Electrons and observer, Heisenberg Copenhagen experiment

[alnetworks2010]

In my opinion, this video -as well as the double slit experiment, and Schrödinger's and Heissenberg's postulates and equations- are only simple consequences of the first hermetic principle: The All is Mental. Universe is mentally created, -as a sort of hologram-.

C'mon "solid people"; don't be that scared about that, and look at yourselfs: You are FULL of VACUUM. Matter is just particles vibrating.

[tberrardy]

I agree it's not supernatural, but it is just as mysterious!

[ButtplugClock]

why is everyone trying to act so smart when commenting on a video for 6th graders?

[maplebayou1]

@ButtplugClock I'm simply trying to point out that attempts to "demystify" QM by resorting to classical explanations will not succeed. That does not mean that "quantum mysticism" is justified. It does mean that we have to abandon LOCAL MECHANISMS, which is quite revolutionary.

[DattebayoAMVs]

@ButtplugClock because its part of human nature to question anything my friend

[maplebayou1]

The distinction between virtual reality and physical reality is, I believe, merely semantic. Information is the one thing every physical particle, every physical force, even what we call space and time, have in common. With a sufficiently sophisticated computer, properly programmed, it is difficult to see how a virtual particle would look different to a virtual human than a "real" one looks to us.

[maplebayou1]

QM is indeed revolutionary, I think most people have no clue how revolutionary it is. They insist on continuing with classical reasoning which simply won't work. Of course this does not mean that quantum mysticism is justified. What physics is pointing us to, in my opinion, is Wheeler's idea that the fundamental constituent of what we call physical reality is information. We already know that information can be converted into energy using a Szilard's engine. Nothing mystical about that.

[Perrickan]

Yes there are things we do not understand. Quantum Mechanics is not one of them. This cartoon is a lie.

[kevinstuartfr0st]

video of young's double slit,with a shallow slit,and another slit approx 35 times thicker (deeper),then the lens removed from laser and shone through the slit,

watch?v=Zns659ClKtY

[catherton13]

Yea, this is a good video for kids... but showing the "observer" as an eyeball adds a fake amount of mystery to it. We need to remember what an observation is. No matter the method, whether it be detection of a photon interacting with the object in question, sensing a change in electric field, phonons from a collision... whatever, ALL of them perturb the object. There is no "Passive" observer. This seems irrelevant in the macro world, but it is HUGELY important in the quantum world.

[tierjj]

hey, i found your video very interesting and informative.

[berniedo]

In my first comment I should have said the weight of observation itself, not the weight of the observer.

[berniedo]

Perhaps because of the extremely tiny mass of these minute particles, the "weight" of an observer, conscious or mechanical, can affect the outcome of the experiment, thereby collapsing the wave function.

[93D15B7]

i think you all need to open your mind a little more. im not defending this video but there is more to the universe than what is perceived. the fact that the observer changed the pattern is most likely due to his eyes. when noone was observing the electron became a wave. it is my theory that when someone was watching the electron Still became a wave but it was absorbed by the eye instead of passing through the slits.

[jackofwack]

What do you mean observed by the eye? Its not actually an eye observing the electrons... the eye in the video is so retards can understand.

[RBSM100]

How smart you all, people, are... The cartoon is great, especially for children and kids at school: it does not scare them from the science and it explains perfectly the main ideas. Why are you so snobbish, faultfinders? Make the cartoon yourselves then and help us, school teachers to reason with kids about the uncertainty principle. Thank you to the creators of this cartoon.

[btron1234]

haha,is this a joke? i think the term "observer" has confused alot of people, the electron isn't AWARE of anything, and the light shining on it isn't disturbing it. if you would like to learn more about it, i just suggest googling it

[mpd19666]

This video is poorly done and i think its confusing a lot of people. The act of observing doesn't cause the collapse of the wave function. it is the LIGHT that the observing instrament radiates that interacts with the particle causeing the collapse. At least this is what ive come to believe. Please correct me if im wrong.

[FirstTruthSeeker]

Not always is just the light that changes things, sometimes seems to be only the observer, i think that in a not so far future, we will discover a lot of things about these happening that now seems to be so strange.

