Understanding Quantum Mechanics #8: The Tunnel Effect

Рет қаралды 178,942

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 982

@alexChook 3 жыл бұрын

This is a fantastic presentation Sabine! I studied quantum mechanics as part of my physics undergraduate degree and I love how you are helping to de-mistify some of these concepts which are labelled as 'weird' by most people. Thanks for your contributions to scientific knowledge.

@georgesiantis8485 3 жыл бұрын

Bin ein Fan, aber die Verharmlosung dieses großen Rätsels, das unsere Realität in Frage stellt, in diesem Video finde ich suboptimal. Die ach, so coolen Referenzen von Sabine, wie kallulierbar die Hauptprobleme der Quantenmechanik doch noch seien, wenn man nur das und dies wegdenke und abstrahiere, sind respektabel aber machen auch verlegen.

@crystalgiddens7276 3 жыл бұрын

total gibberish. I cannot understand because it is total gibberish.

@crystalgiddens7276 3 жыл бұрын

@@georgesiantis8485 even more gibberish? I'm a fan, but the trivialization of this great mystery that questions our reality in this video is suboptimal. The oh, so cool references from Sabine, how calculable the main problems of quantum mechanics are, if one only thinks away and abstracts this and this, are respectable but also make you embarrassed.

@frankdimeglio8216 3 жыл бұрын

The page Nexus of Physics has now given the following two writings the thumbs up on their page. ALSO consider this: E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS time DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. THE UNIVERSAL AND MATHEMATICAL PROOF THAT ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY: Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. SO, gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. THE SUN AND THE EARTH are described and represented by BOTH F=ma AND E=mc2. F=ma AND E=mc2 PROVE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS ALL of SPACE is NECESSARILY electromagnetic/gravitational (IN BALANCE). Objects fall at the same rate (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS the SPEED OF LIGHT is RELATIVELY CONSTANT AS WELL. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. In fact, the rotation of THE MOON MATCHES it's revolution; AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. So, THE PLANETS (INCLUDING WHAT IS THE EARTH) are not "falling" in what is "curved SPACE" in RELATION to what is THE SUN. This is nonsense. E=mc2 is DIRECTLY AND FUNDAMENTALLY DERIVED FROM F=ma. This truly explains PERPETUAL MOTION. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. A PHOTON may be placed the center of THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), as the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the SPEED OF LIGHT; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. By Frank DiMeglio EINSTEIN NEVER UNDERSTOOD PHILOSOPHY, MATHEMATICS, AND PHYSICS, AS HE HAS BEEN TOTALLY OUTSMARTED BY SIR FRANK MARTIN DIMEGLIO: The balance of being AND EXPERIENCE is ESSENTIAL. BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. THE SELF represents, FORMS, and experiences a COMPREHENSIVE approximation of experience in general by combining conscious and unconscious experience. MOREOVER, the ability of THOUGHT to DESCRIBE OR RECONFIGURE sensory experience is ULTIMATELY dependent upon the extent to which THOUGHT IS SIMILAR TO sensory experience. THOUGHTS ARE INVISIBLE. Dream experience is/involves true/real QUANTUM GRAVITY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. MOST IMPORTANTLY, in dreams, BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE is invisible AND VISIBLE IN BALANCE. IMPORTANTLY, dream experience is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. THE EYE is ALSO the body. Dreams improve upon memory AND UNDERSTANDING. Indeed, there is no outsmarting the GENIUS of dreams. OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/with what is THE EARTH. NOW, get a good LOOK at what is the translucent, SEMI-SPHERICAL, QUANTUM GRAVITATIONAL, AND BLUE sky. Excellent. The DOME of a person's EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. THE EARTH IS also BLUE (as water). F=ma AND E=mc2 PROVE that, why, and how ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, and describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. SO, it is NECESSARILY a matter of precisely how these equations are understood in a BALANCED, EXTENSIVE, AND INTEGRATED fashion in RELATION to/with WHAT IS THOUGHT. The INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of THOUGHT (AND description) is improved in the truly superior mind. E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. A PHOTON may be placed at the center of THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), as the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the SPEED OF LIGHT; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Get a good LOOK at what is THE EYE. POINTS are points. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. F=ma AND E=mc2 PROVE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS ALL of SPACE is NECESSARILY electromagnetic/gravitational IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. OPEN your EYES. NOW, LOOK at what is the FLAT, SETTING, AND ORANGE SUN (with the SPACE around it THEN going invisible AND VISIBLE IN BALANCE). This ORANGE SUN manifests or forms at what is EYE LEVEL/BODY HEIGHT as well. This ORANGE SUN is manifest ON BALANCE as what is NECESSARILY the BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE of THE EARTH/LAVA. The viscosity of LAVA IS BETWEEN what is manifest as WATER AND THE EARTH/GROUND. ALL of SPACE is NECESSARILY electromagnetic/gravitational IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. F=ma AND E=mc2 do provide absolute, BALANCED, THEORETICAL, and CLEAR proof that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. THEREFORE, the rotation of THE MOON MATCHES it's revolution. MOREOVER, a given PLANET (INCLUDING WHAT IS THE EARTH) sweeps out equal areas in equal times; AND this is THEN consistent with/as what is F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is PERPETUAL MOTION; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It ALL makes perfect sense. BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. THE PLANETS (INCLUDING WHAT IS THE EARTH) are NOT "falling" in what is "curved SPACE". In fact, this is nonsense. It is PROVEN. By Frank DiMeglio

