Regardless of any partisan spin, here's what Erwin Schrödinger had to say about our relationship to an objective reality.
"What we observe as material bodies and forces are nothing but shapes and variations in the structure of space."
The implication here seems obvious to me.. material bodies and forces (inclusive of the phenomena observed during an experiment or any form of lived experience) are a departure from something more fundamental than we can ever know. That's enough, for me.
what i don't get about this demonstration is why SHOULDN'T the atoms split in 2 beams the second time around as they did the first time. same set up, same magnets, same projection of a single beam. so why shouldn't the atoms split in to 2 beams again? the same way flowing water splits in to 2 streams if offered 2 directions in which to go, & then each of these streams of water splitting yet again in t0 2 streams. wouldn't it be more weird if the atoms DIDN'T split in to 2 beams the second time?
This is an invitation to everyone or anyone to see an artist theory on the physics of light and time!
This theory is based on two postulates
1. Is that the quantum wave particle function Ψ represents the forward passage of time ∆E ∆t ≥ h/2π itself
2. Is that Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle ∆×∆p×≥h/4π that is formed by the w- function is the same uncertainty we have with any future event that we can interact with turning the possible into the actual!
Part way through this video strange curlicues and butterflies appear for no apparent reason. This, to me, proves that up equals down and the square root of 17 is Tuesday.
con'td: Now how about have everyone in the line rotate right or left. Wouldn't matter, the people at the door can still take each one as they pass through. Now imagine having two more doors for the new lines of people, repeat the process. It also wouldnt matter if they are horizontal or on a very steep hill. You can't expect to have only one magnet to have magnetic pull and the other to have ZERO effect do you? :)
Either way, nice vid. good discussion on the topic. :D
I find this odd. Is this stuff really hard to understand? The reason why the stream of particles split like that is because of the two magnets themselves. They're always going to split. It's like this, try this experiment: take a long line of people each one representing a particle. Have two other people at a door to represent magnets. Have the line walk through. Then, each person grabs somebody from the line Each "magnet" will get their own "pull"...
Unification of Isolated science and GOD particle exist within Human body which is CERN Laboratory of Nature.for details see YOU TUBE VK SONAKIA and read article on all voices.com -certainty-tool-is-higgin-boson-or-god-particle-which-exist-in-human-body.We have already developed next generation easy to learn unified science.world scientist are welcome to see and test FIT-Future Imaging Tool technology
I appreciate an explanation of QM using scientifically verifiable evidence. Although I like to entertain the idea of combining consciousness with QM, I must realize it is simply pseudoscience at this point in time. I wonder if you've seen the video "Athenes Theory of Everything." It shows an equation of consciousness with wave function. Do you consider that BS as well? Its an interesting video nonetheless.
you only are creating paths any measure or experiment of human mind do already know that there are paths or diferents types of results so the atoms just go to all viable solutions or possible paths all at the same time creating a interference pattern or odds. Only if you look you manifest the wave in to a visible particle. But is not a wave is more like a assosiation between the atoms cuz all atoms are the same in some point they reflect one another under the eye of a observant is particle.
You mention there can be no hidden variable interpretation of quantum mechanics. Well, I don't understand. I understand that local hidden variables are impossible. Do you think that you can prove/argue that a non-local hidden variable interpretation is impossible?
could you please explain to me or more so yourself how something based on theory can be misrepresented, really think long and hard about that my friend, it may start to free your mind if you do so. also keep in mind the only truth you will ever know is who you are, peace bro
did you ever stop to think calling it bullshit newage hippie dippie whatever, is due to the fact that you might fear the idea. try acid or dmt and you may start to realise that it comes down to feeling and emotion not some science experiment. take from this what you will if you can. please remember words and language are simply symbology which is a form of brainwashing. love and peace to all
@rondowgs Yes, I have stopped to consider that it might be due to fear. And it turned out that its not due to fear. I am OK with most of the concepts often involved, but quantum mechanics is misrepresented and used as a tool to convince people of something, and it has nothing to do with QM. Also, acid trip or no, QM does have to do with science experiments, to deny that suggests that you are the one who is controlled by fear. fear of science. which is probably the result of a misunderstanding.
