In this world there are fools, idiots, mongoloids, stupids, gullible individuals that lack the abillity to reason, and they live life as zombies inept to judge that which is real and that which is not. All they can do is repeat the stupidities of others as they believe in it. Unfortunately God loves them all. WHICH OF THESE ARE YOU?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Protons, neutrons, electrons, positrons, neutrinos, quarks, leptons, byrons, mesons, pions, kaons, gluons,ballence orbits, energy levels of the orbits, number of electrons per orbital energy levels; nonsence!
The sub atomic particles depicted here and all other sub division of the atom as represented in the modern atomic theory will lead us nowhere unless we deviate from the illusion that those things are real, and get real ourselves. Matter can be made synthetically!
Quantum mechanics in the interrelation of energies to me is a GODLY science, but as its used in conjuntion with the current atomic theory, it places science in the stone age. The atom is a very simple devise of nature that can be replicated synthetically under controlled conditions to whatever predermine value we want, once we decodify certains correlations of the energies that make up the atom. To start with, atoms have an average diameter of 3 billionths of one inch.
some of the terminology is gibberish. "The electron is oscillating in space" That's mixing wave and particle in the statement...Help me out here folks...
If I could enlarge Dr. Christopher Hill, to a point where.. lets say the universe fit in the palm of his hand, observing, measuring and finding us would be very uncertain, but we sure are in there somewhere in orbit just like and electron. When the universe is taken on a whole we become the tiny quantum within. An atom in a pin head in a pin hidden in a haystack amoung all the worlds fields of haystacks.
@VarvaraBell No, thats not the point. An electron does not occupy an exact location and does not have an exact trajectory (really the same thing). Look at double slit experiments and you will see what I mean.
The Federal gov't has just decided to de-fund FermiLab, the place where the protagonist professor in our clip works. COntact your representative and tell tehm to continue funding FermiLab. We need education and knowledge going forward!
This is beyond my education level, but it started making some sense. Well, it sparked my interest. I think I'll take a few classes at the local community collage. After I brush up on my spelling skills.
@HoShiiJii It's been proven that entangled particles cannot be used to transmit information because it defies special relativity. So no, this is not the future of instantaneous communication.
@PlaguedMaggot I'm not sure this is true. If we were to fire off a string of entangled particles to Alpha Centauri. The spin of these particles (up/down) isn't yet determined. By observing the spin of these particle we fix them (up/down) at our will. The entangled string now contains information, but the information is still limited by the time require to transverse the distance. It's like sending a letter except you can wait until the letter arrives to write the message.
Wow, that was fantastic! I've always loved studying sub-atomic particle physics, but I never had the chance to take a college class in it. The math would eat me alive.
Man's brilliance and thirst for knowledge is the most dangerous thing to his existence. The more we learn, the higher is the probability that we will destroy our species with these discoveries, which we think will be beneficial to us. Our instincts will always be stronger than our brilliance and will therefore cause us to use our inventions for self/individual (as opposed to collective) preservation . In essence, our hubris will do us in.
@wojtek0000 Interesting insight. I like how you averred the heart of your idea with the instinct vs. brilliance thought. Very rarely do I see someone go beyond the typical, "technology will destroy us." I think there's also something to be said about how this thirst affects most, if not, all other species on earth. I don't necessarily agree, but your idea appears noteworthy at a glance.
yup - in quantum mechanics, there is a rule which says that if you want to find out where a particle is going to be in space, you take a wave and adjust the length of the wave to match the momentum of the particle. this is an oversimplification, but the formula looks like this:
momentum of particle = small number / length of wave
seriously!
there is a good book you should read called "QED, the strange theory of light and matter" it's by Feynman.
i wasnt trying to be that precise, just to give an idea of what's going on. not much point in talking about hilbert spaces, path integral renormalization and ward-takahashi identities here, but if instead of just knocking down my attempt you care to be constructive and impart some of your own well thought ideas on the subject then by all means do so...
@matt247ryan Wow, take it easy, I said what I said with a very light heart. You're not the only one with a degree and experience in quantum mechanics. No need get offended; I knocked down nothing. I'm not judging you.
Also wanted to say that even the most abstract topics have applications in the real world. I thought of a couple examples. GPS satellites utilize Einsteins special theory of relativity and wouldn't work right without it. I also thought of an example from math. The material from a branch called linear algebra seems very abstract and disconnected from the real world but it's what the Google search engine is based on. Without what are called eigenvectors and eigenvalues Google wouldn't exist!
@baranlomiel GPS systems actually use the General theory of relativity which is, if anything, even more esoteric! The reason is that satellites are higher is a gravitational field than we are, and so time runs at a different speed. They have to use General relativity to calculate what corrections to make when taking and sending data to and from the earth.
@Stooveth Thanks for the correction! I think I mistakenly thought that time dilation was a factor, but it's not nearly so much of a factor as the effects from general relativity given that the satellites are moving such a small fraction of the speed of light. I appreciate you clearing that up for me
gold? prophecy? education? Nope, I don't think so. Feynman was one of the greatest minds of the 20th century. Ever heard of CalTech? The bomb? But I do feel sorry for him on the death note. Feynman was brilliant. When you prophesy ridden silly ones get a hard science degree (or 3 like me) then post.
Step #2. Someone stopped to listen, heard and understood the madman.
Step #3. The person who understood the madman, now teaches in MIT. Repeating over and over and over that measly little period of a few months of the madman's ideation that he/she's listened to.
Step#4. The student in the chair, sits through 1 class, gathers this "diploma" and sets off using it to assert argumentum ad authoritatum on the man under the apple tree?
Look, I understand you're proud of your degrees, no doubt you studied a lot of words, and sat and listened for a long time and remembered hard for 2 weeks before a test and so and and so forth. Frankly, I'm flattered because we need people IMPLEMENTING and not just THINKING real hard.
