Quantum mechanics - The measurement problem

[MisterBouncyBounce]

i hate this kinds of videos, they talk and talk and talk and say nothing at all. it's like idiots trying to convince morons they are smart.

[goodmmann123]

Omar only exist when you smell him. He stinks. Just like u

[hobstweedle123]

only thing i dont understand is when he says "atoms are all over the place until one is observed" how would anyone know this because the only time we see atoms is when we observe them? someone please explain



[str8footage]

bro bro dude dnt knw wat hes talkn abt they all got there phd wat do u have

[KayBeeEee1983]

How do we know an atom is "spread out all over the place" if no one is observing it?

[DavinWilliamKraft]

Works for me half of the time.

[TehOwnerer999]

Why is it so hard to find a legitimate science video on quantum mechanics anymore that isn't ridiculously over dramatized?

[sexyeur]

We get what we measure for. It does speak to faith, does it not? Science and Biblical Wisdom are converging, but at a time when too many man are completely godless and worshiping demons in the names of their false gods or the gods they refuse to name...idolatries abound. Love in Jesus Christ is the real reality. We have to leave everything behind...we take nothing with us. As we were born with nothing, so shall it be again. God is holy! You are warned!

[Aron51869]

@sexyeur Ah ! here they go again. True God and My God and yours is saddam hussein...ha ha. How you connect a dogmatic roman Imperial Cult with scientific self doubts about a solid world ? At best Observer displacement and other quantum paradoxes are at subatomic levels and doesnt mean you can bring rabbits out of aht or feed sudan with jesus fish.ha ha. Its subtler, psychological and if it validates magic of Jeusus so does it the pagan magic and voodoo- poor guys demonised by eucharist cannibals

[sexyeur]

@Aron51869 You would be right not to dismiss demonic activity. but you're too stupid to know you shouldn't laugh at it. Should you really discount evil only bc you can't put it in a beaker? Perhaps you won't mind a known brutal rapist spending a few nights with your wife then, eh? Can you imagine how stupid you'd pretend to be? An arrogant ass like you could be dismissive of love itself as most understand it, merely by trivializing it as some 'household' chemical reaction. Sick!

[oxyparadox]

I love the irrationality of quantam physics. Amazing

[cunnidvd]

the creator of this video is either a liar or a moron. this video is a hideous distortion of the truth. it seriously misrepresents the measurement problem.

[cunnidvd]

this is a huge and reckless distortion of the truth.  shame on you.

[b29349]

There is Only RELATIONSHIPS. Sounds like fellowshipping with God and others.

[mdrndrum]

if we create our own reality, how come we can look at a distant galaxy, look away, and look back again, and that same galaxy is there? is it because once we create our reality, it remains constant? also, if a conscious observer is what creates matter itself, what conscious being existed to create the energy of the big bang and the possible infinite time and energy before the big bang? i'm not suggesting a "creator," but could someone please help me make a better understanding of this concept?

[jimmayl1]

@mdrndrum There is time dependance in quantum states, depending on what you are measuring. The galaxy looks the same when we look back again because quantum fluctuations do not present themselves on a large scale. It is only at the very small scale that you can see them, otherwise the effects tend to get smoothed out with large number of particles. Same idea that you see a cloud in the sky, not many small collections of water vapour.

[coldarc]

there only thing that is real is energy. its the energy we measure. actually its the means to measure that changes the energy we try to measure. when you measure somthing the tools either eyes or machines all have to scatter energy so conciousness can understand the pattern. energy is the glue that holds everything together. particles are field effects of energy as waves in a conserved form. we never measure energy, we only measure the change in energy.

[psycogeek]

Observation and observations equiptment (presentally) is not of the level of the particals being observed.

the observation equiptment and human requires particals or waves to observe a partical or a wave.

I could see where you would BEGIN to believe that without the observation the universe changes, but this is only a desperate mental state of not being able to observe, without effecting the outcome , at a level that is not within our scientific grasp yet.

So we go with Belief, not science.

