randym1954tx]

Great program, explaining how one can go from a problem and solve it correctly by following the math based on the data. I started with Quantan Mechanics from the chemistry viewpoint, Bolzman and Clarks' work in Statical Thermodynamics to me has always been my foundation when working in by career in Chemical Engineering and process control applications in the chemical/petrochemical/oil & gas work. When considering the 1960's work of Edward Lorenze at MIT in metrological models and discovering how a group of simple linear differential equations can become chaotic, thus the discovery of chaos Bolzman view rules.

[@jkzero]

I am glad that you appreciate the effort to bring to life the process, I believe this requires more visibility and valuation. As a physics student I was simply told "...and Planck appeared, quantized energy, and solved the problem." But how?! I remember that the lack of context and details was quite unsatisfactory. I decided to dig deeper, read parts of the original papers, and I decided to share the details and get the record straight. I think that the story gets even more fascinating. Thanks again for watching for your generous support.

[@Alex-ff1mk]

I love physics so much. Even though I dont understand most of these formulas and consepts but the important thing is that I’m learning not only the consepts but also the super interesting history behind them. Awesome work

[@jkzero]

I am glad that you can appreciate the story behind the calculations, I hope not to isolate people who don't follow the math and this is why I try to include the story and human aspects behind these discoveries

[@Alex-ff1mk]

@@jkzero its really appreciated

[@johnned4848]

Early morning as I watched this. I'll just say right now another brilliant post . A great tutorial on physics understandable to the layman.

[@jkzero]

Thanks for the feedback, it is always great reading that viewers appreciate the content. Today experimenting with new topics.

[@kwzieleniewski]

Seeing Curie, best known for chemistry, and Poincaré, best known for fractals, is really something TIL.

[@kid_missive]

She looks bored! Or just excited to be there and not wanting to waste any time.

[@jkzero]

I have always seen her as "I am so focused on this discussion with Poincaré that I didn't even notice that a picture was taken"

[@heribertovasquez5945]

I absolutely love the linear history, along with the actual math! I knew it as a physicist, but always separate from the detailed history. I knew bits and pieces of the history. But never so presented as if I was there with Plank. I love the presentation of the things they didn't know, the intuition they yet had to grasp. I absolutely love the appreciation for the experimentalists!! I always wondered who they were but they were brushed off in physics class because a lot of attention to theory was prioritized (understandably so because it's a lot of material we had to go through and not enough time). I'm on my lunch break and can't stop thinking about this video. It was wonderful!

[@jkzero]

Thanks for sharing such a lovely feedback, I am glad you liked the video. This video was just the kick-off of the currently running series on quantum physics. Make sure to check the rest here kzbin.info/aero/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH

[@adityabaghel1270]

Amazing video! And the sentimental values to the experimental physicists was a great touch!!

[@jkzero]

I am glad you liked the video, I am a theorist but I believe experimentalists deserve way more credit than history or popular stories give them.

[@ethanyap8680]

As a highschool student who recently graduated, I'm so glad I stumbled upon your channel! I'd been waiting to finish my exams so I could go digging into more physics, so I'm gonna have a few fun hours with your great videos!

[@jkzero]

Enjoy, the videos on quantum mechanics are all as a playlist here kzbin.info/aero/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH

[@puneetkumarsingh1484]

I had read all this history in one of the modern physics textbooks! Glad to see it is making its way to the KZbin community as well. Please keep making the sequels.

[@jkzero]

Thanks so much for supporting me to keep making these videos! Make sure to check the others and more coming soon. Thanks again for your generous support.

[@DJondo666]

Which textbook is so great?

[@waltertoki1]

This is an excellent video of a detailed history of Planck’s constant h, that was the beginning of Quantum Mechanics. After Planck’s paper, Einstein (photo electric effect) and Bohr (hydrogen spectrum) used h in their models which led to Quantum Mechanics, the most important scientific theory of the 20th century. This basically explained the atomic world.

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked the video, and Einstein and Bohr are coming soon. I have to ask: are you Professor Toki from Colorado State? If so, you invited me to CSU to give a seminar on Lorentz violation in neutrinos over 10 years ago when I was a grad student at Indiana U.

[@Grateful92]

​@@jkzeroyes, it is him😊

[@veno8mm]

Early 1900s boon of math, physics, science, psycology, and meds is truly mindboggling. So many advancements, discoveries, and breakthrus. Love this type of yt. Wish there was more.

