Added: 8 months ago
From: TEDtalksDirector
Views: 55,139
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (402)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • "your connections to all the things around you literally define who you are". sort of like how my own spirit does things around the house to get my attention but i just keep ignoring myself? i'm so quantum.

  • @schizotypalgrasp Has this idea been brought into the scientific community?

  • @Sappharos From the Ted site: "Named Breakthrough of the year by Science Magazine, the experiment shattered the previous record for the largest quantum object, showing decisively that there is no hard line between the quantum and everyday worlds."

  • Jus beautiful! 

  • Therefore, we have reasoned that spirituality is any knowledge that has not yet been proven to be scientific. We believe that there is a science to everything in life; we are simply not using all of our brain ability to implement or understand that science. As a result of that anything that the mind cannot comprehend is referred to as being mystical which off-course is the essence of spirituality. Peoplebreeze com

  • There are plenty people who have gained access to spiritual means, but don’t have the scientific knowledge to relate the information. All knowledge is important to study spirituality, but those who have a good grasp of the scientific world are better equipped to study spirituality. peoplebreeze com

  • Why must we think that our body should be at every place in order for us to be there? If our existence consists of a body and a soul why it is then we focus so much of our attention on the body when in fact the body is the least importance? Why can’t we travel through dimensions without the body – is this not a possibility?

  • The one thing physicists dont know is fashion.

  • The best way to predict the future is to invent it.

  • It makes being a nerd less nerdy. He's talking about quantum non-locality but doing it while looking more like a foo-fighter which makes quantum non-locality far more cool. Also, I question his playing with particles. I bet he plays with them a LOT, but I'm pretty sure that's his pet name for something :)

  • Not gonna lie, really diging that shirt. Of course, I am a big fan of the '80s.

  • I don't know that he explained it well, but still cool stuff.

  • where the hell do you even buy a shirt like that??? 0_o

  • @khepri Probably have to get in touch with Duran Duran's fashion designer

  • university members sure are dumb

  • Why if they had cameras to show us still pictures of the thing, could they not actually high speed film it while in motion?. He said THEY could see it be in two places at the same time,... well, I wanted to see it too!

  • i Love this kind of stuff

  • Incidentally, social research suggests that makes people happiest is harmonious relationships. Makes sense...

  • Comment removed

  • Talk about 2 places at once, this guy is totally cool and totally nerd at the same time. How cool is that? Or, am I just a nerd? ;-)

  • mind = fucked

  • What he is saying was said over 2500 years ago in India by sages who had become enlightened, except of course not using these QM terms like "particles". Cool stuff indeed.

  • ok..... so they actually observed the metal vibrating with their naked eye (micrscope/camera), is what hes saying? and the reason it LOOKED like it was vibrating was because the metal was IN REALITY in several different places at the same time. Giving it the illusion of a vibrating piece of metal?

  • The following statement is false.

    The previous statement is true.

    Quantum mechanics in linguistic form.

  • when there's less change of human contact there's less need for reality bandwidth so it starts to revert back to its original quantum state

  • He doesn't explain the reason why very well.

  • @LasergunExtreme There's a reason for that...it takes math. Physics is better understood mathematically and he's not really going to be able to discuss the math with a lay audience. "Particles" aren't even a proper construction in small enough spaces, they're just convenient ways to think about something more abstract.

  • @LasergunExtreme That's because TED doesn't let people talk for roughly three years, which is probably how long it would take to encompass all of the ideas that explain quantum activity "very well."

  • This is amazing, but very hard to believe.

    Too bad there isn't a simple way to prove this to something with just a basic physics education..

  • 7:51 minutes of talking on a stage, no demonstration? Thanks for wasting my time.

  • Rookie question: Why don't the other atoms in the piece of metal behave like other people in the elevator and prevent this happening?

  • @ellieban I believe it has to do with the fact that all of the subatomic vibrances of the atoms being nil, therefore they wouldn't actually interact with eachother

  • How were they able to distinguish that the piece of metal was vibrating and staying still at the same time?

  • I think he is gay.

  • @WilliamFineB because hes articulate? OR GOOD LOOKING?

  • Im so sad that I never concluded that a gay man could be an experimental physicist...

    Fuck how Ive been raised.

  • He's kinda half-way between Brian Cox and Eddie Izzard. But putting a computer component into superposition is badass.