@frankdimeglio8216 3 жыл бұрын

THE THEORETICAL, SIMPLE, ULTIMATE, CLEAR, LINKED, BALANCED, AND EXTENSIVE MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION OF PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE IS PROVEN, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA: Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. The perpetual motion of THE PLANETS in RELATION to WHAT IS THE SUN is the result of the fact that gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, as this IS proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. GREAT !!!! ACCORDINGLY, a given PLANET sweeps out equal areas in equal times; AS GRAVITY IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. THEREFORE, this NECESSARILY represents, involves, and describes what is MOTION AND NO MOTION IN BALANCE. SO, THE SPEED OF LIGHT (c) IS THEN understood as a POINT; AS the SPACE that envelopes THE EARTH IN BALANCE IS the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE. E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand.) Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Indeed, gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Again, E=mc2 IS F=ma. OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/with WHAT IS THE EARTH. NOW, LOOK at what is the translucent, semi-spherical, AND BLUE SKY. THE EARTH is ALSO blue. SO, objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Great. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This is proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. Indeed, a PHOTON may be placed at the center of THE SUN (as a POINT, of course); as the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the SPEED OF LIGHT (c). GREAT. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy IS gravity. This is proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. "Mass"/energy involves balanced inertia/inertial resistance consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/energy, as electromagnetism/energy is gravity. Gravity AND electromagnetism/energy are linked AND balanced, as electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ACCORDINGLY, gravity/acceleration involves balanced inertia/inertial resistance; as gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Carefully consider what is THE EYE along with the falling man. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This is proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. (E=mc2 is directly and FUNDAMENTALLY DERIVED FROM F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. That is where Einstein got it from.) This NECESSARILY represents, involves, AND describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. THOUGHTS are invisible. Very importantly, the ability of THOUGHT to DESCRIBE OR RECONFIGURE sensory experience is ULTIMATELY dependent upon the extent to which thought is SIMILAR to sensory experience. SO, BOTH equations apply to, represent, AND perfectly describe the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE as invisible AND VISIBLE ELECTROMAGNETIC/GRAVITATIONAL SPACE in FUNDAMENTAL equilibrium AND BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The BALANCE of being AND EXPERIENCE is essential. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Consider THE MAN who is standing on WHAT IS the EARTH/GROUND. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Take careful notice of WHAT IS THE ORANGE SUN. Beautiful. Now, carefully consider the role and RELATIONAL significance of what is the eyelid. Consider what is lava. The viscosity of lava is BETWEEN that of what is water AND what is the Earth/ground. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Time DILATION ALSO ULTIMATELY proves that GRAVITY IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Indeed, this not only explains the term c4; but it ALSO explains the significance of the fourth spatial dimension. GREAT !!! Notice that THE DOME of a person's EYE may also be visible. THINK. IT IS CLEARLY PROVEN. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper understanding of physics/physical experience, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Moreover, objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper understanding of physics/physical experience, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Ultimately and truly, time is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (E=mc2 IS F=ma.) This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of thought (AND description) is improved in the truly superior mind. THINK. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. The full distance in/of SPACE is thus LINKED and BALANCED with what is the middle distance in/of SPACE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. GREAT !!!! The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. SO, stellar clustering ALSO proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Carefully consider what is A GALAXY. (BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand.) By Frank DiMeglio

@hylianknight3 3 жыл бұрын

"Quantum tunneling isnt that weird... except for this, whoops" i love it

@MrHotlipsholohan Ай бұрын

Saw on documentaries people describing light objects that appeared in their houses going through walls , must be the same principle ,

@dekenba6482 3 жыл бұрын

Just superb. Sabine has a real passion for physics, she fully understands what she is explaining, she has a dry sense of humour, she doesn't mind being controversial when it's necessary and she has one of the world's largest wardrobes.

@andrewphillips-hird3761 Жыл бұрын

Literally goals

@m_jackson 3 жыл бұрын

Thank you. The way you convey concepts is the most understandable I've yet seen.

@crystalgiddens7276 3 жыл бұрын

@@dixztube total gibberish. I cannot understand because it is total gibberish.

@frankdimeglio8216 3 жыл бұрын

@manucitomx 3 жыл бұрын

Thank you, Dr. you’re surely one of the best science explainers of this century. I look forward to your videos every week.

@nicolasduguay4 3 жыл бұрын

Increadible how you, Sabine, are able to clarify decades of quantum mystisism in a video shorter than 10 minutes! This schrodinger equation visual representation is absolute gold. I'm also so glad to have learn what is the current scientific quantum struggle and challenge! Thank you Sabine, please go on in your very constructive educative journey!

@iphotobomb 3 жыл бұрын

One of the best visualisations of the probability wave I've seen. Love to see explanation of other aspects of the wave seen here (eg those many peaks when bouncing) or some other examples

@MCsCreations 3 жыл бұрын

Fantastic, Sabine! Thanks a lot! 😃 Stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊

@SabineHossenfelder 3 жыл бұрын

Thanks, best wishes back to you and your family!

@LowellBoggs 3 жыл бұрын

absolutely outstanding video. this is really high quality education. thank you so much.