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked the content. Make sure to check my other videos too. The follow-up story is also quite interesting. Coming soon.

[@alaeifR]

As a curious lay-person non-mathematician and non-physicist I found this history lesson riveting and illuminating! Looking forward to watching all other videos you've made.

[@jkzero]

I am glad you like the content and thanks for watching. Make sure to check the other videos in the series.

[@RalphDratman]

What a wonderful talk and video. Thank you so much for publishing it here.

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked it, I noticed that you watched the follow-up too, third part coming soon!

[@DavidMFChapman]

I’ve watched this several times and I think it’s brilliant. Planck stood at the transition point between classical physics and modern physics by applying classical thermodynamics to the black body problem and matching the observations without having to take the limit. I did not know this part of the story!

[@jkzero]

Yeah, this part of the story is left out in most textbooks and versions of the story, I thought it was necessary to share this aspect because the standard narrative of "Planck came up with discrete energy level out of the blue" is really too simplistic. I see no need to not share the actual story that it is even more fascinating.

[@escandestone6001]

14:47 checked. Remove the extra minus sign in front of the (1/bv) to get 1/T = (1/bv) ln (1+ (kbv/U)).

[@jkzero]

Thanks for working it out and checking. You are right, there is a minus sign that should not be there, that's a typo (not the first one). Of course, this does not change the final result but I messed it up. Good catch and thanks fro notifying. I will include an erratum on the video description.

[@marcovillalobos5177]

I absolutely love the mathematical details!! ❤

[@marcovillalobos5177]

By the way, whats the meaning of the R constant?

[@jkzero]

yeah, me too. We are used to hear the stories but sometimes I want to know the details, how is that an idea evolved to the final form that we find in textbooks. And I am glad that found an audience that also cares about this stuff.

[@Galileosays]

@20:22 Second eqn. should be; epsilon/(kT)=log(1+epsilon/U)

[@jkzero]

Oh rats! You are totally right, I messed up the ε/U term. Thanks so much for pointing this out, it is a good catch. I will include an erratum in the video description. I do my best to avoid these typos but after watching everything many times some minor details slip through. Thanks again.

[@alainpean1119]

Very intersting presentation of the disvovery of Planck's formula and it's interpretation. Thank you.

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked the video. I am curious to know what brings viewers to the channel, were you searching for something in particular or did the 'mighty algorithm' find you?

[@nashs.4206]

Wow this is an amazing video! I find that when learning physics, it isn't enough to just present equations -- the history and the context behind these equations go a long way in providing motivation for someone learning physics.

[@jkzero]

Thanks for watching and the positive feedback. Welcome to the channel.

[@quantumality0084]

Amazing video i love physics more than i already did. Keep it up!!!

[@jkzero]

wow, I am glad that my video increased that love for physics!

[@billmichae]

Impressive compressed, to-the-point, presentation/story!!!

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked the video and the style. I am always curious to know what brings viewers to the channel, were you searching for something in particular or did the 'mighty algorithm' find you?

[@siddhuzplace3737]

I remember solving the long derivations of Planck's radiation formula, Rayleigh-Jeans formula, and thermionic emission formula (Richardson-Dushman Equation)... I almost forgot it. And I was completely unaware of the historical background... Thank you so much for this explanation! It was a master class.

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked the video. As an undergrad I was simply told "...and Planck appeared and solved it after he quantized energy," which is quite unsatisfactory. I decided to dig deeper and I thought I had to share this fascinating story. The follow-up is also quite interesting. Coming soon.

[@notanemoprog]

Great video. Looking forward to watching all the rest on the channel

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked the video. I am always curious to know what brings viewers to the channel, were you searching for something in particular or did the 'mighty algorithm' find you?

[@notanemoprog]

If I remember correctly the Algo showed your video to me - I watch a lot of Sabine etc. so perhaps that's why :)@@jkzero

[@jkzero]

@moprog Thanks for sharing, nice to attract some of Sabine's audience. Fun fact: she brought me to Europe in 2013 and I almost ended up as her postdoc. Great that the algorithm is working, I hope you find the other videos of interest too and welcome to the channel.

[@chalkchalkson5639]

I find that was fascinates me most in this telling is not the maths trick or the quantisation of energy, but the strong conviction planck had in thermodynamics. Especially considering that it wasn't even the statistical thermodynamics we know and love today. It truly boggles my mind how a concept like entropy could be seen as so fundamental and important that quantising energy was a reasonable sacrifice, when he didn't yet believe in / had access to the insights linking thermo and shannon entropy. I personally see the move to statistical physics as on-par with quantum and relativity, a shame that the general public only really gets to learn about the latter two.