But where issues arise is where you lean on your own misunderstand aka allowing those diplomas to represent and authority or intellect that you do not actually have.
@D33veeoss the study of physics is not a matter of memorizing facts and spewing them out again for a test. It's a lot deeper than that. It's about learning fundamental physical principles and being able to apply them. You cannot solve difficult scientific problems through memorization, it's about the ability to problem solve. Besides, without the study of physics and mathematics you wouldn't have the computer the you're using, or your radio, cell phone, television, the list goes on...
wow, really? no, really? apparently nobody has an education or an IQ over, say 120? maybe not iono54321, but oh my god, and I do spell that lowercase for y'all, soooo ignorant!!!
Could we have the Uncertainty Principle because time is a measurement and a variable? Time will slow down the more we accelerate towards the speed of light. At very small distances and short time scales could this show up as the Measurement Problem?
One over the wavelength is its momentum? That's the frequency of the wave. Which, incidentally is the frequency, hence the energy, hence the momentum, but he phrases it in a really confusing fashion.
WOW! I had no idea all of the forces are gauge forces. I wonder why they cannot find the particle that transmits gravity. maybe because the particle accelerators arent strong enough yet?
This video is awesome! Thank you for posting. Do you have more of Dr. Hill? After many years of attempting to understand Quantum Mechanics on my own I think I finally understand what a gauge field is. His english is spectacular, his diagrams are nice and BIG and clear, he is thorough and he has a nice appearance and a nice attitude. This man is a treasure...this is the way you teach.
This is so cool. Science is so cool. I personally do not give a damn about religious freaks how don't get it. Let them believe their stupid stories. their happy with their crap anyway. They don't deserve to be in the know.
There are people who have invented and innovated copious amounts of information, for the people who ride their coattails, of whom the ankles you grab.
Next, you're going to call me a 'theist' for simply pointing out that you sound like an idiot on the subject and are a deficit to science rather than attribute. You and your type are not the type to 'withhold judgement ' . You will never invent or innovate, only pay due flattery to the minds who've brought this for you to ponder upon.
...namely the thumb down cats. I have 4 'thumb downs' so I presume you could paraphrase my point if asked? Perhaps, before you take that challenge, look up "strawman fallacy" aka "scarecrow fallacy" first. As a matter of fact, read up on Red Herring while you're there.
I genuinely suspect you can't even paraphrase me much less offer accurate adujdication regarding the context and meaning, validating factors and so forth.
If you do not have equally vested stock in: white as you do black, -1 as you do +1, in cold as you do in hot; then, 'even grey' is out of your grasp. 0 is out of your grasp. 0*celsius is out of your grasp. etc See what Im driving at? Your outlook factually demonstrates the likelyhood of a piss poor understanding of the mandate of perfect zero, true north, aka sober objectivity that is needed to embrace science It is the tool that was used to measure and uncover E=MC2
The christians and atheists are cornering a market that connot be cornered. The reason they persist is because they can force 'said' commodity into a state of SUBJECTIVITY ... ... + therefore make it "tangible" and imaginary*3. Nonetheless imaginary.
However, with this little facade and charade come along a consequence
ie. the OBJECTIVE IDEA aka our "catalyst" / "what is" / "reality" / "truth" is ASSIMILATED into the SUBJECTIVITY of their projections.
What none of them understood, was that the prophecy meant the 3 gold bars in a slot machine at the Bellagio. Luck is god's bitch yeah? Let me explain that assertion: IF there is to be a word with idea of gGod, then it's only OBJECTIVE meaning can be,"our catalyst", "reality", what is", God is the idea of 2+2=4 It was never started. ALPHA It will never stop. OMEGA God's the Rules Themselves. God is information itself? The informtion within the Laws of Physics? INFORMATION ALWAYS WAS
@D33veeoss apparently you do not understand the concept of GOD, or maybe just in a Christian way? because it is not an entity, maybe youtube how to visualize the 10th dimension, it might give you some insight, somehow I doubt it
#1. Your position is I don't understand "GOD". Funny you never connected the dots. You just say something and it's true huh? Tell me I have a million bucks. Well actually....heh.
#2. When you can so much as define "it" (it's already qualified so no need to prosecute a scarecrow; we agree "it's " qualified, obviously) no, I said when you can DEFINE it, then I'll begin to listen to what you think it is you UNDERSTAND about "it?".
The concept of "god" is fine and dandy. I understand the roots the origins how it's fallciously defined into a non starter in the because it assumes OBJECTIVE origin(god) with an undefined yet qualified SUBJECTIVE deity/omniscience("god") and it rolls them up and assumes the can meld together.
Honestly I'd be surprised, if in your mind, you have/had the 2 serarated when you wrote the word "GOD" address me in your last tell.
I be you think you can picture what "nothingness".
@humbil5 "Apparently you don't understand" "Or maybe just in a Christian way"
Lastly, the fact that you think the word "christian" in ANYWAY, shape or form, belongs in a discussion about an OBJECTIVE gGod?, leaves me informed that you still havent separated what we assert about "god" from a subjective point, what we assert about ?gGod? from an objective point, what we subjectively assert is the case; and lastly, what is, in fact, objectively the case.
Ah yes, and lastly, you using the word "Christian" as though it were an objective thing (annotated with a capital "C") is about the Tier 4 separation between you and I. That word, is useless without at least a DEFINED framework of what 're looking at when we say "god". I already explained that dictionary def. is bunk because it's mixing obj and sub where the point of the dictionary is to bolster idea transfer via efficient linguistic complimenting definition of topic matter.
Basicaly, don't call "chrisntian" and objective word unless you have "god" wrapped in a box for me.
"christian" is a subjective term based on a wholly subjective definition of "god" with little gold flakes of half-cocked objectivity(origins) mixed in.
So you've used 2 words with 100% subjective push behind them....and you've asserted them to be 24Karat. OBJECTIVE for the market.