@LowellBoggs Жыл бұрын

Replying to my own reply from 2 years ago, I have watched several videos by different youtubers, and still feel this is the best that I have seen. It has great animations and discussed the key controversies in a manner that is understandable to educated non specialists. Thanks Sabine!

@baganatube 3 жыл бұрын

Every video of yours reminds me of how lucky I am to have come across your channel some time ago. I've seen a few great science popularization channels, but none has explained this concept so intuitively.

@prydin 3 жыл бұрын

You’re doing something that few educators bother to do: You actually solve the equation! Most of the time we are just supposed to look at an abstract equation without any connection to something tangible. This made all the difference in the world. Thanks Sabine!

@eulogionavarro6935 Жыл бұрын

If I had had this videos back in the 90s... oh dear! Thank you so much for this Sabine!!!!

@luudest 3 жыл бұрын

2:37 thank you for visualizing the developement of the propability distribution over time. It‘s the best visiulation and explanation about this behaviour on youtube that I‘ve seen!! Historical question: When was this developement of the probability over time first described?

@dlevi67 3 жыл бұрын

I think it dates back to the 1920s - Schroedinger himself developed the equation to represent the "spread" of an electron's charge through space. Max Born published what I believe to be the first interpretation of Ψ as probability density through time in 1926.

@sirmclovin9184 3 жыл бұрын

You would have to specify the question a bit more. Heisenberg was the first one to give a quantum mechanical-evolution equation (Heisenberg equation), but Schrödinger's discovery of the Schrödinger equation really clarified things a lot. Schrödinger actually later showed that it was equivalent to Heisenberg's equation. As for the statistical interpretation, it is true that Max Born really got the ball rolling, but it took quite some time to get things right (Mara Beller has written an article on it). If you are asking when the tunnel effect was first described, I actually don't know but googling it should help you to answer the question.

@whatitis4872 3 жыл бұрын

@@dlevi67 It turns out that without even knowing it was a probability density Born was doing something way more advanced. His understanding of this stuff was astronomical (as in amazing) He was doing an analysis that was later fleshed out by Mott and as a passing comment in a footnote he noticed that |psi^2 was a probability density.| He was studying collisions. its like putting the horse before the cart yet Born was doing it very well. By the way the best example off tunneling is Hunds Potential.

@jjeherrera 3 жыл бұрын

Regarding the tunnel effect, although I'm not 100% sure, I believe it was first proposed by Gamow, in the context of understanding alpha decay.

@whatitis4872 3 жыл бұрын

@@jjeherrera Yes I kinow Gamow mentioned it to explain alpha decay which I mention in my video on this in my channel. Though the effect nust have been known before since its just something that quantum systems do.

@swarnendudas3057 2 жыл бұрын

The best channel ever to have a crystal clear understanding of the fundamentals of Quantum Mechanics. ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️

@BardaKWolfgangTheDrug 3 жыл бұрын

I watch tons of physics and math videos and I've never seen the part with faster than light tunneling :o Thank you!

@chamstrauss 3 жыл бұрын

this is the best physics channel in youtube! straight to the point with no bullshit and unnecesery promotions. with beatiful and simple explanations.

@IZn0g0uDatAll 3 жыл бұрын

Loved the wooooops, that made me laugh out loud

@jimmyzhao2673 3 жыл бұрын

Ha Ha, so true. I loved following along with the animations, then came the 'wooops'

@doommaker4000 3 жыл бұрын

Whoops, we broke physics. Or have we?

@mabd7340 3 жыл бұрын

Is Sabine Russian?

@jimmyzhao2673 3 жыл бұрын

@@mabd7340 German

@wayneyadams 2 жыл бұрын

This is the best explanation I have seen, read, or heard to date. The animations were excellent.

@paulthompson9668 3 жыл бұрын

Sabine, that was well done in the short amount of time you had to explain it in. In a longer video, I would emphasize how the "wall" does not completely fill up the space that the particle may pass through. As a result, the tunnel effect can simply be interpreted as the particle making its way through the "gaps" in the "wall".

@sven_lu_ 3 жыл бұрын

That's not what tunneling is, though. The 'wall' in this standard calculation is just symbolic für any potential that could hinder a particle's movement, not just a literal wall. For nuclear fusion there is tunneling involved, where the nucleus of one atom tunnels close enough to another nucleus so they can interact with the strong nuclear force, even though they would be repelled classically, since both have a positive charge which dominates the interaction at larger distances. So the particle tunnels through the potential barrier, which is the Coulomb potential in this case. There are no gaps.

@paulthompson9668 3 жыл бұрын

@@sven_lu_ You bring up exactly what makes this topic difficult to present to someone with little to no knowledge of physics. When you combine a description with "symbolic", "tunnels close enough", "tunnels through", and "no gaps", it would leave the neophyte confused.

@sven_lu_ 3 жыл бұрын

@@paulthompson9668 I can see that that may have been a bit too much. Sorry about that. May I ask instead what exactly you meant by 1) gaps in the wall that the particle can make its way through and 2) the wall not completely filling up the space?