[@jkzero]

fully agree; statistical mechanics does not have the flare of relativity and quantum mechanics for the general public but it is one of the fundamental pillars of physics. This is why doctoral students get questioned during their qualifying exams in the four fields: classical mechanics, quantum mechanics, electrodynamics, and statistical mechanics.

[@jorgeluis4389]

Awesome channel. Vaguely remember my high school physics classes but these videos makes it fun.

[@jkzero]

Thanks for watching, glad you enjoy the content. Make sure to check the rest of the ongoing series on quantum physics, this video was just the kick off.

[@abrikos1100]

Thank you very much for this understandable explanation! I always thought that quantum assumption was before Planck's law, like "math dont work -- assume quantum energy -- bingo". Popular science oversimplifications are harmful sometimes imo

[@jkzero]

I am totally with you. Even as a physics student I was simply told "...and Planck appeared, quantized energy, and solved the problem." But how?! I remember that the lack of context and details was quite unsatisfactory. I decided to dig deeper, read parts of the original papers, and I decided to share the details and get the record straight. I think that the story gets even more fascinating. The follow-up is also quite interesting. Coming soon.

[@abrikos1100]

@@jkzero Yes, i see real story much more fascinating too because they needed to "reverse-engineer physics from math"

[@solcarzemog5232]

I didn't know the story. I've done physics in college but not this deep. I understood like 40% of the exposition, but it was so well laid out that the core message got to me straight and clear. You're an excellent communicator. I'd really wish to master the math behids this physics to fully grasp the meaning of it.

[@jkzero]

Thanks for watching and the positive feedback. Follow-up video coming soon. Welcome to the channel.

[@NicholsonNeisler-fz3gi]

The last of the classical physicists - he was a dogged beast ❤

[@jkzero]

Thanks for watching. This was just the kick-off, in case you haven't, make sure to check the currently running series on quantum physics kzbin.info/aero/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH

[@silatapeldoorn]

Great video! This helps me to understand the physics I teach in my classes better at a fundamental level. Greetings from a physics teacher from the Netherlands

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked the video. I am curious to know what brings viewers to the channel, were you searching for something in particular or did the 'mighty algorithm' find you?

[@silatapeldoorn]

@jkzero The mighty algorithm found me. I'm subscribed to some other interesting channels with good physics content. That shall be the reason. What I like about your video is that for me it was exactly the right level regarding theoretical physics and math. Not to easy and not to difficult. To be honest: I don't think this will be the case for many people. But still I hope for more videos about fundamental physics made by you...

[@silatapeldoorn]

But now I see that your video is been watched already 70k times. So I was wrong. You have a big audience....😊 Good to see that!

[@jkzero]

@@silatapeldoorn Thanks for sharing and I am glad the algorithm is working, I hope you find the other videos of interest too, there is plenty of history and some math too; and welcome to the channel. Greetings from Germany.

[@jkzero]

@@silatapeldoorn I have no idea how the 70k views in four days happened, somehow the algorithm saw the interest of people, the new subs, and the many comments and it kept recommending it to more people... a chain reaction

[@tacemus]

I recently had an indication of this full story, briefly related in Carlo Rovelli's wonderful "Helgoland". Thank you very much for your fantastic explanation. Beautifully laid out. You've obviously put an enormous effort into this. I really appreciate that. 😊

[@jkzero]

Glad you enjoyed it! I have not read Helgoland although Amazon keeps recommending it to me. As a big fan of Werner Heisenberg and am curious about it. Would you recommend the book?

[@tacemus]

Sorry for the delay; I didn't see this. Yes, definitely. Prof. Rovelli explains that it's aimed at general readers but also including what he calls colleagues. It's full of notes with references and deeper explanations, including maths. He has his own interpretation of quantum mechanics. About a third of the book is not pure "science" as such but philosophy. He goes into the mind-body problem and the meaning of "consciousness". I'm a biologist and happen to agree with him by looking at it from that perspective too. All this gives us wonderful, deep insights which can change one's whole outlook on life. It did for me! @@jkzero

[@jppagetoo]

The quantum-ness of the physical world adopted by Planck has led science to explain so much of the world around us. What has not been found is a explanation for quantum-ness and all the things that it implies by being that. That is something I find absoutely stunning.

