Added: 4 years ago
From: popparodz54
Views: 27,096
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (47)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • add on for young's double slit experiment like you've never seen before

    watch?v=Z_6XqRHrp7U

  • And this is a side comment, is it just me or is this a good looking white boy, just wondering. lol

    

  • It has something to do with the way our mind registers the information. Our brain perceives it in the way that makes it look like it is trying to choose. My theory.

  • None of them seem to mention that the distance between the slits is of the order of the wave length of light. Examined as a wave the photon is doing nothing surprising.

  • The truly weird part is if you use something to detect wich hole it goes through it stops making that wave patern

  • Was this done in a church?

  • @LBpDC That def looks like an altar behind him. Good for that religious university for actually accepting science

  • @RandomResponse Yeah um, the distance angels travel in a day, and are made of light is in the Holy Quran, and the speed of light is that distance in a day down to all decimal points. Looks like God knew the speed of light before people did, oh but science and religion don't go together I forgot. Also the atomic weight of about 15 elements are in the Holy Quran, not the light ones, the HUGE ONES, wonder how they knew that over a thousand years ago. Dark matter, black holes, all sorts of stuff.

  • this whole lecture could be sooo much shorter ;P

  • Yeah, but you need thinking time to take it all in. Note how everyone goes quiet around 6:20 - 6:30 or so while they are all thinking WTF??!! The steady pace of this lecture makes it good for actually grasping what the guy is trying to get across.

  • @chrisofnottingham I agree

  • It appears the fabric of Logic 101 does not follow "Logical" rules.

  • Waves do not require a medium to propagate and this has been proven by the fact that photons can exist within a vacuum. It is the simple property of matter and is one of the fundamental elements of understanding quantum mechanics.

  • Logic is man's prayer for rain in its relevance (or lack of it) to natural phenomena. Incidentally, the world does not revolve around us humans. Wave functions do not collapse at the point of measurement. Our measurements collapse at the point of measurements. Think of it as the frog in the well.

  • Electron microscopes, transistors, USB Flash drives, bar code readers, these are all applications of our understand of the wave-partical duality of matter described by quantum mechanics. The theory is consistant but requires us to discard our classical notions of matter, space and time and open up to the possibility that things are very different from what we though they were.

  • If atoms are all waves, then what is the medium in which these waves propagate?

    Sound waves propagate through a medium of matter (particles, atoms). A vaccuum will not transmit sound waves.

    Also - Logic 101 says that one thing cannot be in two places at once. I'm not sure if these people have taken Logic 101 or not, but they don't seem to be aware of this.

    I am not trying to deny the observations they made. Simply put - if your theory is logically inconsistant, it's time to get a new theory.

  • atoms are not exactly like the waves you see on the ocean. Their behaviour is described by a wave function. They interact with each other like waves interfere but they do not require any medium to propogate through. They are not contemporary waves but are best thought of behaving in a similar fashion to that of waves.

    Logic 101 is the first thing that needs to be put aside if one is going to be able to understand Quantum mechanics. Simply put, common sense has no place in the quantum world.

  • Dude, its time you learn about electromagnetic waves. Unlike sound, these waves do not need a medium to propagate. A vaccuum will transmit light and radio signals.

  • Dark matter?

  • The medium is actually space-time.

    Waves can go through two places at once because they don't have a single location.

  • Why are we talked to as if we were 12?!

  • its necessary for the information to be presented to everyone easily.

  • ^sorry for the 11 years old^

  • lol

  • This is bullshit, If the particle was emanated from from the center then it could never go through a hole and land straight below it, but it could go dioganally and hit the edge of the slit and bounce. The reason why there is a bigger pileup in the center is because it can end up there by bouncing from the outer edges of both slits, so probability is double than the next pile which is a straight line from the source, the outermost pile is a bounce of the inner edge of the slit.

  • put two of these slit boards after each other, you won't see a distribution pattern like this because the particle will be trapped between the boards.

  • why are there gaps then? marbles shot through the slits would not create an interference pattern. atoms can be at two different places at the same time, the atom interferes with itself, also how do you explain the fact that atoms change their behavior simply when something observes them ?

  • Yeah, I've been thinking that, too.

  • ill tell u why it goes in the center inbetween the two slits. the duality of wave-particle is wrong. there is no such thing as a point particle, it is only a wave in disguised as a particle. if anything, itsn ot surprising and rather logical since atoms are actually WAVES. (not particles). too bad science will not follow for at least 50 years on ignorance.

  • how come i can never find one single video on youtube of the ACTUAL experiment!!!!!

  • Check out ..Walter Lewin , a physics professor who I have seen do the experiment on youtube.

  • *videosift*com/video/Quantum-M­echanics-The-Uncertainty-Princ­iple-Light-Particles

  • This isn't dull and boring, but he's not an engaging speaker. You'd be better off watching the "what the bleep do we know" series by Fred Alan Wolfe.

  • Except that What the bleep is pseudoscience.

  • might be...it's a hypothesis at it's best...and mind you...a guy in it has made MORE contribution to physics than Stephen Hawkings has...

    what are your thoughts on that?

  • Which guy? One guy was taken out of context greatly and he was given clarity in the sequel. Most of the quirky world of quantum was scientific. The conclusions, in fact any conclusion involving the macro-scale from quantum quirkyness is shakey don't you think?

  • Also, the idea of creating your own reality has no evidence not even in quantum sense. We don't expect our way to a different electron cloud arrangement. We never expect our way to different chemical reaction than the one we got the first time. If we use the commonly used Schrödinger cat for example, no one has even shown a half dead half alive cat in real life - meaning if you opened a box and see a dead cat I will never open the box later and see a still living cat.

  • This probably a dumb question, but what causes the particles to move toward a slit when they are directed at the centre?

  • There are no dumb questions in QM. For electrons, it is the "electron gun" at the back of your old-fashioned TV/computer monitor. I don't know how it works, find an engineer. For photons, it is a flashlight, or the laser equivalent, together with the fact that a photon can't stand still. For buckyballs, viruses, etc., IDK, a catapult should do fine.

  • bad accuracy?

  • the particles position and speed can never be accurately known. if you imagine one electron being shot at the slits, but rather than imagining it as a particle, imagine it as a cloud, or 3-dimensional probability distribution. That cloud is theoretically infinintely large, just exponentially thinner after a very small radius. If you imagine a cloud of probability wider than the distance between the slits, some of it will come through both of them.

  • how about doing it in a vacuum box? O.o

  • i thought that small balls were photons, isn't a particle a physical thing?

  • later segments address the question of what it means to be a "physical thing." the balls of the illustrations may represent any quantum unit from photons to electrons to molecules and more.

  • @popparodz54 not molecules lol

  • strange how someone might find this dull or boring... I'm familiar with this concept, and I found the lecturer to be quite engaging and fascinating. And he certainly knows how to put things in laymans terms, yet retain the overrall intrigue.

  • It's amazing how some folks can take such an incredible phenomenon and make it less exciting that watching paint peel.

  • hahahahahahah

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more