@robharwood3538 3 жыл бұрын

@@sven_lu_ Perhaps he is pointing towards a potential misunderstanding of the concept of a 'wall' by a lay person who might imagine that it means a real wall, with possible imperfections (thus 'gaps') through which an imagined 'probability substance' could thus 'flow'? The point being, exactly as you've stated, that this 'wall' is a mathematical ideal used to illustrate the more important theoretical insight that -- even without any gaps, for a 'perfect wall' -- tunneling would still happen. Not sure if that's what he meant, but it seems to me a potentially reasonable interpretation. Cheers! 😊

@sven_lu_ 3 жыл бұрын

@@robharwood3538 I thought that as well, which is why I reacted as I did. But to try and explain it in good faith I wanted to make sure I understood what they meant so I could respond to that specifically. :)

@gretalaube91 2 ай бұрын

I am an old retired EE, and just got some tunnel diodes for fun. I started to play with them, and noticed that the thresholds are really "noisy". This video is a great explanation, but I had to go back and watch all the previous ones, too. Each device and oscillator circuit has different thresholds, and is "fussy" and unpredictable. Now, it makes some sense. Sometimes they oscillate one way, and other times, they go to some completely different loci. ...amusing little fellows! No wonder! Thanks for your explanation.

@youtubeuser8232 3 жыл бұрын

This video stopped at the most interesting point! In any case, amazing video!

@aSpyIntheHaus 3 жыл бұрын

I love watching these vids, then heading over and listening to one of her songs, then coming back and watching some more physics vids.

@Y2Kvids 3 жыл бұрын

Hi Can you make a explainer on the recent verification of Hawkin Radiation and how Black Hole Preserve Information which was thought to not occur .

@RoySchl 3 жыл бұрын

nice, I like that uncertainty/dispersion explanation, never realized it was "just" that, makes total sense now. thanks for that

@hyperduality2838 3 жыл бұрын

Certainty (real, actualized) is dual to uncertainty (probability, information) -- the Heisenberg certainty/uncertainty principle. The conversion of information (entropy, uncertainty) into mutual information (deterministic, certainty) is a converging or syntropic process -- Shannon Information theory. "Through imagination and reason we turn experience into foresight (prediction)" -- Spinoza describing syntropy. Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics. All observers track targets by using optimized predictions -- teleology. Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non-teleological physics (entropy). Randomness (entropy) is dual to order (predictability, patterns, syntropy). Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality. Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.

@loganh2140 3 жыл бұрын

I love this lady

@thewaytruthandlife 3 жыл бұрын

then marry her....good luck

@Blowfeld20k 3 жыл бұрын

@logan H EVERYONE loves Sabine m8 ...... Except boisterous sharp elbowed lads with a TOA they want to push .... lol

@thewaytruthandlife 3 жыл бұрын

@Ben Louis is she your mom ???

@thewaytruthandlife 3 жыл бұрын

@Ben Louis just kidding ....man....relax

@CollyDoo 3 жыл бұрын

She reminds me of Yeardley Smith.

@jamesmahoney4525 3 жыл бұрын

I like your use of dynamic graphing techniques and your explanation, you should do an entire physics course using these techniques!

@LeopoldoGhielmetti 3 жыл бұрын

So if I want to go faster than light, I just have to run against a wall and if I have enough luck I can found myself on the other side of the wall after having traveled faster than light. I don't know why but it seems to me that it hurts a lot, maybe because I'm not lucky enough. 😂😂😂

@tTtt-ho3tq 3 жыл бұрын

Theoretically yes, I'd say! However, you may have to try many times ... many many times. Never give up. Science is hard.

@allthe1 3 жыл бұрын

You have to get a headstart on your other trials but not tell the observer

@stefanguels 3 жыл бұрын

So the wave function that represents you is too sharp. As you've seen your actual location needs to be a bit blurred . So getting drunk before might help, and certainly makes hitting the wall less painful :-0

@trucid2 3 жыл бұрын

The trick to faster than light travel is to cheat and have a head start.

@AndreasHLux 3 жыл бұрын

Wait until the Earth is in speed of light , may be easier. Zwischenzeitlich kannste einfach ein Sieb nehmen, kommt auch was durch.

@RonLWilson 3 жыл бұрын

Wow, great visualizations! These make it soooo much easier for me to understand what is happening!

@discogodfather22 3 жыл бұрын

I wish my brain could tunnel into an understanding of quantum mechanics.

@thewaytruthandlife 3 жыл бұрын

quantum mechanically spoken there is a small chance depending on the thickness of your skull (your energy barrier) !

@EK-gr9gd 3 жыл бұрын

It is not that difficult. But to comfort you a bit E. Schroedinger wished to have a better mastery of mathematics.

@AndreasHLux 3 жыл бұрын

...no hope!

@frun 3 жыл бұрын

Just ask questions. People wi!l explain it to you.

@antoniomaglione4101 3 жыл бұрын

I believe most minds could easily grasp quantum mechanics. The problem is, from the cradle we are taught a number of facts and concepts and, as we grow, we become convinced that the world is made up of these facts and concepts. Reality is, there is a great deal more of other facts and concepts, most of which cannot be described or managed correctly with words, and require mandatorily the language of mathematics. When scientists do their best and try to describe these facts with words, they get a mixed result and can confuse further many listeners. Then, there is a wrong approach by many schools about the teaching of mathematics, where many pupils become convinced that they aren't shaped for math; possibly, they just got a bad teacher.

