Science Bytes - Episode 15

[arachnophile01]

"My demon is named Maxwell" I wish i could give you five stars for that alone, because that is exactly what i thought when you said "Demon"

[ScienceBytes]

@arachnophile01 Thanks! :)

[chrisjohn2279]

lost

[chrisjohn2279]

lost

[Nocturnuz]

Something else XD

[zengrz]

to make the experiment more intuitive i think he should have replaced the decaying particle with something else, like a monkey with a gun or something....LOL?

[tintiringa]

I don't think you explained anything to anyone who wasn't already familiar with the content. The whole video seemed rushed.

Anyway, 1*

[ScienceBytes]

I have no problem accepting legit criticism, but I just don't understand your comment. My videos are three to five minutes and serve to introduce new concepts to people. If you are already "familiar with the content," why bother watching and then criticize when you didn't learn anything? This doesn't make sense.

[Fnordicus]

@ScienceBytes

I, too, found this one lacking in depth and didactical consistency. Sorry! (I am quite familiar with the subject)

[ErisTheFairest5]

@tintiringa, Are you being dumb on purpose?

[newcoyote]

@tintiringa OK Everybody! A moment please. Can you stop what you're doing. Let's all acknowledge how smart tintiringa is. He really want's you to know that. Cookie for tintiringa! OK thank you. Carry on.

Goof.

[v94j]

your ö sounds like a u... atleast in swedish :P

[artemisfair]

Awesome. Also, i want a tiny cat that can fit in my hand.

[WaiteDavid137]

Vacuum

Do we message the answers or something? I thought I was the first to get the last one right.

[ScienceBytes]

Send me a YT message or e-mail.

[WaiteDavid137]

@ScienceBytes

ok thanks. I should have read the description.

[gullf1sk]

Read the BIG TEXT on the description field.

Thanks for ruining it for so many people, by the way.

[FurieMan]

You seem to miss an important point. And that is that shrödinger created this thought experiment to show that this way of thinking is wrong.

From shrödingers cat on wikipedia

"Schrödinger did not wish to promote the idea of dead-and-alive cats as a serious possibility; quite the reverse,"

[ScienceBytes]

My videos are short, I don't have time to go into every single detail.

[RaymondCorrigan]

Yeah, according to Charles Sheife`s `Decoding the Universe` he was on a trip with his mistress when he came up with the cat to express to the world what he saw as absurd.

Certainly wasn`t a supporter and it definitely wan`t his theory as the video says.

I`m glad the video got the so often missed point that the example is not literal. Quantum effects only apply to particles/systems not interfering with other particles. (Philosophers always miss this.)

Still, better than most videos on QT.

[ScienceBytes]

The problem with the Copenhagen interpretation was his theory. Perhaps I didn't state that directly enough but that was my intent.

[RaymondCorrigan]

@ScienceBytes

ahhhhhhh...

Fair enough : )

[sciguy11]

How do you pronounce shrodinger?

[ScienceBytes]

I took seven years of German and cannot allow an umlaut to go unpronounced.

[artemisfair]

I've seen it pronounced shr-oh-din-GUR and sh-rah-din-JUR. I pronounce it the first way.

[CommonSensation]

I always heard it was a poisoned fish, but okay.

[UncomfortableSilence]

haha your demon is maxwell. Nice scientific joke. None of my friends would get that one.

[winterstellar]

TomConger and The Videomaker. That was an interesting question. I want to know that too. So now there are two people asking, mr videomaker. Can you explain something about that?: )

[TomConger]

As far as I've always understood it, the reason the electrons act weirdly when being observed is because photons are required to bounce off the electrons in order to see them, and those collisions cause the electron's course to be altered. Is that more-or-less correct?

[excandersham]

The electrons course wouldn't change our perception would however as these photons would be constantly colliding.

I dont know what im talking about btw but seems more logical

[reasonintheright]

You are mostly correct. The mere act of observing applies energy to the electron stream so they don't interact with each other the same way. In the case of a double slit experiment, since the particles are also waves, when unobserved they express a diffraction pattern just like light would. When observed the energy applied to observe causes them to behave more like particles and just hit the screen around the same spot. If this doesn't help I am sorry, I can see how it would be confusing.

[BoredwithBS]

That's so true