  • @Epistemofo Yeah. This is badass science alright. I wanna jump into some dark vacuum right now and get delocalized :P

  • Wouldn't it appear that the object was delocalised (i.e. appearing in two places at once) while viewing it at absolute zero because the photons are at such a low energy state that they take longer to reach the observer? Just a thought...

  • @setherith the speed of light is c regardless of energy in a photon be it 1.21 gigajoules or a picojoule.

  • Who is Adam?

  • What a pity that such an interesting topic - explained well or not, should generate so much mental noise... But I guess that is the nature of quanta

  • Allot of this comment section is almost like the movie idiocracy.

    Come on, people.

  • aww nobody laughed at his jokes

  • As a layman who's familiar with the history & current stage of quantum mechanics, this guy is frankly "over my head." Is he talking about particles or waves? A particle being in two positions at the same time? Since he's talking about movement (vibration), isn't he really talking about waves whose exact position is always indeterminate (Heisenberg)? With all of his equipment & theoretical knowledge, this guy should have devoted more time to his presentation. Elevator analogy made no sense.

  • Excellent science and presentation! This Space Age understanding of the Universe will lead to new ideas for space travel my intuition tells me. Thanks!

  • QM is BS. Lets get back to basics and stop with all the weird theories.

  • @shagster1970 The only reason quantum mechanics was introduced was because 'the basics' could not explain the experimental observations we were getting.

  • full of shit!

  • wtf is this guy wearing?

  • sounded like bose-Einstein condensate to me :X

  • Nothing new: Everyone knows that this one Peruvian pan flute playing band is playing in all pedestrian zones in the world at the same time!

  • there is nothing that makes me more angry then stupid people pretending to be smart people. sadly this guy is one of many people that call them selfless a quantum-physic ""scientist""! which could not be selling more crap to the common growing mind to lead him more of track! now im a guy who loves since and full heartedly follow it but this lecture he just gave is about as intelligent as a 11 year old lecturing to his friends on the play ground. so many presumption that he talks about as facts

  • is this ted's stage or a catwalk?

  • Unfortunately, talks like this are just used as ammunition for the New Age fanatics and "gullibility exploiters". Witness the movie "What the Bleep do we Know?", which stretches quantum theory well past the breaking point, to make all sorts of silly pseudoscientific claims. I don't think Mr. O'Connell buys into that stuff - at least one would HOPE he doesn't - but he plays right into their hands.

  • @TroyOi We know soooooooooo little........world was flat practically days ago......let people push one way or another........what gets done gets done and often some pretty kooky ideas become what we call law.....

  • @nyclear Pretty kooky ideas can become law, yes, I'm all for that. What I'm not for is using real science in one domain to prop up kooky theories in an entirely different domain, when in fact any real scientist can tell you that the two bear absolutely no relation to each other. But doing just that has gotten to be quite an art form with New Age marketeers, most of whom have mastered at least one law propounded by that great scientist PT Barnum: "There's a sucker born every minute".

  • This is interesting.

    I wish he would explain how they are taking measuresments of the object.

    His explaination reminds me of when you watch a wave at the right frequency it looks like the wave isn't moving.

  • The title of the conference is "visible quantum object" but it seems it wasn't "visible" to the camera :\ nor did they have pre-recorded footage of this(perhaps using a electron-microscope or what have you) :\ quite retarded :(

  • one more tedtalk that blows me away. i always wondered about how quantum mechanics could be only for small objects but this guy demonstrated that it isn't.

  • Thank you a great work, people even those who doesn't really curious about qm should easily relate to this talk imo, smart content, smart presentation, imo.

  • If The Universe has a sense of "self", then it is everything, nothing, everywhere and nowhere at once. This is my logical side speaking.

  • @SincereCreature this is your BS side speaking

  • @Tolstoievsky Fuck you. lol

  • Comment removed

  • Im disappointed in this speech, not because I doubt his intellect or credibility, but I saw little passion in his speech and expression, where was the fire in his eyes??? I didnt feel the love and inspiration I almost always do with TED talks speeches... I love this topic and am fascinated by quantum physics,, but am very disappointed that such a spectacular subject was presented in such a bland/un-passionate manor.

  • @arendir I think he is anxious, which took away from his expressive delivery.

  • @arendir Only women are passionate. Men are too smart for that sort of nonsense.

  • @HammeredRacoon As a man who pursues my goals and dreams with passion, Im sorry that you think so,,, i completely disagree. I hope you can take a step back and see how sexist a comment like that is, because that is far from the intent of my original comment. Both men and woman adhere to many different aptitudes, and if it wasnt for the passion of BOTH your mom and your dad im a million percent sure wouldn't exist.