@UkrainiWins 3 жыл бұрын

The plain-talk and the graphics help immensely Sabine. Excellent job as usual please keep up the good work! 👍😎🇺🇸

@clmasse 3 жыл бұрын

The speed is not discussed to day anymore. There is the phase velocity and the group velocity. Only the group velocity is the velocity of information transfer, and it is smaller than the speed of light. The phase velocity could transfer information only if it was possible to measure the whole wave function, which is not. In some situations, the group velocity is larger than the speed of light, but it has been calculated that the velocity of energy transfer is smaller all the same. This is usual textbook material. Some people still discuss, but they are definitely wrong. Many more people have wrong ideas about quantum mechanics, that even date back to old quantum mechanics, before 1924.

@BlackbodyEconomics 3 жыл бұрын

This is one of the best explanations I've heard. Thank you :)

@78sucinrepoc 3 жыл бұрын

Stumbbled accross your channel a week ago. I absolutely love it! Trying to get through previously posted videos. Thank you for sharing your learnings!

@GururajBN 3 жыл бұрын

Excellent explanation of a rather obfuscating topic. To some extent, the popular science writers are responsible for the misunderstandings about tunnel effect. I recall reading one book on quantum mechanics where the writer describes it with the analogy of two pieces of dices in a cup. now inside the cup and next moment sitting outside the cup! Evidently tunnel effect is neither so miraculous nor mysterious. 👍 to a wonderful presentation.

@dsc4178 3 жыл бұрын

That was interesting. One would hope someone someday soon will make the same kind of breakthroughs in such science as Einstein did with matter, energy, and gravity on the 'bigger than an angel on the head of a pin' part of the universe.

@flippert0 3 жыл бұрын

Haha, just when you think everything's neatly solved, there comes a bummer at the end. OK, finally I think, no one can understand quantum mechanics despite Sabine's best effort to convince us otherwise ;-)

@sirmclovin9184 3 жыл бұрын

I think you are mistaken.

@danfara6126 2 жыл бұрын

Fantastic, fantastic! I guess that what we saw is the distribution of the position. It would be illuminating to have simultaneous representation of the momentum distribution

@johnwilson4909 3 жыл бұрын

Hello Sabine, I really enjoyed your description of quantum tunneling. The idea that a portion of the waveform can make it through because it has sufficient potential is clear. In your animation at 5:53, you show the wave colliding with the wall. Some portions of the wave rebound with a height greater than the wall. Does this represent the portions of the wave that have enough potential to make it past the wall? I am hoping I understood this analogy correctly. - sincerely, John.

@usandthen 3 жыл бұрын

I just love you! you give one of the best's "one on one with myself times" on the pc.

@jjeherrera 3 жыл бұрын

Nice explanation. The tunnel effect is a general property of waves in dispersive media. It is well known as a diagnostic tool in plasma physics. The question in quantum mechanics is up to what point you can associate a particle to a wave packet. In your example, for instance, it would look as if you were splitting a particle in two. But of course that's not the case; what you're splitting is the probability of finding the particle on either side of the barrier. Also, when you build a wave packet you're actually superposing the probabilities of particles with a range of momenta, which we interpret as the uncertainty of the momentum. In that sense I agree with what you said at the beginning: understanding [the mathematics of] quantum mechanics isn't hard. People studying waves already understood it in the 19th century. What is hard is to understand the interpretation. Experimental advancements are helping. The time a particle "takes to cross the barrier," for instance, has been recently measured.

@petarcuric5003 3 жыл бұрын

Sabine can you do a video or just say what you think abouth people people explaining abouth science but who are not real science like Bill Nye or its too pointless to talk abouth them.

@SabineHossenfelder 3 жыл бұрын

I am not sure there is much to say. You don't need to be a scientist to communicate science, though it certainly makes things easier.

@ZeroOskul 3 жыл бұрын

Your opening statement is exactly my feeling about QM. You don't understand and not because you can't understand but because you have been told you can't understad so you don't really try to understand.

@johnpapish9409 3 жыл бұрын

this lady offers some brilliant explanations of things, and rather than regarding her as an 'outsider' or a loose cannon if you will, i believe we should pay very close attention to her interpretations. look at her explanation of 'faster than light' illustration of quantum tunneling effect'. now this is worthy of serious consideration and explanation

@HowardS185 2 жыл бұрын

A great video Sabine. I'm a physicist, and I have never seen an illustration of the interaction of a particle with a potential wall (I've spent 40 years doing research in physical oceanography). I'd love to see how you did it, how you initialized the wave function, and gave it a shove toward the wall. Thanks again.

@schmetterling4477 Жыл бұрын

If you were a physicist, then you would know that this is not how quantum mechanics actually works. :-)

@HowardS185 Жыл бұрын

@@schmetterling4477 You seem to be questioning whether I am a physicist. I have both a BS and MS in physics (no PhD though). I am a member of the principal professional staff at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory. They classify me as a physicist, although I like to think of myself as a jack of all trades. You also seem to have some problem with what Sabine has presented; what is wrong with what she presented? In any event, you should probably take that up with her, and not me.

@schmetterling4477 Жыл бұрын

@@HowardS185 But you still don't know how QM works. Hint: the oceans are classical systems.