You must have me mistaken for a tourist that wasn't amongst the first to establish the difference.
Counter my claim of "'information never started and will not stop" lest this conversation goes nowhere without agreement this point.
Actually, come to think of it, "information never started" is fallacious because you're creating a premise (ability of something to have 'began' and then applying it to an irrrelevant subject (aka information which has no beginning.)
Anyway,
It calls into question OUR understanding of SO CALLED time.
Nice Video! To understand this we are going to need an open mind could it not be that Time has symmetry and geometry? Newton believed Time was a thing in itself and connected to motion and Einstein believed there was something missing from quantum mechanics. In my video The Paradox of Schrodingers Cat an artist view it is Time that is the Hidden Variable.
Hill is so glib and non-chalante that it is clear to me that he thinks he understands what he is talking about but in fact he has only memorized the things he has been told are accpted fact and is repeating them as if it were obvious to anyone. A parrot could be trained to give the same lecture.
i can agree with you on that one. that's the price you pay unless you go to a top notch school. like mit, cambridge or princeton to name a few. if you have the ability to ask questions and stump teachers from a highschool or community college, then you have a franction of potential go to a school like that, not to mention excellent grades, test scores and a reasonably high iq. then you wouldn't have to worry about professors with their own understanding of somebody elses work.
I disagree that using the term "they" instead of "we" means he's clueless, but...
When you have a professor who believes that he is only lecturing for the sake of communicating that someone has some idea, the quality of the communication of the information diminishes greatly when compared to someone who not only fathoms, but believes, what they are saying.
Why always the haters, this is interesting stuff and then you always get this unknown, called the hater, their frequency i.e. low self esteem can be measured by their hater comment squared :), dam I'm clever, hate on that :)
iono54321, if you don't know the answer to why all the haters then you don't really fully believe in quantum physics. They're there! It's a fact. Where you have boats you have barnacles- k? Where you have discussions you have discussion barnacles- K? I hope it's a little clearer now!!
I found a book on quantim mecanics hidden underneath my son's mattress. I confiscated it and threw it in the trash because I don't want this mumbo-jumbo nonsense poissoning his young mind and turning him away from Jesus. As long as lived under MY roof and abides by MY rules, there is no place for quantim mecanics in our Christian home!
learn at least a little bit about quantum mechanics my friend... even the Pope won't scathe Stephen Hawking. Why? Because. What if he's right? You're the equivalent to a book burning Nazi.
Do you actually know anything about quantum mechanics, or did you just decide on a whim that it's evil? You're like those people that say the Harry Potter books are the work of satan, but have never actually read them.
Your son is not your property. If you are acting like that - he will leave the religion you believe in - sooner then you think. You cannot force no one, to believe what you believe and to read, what you read. I thought that your religion gives its believers free will to decide?
All is inside our interacting brain hemispheres; right=parallel processor, left=serial. This (and prob the double helix structure of DNA) creates duality thinking and perception, e.g., polarity, matter/antimatter, yin/yang, etc. Right brain is sensitive to external waves, while left interprets them to comport with our senses; hence the illusion of sequentiality (time), for example. Everything "exists" in an eternal, pulsating, spherical wave singularity. Such is likely the physics of Reality.
OMG the lecturer is very good!! I just took course of particle physics including feynmann diagrams and the lecturer was laame. With the videos lecturer, it is joy to listen instead of pain in the ass feeling of the course
i took a course in intro quantum mechanics and we studied the wave function.
apparently the wave function has no physical meaning...just a mathematical construct. the square as he says here is the probability of finding the PARTICLE at wherever.
this is what i don't get...the "WAVE" is just the representation of the prob. with math. the particle is still a particle. so what's with the wave-particle duality? the electron ITSELF is not a wave right? only mathematically it is
Well, electrons will form an interference pattern similar to waves in water, so there is something "wavelike" about them- they have a frequency, and a wavelength, which you can detect through the interference pattern.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
we don't know what the fuk, we just have some information and try to feel important thinking we understand it, cause we reproduce the results, but it may be in other dimensions further than the third and we'll never understand that
In your class they probably said something about "states" of quantum mechanical objects. A state being some quantity you can use to describe the thing (like it's energy, position, momentum, spin, etc.). Well, you can use spacial position the same way. But something in a given state of, say energy, can also be at many positions. The wavefunction holds information about the likelihood of being at different spacial positions.
All pieces of matter are inherently waves and point particles. the De Broglie equation is what explains this relationship. the reason why we use wave equations for electrons and neutrinos is because of their mass density in relation to their velocity and thus they are intrinsicly probabilistic particles-by definition. it is actually more accurate to think of the electron as smear of probility waves around an atom than a point particle. this wave also makes it easier to understand electricity.
yeah i had a similar idea recently. i was thinking about relativity and quantum mechanics and how to bring them together. i came up with an equation but i doubt it's any good. it makes use of four-by-four matrices and seems to predict a particle of equal mass to the electron but different charge. huh! go figure!
Correct me if I am wrong: He is stating that in nature, the forces that we experience all contain a similar property. That similar property, as realized by gauge transformations, is symmetry.
well not yet any way. If anything the symettry exists between gravity and electromagnetism, both non-abelian(though electromagnetism is gauge also) well we would have a gauge theory for gravity, but the mathematics is too complicated to proove even with the most advanced supercomputers as you need to have a form of wavefunction that is related to space time manifolds in order to have gravitons.
einstein never said that gravity is not a force, as a matter of act he predicted that this force can come crashing IN onitself catastrophically , but he also understood that there was some other force preventing this cataclysm from occuring , which is also hoding the universe together in a static shape, and thus he dubbed it the cosmological constant in which he added into his equations.
th curvature of space-time was understood by einstein to be the replacement of what was supposed to be a physical medium for which light and or any electromagnetic energy was supposed to be travelling through (dubbed the aether). this space-time continuum rplaced this hypothetical 'aether' concept.