[psycogeek]

Another example of how we end up with belief systems (religious or not) When we cant totally figure out something, MAKE UP some potheaded alcoholic belief that something is not set in stone,Just because we dont completly understand it yet.

if it is easy for your mental state to aquire the belief system, then go ahead, and take the easy way out. If you really want to know the truth, then keep seeking it.

[mashka888]

Well, we haven`t really understood QM. The mathematics of QM is an approximation to reality in fact anybody can interpret QM their own way. Just saying QM is ugly theory we havent really fully understood. It is too early to state such an statement as this video.

[Daedae333]

@mashka888 lmao you have no clue what you're talking about... quantum mechanics is not a theory SMH. stop being ignorant!!!

[yanthinator]

@Daedae333 Quantum Mechanics is a theory. Just like gravity and many other things we take as established fact; like that you have no idea about anything - ever.

[moderatemotive]

To the critics, the measurement problem/observer effect are not theory. Countless experiments have shown this to be true. It is a demonstrable fact, not just theory. As for it not effecting the macroscopic scale, that is flawed logic. Every atom exists in a probabilistic state. Atoms are the building blocks of all matter. Every "piece" of you is probabilistic. The macroscopic and microscopic are inseparable. It's just easier to see in atomic and smaller scales.

[Smith11s]

Unreal. Remeber when religion knew the earth was flat and that the earth was the center of the universe and the end of the world was when Paul was alive... You guys should research what your pushing... Religion and pushing it on people is why we have wars... wake up... you;re the cause for the problems on the earth,,,, U mad brah ... you want to stone me?! No? I lie... look up the evil bible on yt then look for yourself.... the bible is more man than god!

[mjshikeli]

@Smith11s We have wars not because of religion but because someone always says: I disobey to "you shall not kill, You shall not covet" GOD is not the problem but human stupidity is.

[arsenal997]

jaja im joking, anton zeilinger, jim al kahili, DAVID BOHM (in capital letters) are really good and serious physicist, but john hagelin, lynne mctagart, and over all fred alan wolf are just jokers

[arsenal997]

that is just nonsense and nontruth

[martiangrundy]

Fuckin cobblers.

Man I really hate it when they intentionally misrepresent things in order to turn it into semi religious claptrap. Hinting that were the most important things in the universe again. Arrogant ego-centrist shite.

I'm surprised we didn't get Deepak fuckin Chopra spoutin' some bullshit at the end there.

[jacobromu]

@martiangrundy YES! I hate when people either don't understand that this shit doesn't really show up on the macro scale. Quantum mysticism is bullshit.

[deskset24]

@martiangrundy AMEN! (oops - sorry - didn't mean to end with a prayer! :)

Seriously - I agree 100%!

[martiangrundy]

@deskset24

I'll let it slide. THIS TIME. In a good cause. ;-)

[ojideagu]

@martiangrundy All "conscious" life is very important. Humans and every other "conscious" life form in the universe is vital to the Universe's current observed state.

We are the consciousness of the universe. The universe in THIS state is self aware because of conscious life like Humans. There are other states were a universe is not self aware.

[ScorchinBeats]

I move we create the Chuck Norris interpretation. The universe is just an interpretation of spacetime created by his observation

[NathBonn]

If this was true why can't i stop bills from coming through my fucking door? or win the god dam lottery, i wish for this shit every god damn day.

THIS IS ALL BULLSHIT!

[aba2185]

so is this like that same stuff as if a book is dropped in a hallway with nobody in it does it make a sound?

[fransescobattle]

Conscience may just be the mysterious Dark Matter.

[BroBroDude]

This video is outrageously misleading for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that it cites David Bohm speaking ABOUT relativity theory/the Copenhagen interpretation/quantum mechanics.

David Bohm famously resolved these very "problems" with the quantum mechanical problem of superpositioning and observation-dependence. Google Bohmian Mechanics.

This video is absolute, intentionally dishonest shit. It misrepresents the state of the science COMPLETELY.

[SHIBBYiPANDA]

@BroBroDude is this video just talking about the uncertainty principal?