@markusdd5 3 жыл бұрын

I work in micro/nanoelectronics and the example I always use to explain to people what Tunnel-Effect means, is using USB-drives or SD-cards. Flash memory does not work in "classical" physics. The gates on which electrons are stored to encode data (or 'program the flash cell') are completely isolated. there is no conductive path to them. But if the voltage you apply across the gate is just large enough, some high-energy electrons can pass through to the isolated gate without having enough energy to classically 'pierce-through (and destroy) the gate isolation. I was amazed how well suited this example is to convince people that this is not just some 'theoretical phenomenon'. Everyone uses it. Millions to Billions of times daily.

@arieldelaguila760 3 жыл бұрын

Sabine, all your videos are brilliant. Thanks for keeping us interested in Physics. I wish I had you as a teacher when I was studying Physics.

@leyasep5919 3 жыл бұрын

7:21 I saw this experiment explained in a 20-years old Elektor magazine issue, it's a nice party trick, I mean, a nice classroom trick to make students more curious about the superficial inconsistencies of quantum mechanics. And it even works with a simple coaxial cable :-)

@reitze01 3 жыл бұрын

You're intelligence and down-to-earth descriptions are absolutely beautiful. I love you like a little girl might love a rock star. :D

@sphericalharmony1603 3 жыл бұрын

Another nice thing worth mentioning about the simulation is that it shows interference between the incident and reflected parts of the wavefunction.

@QuicksilverSG Жыл бұрын

One way to understand quantum tunneling is to recognize that the wave-function does not literally predict the movement of an individual particle over time, it only predicts the probability of detecting "a" particle at any particular location each time you make a measurement. Since all such particles are identical and indistinguishable, it is only our assumption of continuous motion that leads us to conclude that all such measurements are of the "same" individual particle. In the case of quantum tunneling, the wave-function predicts there is a small probability that a particle will appear on the opposite side of the barrier, regardless of how we might imagine "it" manages to "tunnel through" the barrier.

@schmetterling4477 Жыл бұрын

It's just too bad that particles don't exist. ;-)

@williejohnson5172 3 жыл бұрын

I was just about to get on my soapbox and she said , "whoops..." . Excellent presentation of the conundrum. Again, we do not need quantum mechanics and its "weirdness" to explain tunneling effects. Classical physics works just fine, preserves the law conservation of energy, preserves the speed of light, and is sane. The effect can easily be explained by Clenthia's law where (-force=-Vi/c). The potential and current are inversely proportional. Or Lenz's law, Lodge's alternative path , and Maxwell's displacement current (the wall is the spark gap or dielectric) can all be used to explain this effect. And the classical Schrodinger's equation is not an equation of probability (insanity) but is one of enstrophy or vorticity squared or pressure or negative force. The longer physicists stick with this QM craziness the longer they are doomed to keep spinning on the hamster wheel.

@davesutherland1864 3 жыл бұрын

One interpretation of the 'faster than light' of the tunneled part of the wave function is that this is OK as long as any information it was carrying can only be observed (if that is the correct term) at a time after the peak has passed. I can see how this could make senses for a group of particles, not so sure about a single particle.

@chuckszmanda6603 2 жыл бұрын

The tunneling effect is used to great effect in flash memories, where a thin layer of silicon dioxide creates a potential barrier which can be traversed and store the electron on a structure called a “floating gate.” This is accomplished by a kind of tunneling called Fowler Nordheim tunneling, in which the potential barrier is modified by the application of a voltage.

@ATSF854 3 жыл бұрын

Very interesting. I honestly want to study this in more detail

@aurelienyonrac 3 жыл бұрын

First time that it makes sense. Amazing

@elischrock5356 3 жыл бұрын

This simple visualization helps so much. Thank you.

@illogicmath 3 жыл бұрын

As a student of electronics engineering I never fully understood the quantum tunneling effect but now thankfully to your video I think I grasped the fundamental things

@Almeida19001 3 жыл бұрын

Thanks Sabine for covering this weird effect. It becomes even weirder when you learn about the Hartmann effect: ie tunneling time of the tunneled wavefuntion is independant from the width of the wall.

@onderozenc4470 3 жыл бұрын

The tunneling phenomenon is most visible in the case of tunneling of noise through the n-p region of a diode. ** To have a particular wave component of a wave packet to travel faster than light, there should be a dispersion relation n(w) which makes v = c/n faster than light.

@leonardselenide2204 3 жыл бұрын

Thank you very much Sabine! It was really very interesting!! And thank you very much to your sponsor - BRILLIANT!!!

@leyasep5919 3 жыл бұрын

5:30 awesome work here, Sabine ! I'm sending you a quantum cookie your way !

@JohnDunne001 3 жыл бұрын

Your videos are fantastic! You've got a lovely accent and a luscious voice so your videos are quite brilliant to learn and feel like I actually understand, for a moment, the subject perfectly.

@gmotionedc5412 3 жыл бұрын

Fascinating. And baffling. Great background!!

@archeiskotia2764 3 жыл бұрын

a brilliant explenation of the tunnel effect.

@kagannasuhbeyoglu 3 жыл бұрын

How late i noticed this wonderful channel. Thank you so much Sabine Hossenfelder 👍

@KarneiGozman 3 жыл бұрын

Thanks! Have a great weekend Sabine, see you next week!

@rajvirsingh4828 3 жыл бұрын

This is a wonderful presentation for non graduate persons taking interest in quantum physics. I appreciate you.

@ches51320 3 жыл бұрын

Very easy to understand such hard physics!