[mpd19666]

Really? what is the quantum definition of an observer? How sure are you of this becuase im getting conflicting stories and i am trying to get the story straight. If you are correct then, this makes quantum theory even stranger than i though. its amazing.

[trtnec]

That's why Neils Bohr said something like if quantum mechanics doesn't profoundly shock you, you don't understand it

[fiesta181]

To properly annalise this sketch, you should see the all movie: "what the bleep do we know". Its about Quantum Mechanics and Spirituality. Well you can see where this leads...

Personally I believe that it's all bullshit and of course I understand your conflicting stories. They use complex concepts as the ones in QM, that most people don´t acknowledge, but the real message that they share as actually nothing to do with Physics.

[fiesta181]

I didn't even read the other comments. This is not novelty for most people...

Which is good...

Lol

[NathBonn]

@fiesta181

And whats the difference, science is stabbing into the dark just as much as anyone in this area, anyones guess is as good as, well anyones when you think about it.

There is something very very funky going on and people have no answers, just theory after theory, or use the work "dark" a lot whenever there is something there that should be ect ect.

I like logic, i like things that make sense and stuff like this is just horrid.

[GateMessenger]

You are wrong. The same experiment was done with a lens cap on while the camera ran & it knew it was not being watched then resumed as a wave. Even though the electronics in the camera were still working the electron knew if it was being observed or if it was not. Showing the electrons or that which controlled them to be knowledgeable through visual stimuli. Other experiments like Roger Vogelsang's STI device showed it to be omniscient. The EPR experiment showed it to be eternal & omnipresent.

[777lucifero]

@mpd19666 i think the major problem in understanding quantum physics (maybe it's just not really understandable by human brain, like infinity) is that it puts into question your very state of being. We feel we decide, take actions, have a free will... yet we do know that particles react in a specific way to things around them. and we are made of particles. it would sound strange to me that we have free will.. because that would mean that we are ''gods'', defying all rules of physics and

[777lucifero]

continued... and making particles do what we want. On the other side, my ego would find strange that I am merely a spectator in my body. What i mean to say is, it is quite clear that our brain is limited and there's many things we cant comprehend.. that seem just fantasy or impossible, but yet even denying them would be illogical.

[tberrardy]

@mpd19666 There is a lot of confusion on that issue. According to Leonard Suskind in his book 'The Black Hole Wars: ...', it is the photons used to illuminate the particle that cause the collapse of the wave function. I suspect that some religious people may deliberately or through wishful thinking try to exploit this phenomena to support their supernatural beliefs.

[tberrardy]

@mpd19666 There is a lot of confusion on that issue. According to Leonard Suskind in his book 'The Black Hole Wars: ...', it is the photons used to illuminate the particle that cause the collapse of the wave function. I suspect that some religious people may deliberately or through wishful thinking try to exploit this phenomena to support their supernatural beliefs.

[maplebayou1]

@tberrardy The problem is that the photon, or whatever we use to "illuminate" the particle does not have to interact with it directly. This interaction doesn't even have to occur during the particle's lifetime. QM may not be supernatural, but it is quite revolutionary.

[DattebayoAMVs]

@mpd19666 tbh, it didn't confuse me, its clearly simple to understand

[underfaker43657]

Yeah maybe, but i think the uncertainty principle is right, maybe because an observer emits or reflects certain electromagnetic radiation that could have changed the way the electron behaved compared to when it was not being observed and thus when that certain radiation was not present. Its really true that "nothing is real" because for us to witness it, light has to bounce off it, photon or wave, it alters the way that thing behaves and we do not see what how the object really behaves.

[BogdaNO88]

wow that is so weird how can an electron be aware of an observer and change it's state,hmm the world is much more weirder and complicated than i taught it is.

[Perrickan]

This cartoon is taken from the most biased and un-scientific film ever made: 'What The Bleep?' That film takes a few quotes from scientists of varying schools and then it's interpreted by journalists and spiritual guides and churned out as SCIENCE.

This is a classic example. It's close to reality, but it implies that some kind of spiritual conscious being changes the outcome, which simply isn't true.

[FirstTruthSeeker]

Until 100 years ago, 99% of scientists were laughing at the Einstein theory, now it's a Dogma. Science leads at a form of ateism, but at the other part at a sort of science-religion, because everything scientific it's untouchable like dogma. I think that these could be theory, not far from science, end we have so many things to discover in this new science era.