[@andrescabrera2647]

Thank you!, please continue making such great videos.

[@jkzero]

I am having a blast making these videos so I plan to continue. In case you haven't, make sure to check the currently running series on quantum physics kzbin.info/aero/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH

[@JagdishCVyas]

Thank you very much for a wonderful presentation of the background on Plancks constant and on real background of quantum mechanics.

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked the video. I am curious to know what brings viewers to the channel, were you searching for something in particular or did the 'mighty algorithm' find you?

[@jesterps2236]

amazing video and really interesting that picture from the fifth solvay conference was so cool and inciting awesome, please keep it up i love these videos

[@jkzero]

The famous picture is for making many videos, it will definitely keep popping up in future videos.

[@andersongomez636]

Discrete math and quanta( in reality not just as an idea )seems like 2 extremely different concepts even if related ! For me Quantum Mechanics really started with Einstein light Quanta paper! He’s the first to really understand classical physics is dead and how !

[@jkzero]

agreed

[@ufuk5396]

I have just graduated from physics. We did not learn statistical mechanics like this. Seeing all the formulas developing in the minds of great physicists I have learn over years is giving me goosebumps. Great video. Thanks.

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad that many viewers got the same feeling watching the video that I had when I created it. I had the issue that as an undergrad I was simply told "...and Planck appeared and solved it after he quantized energy," which is quite unsatisfactory. I decided to dig deeper, read some of the original papers, and I thought I had to share this fascinating story. The follow-up is also quite interesting. Coming soon.

[@ufuk5396]

@@jkzero Cant wait 🥳

[@davegaming8674]

I remember learning statmech last semester, and my profs and all of my classmates including myself took quantitization of energy for granted cause statmech came after QM. I never knew quantitzation of energy came after statistical approach, not before. It tracks that something so different compared to classical mechanics would come after a discovery that would demonstrate the limits of classical mechanics, but tbh, 'shut up and calculate' always worked out for me, so I never really felt the now obvious backwardsness of the approach until this video! Thanks for the amazing content.

[@RainerNase-b3q]

It is that true that Planck used methods of the statistical theory of heat to find his solution. But this was just a vehicle to him, he wanted to shrink the "particle" to size zero. But that didn't work. So by quantization of energy he found the "real" quantum: the quantum of action. It is not, that energy is quantized intrinsically, but it is ACTION. Energy is quantized only by the interaction with something else. A theoretical physicist should be able to calculate what is needed to shift the phase between electrical and magnetic field of a "photon" bound in an atom (with must be 90°, however it is defined) to a phase shift of 0° what is the case in a moving "photon". I use the term "Photon" with care, as to me this just identifies the transition of energy from a stationary state to a moving state. There is a simple explanation why this should happen. And then there is no need for a "foggy" quantum leap or a quantum fluctuation or any other "spooky" event. Remember: it is wrong to describe a "photon" as a wavelet. Because: a wavelet can be fourier transformed and will show different frequencies, that is, multiple photon, what is a contradiction both to the quantization and the conservation of energy. But: if you see a "Photon" as an event, and if you describe an event by the probability of detecting such an event, you will end up in a gaussian and the gaussian is an Eigenfunktion of the Fourier Transform. But if you place to gaussian in a distance and invert polarity, you create a wavelet and if you do this over and over, you get a perfect harmonic function. Alternatively you can have the derivative of a gaussian and so have a wavelet from start, add those wavelets and you will have the same result. We now need a solution in 3D to explain how the electromagnetic field can be a continuum, but only be observed in quantized form.

[@jkzero]

Same here, everything was presented to me as a brilliant idea out of the blue and I totally disliked this presentation. After pressing one of my undergrad QM teachers he shared a bit more on the blackbody radiation story but in the end his version fell back to the narrative "...and Planck solved it after he quantized energy," which is quite unsatisfactory. After I could ask more we were introduced to the QM postulates are introduced and then followed the "shut up and calculate" approach. Anyway, I decided to dig deeper and I thought I had to share this story before the standard narrative keeps propagating. I am glad you liked the video and thanks for watching.