@denito9474 In the double slit experiment an electron is a wave when not observed on approach to the double slit but a particle when it is observed. The presence/absence of the observer affects the outcome. Similiarly, when awake the conciousness experiences being the body which is particle-like, when asleep the experience is more fluid & wave-like, past & future merge, locality is transcended, & you dream. This is where free-will comes in, the ability to change past or future & distant events.
@rondowgs feel or use ur emotions make a million dollars show up in my mailbox. But u cant , u cant even determine when ur next bowel movement will come. And ur the one brainwashed due to u believing ur new age crap which u didnt come up with but were taught. All u know is what someone else told u. You are as dumb as the day u were born, u are no more than a puppet doing the things and believing the things others tell you. then u mention ur so spiritually dead u have to take drugs to learn.
@valkour22 take what you just and re-apply it to yourself, good luck my friend. also try and question why your so angry bacause i gurantee it has nothing to do with me. peace
@rondowgs first off; you need drugs in order to realize that emotions have a large role on just about everything? thats just pathetic.
second off; you do need a scientific experiment or nothing will get tested or proven. everything you are thinking is a mere guess that you are simply adding onto from your own imagination and consciousness to explain what you believe.
the experiments are necessary to determine reality from opinion.
@rondowgs I Myself As A Experimental Entheogen User, I Believe That There Is Strong Scientific Research Which Suggests There Is A Human Spirit, But I Can Quite Clearly Say That This New Age Bullcrap Fad Is One Of The Most Stupid Scams I Have Ever Heard Of, And Is Completely Irrelevant, I Have Had Severe Hallucinations To The Extent Where I Had Believed That My Spirit Had Been Seperated From My Body And I Do Not See Any "Unforseen Forces" Or " Magical Faerie Spirit Guides" Out There To "Aid" Us.
and on another note, every thing has to do with quantum mechanics, but nothing has to do with it at all, it is what it is and its not what you think it is
how about a particle traveling at terminal velocity through the magnet is having its properties systematically changed, given the environmental and spacial air density, friction of the particle against the environment, the speed at which it is traveling and the force exerted upon it through the magnetic wave. and with a non uniform wave we would expect a non uniform result. but you have to factor in the variables meaning a non uniform wave doesn't matter, the fact that the wave is there does.
You are correct - "hippy-dippy" is quite a polite way of characterizing some of the nonsense that is in popular culture and media today. Fraud would be a better word for some of the ridiculous things which are being touted. See my videos for a complete explanation which circumvents the psycho-babble.
Everyone's making the same mistake: They hear how the brain interprets information and then create reality, then they assume we create reality directly and completely ignore the first part: You are influenced by your environment! You may misinterpret the information receive and then think you control your reality, but it simply isn't so. Otherwise there would be a LOT less traffic on the I5.
when i first saw the title of this video , it took me a few seconds to suspend my judgment as a an "airy fairy psychic and lecturer of metaphysics,. But it was very well explained and well presented. it definitely merits consideration and contemplation, i look for ward to the rest of the series
So magnetic moment (i think that's the word you are saying... not sure though), should be "equally distributed in terms of the direction etc..."... BUT shouldn't the same apply for the "quantity of angular momentum?". In real world things happen in 3D, so i would expect atoms spinning horizontally too (not only clock- and counter-clockwise)... ??? I m just saying...
In the case of the observer affecting the reality it is wittnessing ( documented ) on a sub atomic level we find the philosophical theory of conciousness affecting reality.The higgs boson is the predicted holographic creater of mass,yet this higgs only adds drag to create the illusion of mass,a very interesting thought yet it raises the idea that we are not here,only a projection of 2d infomation manifested as a 3d reality...interresting im sure many will agree
"In the case of the observer affecting the reality it is wittnessing ( documented ) on a sub atomic level we find the philosophical theory of conciousness affecting reality."
No we do not. You cannot substitute the word "consciousness" for "measurement" and expect it to hold any grain of scientific merit. Measurement in quantum mechanics is a very precisely approached topic, it is not reconciled with philosophical hand waving.
BTW There is a video of an electron made by some Swedish scientists check it out. If I understood it correctly the electron itself is quantized and has concentric rings similar to MF structure and a hole in the middle.
Classically, the spin angular momentum (angular momentum about particle's central axis) of a particle with charge distribution implies some magnetic moment dictating its angle of deflection through an external magnetic field.