[runnybabbit12]

@BroBroDude

you are very smart for someone who is named BroBroDude

but i am glad that you too acknowledge the inaccuracy of these statements

[MegaBEANER1000]

@BroBroDude Uhm its how Tv brodcasting sts get money, and certain aspects of what they are saying are partially true, but to the uneducated mind such as yours you probably uncousinly made false assumptions and rewired your brain into thinking thats what the clip was indeed disputing these false assumptions its called confirmation bias, some ideas may be miss leading but your blunt comment falsely reflects on what they are trying to say.

[BroBroDude]

@MegaBEANER1000 @MegaBEANER1000 "but to the uneducated mind such as yours you probably uncousinly made false"

Well said.

[murkenemsoftly]

@BroBroDude

I think calling it "dishonest shit" is going a bit overboard, are you saying that all these respected scientists are liars?? There is no real solution to the measurement paradox, this is simply a theory, a postulation. Nothing is being misrepresented, its called science, when you cant explain something you come up with ideas based on the data available.

[BroBroDude]

@murkenemsoftly That is precisely the kind of BS this video opens the door to.

"An atom only appears in a particular place if you measure it," MRESHPECTED SHIENTISHT says. Ignoring that the word "if" should be the word "when", this statement is factual. The next sentence is: "In other words, an atom is spread out all over the place until a conscious observer decides to look at it"

UTTER B.S. It is not presented as theory, but pretended to be a restatement of a previous fact. Dishonest. Shit.

[SlipAllCityToy]

@BroBroDude

Can you say things for an idiot like me who doesn't understand shit.

The problem with this video is that it presents theories as facts?

You are all over the place about these people being liars and such but you say very little about what is actually wrong,

so "if you measure it" should be "when you measure it"?

What difference does it make about it changing if/when you measure it?

And is there a theory that debunks this stuff?

Thanks.

[BroBroDude]

@SlipAllCityToy Did you look up Bohmian Mechanics yet?

"Superpositioning"/"delocalisa­tion" is 100% theoretical. Changing "if" to "when" in the statement changes the entire idea they're dealing with: from the measurement/observation CAUSING the atom to appear ("if") to the appearance merely coinciding with it ("when").

The reason they say it the first way is that it's mystical: "observation has causal power", oooh! That's also why it's rubbish. See also the instrumentalist interpretation of QM.

[julzberg]

@BroBroDude Never, I repeat NEVER TAKE ADVICE FROM SOMEONE WITH THE WORDS BRO OR DUDE IN THEIR DISPLAY NAME.

[juggalobone94]

@BroBroDude dude stfu bitch your not smarter than a quantum mechanic so eat pubes and hug a nut bitch

[Zee96969696]

why doesn't michio kaku talk about this? talk about conciousness and influence of thinking? maybe because not all scientists agree that there is a conciousness, not agree that thinking matters as moch as other scientists think? a?

[bendystix]

Who else became more confused after watching this video?

[bryansteeksma]

It could be that instead of "creating" our reality, arbitrarily, there is an objective reality in place, of which, for some unknown reason, the structure does not exist until we observe it.

ie// like a computer game saves memory by deconstructing objects that are out of the players line of sight, the universe might ultimately operate under similar restrictions. eg: everything behind you is formless, until you observe it. However, it does not mean that there is no objective reality.

[mrnicomedes]

A shame this is still getting peddled around. The number of working physicists who consider *consiousness* required for observation/measurement is asymptotically approaching zero, and for good reason. We have a better understanding of quantum mechanics than they did when the Copenhagen interpretation was developed.

Not a complete understanding, mind you. There are still unresolved philosophical problems. But you don't need grad students in your lab to get an atom to be localized.

[WOWJBEOWULF]

It is naive to say the observer is a conscious human being; the observer is the particles of the Universe: You do not need a human to detect, we are all observed by the Universe creating our time & space frame. We just say observer to say the quantum wave has been detected, altered, collapsed, new waveform spawned. The Universe has no outside, thus neither size nor location; time & space is how energy is process and can be altered, we are all energy transfers and relative conditions.