  • @arendir Have you spoken in front of an audience of intellectuals on a complicated topic with a short time limit much? He was obvioiusly somewhat nervous. I think we could cut him a little slack. I found him to be very animated and anything but bland. Nine minutes was nowhere near enough time for him to explain his topic.

  • @elizzievb absolutely,its my job as an educator! =) but thank you I appreciate your perspective =)

  • He talks like a physicist but he's dressed like a fashion designer from the Starship Enterprise...which seems appropriate when you consider that he's talking about a primitive mechanism for a classic Star Trek teleporter.

  • >to dance weired

    >dance weired

    >weired

  • I hear a lot of talking, but nothing worth listening to. In a sense, he's talking AND he's not talking....or, perhaps better said, making sense and NOT REALLY making any sense at all. P.S. WORST - TEDTALK- EVER!

  • @openuniverse2003 Or then again, maybe you are just too uneducated to understand.

  • @sirachman No, sweetie, I'm pretty sure this guy is a doofus, and that this particular TedTalk was boring as all hell and uninformative and nonsensical. But thanks for voicing your moronic opinion.  Good luck!

  • @openuniverse2003 I bet you think you are cute. However I have high doubts on whether your level of education is anywhere near this mans level. Maybe you should stick to less 'complex' topics if this seemed nonsensical to you.

  • We are a product of our environment. This profound realization will help empathy become a new force for human understanding. And strangely, comes from quantum mechanics.

  • @Icemario87 its amazing we have to learn empathy and apply it to our lives.

  • @dbfro1

    We don't have to learn empathy. It's hard-wired into our brains via structures like the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex and ventromedial prefrontal cortex, and damage to these areas has been linked to numerous anti-social disorders such as sociopathy. The brain has amazing plasticity though, and environmental factors can modify existing structures resulting in either strengthened or atrophied sense of empathy.

    We are a product of Nature AND Nurture.

  • @Sinuev1 so, as u look around the world u live in... what would make one believe that anything other than further atrophy to our collective empathetic sense is going to occur? glass half empty, i know, but it is what it is.

  • @dbfro1

    Well there was the civil rights movement, the women's movement, children's rights movement, the LBGT movement, the institution of Medicare/Welfare/Social Security, unprecedented amounts of foreign aid and charity during natural disasters, the formation of the Peace Corps, etc... etc... all within the last century alone.

    I think you're seeing the ebb and flow of these things only from the perspective of where we're at now. Try it from the perspective of society in the 19th century.

  • @Sinuev1 i guess ur right in that our tendency to go from apathetic to empathetic and vice versa is very cyclical. if things deteriorate enough, ppl do what is necessary for their fellow man. but, its in our very nature to be selfish absolutely. it is also what proves to be the most beneficial character trait in today's environment. we connive, deceive, steal, lie, cheat, etc to get what we want for ourselves. those things youve mentioned are all great, but even with those you have corruption,

  • @Sinuev1 scandal, bribery, etc etc. empathy, to me, is a wonderful ideal that doesnt apply to our society anymore.

  • I guess I am in two different places at once but its such a small distance that its meaningless and looks like I am in one location....

  • I'm pretty sure that shirt is in multiple states simultaneously

  • does this mean i can be....DR MANHATTAN?!?!?!

  • Why the FFFF was this talk so short?

  • If somebody could answer this question for me, I would be thankful.

    Does the mass inside the container for the metal bit double when i "vibrates"?

  • Love Aaron, love his fantastic style, love everything about this talk. It is interesting and mind expanding, and goes really well with the main article of this months Scientific American, and I've been unemployed and just mulling this over while working on a base tan, and it's been fantastic. Recent experiments (relatively recent; in the last few years) have been completely mind blowing, in terms of increasing the scale of quantum behaviors. I am excited and astounded by it all. Kudos.

  • In the Q&A on the blog, Aaron mentioned, "One other interesting thing you could do is take a virus or bacteria, some very small living or questionably living thing, and put it on top of the resonator, it’s a big object. And then just re-do the experiment and put it in a superposition, bring it back together and then wake the bacteria. That would be interesting philosophically: whether quantum delocalization somehow affects the abilities for life processes to occur."

  • Here's a long Q&A with Aaron that explains a lot more: blog.ted(dot)com/2011/06/02/st­ruggling-with-quantum-logic-qa­-with-aaron-oconnell/

  • "shoudn't everything just follow quantum mechanics?"