[Perrickan]

But we have solid theories as to why particles behave as though "they know they're being watched!" It's because in order to observe a particle, you have to shine light on it, thus changing the experiment, thus changing the outcome!

They don't "know they're being watched," they just behave differently because when they're being watched their surroundings are different and henceforth they behave differently. Much like YOU behave differently if you're immersed in water.

[nullrand]

@FirstTruthSeeker Science is not dogma; dogma by definition is undisputable. Everything science puts forward is completely disputable and can be proven wrong if given evidence.

Heisenberg in his writings on the Copenhaguen interpretation stated clearly the difference between an observer and a measuring device. The guy in this video is plainly disregarding this difference so he can give space to this movies mubo-jumbo.

[Brainbuster1000]

@FirstTruthSeeker Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolution.

[NIMHFS]

'What The Bleep?' is a joke, but I think most people know that...hopefully.

[lean84]

he is absolutly right!!! that film is crap. It say things that are really really close to the truth, but uses them to sugest things that are purely un-scientific like he said.

For example, everything said about the heisenberg principle is true, BUT it implies that observing means watching, which is not true, observing means "using some measuring instrument to obtain some magnitude". Then, when you MEASURE some property you make the wavefunction colapse

[NathBonn]

@Perrickan How the bleep do you know that it's not true? scientist are coming to the fact that there are some things we simply cannot understand, infinity and such does not make any logical sense yet it exists, there is something more to the whole of this, the uncertainty principle is no exception, it goes against everything we use to measure our surroundings,

It's horrible! something is fundamentally wrong with how we see and understand our world through physics, mathematics and logic, horrid.

[mikesymbian7]

Since youtube will not permit me to type in a website

Let me spell out a very usefull site. There is NO triple W in the

address, type it out as it is but replace the "," with a period and add

a com at the end lol

symbian7,tripod,

[HerculesSpock]

The frequency one associates with a quantum is the frequency of the classical wave which corresponds to the case of a large number of identically prepared quanta as in a beam. Photons in a beam can have the same energy, and by the equation, E = hf, a classical wave of frequency f would consist of a large number of these photons, whereas electrons will have an energy spread due to the Pauli exclusion principle.

[HerculesSpock]

A very tiny wavelength implies a high frequency and a high energy. The matter wave is a limted idea that only makes sense as a classical approximation in the limit of a large number of identically prepared quanta, like in a beam of photons.

[HerculesSpock]

It's a pleasure to chat. The old school was limited in thought since they were used to classical ideas in the first place. It has taken many decades to arrive at the more modern understanding of quantum theory which is clearly elucidated in quantum information theory. It's like trying to believe, in special relativity, that there really is a preferred reference frame or absolute time even though special relativity clearly indicates that there is not.

[HerculesSpock]

"What are they in reality" is a meaningless question. How do you define this experimentally? The concepts of particle and wave carry over from classical mechanics, but we know that classical mechanics is only an approximation to quantum mechanics, and quantum mechanics is more fundamental. You can't ask what a quantum is 'really' anymore than you can define a position and momentum of a quantum simultaneously in a single measurement.

[HerculesSpock]

Also, the idea of "collapsing" the wave function is not correct. This is a misconception that carries over from trying to assign a classical meaning to the wave function which is simply a statistical distribution function characterising the ensemble of similarly prepared systems (electrons, photons etc.). The book by "Quantum Mechanics: A Modern Development" by Ballentine is excellent in discussing this as is the book "Entangled Systems" by Audretsch.

[HerculesSpock]

The answer is that a quantum is neither a particle nor a wave. Particle and wave are merely classical conceptions.

[HerculesSpock]

The answer is that quanta are neither particle nor wave. Particle and wave are merely classical conceptions.

[goodsnservices]

This conception of the double slit experiment is wrong. It isn't seeing that changes the outcome, it's measuring it that screws it up. because you have to shoot something at the electron and bounce it back to get a second reading of where it is. That naturally changes where it is. The true nature of the universe is that at the very small level, you can't directly measure it.

[Spectr0l]

simply superb and mesmerizing at the same time