I can recognize the distance between two electrons becomes long. However, I can't recognize that between electron and proton becomes short. According to QED, not use difficult math. if you can. Feynman diagram is OK.
Cashimir fields are interesting, but my question is why does matter spin in space? What is it about matter that makes it spin? What exactly is angular momentum? Is it an object's gravity acting on itself that makes it spin, or is it something else?
I can only answer what angular momentum is: Angular momentum is a measurement of an object's ability to resist outside forces (it's tendency to resist change in motion or it's Moment of Inertia). It is analogous to linear momentum only angular momentum describes bodies rotating around a point, axis, etc. and linear describes bodies moving in a line, curve, etc.
That makes sense, thanks for the answer. So I assume massive objects' tendency to spin is probably an intersection of two aspects of "least action" that so fascinated Feynman. Mass, of course, tends inward as the most compact way to contain matter in space (and a function of gravity, of course), and angular momentum would as a circular path aroung a spherical object would be the path of least resistance against inertia.
Funny. This deals with exactly the chapter in the book I was reading today 'In search of Schrödinger's cat'. This is wildly fascinating. More, more, more!
Im going to take this class soon. It sounds really abstract to me though :/
juanarruti 2 months ago
I donno why but when a see a guy with white hair I believe he knows what he is talking about.
Flextaa 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Some people want young white females to mix with non-white males.
I made a one-minute video highlighting a very tiny sample of race-mixing advertisements.
I love white people, and I am opposed to race-mixing. But I do not hate non-whites.
If you click on my name “autumntree2011” highlighted in blue below this comment, you can watch my video.
(I'm not a fan of Hitler or KKK.)
autumntree2011 4 months ago
What do they mean by kick? i dont understand how they manipulate the electron.
TamaNewb 7 months ago
that helped me so much! gave me a clear look at the fundamental basis of the Feynman diagram :) thanks for posting
paigeedwards65 8 months ago
Huh. So that explains what gauge theory is all about!
whiternoise2 9 months ago
In this world there are fools, idiots, mongoloids, stupids, gullible individuals that lack the abillity to reason, and they live life as zombies inept to judge that which is real and that which is not. All they can do is repeat the stupidities of others as they believe in it. Unfortunately God loves them all. WHICH OF THESE ARE YOU?
jqs1943 10 months ago
@jqs1943 What are you on about?
Eric13251 10 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Protons, neutrons, electrons, positrons, neutrinos, quarks, leptons, byrons, mesons, pions, kaons, gluons,ballence orbits, energy levels of the orbits, number of electrons per orbital energy levels; nonsence!
The sub atomic particles depicted here and all other sub division of the atom as represented in the modern atomic theory will lead us nowhere unless we deviate from the illusion that those things are real, and get real ourselves. Matter can be made synthetically!
jqs1943 11 months ago
@jqs1943 Byrons?
mathkills 10 months ago
Quantum mechanics in the interrelation of energies to me is a GODLY science, but as its used in conjuntion with the current atomic theory, it places science in the stone age. The atom is a very simple devise of nature that can be replicated synthetically under controlled conditions to whatever predermine value we want, once we decodify certains correlations of the energies that make up the atom. To start with, atoms have an average diameter of 3 billionths of one inch.
email: jqs43@hotmail.com
jqs1943 11 months ago
@jqs1943 Too much acid man! You need to back off the dose a little bit...
mathkills 10 months ago
cool there are bottons on the blackboard :D
nachoseg 11 months ago
some of the terminology is gibberish. "The electron is oscillating in space" That's mixing wave and particle in the statement...Help me out here folks...
LWDNKUMUS 11 months ago
If I could enlarge Dr. Christopher Hill, to a point where.. lets say the universe fit in the palm of his hand, observing, measuring and finding us would be very uncertain, but we sure are in there somewhere in orbit just like and electron. When the universe is taken on a whole we become the tiny quantum within. An atom in a pin head in a pin hidden in a haystack amoung all the worlds fields of haystacks.
VarvaraBell 11 months ago
@VarvaraBell No, thats not the point. An electron does not occupy an exact location and does not have an exact trajectory (really the same thing). Look at double slit experiments and you will see what I mean.
mathkills 10 months ago
The Federal gov't has just decided to de-fund FermiLab, the place where the protagonist professor in our clip works. COntact your representative and tell tehm to continue funding FermiLab. We need education and knowledge going forward!
idic5 1 year ago
This is beyond my education level, but it started making some sense. Well, it sparked my interest. I think I'll take a few classes at the local community collage. After I brush up on my spelling skills.
therugburnz 1 year ago
@therugburnz
might want to review your timestables as well.....
Educationey 1 year ago
@therugburnz Good for you! Send me a private message if you ever need any help on anything physics. Always more than happy to talk physics!
mathkills 10 months ago
This lecturer should have a beard.
moaimullet 1 year ago 2
Magic everywhere in this bitch.
tike0rz 1 year ago 2
Insane clown posse needs to see this video. =]
Quarks are used in particle entanglement? As in, the future of instantaneous communication? Or am I confused?
HoShiiJii 1 year ago
@HoShiiJii It's been proven that entangled particles cannot be used to transmit information because it defies special relativity. So no, this is not the future of instantaneous communication.
PlaguedMaggot 1 year ago
@PlaguedMaggot I'm not sure this is true. If we were to fire off a string of entangled particles to Alpha Centauri. The spin of these particles (up/down) isn't yet determined. By observing the spin of these particle we fix them (up/down) at our will. The entangled string now contains information, but the information is still limited by the time require to transverse the distance. It's like sending a letter except you can wait until the letter arrives to write the message.
iMaDeMoN2012 1 year ago
Insane clown posse needs to see this video. =]
HoShiiJii 1 year ago
Sorry guys Im on the wrong page I'm lookin for auto fellatio. Great vid though.....
daveavalon 1 year ago
Wow, that was fantastic! I've always loved studying sub-atomic particle physics, but I never had the chance to take a college class in it. The math would eat me alive.