[erichathy222]

lol someone always posts chuck norris on these videos

[masondrool]

I hate these spins that people take away from the problem of quantum measurement. Consciousness has nothing to do with it. It is the fact that the act of measuring a system influences the system itself. You cannot measure the position of a particle without bumping some other particle against it, which alters the position or velocity of the particle. None of this 'We are actively changing our realities' nonsense is required to have a (somewhat) sound explanation for it. >_<

[erichathy222]

@masondrool wrong

[masondrool]

@erichathy222

Could you please explain? My main gripe was the video's implication that 'consciousness' has a huge role in this phenomenon.

Quote from the video: "[We can] literally influence the physical reality of our world"

I've seen videos explaining the uncertainty principle exactly how I describe it in my post and I think it gives a more scientifically sound interpretation of the phenomenon than this 'consciousness controls reality' thought. If there's a hole in my post, please tell me.

[erichathy222]

@masondrool yes, you are wrong my friend chuck norris is the only one who has ever came close to figuring this stuff out! he can kick all of these scientists in the head 50 times before they even start their research.

[lordnipple]

basically, it means that atoms get 'busted' when we look at them; they stop fucking around and settle down...like a classroom full of naughty kids once the teacher walks back in.

[blackbirddsinging]

@lordnipple If I could thumbs this up 100 times, I would.

[Gambetto666]

0:54/3:57 How does he know the atom is spread out all over the place if he is not observing it?

[medoh1]

@Gambetto666

good point. I could say my body looks like arnolds, if noone is looking at me. Only when iam observed, I am fat :-)

Well that is easing me. Lets have some cake :-)

[bazle64]

chuck norris? this is proof that all humankind is not equal. and that some people have not evolved at all

[medoh1]

Take that ! : Chuck Norris is not observing the effect, the effect is observing Chuck Norris. If Chuck allows him to do so....

[medoh1]

Chuck Norris is not observing an atom. Therefore the atom is to unimportant.

All atoms of the world are observing Chuck Norris, but they can not understand, because weather they can see where he is or how fast he is. Never both at the same time.

[umrahsahab]

@medoh1

Oh God that one is awesome can I plz use it?

[falconfira]

Chuck Norris see an electron as a wave

[The4LA2Baker0]

Great video.

If you like this video you must see (watch?v=VCx1ISQ-lv0).

Its truly amazing, inspiring, and is directly pertaining to this.

[jacksawild]

The argument is whether or not we can predict based on probabilities or whether we can predict based on known and absolute quantities. If the latter is true, as Einstein believed, then there must be gaps in our theories as they stand. If the former is true then we can only hope to refine our estimates of probabilities, which is what we've been doing for about 90 years and it's working great. Controlling the universe by our thoughts is heavy-duty arse gravy regurgitated by morons.

[adam0900909]

This is just scientists rephrasing the does a falling tree make a sound if nothings there to hear it. Sorry chaps but you were beat to it by at least 300 years. This is neither smart nor rational and, in my opinion, a waste of time.

[giddygiddy85]

bullshit... my dad told me this is fake.. and he knows fuckin everything

[AhmedSafaa1]

is the problem solved?

[smihai81]

It's all bullshit, the big bang and the quantum physics are only religion disguised as science, they all tend to sugest the ideea "I am god, I create the universe, the mind creates the univers, the univers obeys the mind". Well, if the univers obeys the mind, then what is there left to be discovered, haw can we learn something new if we command the universe, haw can we be surprized by something unknown ?

[larbo1616]

One question: according to quantumphysics, do we really die when our body dies?

[eargh]

@larbo1616 'death' in the sense we are led to believe, doesn't exist, your concious reality dies when the mind stops interpreting, however your interconnectedness to everything around your remains, regardless of whether or not you are able to interpret the universe into a 3D reality

[umrahsahab]

@larbo1616

it doesnt say anything about death. Quantum mechanics is just used to explain and calculate some phenomenon

[larbo1616]

Can someone please enlighten me. I'm still a layman in quantumphysics, and I'd like to know whether quantumphysics says that there is a spiritual side to the universe. If not, I'd be dissapointed, but I do want to know the truth. Someone, please tell me.

[funkyflea89]

The suppression of this knowledge is self evident within our society.