  • I know, truly amazing

  • Why does this guy get such a short talk on something incredible and interesting, when people like Damon Horowitz get about 15 to 16 minutes??

  • Nice shirt!

  • I do not want to be in two places at the same time if it means to be frozen to near zero kelvin and in a vacum

  • I'd love it if the person who edits TedTalks would read this comment and stop making the opening and closing sounds so disproportionately loud compared to the speaker's voice.

  • @Jotto999 - Wish I could "like" this comment about a hundred times more.

  • @Jotto999 is there no way to mail them?

  • Just read the guy's thesis. His work really isn't as ludicrous as he makes it out to be.

  • did he make a bose-einstein condensate?

  • What would the measurement of the metal being in two places at once look like? I thought that observing a quantum state forced it to collapse. So wouldn't you only be able to measure a vibrating or a not vibrating state? How was the measurement preformed to show both?

  • @Ichijojichan after a large number of measurements it would fall into a distribution of half the times it's vibrating and half the time it's not vibrating, so it's equally likely to be in either state which is effectively the same as being in both states at the same time

  • @22ceavou22 This has always been a conceptual sticking point for me. How do we know the metal (or any quantum state object) is not just switching rapidly and randomly between two states? Switching would yield the same set of measurements, wouldn't it?

  • @Ichijojichan That certainly is a confusing thing to think about, but they do have certain apparatuses that allow them to perform these experiments and produce the results that are explained to us. I assume you would have to take a class or do some heavy reading to understand it all. But we know that these sorts of phenomena exist, otherwise there would be no such thing as quantum mechanics. Superpositions, entanglement, etc, all exist. Its just the interpretation that drives us all crazy.

  • so you told us how it can be in two places at once, i want to see or understand that now

  • 05:23

    I am guessing that some audio engineers who were hearing this went like "wtf lol".

    I know I did.

  • I love when stuff blows my mind. Feels good man.

  • i don't think i would feel so good if my atoms delocalized lol

  • Al Gore is a fraud. i hate the TED intro.

  • I dont know enough about how the measurements were taken but could the vibration be error in the devices used or the transmission of those devices data?

  • Nonsense - the Measure does not define the Object, it only perceives it. In fact, the Objects define the measure. Your difficulty in measuring an Object is not the Object's problem.

  • man this is awesome i love ted

  • nope, doesn't make sense.

  • Comment removed

  • it works the other way around too... you don't need to get rid of the people in an elevator to dance weired. if you dance weired, they disapear the next stop on their own....

  • @liquidminds Not really. I have to disagree with you, my friend, because:

    1. It depends on who's dancing.

    2. It depends on what is the dance like.

    3. It depends on what kind of people are present in the elevator.

    I hope you're just joking... lol

  • Being a quantum object actually explains a lot about my life.

  • I didn't quite understand the end: "Your connections to all the things around you literally define who you are", what is that supposed to mean? Anybody care to elaborate on that?

  • @elchafa He did not explain anything so there is nothing to understand.

    atoms are all much the same, especially when they are cold. the bigger and warmer the system the more interactions there are, the more likely a Quantum decoherence, therefore the clearer the identity of the atom.

  • I'll remember to use quantum mechanics the next time I'm constipated. Should loosen me right up.

  • What he is saying is he look like a male and behave like a female, so he's in both state of realities at the same time.

  • seems he didn't use logic or intuition before choosing his shirt

  • So Schroedinger's cat can be both alive and dead after all?

  • particles passing thru walls and being in 2 places at the same time is the same thing...

  • i don't know if he will read it but the jokes will work if hi will do write poses

  • As far as I can see, he just restated Schrodinger's cat.

  • @SpookyFan no as far as i see he just proved schrodinger's cat

  • @frisbie8 I see. I thought it was already accepted as true. Thanks for the correction.

  • @SpookyFan string theory is widely accepted as true, but it's never been proven

  • @frisbie8 no he did not.

    a cat might be statistically in multiple states, but not physically. a cat is much too big and if you cool it to ~0°K it is dead.

    Once you couple it to a qbit it will loose it's quantum nature.

  • @SpookyFan

    Schroedinger's cat is a thought experiment used as criticism AGAINST the idea of two states at once until measured or observed. To show the absurdity of it. It is not a thought experiment meant to support it.

  • @trick0171 I see. Thank you for the correction.

  • He really did not explain (at all) how they were able to "MEASURE" the chunk of metal both vibrating and not vibrating at the same time. I call major BS. Can anyone point me to the peer reviewed journal on this?