Pooua 1 year ago
@Pooua lol dumbo
mnagmobile1 1 year ago
Man's brilliance and thirst for knowledge is the most dangerous thing to his existence. The more we learn, the higher is the probability that we will destroy our species with these discoveries, which we think will be beneficial to us. Our instincts will always be stronger than our brilliance and will therefore cause us to use our inventions for self/individual (as opposed to collective) preservation . In essence, our hubris will do us in.
wojtek0000 1 year ago
@wojtek0000
[citation needed]
ewgeesjames 1 year ago
@wojtek0000 Interesting insight. I like how you averred the heart of your idea with the instinct vs. brilliance thought. Very rarely do I see someone go beyond the typical, "technology will destroy us." I think there's also something to be said about how this thirst affects most, if not, all other species on earth. I don't necessarily agree, but your idea appears noteworthy at a glance.
styler3vct 1 year ago
Hot chicks love quantum mechanics. Not.
Bob8199 1 year ago
@Bob8199 the hottest chicks I've met are actually into quantum mechanics!
NScott45 1 year ago
See, you didn't all know I was smart, did ya...
wrongdooers 1 year ago
Brilliant explanation!
MrRobotoToo 1 year ago
fascinating video. thanks for posting.
EcrossH 1 year ago
I studies this at uni for 3 years and this five minute video has made more sence than my damn lecturers!
Rubethebest 1 year ago
waves have momentum?
jaymcd84 1 year ago
@jaymcd84
yup - in quantum mechanics, there is a rule which says that if you want to find out where a particle is going to be in space, you take a wave and adjust the length of the wave to match the momentum of the particle. this is an oversimplification, but the formula looks like this:
momentum of particle = small number / length of wave
seriously!
there is a good book you should read called "QED, the strange theory of light and matter" it's by Feynman.
matt247ryan 1 year ago
@matt247ryan lol @ your formula. You're talking about the eisenberg (iffy spelling) uncertainty principle.
styler3vct 1 year ago
@styler3vct
i wasnt trying to be that precise, just to give an idea of what's going on. not much point in talking about hilbert spaces, path integral renormalization and ward-takahashi identities here, but if instead of just knocking down my attempt you care to be constructive and impart some of your own well thought ideas on the subject then by all means do so...
matt247ryan 1 year ago
@matt247ryan Wow, take it easy, I said what I said with a very light heart. You're not the only one with a degree and experience in quantum mechanics. No need get offended; I knocked down nothing. I'm not judging you.
styler3vct 1 year ago
@styler3vct
my apologies, it's the medication...
matt247ryan 1 year ago
Also wanted to say that even the most abstract topics have applications in the real world. I thought of a couple examples. GPS satellites utilize Einsteins special theory of relativity and wouldn't work right without it. I also thought of an example from math. The material from a branch called linear algebra seems very abstract and disconnected from the real world but it's what the Google search engine is based on. Without what are called eigenvectors and eigenvalues Google wouldn't exist!
baranlomiel 1 year ago
@baranlomiel GPS systems actually use the General theory of relativity which is, if anything, even more esoteric! The reason is that satellites are higher is a gravitational field than we are, and so time runs at a different speed. They have to use General relativity to calculate what corrections to make when taking and sending data to and from the earth.
Stooveth 1 year ago
@Stooveth Thanks for the correction! I think I mistakenly thought that time dilation was a factor, but it's not nearly so much of a factor as the effects from general relativity given that the satellites are moving such a small fraction of the speed of light. I appreciate you clearing that up for me
baranlomiel 1 year ago
gold? prophecy? education? Nope, I don't think so. Feynman was one of the greatest minds of the 20th century. Ever heard of CalTech? The bomb? But I do feel sorry for him on the death note. Feynman was brilliant. When you prophesy ridden silly ones get a hard science degree (or 3 like me) then post.
humbil5 1 year ago
@humbil5
Step #1. Someone sat under the apple tree.
Step #2. Someone stopped to listen, heard and understood the madman.
Step #3. The person who understood the madman, now teaches in MIT. Repeating over and over and over that measly little period of a few months of the madman's ideation that he/she's listened to.
Step#4. The student in the chair, sits through 1 class, gathers this "diploma" and sets off using it to assert argumentum ad authoritatum on the man under the apple tree?
D33veeoss 1 year ago
@humbil5 Pfffffffffft. Yeah good luck.
Look, I understand you're proud of your degrees, no doubt you studied a lot of words, and sat and listened for a long time and remembered hard for 2 weeks before a test and so and and so forth. Frankly, I'm flattered because we need people IMPLEMENTING and not just THINKING real hard.
But where issues arise is where you lean on your own misunderstand aka allowing those diplomas to represent and authority or intellect that you do not actually have.
D33veeoss 1 year ago
@D33veeoss the study of physics is not a matter of memorizing facts and spewing them out again for a test. It's a lot deeper than that. It's about learning fundamental physical principles and being able to apply them. You cannot solve difficult scientific problems through memorization, it's about the ability to problem solve. Besides, without the study of physics and mathematics you wouldn't have the computer the you're using, or your radio, cell phone, television, the list goes on...
baranlomiel 1 year ago
wow, really? no, really? apparently nobody has an education or an IQ over, say 120? maybe not iono54321, but oh my god, and I do spell that lowercase for y'all, soooo ignorant!!!
humbil5 1 year ago
Could we have the Uncertainty Principle because time is a measurement and a variable? Time will slow down the more we accelerate towards the speed of light. At very small distances and short time scales could this show up as the Measurement Problem?
nickharvey7 1 year ago
I'm trying to figure out which "Lee" he is referring to that went mad?