@michaelworkman4057 3 жыл бұрын

I agree, some things just have to be accepted in a way but after that happens it's not nearly as hard. I was lucky to be introduced to the concepts when I was fairly young although I didn't then (or now) have an advanced mathematical understanding of it, at least not in a way I can convey anywhere near as well as Sabine does.

@ultraultra6726 3 жыл бұрын

Nothing should be accepted by a learning mind. If it isn't learning, then what is it doing? Don't fall in line like the "scientists," who never actually prove anything.

@insightfool 3 жыл бұрын

Fantastic explanation of something that really bugged me in school.

@discoverrealityclover9620 3 жыл бұрын

A wonderful explanation. Issues with the phrase 'tunnelling effect', it suggests that the particle is doing something.

@albertskoope 3 жыл бұрын

Excellent explanation; Thank you. It explains well the nuances of quantum effects to lay people like me. I get better understanding today. Thank you.

@waynesmith6417 3 жыл бұрын

Sabine, thanks for making your videos. I watch you a lot and I get a lot out your presentations. I live in Texas in the US out in the country. Its humorous to me that people that can believe in eleven dimensions have a hard time believing in angles. Keep up the good work.

@sohlbergk 3 жыл бұрын

@Sabine, excellent animations. What numerical strategy did you use the time propagate the wavefunction?

@ArrakisMusicOfficial 3 жыл бұрын

Great video, thank you! You're completely right, little did Feynmann know how much impact his little quote will have. It's about time we stop repeating it.

@Thomas-gk42 Жыл бұрын

Again a wow-effect in clear and straight education, Sabine, though I knew already the most of this, it's a great enjoyment to listen to you. And of course, learned something new: what the 'Hamiltonian' is. To say thank you sounds lame, but you really bring enlightment in lifes.

@johnmatelski6413 3 жыл бұрын

'This is where the probabilistic interpretation comes to haunt you. If you look at where the faster than light particles came from...' I'm not a physicist, but I am a statistician. And I think the problem is mixing the interpretations. When I heard the above, my immediate thought was "there are no faster than light particles!" There is uncertainty in the position and velocity of a particle at the start, but there is an upper limit to the velocity. As is stated, if a particle is energetic enough to clear the potential wall, it must have had a head start (i.e. a relatively high velocity at the start) compared to a particle that did not. The probability density function (6:55, on top, with the wall) at the start is 'unconditional', but after the bounce (7:00, top) we have two distributions, conditioned on whether the wall is cleared. My interpretation is intuitive and avoids any weirdness: Although the peak of the distribution (that clears the wall) is to the right of the peak for the distribution for the unimpeded case, this does not imply that any single particle described by this distribution did/could travel faster than light. All it is saying is that if you filter out lower velocity particles, the average distance traveled is greater than if you consider all particles unconditionally (the unimpeded case), which is exactly what we would expect. I think a frequentist probability interpretation is hard to beat for simplicity and directness, provided one has come to terms with what a probability distribution is and is not. A probability density function does not tell you the probability of a particular outcome (at least not for continuous variables). It only tells you the probability of being in a particular interval/region in the support of the distribution when you integrate the pdf over that region. The added complexity in the video is that the pdf is evolving over time, which becomes a problem if you watch the animation and believe that it is describing a specific particle, as if a single particle is 'riding on the peak' and thus moves faster than light. Although the peak is the most likely value along the support, the probability of being EXACTLY at the peak is actually zero. Further, the probability that a particle has EXACTTLY the average velocity is also zero. So it does not make sense, from a probability perspective, to comment on the physical possibility of a single particle whose behavior is constrained to be described by those peaks.

@jonashartmann6687 3 жыл бұрын

Can the effect be described in the same way with the path integral formulation? I'm asking this because that formulation specifically doesn't require the particle to take a certain trajectory at all.

@eustacenjeru7225 2 жыл бұрын

Sabine this is great

@ernestgrouns8710 3 жыл бұрын

I configure tunnels everyday- IPsec tunnels. This however, is WAY BEYOND ME, but I absolutely love trying to learn more about physics!!

@ivobrabec1500 Жыл бұрын

Amazingly interesting and finally explained for normal person….

@Petercookintaiwan 3 жыл бұрын

The most important statement of the video is that quantum mechanics is only hard to understand if you are constantly told this. We are hardwired to conform to tradition and the norm neither of which reflect reality. The norm is that we teach in isolated university departments which is also tradition but reality all works together so the norm and tradition are wrong.

@madmillerphysics 2 жыл бұрын

An amazing teacher ☘️❤️☘️

@MichelleHell 3 жыл бұрын

Tunneling allows us to image surfaces at the nano-scale. They use flowery language to make quantum mechanics sound like there's some ethereal quality to physics, but the end result of these theories is always the development of a repeatable, mechanical process.

@AcesAndNates 3 жыл бұрын

This channel is excellent!

@masonart4950 2 жыл бұрын

I enjoyed the quiet, gentle speed of the bouncing ball. 3:38

@MrHotlipsholohan Ай бұрын

A brilliant scientist, its a strange world she is describing and is undoubtedly part of our reality which we cant define yet but it exists.