[@davegaming8674]

​@@jkzero It is somewhat unfortunate that all the things in the undergrad physics were taught in a specific manner that's usually the easiest for the profs to just dispense what's written in the book. Granted, it'd be much harder to follow how things actually developed, and maybe I am being a bit presumptious here, but I doubt most profs have neither the time nor desire to create a lecture in a style similar to your videos. Regardless, it is great to be able to access something so high quality for free. Your presentation is succint, and leaves no room for confusion. Once again, thank you for bringing such a high quality physics video. You are like 3B1B of Physics! Subscribed to the channel and liked the vid instantly. Hope this helps. I would donate if I could, but student loan is a parasite eating through my wallet...

[@jkzero]

@@davegaming8674 Thanks for watching, subscribing, and the positive feedback. I am indeed using 3B1B's library to make my animations, I had the opportunity to thank Grant directly when I won a prize on his 2023 summer competition last October. No worries for the donation, you can help by liking and commenting in future videos, that helps via the mighty algorithm. Welcome to the channel!

[@guilhermehenriquedasilva7680]

I love that in your accent, statistical mechanics sounds a bit like sadistical mechanics, which is an accurate description of the field.

[@jkzero]

I have been told about this in the comment section of another video and I love it! Thanks.

[@eriktempelman2097]

Excellent video, thanks 😊 And yes, the theorists often ignore the vital work done by the experimentalists. Good job to give them some credit ❤

[@jkzero]

thanks for watching and make sure to check the follow-up videos

[@johnbabu3640]

Good summary But the story should begin with Issac Newton who first proposed that (a) light and energy is on and the same : (b) light -energy is a corpuscle (packet) ; which led to particle-wave question addressed in Young’s double slit experiment: And comes Kirchhoff on black body radiation challenge:

[@jkzero]

You are right; however, I had to start at some point. Honestly, I was not sure if this would be a one-video only or a whole series. Given the fantastic feedback from viewers, I have continued the series started with Planck.

[@dieterbaecher2975]

Thank you very much for this great eye opening video. Not that I was able (or willing?) to follow in detail, but now I have a vague understanding of how the idea of discrete energy came into beeing, as a mathematical trick first. Looking forward to learn how Einstein gave this trick a true physical meaning.

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked the video. I had the same issue, as an undergrad I was simply told "...and Planck appeared and solved it after he quantized energy," which is quite unsatisfactory. I decided to dig deeper, read some of the original papers, and I thought I had to share this fascinating story. The follow-up with Einstein and others is coming soon

[@Asterism_Desmos]

You hit 10k! Congrats, dude!

[@jkzero]

🎉thanks! It happened way faster than expected.

[@andyveh221]

Wien acknowledges Friedrich Paschen in his original paper as having supplied him with the same formula based on Paschen's experimental observations. Emilio Segre presents the other derivation in his book "From X-Rays to Quarks". Among the many things I learned in your video is the great day of Oct 7, 1900, and the great exchange between Rubens and Planck.

[@jkzero]

I am glad that you got new insights from the video.

[@DJondo666]

Very detailed narrative revealing the moment of history I am always baffled by. The collective work of all scholars behind Planck's theory has not been mentioned in most physics classes

[@jkzero]

I am totally with you. When I was a physics student I learned the solutions to the problems of the time but I remember that the lack of context and details was quite unsatisfactory. I decided to dig deeper, read parts of the original papers, and I decided to share the details and get the record straight. I think that the story gets even more fascinating. The follow-up with experiments is also quite interesting. Coming soon.

[@789radek]

What a fantastic exposition of the scientific method!

[@jkzero]

thanks for your comment, I find these stories fascinating because they reveal not just the final result but the building up of ideas, mistakes, wild guesses, and brilliant ideas that take years and many people to put together rather than the classic narratives of lone geniuses.

[@Rishabh1867]

Please continue the Nuclear physics series

[@slanglabadang]

Would have have lived to hear Paul Dirac being mentioned in the picture for the 5th Savoy meeting! Amazing breakdown of the maths, it felt super clear when you were going through the limits and integrals.

[@jkzero]

I left many of my favorite one out of the mention: Pauli, Born, Dirac, Wilson... they will have their own videos in the near future. Thanks for watching and the positive feedback. Welcome to the channel.

[@angusjamesprain]

Amazing video. Really interesting journey through this very crazy part of history for physics!

[@jkzero]

Glad you enjoyed it! I find most accounts of these stories to focus on the final result but I find the problems, the struggles, and the wild guesses fascinating and decided to share them here. Glad to find so many people moved by these stories and that don't shy away from some taste of the math behind.