Tsung-Dao Lee?
Benjamin Whiso Lee?
Marius Sophus Lie?
can anybody shed some light?
my guess is he meant Marius... who may have been unfairly portrayed as mad but was actually the victim of unscrupulous "friends"...
but thats just my guess hehe
leet512 2 years ago 2
Sophus Lie i think. He invented lie groups and lie algebra. Lie had a nervous breakdown in 1889.
tygerbright117 1 year ago
One over the wavelength is its momentum? That's the frequency of the wave. Which, incidentally is the frequency, hence the energy, hence the momentum, but he phrases it in a really confusing fashion.
Barkspawn 2 years ago
How doesn't Jesus or the holy spirit fit into this?
LogInForPaper 2 years ago
Same reason why Cthulhu and Thor aren't able to fit.
Cheegro 2 years ago
WOW! I had no idea all of the forces are gauge forces. I wonder why they cannot find the particle that transmits gravity. maybe because the particle accelerators arent strong enough yet?
Baddboy187 2 years ago
This video is awesome! Thank you for posting. Do you have more of Dr. Hill? After many years of attempting to understand Quantum Mechanics on my own I think I finally understand what a gauge field is. His english is spectacular, his diagrams are nice and BIG and clear, he is thorough and he has a nice appearance and a nice attitude. This man is a treasure...this is the way you teach.
agentredlum 2 years ago 3
This is so cool. Science is so cool. I personally do not give a damn about religious freaks how don't get it. Let them believe their stupid stories. their happy with their crap anyway. They don't deserve to be in the know.
rlstevenson1886 2 years ago 6
There are people who have invented and innovated copious amounts of information, for the people who ride their coattails, of whom the ankles you grab.
Next, you're going to call me a 'theist' for simply pointing out that you sound like an idiot on the subject and are a deficit to science rather than attribute. You and your type are not the type to 'withhold judgement ' . You will never invent or innovate, only pay due flattery to the minds who've brought this for you to ponder upon.
D33veeoss 2 years ago
You are such a theist man.
dangibbee 2 years ago
@ dangibee ; ) hehe
@ therest...
...namely the thumb down cats. I have 4 'thumb downs' so I presume you could paraphrase my point if asked? Perhaps, before you take that challenge, look up "strawman fallacy" aka "scarecrow fallacy" first. As a matter of fact, read up on Red Herring while you're there.
I genuinely suspect you can't even paraphrase me much less offer accurate adujdication regarding the context and meaning, validating factors and so forth.
Let me ask you all this:
D33veeoss 2 years ago
D33veeoss 2 years ago
The christians and atheists are cornering a market that connot be cornered. The reason they persist is because they can force 'said' commodity into a state of SUBJECTIVITY ... ... + therefore make it "tangible" and imaginary*3. Nonetheless imaginary.
However, with this little facade and charade come along a consequence
ie. the OBJECTIVE IDEA aka our "catalyst" / "what is" / "reality" / "truth" is ASSIMILATED into the SUBJECTIVITY of their projections.
Tragic huh?
How man killed god.
D33veeoss 2 years ago
There was a rumor of bars of gold once
All searched, unified
But then gold was spotted everywhere.
The law in the land was that if you had gold you could show noone, describing was OK
So first with family size and then "belief" type the majority was reputed to have 'the *real* gold"
So people STOPPED looking for the gold because everyone "found" it already
Is the real gold still out there?
*If 2 billion contradicting people already "found it"*
Then we presume it's not been found
D33veeoss 2 years ago
D33veeoss 2 years ago
@D33veeoss apparently you do not understand the concept of GOD, or maybe just in a Christian way? because it is not an entity, maybe youtube how to visualize the 10th dimension, it might give you some insight, somehow I doubt it
humbil5 1 year ago
@humbil5
#1. Your position is I don't understand "GOD". Funny you never connected the dots. You just say something and it's true huh? Tell me I have a million bucks. Well actually....heh.
#2. When you can so much as define "it" (it's already qualified so no need to prosecute a scarecrow; we agree "it's " qualified, obviously) no, I said when you can DEFINE it, then I'll begin to listen to what you think it is you UNDERSTAND about "it?".
D33veeoss 1 year ago
@humbil5
The concept of "god" is fine and dandy. I understand the roots the origins how it's fallciously defined into a non starter in the because it assumes OBJECTIVE origin(god) with an undefined yet qualified SUBJECTIVE deity/omniscience("god") and it rolls them up and assumes the can meld together.
Honestly I'd be surprised, if in your mind, you have/had the 2 serarated when you wrote the word "GOD" address me in your last tell.
I be you think you can picture what "nothingness".
D33veeoss 1 year ago
@humbil5 "Apparently you don't understand" "Or maybe just in a Christian way"
Lastly, the fact that you think the word "christian" in ANYWAY, shape or form, belongs in a discussion about an OBJECTIVE gGod?, leaves me informed that you still havent separated what we assert about "god" from a subjective point, what we assert about ?gGod? from an objective point, what we subjectively assert is the case; and lastly, what is, in fact, objectively the case.
D33veeoss 1 year ago
@humbil5
Ah yes, and lastly, you using the word "Christian" as though it were an objective thing (annotated with a capital "C") is about the Tier 4 separation between you and I. That word, is useless without at least a DEFINED framework of what 're looking at when we say "god". I already explained that dictionary def. is bunk because it's mixing obj and sub where the point of the dictionary is to bolster idea transfer via efficient linguistic complimenting definition of topic matter.
D33veeoss 1 year ago
@humbil5
Basicaly, don't call "chrisntian" and objective word unless you have "god" wrapped in a box for me.
"christian" is a subjective term based on a wholly subjective definition of "god" with little gold flakes of half-cocked objectivity(origins) mixed in.
So you've used 2 words with 100% subjective push behind them....and you've asserted them to be 24Karat. OBJECTIVE for the market.