@Desperajoe 3 жыл бұрын

I'm a 14 year old student making a year project about microscopes. I think I may have went a bit too far by searching up the tunnel effect. Wish me good luck to understand the whole thing :D

@thomasolson7447 3 жыл бұрын

The binomial distribution equation is used in graphs of circles and ellipses. I wonder if that should be part of this discussion in some way. The multinomial distribution is not used in higher dimensions though. Instead in the case of 3 dimensions it just takes the sqrt(y^2+z^2) and the coefficients have nothing to do with binomial distributions or multinomial distributions.

@Deez-Master 3 жыл бұрын

Awesome video. It makes me wonder, are people designing experiments to test if the tunneled particles can "break the speed of light" as described

@boommber30 3 жыл бұрын

Beautiful video

@Lucky10279 3 жыл бұрын

One way to to avoid the FTL travel is to say that the particle didn't travel from position A to position B, but that it simply doesn't _have_ a definite position _at all_ until it's measured.

@Inpreesme 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you

@babyoda1973 3 жыл бұрын

That was how I see it in my mind . Dang you are good

@name1483 3 жыл бұрын

Question: can't we consider quantum effects analogous to classical ones if we just replace the probability wave with uncertainty in our measurements? That is there is a probability wave of the ball being in a specific position and the wall having a specific hight that represent inaccuracy in the measurement, that way the probability of finding a ball on the other side doesn't have to be zero

@clmasse 3 жыл бұрын

No, if you define correctly "quantum effect." A quantum effect is an effect that has no counterpart in classical physics. Many effects in quantum physics have, but not all. Often, demystifiers purposefully omit the true quantum effets.

@name1483 3 жыл бұрын

@@clmasse Quantum effects are merely an interpretation, the true nature can only be described in math at this point. what I was thinking it that we can have similar math that shows the same weirdness if we allow for very high inaccuracy in the measurements

@clmasse 3 жыл бұрын

@@name1483 No.

@nikospitr 3 жыл бұрын

Thanks Sabine. I was just wondering, is the lead of the tunneled wave proportional to the width of the barrier? Thank you!

@markrichards9646 2 жыл бұрын

The same thought occurred to me. After reading more comments, kallala heythem notes that according to the Hartman Effect, tunneling time is independent of the barrier width. This got me thinking about Cherenkov radiation which is caused by electrons moving through water faster than the speed of light in water. What I was thinking was, are the electrons tunneling through the reactor, which acts as a barrier, and appearing within a medium that acts like a barrier but one in which they can pass through instead, revealing their presence as Cherenkov radiation.

@FunkyDexter 3 жыл бұрын

To be perfectly honest, I never was able to get around the MATH of quantum mechanics. In my undergrad chemistry courses, the concept themselves really never posed problems, it's just that I found it hard to comprehend how to illustrate them mathematically.

@DJVARAO 3 жыл бұрын

It is simpler to understand that the wave function is a mean rather than the purpose of QM measurements. It is a mathematical entity, unlike the expectation values of physical observables.

@trucid2 3 жыл бұрын

This is why the apparent nondeterminism of quantum mechanics is an illusion.

@DJVARAO 3 жыл бұрын

@@trucid2 I am not sure what are you exactly referring to by nondeterminism. The QM equations are linear and their outcomes are hence totally determined by the initial conditions of the problem. It is a necessary condition of any physical model to get the same results under the same circumstances. In this sense QM is a deterministic theory. But, because it is inherently statistical, we cannot establish individual outcomes in eg an ensemble of particles. But that is also true in classical mechanics.

@hyperduality2838 3 жыл бұрын

Expectation is what you would predict -- syntropy! Certainty (real, actualized) is dual to uncertainty (probability, information) -- the Heisenberg certainty/uncertainty principle. The conversion of information (entropy, uncertainty) into mutual information (deterministic, certainty) is a converging or syntropic process -- Shannon Information theory. "Through imagination and reason we turn experience into foresight (prediction)" -- Spinoza describing syntropy. Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics. All observers track targets by using optimized predictions -- teleology. Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non-teleological physics (entropy). Randomness (entropy) is dual to order (predictability, patterns, syntropy). Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality. Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.

@DJVARAO 3 жыл бұрын

@@hyperduality2838 I am afraid syntropy is not defined in physics.

@hyperduality2838 3 жыл бұрын

@@DJVARAO Yep I know! Physics and therefore science has a huge problem. "Philosophy is dead" -- Stephen Hawking. Noumenal (rational, analytic) is dual to phenomenal (empirical, synthetic, science) -- Immanuel Kant. Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates converging thesis or synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialetic. Being is dual to non being creates becoming -- Plato. Hegel's cat: Alive (thesis, being) is dual to not alive (anti-thesis, non-being) -- Schrodinger's or Plato's cat. Schrodinger's cat is based upon the Hegelian dialectic which is based upon Plato's or Socrates dialectic. Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes. Syntropy = negative entropy, entangled entropy or mutual information (Claude Shannon). Physics will have to find a definition for syntropy! The conservation of duality -- the 5th law of thermodynamics! Energy is duality, duality is energy. Syntropy = teleological physics, all observers track targets!

@PaulMatthis 3 жыл бұрын

To me, explanations of the uncertainty principle always feel analogous to taking a picture of a race car with different shutter speeds. A slow shutter speed gets you a blurry image, but you can at least tell the car is going really fast, and you can also tell in what direction. A super fast shutter speed gives you a clear image of the race car's exact location, but you have no idea if it's going fast or even moving at all.