The problem with the electron (aside from the fact that it is not a classical particle!) is that the magnetic momenta are clearly quantized implying that the spin states are not a possible product classical electrodynamics, even if it might "spin" about a central axis.
And let me clarify, by non-magnetic origins I mean that classical electrodynamics would not account for the phenomenon.
The issue is actually resolved well with quantum field theory, i.e. the magnetic field itself must be quantized. You can certainly discuss the implications of particle spin in non-relativistic QM, but in order to really approach its origins you need quantum electrodynamics.
"My thinking is that if particles have poles it means that there is a magnetic field moving in and out of the center which in turn generates the perpendicular "physical" spin."
This is easy to imagine with something like a hydrogen atom, as the electron (being a moving charge) constitutes an electric current providing a magnetic moment vector perpendicular to the plane of motion. The motion of the electron is non-deterministic, apropos the magnetic moment.
The spin angular momenta of photons are not defined classically, so in a way you are right.
The spin angular momentum is some intrinsic property of the particle and is clearly not as simple as the rotation of said object around it's central axis.
My thinking is that if particles have poles it means that there is a magnetic field moving in and out of the center which in turn generates the perpendicular "physical" spin. Just like with Earth and planets or an electic motor. Lorentz force I think its called. The real question is where does the magnetic field come from? The cause and effect here is really something to ponder.
However, the electrons evidently possess some intrinsic spin property and in terms of classical electrodynamics we would then infer the presence of an intrinsic B-field; that's certainly true. The problem however is that relative to the motion of the electron, only an electric field exists; the magnetic field exists only relative to the stationary frame. So clearly the phenomenon of particle spin must have non-magnetic origins. The magnetic moment's origins are perplexing.
I think most people misinterpret "angular momentum". Angular momentum is only generated when the particles move in the same direction but in order for them to do so they need to be polarized so here again the magnetic field is required. Without it there would only be a chaotic movement and no momentum would be genereated. So here again we go back to chicken or the egg situation. I think that magnetic field is the primary force in matter formation but where does it come from?
"Angular momentum is only generated when the particles move in the same direction"
I don't understand what you're saying here; all moving particles have orbital angular momentum angular momentum relative to SOME point. Theoretically speaking, you can even imagine that a particle moving in a straight line possess infinite angular momentum relative to the center of a circle of infinite radius.
@DavidAlanRogers Lets think about angular momentum for a moment. If the center of an infinite radius is a single point wouldn't that mean that all particles in that radius would move in the same direction toward that point? Wouldn't it also imply a collapsing universe not an expanding one? Also are you thinking in a ucledian space or 3D?
"Lets think about angular momentum for a moment. If the center of an infinite radius is a single point wouldn't that mean that all particles in that radius would move in the same direction toward that point?"
What? If the particle moves directly towards the point it's motion is directed radially and L = r cross p is clearly zero. If the radius is "infinite" then a particle moving in a straight line always has momentum at right angles to level arm w/ respect to the center.
"Also are you thinking in a ucledian space or 3D?"
A Euclidean space is just one with Euclidean geometry. It can be 3-dimensional, in any case I don't care what space you use.
"Organized quanta with no mass thats donwright metaphysical."
I don't think so, you wouldn't call an rigid body's moment of inertia "metaphysical" but it is purely a defined property of natural objects. Who is to say that "physical" things are things which have mass, charge, etc anyways? We defined those terms.
"If the center of an infinite radius is a single point wouldn't that mean that all particles in that radius would move in the same direction toward that point?"
What? If the particles' motions are directed radially inward then there is NO orbital angular momentum; L = r cross p is clearly zero. If a particle moves in a straight line then it's momentum is always at right angles to an infinite lever arm. I'm not arguing that this situation is realizable, it's just an aside.
Ok lets take this step by step since there are a few definitions for angular momentum. The force behind it in classical terms is gravity. Normally the AM of multiple particles adds up to a whole rigid body AM. This denotes that particles are moving in the same direction. The acceleration comes through conservation. Isn't it a radially inward vortexial movement? There is also a spherical harmonic component to it that results in a sphere.
"The force behind it in classical terms is gravity."
Angular momentum is just the cross product of a particles momentum and a level arm with respect so some origin. Any force (not just gravity) can CHANGE the angular momentum of a system, but a system need not have an external force acting to possess angular momentum.