You must have me mistaken for a tourist that wasn't amongst the first to establish the difference.
D33veeoss 1 year ago
Let's let that be the anchor.
Counter my claim of "'information never started and will not stop" lest this conversation goes nowhere without agreement this point.
Actually, come to think of it, "information never started" is fallacious because you're creating a premise (ability of something to have 'began' and then applying it to an irrrelevant subject (aka information which has no beginning.)
Anyway,
It calls into question OUR understanding of SO CALLED time.
D33veeoss 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice Video! To understand this we are going to need an open mind could it not be that Time has symmetry and geometry? Newton believed Time was a thing in itself and connected to motion and Einstein believed there was something missing from quantum mechanics. In my video The Paradox of Schrodingers Cat an artist view it is Time that is the Hidden Variable.
Nick
nickharvey7 2 years ago
This is.. surprisingly understandable?
Thx for posting!
Cephalochordata 2 years ago
This guy is scamming. He is repeating like a parrot.
DAILEYericCaryUSA 2 years ago
Uh-huh. He doesn't know what he's talking about, and that's why he's on the staff at Fermilab...
The reason he sounds like he's parroting is because he's given this sort of lecture so many times that he's run out of novel ways to present it.
qed100 2 years ago
I'm sorry. I didn't catch that. He's doing what?
mikeroephonics 2 years ago
to:mikeroephonics; qed100,
Hill is so glib and non-chalante that it is clear to me that he thinks he understands what he is talking about but in fact he has only memorized the things he has been told are accpted fact and is repeating them as if it were obvious to anyone. A parrot could be trained to give the same lecture.
DAILEYericCaryUSA 2 years ago
Comment removed
D33veeoss 2 years ago
i can agree with you on that one. that's the price you pay unless you go to a top notch school. like mit, cambridge or princeton to name a few. if you have the ability to ask questions and stump teachers from a highschool or community college, then you have a franction of potential go to a school like that, not to mention excellent grades, test scores and a reasonably high iq. then you wouldn't have to worry about professors with their own understanding of somebody elses work.
cannibuzz83 2 years ago
Comment removed
D33veeoss 2 years ago
Yes, and this is an obvious inherent issue.
I disagree that using the term "they" instead of "we" means he's clueless, but...
When you have a professor who believes that he is only lecturing for the sake of communicating that someone has some idea, the quality of the communication of the information diminishes greatly when compared to someone who not only fathoms, but believes, what they are saying.
WeAreCameron 2 years ago
Indeed.
I noticed I was definitly too strong upon my reread. You confirmed that.
I stand corrected. Certainly I was overstating the case and fact of the matter.
Good observation and I think what you stated was the mere point I wanted to volley with.
D33veeoss 2 years ago
Why always the haters, this is interesting stuff and then you always get this unknown, called the hater, their frequency i.e. low self esteem can be measured by their hater comment squared :), dam I'm clever, hate on that :)
iono54321 2 years ago 40
iono54321, if you don't know the answer to why all the haters then you don't really fully believe in quantum physics. They're there! It's a fact. Where you have boats you have barnacles- k? Where you have discussions you have discussion barnacles- K? I hope it's a little clearer now!!
pishdad 2 years ago
@iono54321 Did you know that my penis has to be measured in astronomical units?
suicidewafflez 1 year ago
@iono54321 Haha. I love your comment. I am stealing it.. but I will give you complete credit.!!
karmakomodia 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
quantum mechanics was already developed to an advanced stage.
what did feynman contribute? nothing in my opinion.
abhimanyu5 2 years ago
what did abhimanyu5 contribute? nothing in my opinion.
aneeley 2 years ago 17
hmm, so do you go around and paste this same comment on all videos about feynman?
Once again, that is your uninformed opinion.
slantythecamel 2 years ago 4
Comment removed
abhimanyu5 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I found a book on quantim mecanics hidden underneath my son's mattress. I confiscated it and threw it in the trash because I don't want this mumbo-jumbo nonsense poissoning his young mind and turning him away from Jesus. As long as lived under MY roof and abides by MY rules, there is no place for quantim mecanics in our Christian home!
Wanda4DecentValues 2 years ago
Dear lord I hope you are kidding
CyricMccallen 2 years ago 2
learn at least a little bit about quantum mechanics my friend... even the Pope won't scathe Stephen Hawking. Why? Because. What if he's right? You're the equivalent to a book burning Nazi.
amh5034 2 years ago 4
Hi Poe. Im jack.
jack19790 2 years ago 3
Why didn't you just explain to him what's wrong with quantum mechanics?
Or, since nothing's wrong with qm and that would be a pointless conversation, why didn't you just sell the book for cold, hard cash?
jesse0192 2 years ago
Do you actually know anything about quantum mechanics, or did you just decide on a whim that it's evil? You're like those people that say the Harry Potter books are the work of satan, but have never actually read them.
ironclownfish 2 years ago 3
Youre like one of those people that doesnt read proper books. Harry Potter sucks.
ATiredDogsMouth 2 years ago
possibly, but it is not evil. I assume you've at least read the books before forming an opinion and that's good enough for me.
ironclownfish 2 years ago
Your son is not your property. If you are acting like that - he will leave the religion you believe in - sooner then you think. You cannot force no one, to believe what you believe and to read, what you read. I thought that your religion gives its believers free will to decide?
Slothia 2 years ago 7
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i cant believe how stupid people are in order not to realise youre just a fucking LOSER trying poorly to make religious people look stupid
giovanni9107 2 years ago
you think too much you go coo coo hehehehhe
littletanbear 2 years ago
It's all about drawing arrows.
soccom8341576 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
All is inside our interacting brain hemispheres; right=parallel processor, left=serial. This (and prob the double helix structure of DNA) creates duality thinking and perception, e.g., polarity, matter/antimatter, yin/yang, etc. Right brain is sensitive to external waves, while left interprets them to comport with our senses; hence the illusion of sequentiality (time), for example. Everything "exists" in an eternal, pulsating, spherical wave singularity. Such is likely the physics of Reality.