[@vivekmonteiro]

This video stands out as an extraordinarily lucid presentation of the conceptual development of quantum mechanics. We can now re read Mehra and Jammer with deeper understanding. Many many thanks Prof. Jorge Diaz.

[@jkzero]

Thanks for your feedback, I am glad you liked the video. This was the kick-off of the video series on quantum physics, make sure to check the follow-up videos kzbin.info/aero/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH

[@Somejeestudent-pk2ey]

The quality of the video is really good... I believe it matches that of Morphecular... The explaination is good too...

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked the video. I am curious to know what brings viewers to the channel, were you searching for something in particular or did the 'mighty algorithm' find you?

[@beamshooter]

Im only 3:41 in... but already the best presentation of this material. I LOVE all the context formulae and experiments around this. Subbed.

[@jkzero]

Excellent, I am glad you liked the content and thanks for the sub. I am curious to know what brings viewers to the channel, were you searching for something in particular or did the 'mighty algorithm' find you?

[@beamshooter]

@@jkzerothe almighty algorithm actually brought me your critical mass video, which i liked for the content, but did not yet sub, as I wasn't entirely captivated by the style. So then the algo presented me with this. I found this video really let your presentation skills shine, probably because it is a great mix of both math and history.

[@jkzero]

@@beamshooter Thanks for sharing and I am glad the algorithm brought you back. I find most accounts of these stories to focus on the final result but I find the problems, the struggles, and the wild guesses fascinating and decided to share them here. Glad to find so many people moved by these stories and that don't shy away from some taste of the math behind. I left the cliffhanger, so the follow-up video is coming soon. Thanks for the sub and welcome to the channel.

[@horseracingfreetips785]

How much faster would these advances have happened if they had been able to instantly communicate with each other via an app of some kind instead of writing letters and attending conferences to meet up.

[@bradyshannon8452]

Excellent, I appreciate that you gave information about the men who produced the instrumentation for these experiments. Very informative, even for people with weak math skills. I don know you can't truly appreciate physics without understanding the math, so I strain a bit, but well done!

[@jkzero]

Thanks for your feedback, I am glad you liked the content. I am always curious to know what brings viewers to the channel, were you searching for something in particular or did the 'mighty algorithm' find you?

[@bradyshannon8452]

@@jkzeroI appreciate physics. I took everything undergrad through electricity and magnetism. It's fascinating but I'm not the best at math. Hence, "math trick" caught my eye. I've been learning a little bit about Quantum field theory. Just a little though!! My main focus in college was biochemistry - I learned how to make antibodies specific to the antigen of your choice. I'm not doing anything with it now though, it's all just entertainment these days.

[@jkzero]

@@bradyshannon8452 Thanks for sharing; QFT is a big conceptual jump, after I took QFT I asked if could sit in this class again the following year, and then again... in total I had the opportunity to have 6 semesters of QFT, each time I asked different questions, each I felt that something is mess up there. Welcome to the channel and I am glad the algorithm is working, I hope you find the other videos of interest too, the latest one is a fascinating and historic experiment only using basic electromagnetism so check it out.

[@HitmanR97]

Nice video man, keep up the good work 🫡

[@jkzero]

Appreciate it, man; more coming soon

[@carloshenao18]

It is very interesting to see the details on the development of such foundational concepts in modern physics. The mix of math and the historical significance make for an extremely compelling video. At least to nerdy engineer like me 😊. Please keep it up. I could watch videos like this all day.

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you found the content of interest. The follow-up coming soon. In the meantime, for more mix of history and math please check my other videos, mostly focused on nuclear explosions and nuclear weapons.

[@robertbachman9521]

As an experienced engineer developing simple models for physical systems, I am in awe of the number of people needed to correctly come up with a breakthrough. The time, blood, sweat and yes tears required to crack the nut is sobering. Even after success, a brief moment of euphoria and then: "I wonder why it works?!". Then back down the rabbit hole for you and a whole new generation of researchers. Finally if you are lucky, it becomes canon and just another idea to grind into the students/practitioners. The circle is then complete. 😶 What makes todays world so wonderful is modern software's graphics/calculation power to visualize data and theoretical equations so easily.

[@jkzero]

thanks for your words, I think you really captured the feeling of struggle, doubt, failure, and success that I wanted to share and hoped to transmit. I find these stories fascinating because we can get a glimpse of the human side of great discoveries instead of only the final result shown in textbooks that make us miss the years of effort by so many passionate people in search for answers.