"Normally the AM of multiple particles adds up to a whole rigid body AM. "
Normally? This is always true. The total angular momentum is always a vectorial sum.
"This denotes that particles are moving in the same direction."
What? A system of two oppositely rotating particles of same mass about a common axis with non-equal angular speed possess a vectorial sum of angular momenta that is non-zero. The particles don't need to move in the same direction to have angular momentum.
@DavidAlanRogers L is a vector quantity. when you reverse rotation you reverse the vector. So if you have particles moving in opposite directions you subtract the Ls you don't add them. Thats what I meant.
Yes, L is a vector quantity, ergo you merely sum over all L to get net angular momentum for a system.
If the particles move in opposite directions you don't need to "subtract" the corresponding Ls. L is directional by virtue of it being a vector, you sum all the same. The "subtraction" comes from the fact that the Ls are antiparallel.
If they are equal in magnitude. There is some remainder if they are not. That's precisely my point; the angular momentum can be non-zero even in a system of oppositely rotating particles.
I have no idea what you're saying here. If a system accelerates then there is an applied force (actually a net torque) and then dL/dt is not zero. If the system is conservative then there is NO angular acceleration. Also, if you change the modulus of the lever arm you may think that because a particle spins faster you've violated conservation of angular momentum, but in reality you've applied net torque in changing the system parameters.
@DavidAlanRogers You don't understand a damn thing Im saying, Do me a favor flush your toilet and watch angular momentum and velocity in action a couple of times maybe you'll get it. There is no force applied there other then gravity..
"Do me a favor flush your toilet and watch angular momentum and velocity in action a couple of times maybe you'll get it. There is no force applied there other then gravity.."
First of all, there ARE other forces at work there, namely the normal force of the toilet bowl allowing outer water molecules to execute circular motion. This is an electromagnetic force, not gravitational.
Second, angular momentum can be generated by ANY external force applying a net torque. You need to study.
"Same thing happens in open sea or a lake. Toilet geometry is irrelevant here"
You think that vortexing in fluids is a gravitational effect? If you poke a hole in a pool then gravity does drain it, okay... But then the "swirling" comes from the electromagnetic interactions of the molecules themselves. The centripetal forces come from that, NOT gravity.
@DavidAlanRogers You should read what I write carefully I said in "classical terms" gravity is the force. remember? We were going step by step, and youre stumbling already.
"You should read what I write carefully I said in "classical terms" gravity is the force. remember? We were going step by step, and youre stumbling already."
In "classical terms" gravity is NOT the cause of angular momentum, torque in GENERAL is the cause of angular momentum. Any force can create angular momentum. Just because it's "classical" doesn't mean that the applied forces are gravitational, if anything the vast majority of classical problems are electromagnetic in nature.
@DavidAlanRogers Don't be a wise ass. When I said particles need to move in the same direction to build angular momentum you jumped all over me Yet it is clearly true. So maybe you are learning something afterall and its physics 101.
Particle don't need to rotate in the same direction to build angular momentum. They build angular momentum faster in that case, but it is not a necessary condition.
The Lorentz force is analogous to angular momentum merely because it is a cross product, but the Lorentz force and angular momentum are very different physical quantities.
@DavidAlanRogers All im saying is that you should visualize stuff to understand how it works not just crunch numbers. I didn't say theyre the same quantity, they exhibit the same behavior. Just picture electrons moving around with magnetic field as a vector. Reverse the charge you reverse the vector. Increasing frequency increases velocity. Sounds familiar?
"Just don't let your ego stand in the way of progress. "
Well thanks for the incite, everything I know about masses tied to strings executing uniform circular motion has been shattered! I now see that gravity is the cause of the motion, not the electromagnetic properties of the molecular interactions composing the material of the string. Maybe I can get published with progress like that.
@DavidAlanRogers Think about the bright side. Now when you contemplate the universe you can picture a huge toilet bowl with infinite radius with us being the little shits sliding down. :)
"at quantum levels you can try to visualize Lorentz force as a EM equivalent of L.It will help alot. :)"
The Lorentz force is always vaguely analogous of angular momentum merely because it is a cross product. They are mathematically related, but certainly not "equivalent."
Again, I don't see what you're saying. If a particle is executing circular motion then there IS a centripetal force in the r-hat direction responsible for the curvature of the path. Maybe this is what you're thinking of.