  • @trick0171 go back and rewind. there are moments when the delocalized atom's are in phase with the stationary one. that creates an observable momentary stillness that does not occur within normal vibrations

  • "observable momentary stillness that does not occur within normal vibrations"

    Sorry, but this sentence does not make sense. Either the observation is one of observing/measuring a vibration, or it is one of observing/measuring stillness.

    The question remains on how the observance of a single atom in phase of different localities at the same time was obtained.

    Thanks.

    (END 2)

  • @trick0171 protip: master syntax before attempting to tackle quantum mechanics

  • @cnmaster01

    protip#1: Concern yourself with addressing the actual points rather than "syntax" within youtube comments. Understand that poor syntax does not mean incomprehension of QM.

    protip#2: If you do suggest a problem with syntax, actually point out the syntax that was problematic for you. There is nothing wrong with my syntax, but I can clarify if you cannot parse basic English.

    protip#3: Learn capitalization and punctuation before complaining about syntax.

    Thanks.

  • @trick0171 1&2: "Single atom in phase of different localities" would be the culprit statement. So muddled was your syntax, that I found myself unable to decipher your argument, but I will attempt to make a guess. The delocalization took place on an unprecedented large scale that was wholly visible, as you saw, housed within specially designed equipment to measure the delocalization. To assume the object was delocalized, while it's constituent particles were unaffected would be absurd.

  • @cnmaster01

    No...I said "different localities AT THE SAME TIME "

    You confuse locality with temporality. I never denied different localities, that is what "vibration" is all about. I am denying identical temporal realities that "delocalization" does not explain.

  • @trick0171 Cont; Unless of course you also reject atomic theory.

    3: You make a valid point, but despite not adhering to grammatical conventions, my point remained clear, Meanwhile, your syntax left me befuddled as to what you were trying to say.

  • Sidenote:

    BTW - my very point is that "phase" and a singular temporal state are incompatible. Either A) they are in phase, in which case they are not happening at the same time...or B) they happen at the same time, in which case they are not in "phase". I only used the word phase because that is what you used to explain how two states are measured at different locations at the same time. It is your syntax that is problematic, not mine.

  • His logical side needs to take some logic courses.

  • absolutely mindbendingly fascinating.

  • way. way. WAY too short. Must know more!

  • ahhh that was awesome:)

  • he looks gay but he is smart

  • @raymondkhoury who the fuck cares what he looks like? whats wrong with looking gay?

  • @Scoob505 yeah who cares? I'd bang him xD

  • @Scoob505 it looks ridiculous is what. And lame.

  • @gariadara No you are just small minded. Nothing wrong with being different.

  • @Scoob505 nothing wrong.... just not up to fashion. there is looking elegantly and proudly flamboyant, and there is flat out WTF?! Like Helena Bonham Carter's fashion sense. But I like her, so I'll give her a pass.

  • Good talk

  • Before the non science majors go bat-shit insane:

    Broglie Wave-particle duality states that p = h/λ. meaning as the mass of an object increases it's wave NATURE decreases. Hence why we DONT go through walls. (But we could if you tried to run through it enough times...don't do this at home kids)

  • @NemesisAnother Nice comment. I'm a newbie armchair enthusiast with no physics education. I haven't heard of the Broglie Wave-Particle duality but it sounds interesting. Do they know why or how the wave nature decreases or do they just know it happens? And is it really true in theory that if you try enough times you'll go through a wall? Thanks.

  • @1simonmatthews hypothetically yes, but practically so many things have to be in line for that to happen, that chances are the alignment would end before you got through the wall. not sure if you'd get crushed or stuck, but it would be neither fun nor pretty

  • @cnmaster01 So if the universe was infinite, somewhere there would be a pianist with his fingers stuck inside his piano keys?

  • @1simonmatthews I like to think so, yes

  • @cnmaster01 Haha, if you'd seen the crazy keyboard player in the final of Britain's Got Talent last Saturday night you'd know how true that was :)

  • @NemesisAnother That statement does make sense. It would account for why we see such strange behavior from photons, neutrinos, etc.

  • @NemesisAnother Nitpicking: almost:). For an object to demonstrate a wave-like behavior, it has to interact with structures (openings) of the scale of the object's wavelength. That's why electrons behave like waves when scattered by atomic lattices with angstrom separation. We are MASSIVE, so our wavelength is TINY. Because of our size/wavelength mismatch, we can't interact with objects that are of the size of our wavelength.