[@robertbachman9521]

@@jkzero Despite setbacks, disappointments and skepticism about what I do (can't blame anyone I am a skeptic of most things myself), those occasional small successes make you feel better than anything else I have ever experienced. What I have found is ideas are non-linear, you are stuck and then something random happens and you have a new burst of energy. This fits nicely with Richard Hamming's philosophy. His book: 'The Art of Doing Science and Engineering" is a must read. He shows how to have a successful career in research. There are some old KZbin videos available from his 1990's Naval Academy courses. The first and last lectures are a must see. His thesis is that every researcher has multiple problems he is working on that he is stuck on. With no method of attack the problem is set aside. Once a new idea is revealed (how it is revealed may be random but if you have a broad network/interests/reading lists chances are improved), drop everything and deep dive. Planck did that spectacularly well as illustrated by your video.

[@jkzero]

I find skepticism a healthy lifestyle. I watched Hamming's lectures long ago, I recall that I enjoyed them. I got to Hammings when studying information theory, field in which he contributed to error-correction algorithm.

[@rutger4131]

Props for correctly pointing out the historical parody of the 'catastrophe' and telling the history correctly.

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked the content. Make sure to check the follow-up videos in this series kzbin.info/aero/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH

[@Govstuff137]

Awesome video. I like how scientists discover stuff. And seeing how important each discovery depends on the next.

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked the video. As a physics student I was simply told "...and Planck appeared, quantized energy, and solved the problem." But how?! I remember that the lack of context and details was quite unsatisfactory. I decided to dig deeper, read parts of the original papers, and I thought I had to share this fascinating story. The follow-up is also quite interesting. Coming soon.

[@nativesun7661]

Wonderful video/account. Great work!

[@jkzero]

Thank you very much, I am glad you liked the video. I am curious to know what brings viewers to the channel, were you searching for something in particular or did the 'mighty algorithm' find you?

[@aleratz]

Revolutionize math and create quantum physics with this simple trick

[@jkzero]

interesting title choice

[@nick-xz2ej]

It's here!

[@jkzero]

it took a while but it is finally out

[@blinkingmanchannel]

Again, thank you for taking a minute to explain the importance of engineering these experiments and the equipment involved. Intuitively, that seems to be a missing piece in 21st century experiments. The colliders don’t really seem to get to the point… Of course, it’s also true that I’m interested in electrons rather than quarks or Higgs condensates... :-)

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you like the content and thanks again for your generous support of the channel, I really appreciate it. Make sure to check the full video series on quantum mechanics kzbin.info/aero/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH

[@rohitjohn6180]

23:01 Not gonna lie, they do have glorious collection of mustaches between them. I am kinda jealous.

[@jkzero]

James Jeans disagrees

[@rohitjohn6180]

@@jkzero He is just jealous he doesn't have one awesome mustache

[@jkzero]

@@rohitjohn6180 James "Mustacheless" Jeans

[@claragabbert-fh1uu]

Low frequency spectra were less accurate because prisms tended to absorb some if the infrared light passign through instead of transmitting it.

[@dyllanusher1379]

I love this sort of historical perspectives, thanks for sharing this gem

[@jkzero]

Thanks, I am glad you liked the video. I am curious to know what brings viewers to the channel, were you searching for something in particular or did the 'mighty algorithm' find you?

[@dyllanusher1379]

@@jkzero I'm a math nerd, so I get lots of the videos in my feed using 3b1b/manim! :) Happy to have stumbled upon you. I hope that you are able to take part in the Summer of Math Exposition 2024!

[@dyllanusher1379]

@@jkzero hey! I'm just a fellow math nerd, so I get recommended a bunch of the vids that use 3b1b/manim :) I subbed and can't wait to see what's next!

[@jkzero]

@@dyllanusher1379 Thanks for sharing and I am glad the algorithm is working. Manim is such a beautiful tool, I am so happy that Grant made his library open source. I got the opportunity to thank him directly when I won a prize in his summer math competition in 2023. I hope you also find the other videos of interest too and welcome to the channel!

[@Datamining101]

18:45 is a quote drowning in irony given the “shut up and calculate” we’re comfortable with today

[@jkzero]

yeah, I am not a big fan of the “shut up and calculate” style but I felt for it during my university years. Only after some years I am spent long hours on the more conceptual aspects of QM and accepted that Feynman's "nobody understands QM" was a literal sentiment and not just a funny statement.