AbookOfverse 2 years ago
OMG the lecturer is very good!! I just took course of particle physics including feynmann diagrams and the lecturer was laame. With the videos lecturer, it is joy to listen instead of pain in the ass feeling of the course
perseesrep 2 years ago
i took a course in intro quantum mechanics and we studied the wave function.
apparently the wave function has no physical meaning...just a mathematical construct. the square as he says here is the probability of finding the PARTICLE at wherever.
this is what i don't get...the "WAVE" is just the representation of the prob. with math. the particle is still a particle. so what's with the wave-particle duality? the electron ITSELF is not a wave right? only mathematically it is
could someone explain?
amarnamriju 3 years ago
Well, electrons will form an interference pattern similar to waves in water, so there is something "wavelike" about them- they have a frequency, and a wavelength, which you can detect through the interference pattern.
kashphlinktu 3 years ago 5
Apparently the "PARTICLE bit" has no physical meaning either
blobrana 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
we don't know what the fuk, we just have some information and try to feel important thinking we understand it, cause we reproduce the results, but it may be in other dimensions further than the third and we'll never understand that
forgivensign 3 years ago
In your class they probably said something about "states" of quantum mechanical objects. A state being some quantity you can use to describe the thing (like it's energy, position, momentum, spin, etc.). Well, you can use spacial position the same way. But something in a given state of, say energy, can also be at many positions. The wavefunction holds information about the likelihood of being at different spacial positions.
TQCKyle 2 years ago
All pieces of matter are inherently waves and point particles. the De Broglie equation is what explains this relationship. the reason why we use wave equations for electrons and neutrinos is because of their mass density in relation to their velocity and thus they are intrinsicly probabilistic particles-by definition. it is actually more accurate to think of the electron as smear of probility waves around an atom than a point particle. this wave also makes it easier to understand electricity.
HoloMatter 2 years ago
yeah i had a similar idea recently. i was thinking about relativity and quantum mechanics and how to bring them together. i came up with an equation but i doubt it's any good. it makes use of four-by-four matrices and seems to predict a particle of equal mass to the electron but different charge. huh! go figure!
matt247ryan 2 years ago
go with it man. You never know, you could have something.
ironclownfish 2 years ago
nšw o understand Yeah
system0slaven 3 years ago
@5:50 the good doctor said, 'all forces are gauge forces ...'
... ?
mergatroidal 3 years ago
Correct me if I am wrong: He is stating that in nature, the forces that we experience all contain a similar property. That similar property, as realized by gauge transformations, is symmetry.
harbach 3 years ago
not really
diomedes39 3 years ago
"it was discovered in the 70's"...?
mistermay1 3 years ago
The fact that all of the forces except gravity are a Gauge field.
kq6up 2 years ago
well not yet any way. If anything the symettry exists between gravity and electromagnetism, both non-abelian(though electromagnetism is gauge also) well we would have a gauge theory for gravity, but the mathematics is too complicated to proove even with the most advanced supercomputers as you need to have a form of wavefunction that is related to space time manifolds in order to have gravitons.
HoloMatter 2 years ago
I'm confused. I thought Einstein proved that gravity is not a force, but a result of the curvature of spacetime.
t0kt0k 3 years ago
Yes it is, one way of thinking of this is that gravitons are stretched like elastic bands. strange concept.
marsCubed 3 years ago
einstein never said that gravity is not a force, as a matter of act he predicted that this force can come crashing IN onitself catastrophically , but he also understood that there was some other force preventing this cataclysm from occuring , which is also hoding the universe together in a static shape, and thus he dubbed it the cosmological constant in which he added into his equations.
crawhip2 3 years ago
einstein side the cosmological constant was one of the biggest mistakes of his life
themetalgod21 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
yes , I'm pretty much BEYOND the information that you've just given me-thanks.
crawhip2 3 years ago
easy, it looked as if you thought the cosmological constant was theory.
themetalgod21 3 years ago
th curvature of space-time was understood by einstein to be the replacement of what was supposed to be a physical medium for which light and or any electromagnetic energy was supposed to be travelling through (dubbed the aether). this space-time continuum rplaced this hypothetical 'aether' concept.
crawhip2 3 years ago
Anyone, please tell me following.
I can recognize the distance between two electrons becomes long. However, I can't recognize that between electron and proton becomes short. According to QED, not use difficult math. if you can. Feynman diagram is OK.
1193tiger 3 years ago
Cashimir fields are interesting, but my question is why does matter spin in space? What is it about matter that makes it spin? What exactly is angular momentum? Is it an object's gravity acting on itself that makes it spin, or is it something else?
goodsnservices 3 years ago
I can only answer what angular momentum is: Angular momentum is a measurement of an object's ability to resist outside forces (it's tendency to resist change in motion or it's Moment of Inertia). It is analogous to linear momentum only angular momentum describes bodies rotating around a point, axis, etc. and linear describes bodies moving in a line, curve, etc.
prophetofyomomma 3 years ago
That makes sense, thanks for the answer. So I assume massive objects' tendency to spin is probably an intersection of two aspects of "least action" that so fascinated Feynman. Mass, of course, tends inward as the most compact way to contain matter in space (and a function of gravity, of course), and angular momentum would as a circular path aroung a spherical object would be the path of least resistance against inertia.
goodsnservices 3 years ago
That was interesting , thanks :)))
ZED74 3 years ago
thanks a lot for posting!
cabin5 3 years ago
Funny. This deals with exactly the chapter in the book I was reading today 'In search of Schrödinger's cat'. This is wildly fascinating. More, more, more!
Clausfarre 4 years ago 3
And even more, and more :)
xnmrphr 2 years ago