[micap20078]

this is not proof god exists but every athiest needs to see this because this is what spiritual teachers have been saying for thousands of years

[meloearth]

Words are limited. "Atheist" can't fully define many people who shun religion. I'm one who finds solace and the answers to my spiritual needs in Nature. I'm just not going to allow someone else to translate this experience for me, pre-chewed into a nonsensical mess.

[micap20078]

that is the definition of religion- a nonsensical mess

[meloearth]

Right.

[hubbzee]

Ive been think about this a lot lately. How do we see things? Are all objects sending "pictures" towards us that our eyes pick up and rely to our brain? Or are our eyes sending out and receiving "pictures"? I guess this whole thing about the observed comes from the observer is begining to make sense to me. I have also experimented with mushrooms before and I have to say the whole concept of psychedelics is extremely interesting and definitely ties into this theory.

[EricSV2010]

Chuck Norris can Wacth 48 hours in 40 min.

[erichathy222]

@EricSV2010 lolololol i love it when people say stuff about chuck norris on these videos i might have met the guy that started that at least he said he did i like to say things about chuck norris as well thats hilarious!!

heres mine "chuck norris can be in 3 places at once and dodge all the particles of the double slit experiment"

[umrahsahab]

@EricSV2010

Chuck Norris knows where an electron will really appear.

[cancerian108]

@EricSV2010 chuck norris can watch 60mins twice in an hour

[cancerian108]

@EricSV2010 chuck norris can watch 60mins twice in an hour

[ScottieWallace]

@EricSV2010 Chuck Norris got his ass beat by Bruce lee while watching 48 hrs in 40 seconds ;-)

[elchololo]

so wait only we are really or what? i dont get it

[nickharvey7]

These are well made videos!! But I feel a greater understanding of quantum physics and the dynamic of light and time will explain the Measurement Problem without bringing consciousness into the equation.

[theoutlaw31]

hmm so energy and particles are spread out and when we observe we snap the particles into actuality and that object remains unchanged moment to moment because our sensory perception recognizes the patern constantly?

[Gagbrehij007]

How is it possible to prove this? The scientists cannot know if the atom only shapes itself when a conscious being observes it, so they cannot know if it just took shape or not. They can only know that it is there.

[Fensterplaetzchen]

Yes, it's not possible to prove it. In fact it's not possible to prove any physical theory, meaning that you'll never reach a point where one can say "There can't be a theory, which describes nature better then this one."

Anyway Quantum Mechanics describes and has predicted lots of things in the last 85-110 years and it's kinematics works with waves, which implies these unintuitive things.

So yeah, it's not "a fact" in a mathematical 1+1=2 kinda way, but it's party of a good theory.

[TheKturner05]

this video is taking a ton of peoples words out of context.

[dimebucker2]

kinda.... depends on how much you know about the subject.

[whitecourage]

the colapse of the wave to a point is called decoherance.

[aristicolombia]

wtf did the guru say??

[theoutlaw31]

lol word he said "we dont pull things from outside to inside, we pull things from inside t outside"

[joeyortiz82]

That explains miracles.

[aarondkeogh]

so basically atoms / everything is only their when a concious being decides to observe / measure it. If this is the true way interpreting it then WTF does this mean about everything?

[joeyortiz82]

It means that God also makes things up as we go along.

[CharonZero]

A member of the God-squad strikes again.

Even IF you take what is being said in this video as literal (which, as someone has pointed out is wrong - because alot of these peoples words are being used out of context) - then, it would mean that God would have nothing to do with it, as WE would be the creators as observers. Not God, us.

[tommart123]

It means that everything is everywhere doing everything in every possible state at all times, until something conscious looks at it, then, as a result of the observer, it takes a state, which is only subject to how the observer perceives it.

We only perceive the universe and all it beholds in a certain way, but in reality, there is no mass, no nothing, just an arrangement of energy acting in varying ways relative its self. We are part of this energy, thus we are all one.

[aarondkeogh]

thanks man, that's a pretty straight up way of explaining it.

[99trow]

Everything is a psychological recreation (subjective) of what is believed to be (also subjective) after many sensory translations (which obviously no true pure perception exists, but a translation of a translation, of a translation...) we then have our mental interpretation (subjective) of what is believed to be. Then we describe what is believed to be (subjective once again) in relation to ourselves (the ultimate subject) not as they are in themselves (objective).

[aarondkeogh]

@99trow "Who am I", "What am I"?

[99trow]

I like this quote from the Matrix for it is becoming our reality and may not be far fetched at all

Morpheus- "What is "real"? How do you define "real"? If you're talking about what you can feel, what you can smell, what you can taste and see, then "real" is simply electrical signals interpreted by your brain........"

The only thing we can know or even be aware of is ourselves. Everything mutually exclusive from ourselves can never be truly known objectively, only subjectively.

[99trow]

WE ONLY CONCEIVE REALITY WE CAN'T PERCEIVE REALITY

Everything has to be interpreted mentally before experienced. The only thing we experience, in fact, is our own mind. The only thing we can know, and the only thing we are truly aware of is ourselves. Anything mutually exclusive from ourselves can never be truly known.

[larbo1616]

@99trow

Could this mean that we aren't made up of atoms, but of some completely different substance?

[99trow]

Yes you could be right however I would rather consider that there really is no solid reality, only an immaterial world.

Einstein stated that atoms are 99.99999% empty space.

Quantum mechanics says you can breakdown an atom into a proton, electron, and maybe a nuetron, break them down and you get bosons, quarks, tachyons, etc.

Max Planck said, "All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force........."

According to quantum mechanics this force is light. We are "soldified" light.

[larbo1616]

Could you please look for the video: great minds: Richard Dawkins "we are going to die". I'm having a debate with some new age-darwinists and I cannot convince them that there is a possibility of a god or more mystics. Correct me if I'm wrong at points. And because you know much more than I do, you can maybe tell them what I want to tell them.

[tommart123]

@99trow

Perception is the process of attaining awareness or understanding of sensory information.

I think that is what we do, although to what degree of accuracy I will never know.

[99trow]

Agreed

[johnnygumbo]

@tommart123 there is no spoon

[blackbirddsinging]

@tommart123

So would this conscious observer have to be human? Because in the example

Schrodinger's Cat, observed by Erwin Schrodinger, the cat in the box could be thought of as both alive and dead until a conscious observer opened the box. The cat would then take the state of being either alive or dead. But couldn't the cat take the role of conscious observer himself?

[tommart123]

@blackbirddsinging The same rules apply for the cat. But we don't know how the cat see's the world we only know how we view the cat. The point is that to us the cat is simply an object that may or may not be alive.

On the other hand the cat has no idea what is outside the box, so everything beyond the box can exist in any possible state. That is assuming that the cat isn't simply a fragment of my imagination ;)

[mdrndrum]

@tommart123 how come we all perceive things the same way? in other words, i can look at a stapler and bring someone else into the room and ask them what that thing is on the table, they will also say it is stapler. i guess what i'm trying to ask is if everything comes from inside ourselves, how come our perception of solid reality does not differ drastically from other people? sorry if my question is confusing :P

[tommart123]

@mdrndrum If everybody is brought up and told "that is a stapler", then no matter how it is perceived by the observer, it is still a stapler. A better example is if I say something is red, you (unless colour blind) will agree with me. But how do I know that what seems red to me, doesn't appear green to you, it's just that green as you see it has always been called red, so you call it red. sorry if my explanation is confusing ;)

[mdrndrum]

@tommart123 no no, your explanation of color differences is quite clear. however, wouldn't the spatial dimensions of all objects be completely different from person to person? how would scientists have any consistensies when measuring objects. also, what about other conscious beings around us? wouldn't our perception of, say, our own mother be completely different from someone else's?

[tommart123]

@mdrndrum Perception of spacial dimension could differ completely from person to person and measurement would remain consistent, because the measuring device is relative to the thing being measured.

[silentfart101]

u pigshiting

pissbang

u knicker blower

u arse shilling

u transparent ball kicker

u steamshit roller

[Wowiceblitz]

Is that really nessesary?