If one thinks about the "particles" as plasma and ponders a bit on those dynamics.. a charged "thingy" moving in a field will affect and be affected, repel and attract, change direction.. find the simple rule.
Important question: Why would anything rotate? Is anything making it rotate? What is that force? Why would a "particle" rotate, why do planets and stars rotate? There is an answer in there somewhere, right under everybodys nose.
I really appreciate your effort. I love hearing everyone's point of view. I must say the The Stern-Gerlach experiment is a little funny. It took me a few attempts to understand, but yes. AMAZING! Absolutely love the concept! :)
"It took me a few attempts to understand, but yes. AMAZING! Absolutely love the concept!"
You should be careful when assuming you "understand" any natural phenomenon. It is safe to say that no one can answer the "why?" questions of QM (or even CM!), but understanding the postulates and mathematics is fairly easy. Knowing more about the behavior of nature is the ultimate goal, answering the ultimate "why" questions seems impossible. Maybe one day things will change.
Dude, you know nothing about quantum mechanics. Go read a REAL book on the matter and stop deluding yourself into thinking you know the subject because you read a children's picture book on the matter.
Quantum Mechanics is not the only game in town. A competing theory called the Reciprocal System can explain this gentleman's video, as follows. The neutral atoms (silver, hydrogen, whatever) in the experiment do not initially have a magnetic moment or charge at all. Upon passing through the first magnet, each atom is induced to have two charges (one N and one S). Consequently, the beam splits. Upon leaving the first magnet, the induction ends, the charges revert to thermal energy, etc...
I'm confused... You burn the hippy dippy new age quantum physics philosophy right at the beginning, then immediately start talking about an experiment already proved and not pertaining to the new age hippy dippy philosophy at all... Isn't the goal of criticizing to prove ones criticisms? This was like reading a book called murder mystery and learning about rainbows .... lol like wtf... is this just me here that's thinking this lol??
No, I want to learn both the math and experimental evidence for various phenomena resulting from quantum mechanics, NOT the "philosophy" of it. Philosophy of it IS the bullshit. Also, do you categorize the emerging field of "quantum biology" as "hippy new age" stuff? I don't. String theory - with no experimental proof whatsoever - should be placed firmly into that dumpster.
In contrast, others are at various levels of construction of solid theories and experimental proof for how ...
@deskset24 .. consciousness interacts with matter, and how it all relates to quantum mechanics and relativity and nonlinear partial differential equations.
There are the true 100% bullshitters, like Deepak Chopra and Michio Kaku (doesn't matter if he DID serious physics in the past, he is NOT doing it NOW - all he is NOW is a pop TV physics philosophizer), and then there are those working underpaid and underappreciated like the PEAR lab in Princeton did.
You and Sir Isaac are in for a big surprise ... three-dimensions are only part of a larger energetic frequency network called the unified field which is more 'airy' than the illusion of matter in 3D hominid boy, but then primates always balk when you rattle their cage.
I don't like the fact that you're bullshitting an interpretation of quantum physics in the beginning of your video, which you have no clue about. Maybe there is a possibility that consciousness does play a role here.
I don't like the fact that you're bullshitting an interpretation of quantum physics in the beginning of your video, which you have no clue about. Maybe there is a possibility that consciousness does play a role here.
I don't like the fact that you're bullshitting an interpretation of quantum physics in the beginning of your video, which you have no clue about. Maybe there is a possibility that consciousness does play a role here.
Wow. this was a terrible explanation of quantum physics. Hippy dippy new age rubbish? give me a break. You are a fool if you think that you can explain quantum physics without going into an explanation of consciousness. Do some more homework then post a video. Become an expert, then post a video. Better yet, don't ever post another video about this subject.
"You are a fool if you think that you can explain quantum physics without going into an explanation of consciousness."
... So the enumerable Physicists that see no correlation between consciousness and QM are fools?
"Do some more homework"
Why don't you? Show me that if [A,B]=0 then A|a',b'>=a'|a',b'> and B|a',b'>=b'|a',b'>. That is operators A and B share a common eigenket |a',b'>. An elementary proof... Shouldn't be hard for an expert such as yourself. :]
@lalva1 Ok, first of all, allow me to give you a quick run down of quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics simply put is the study of quantised phenomena i.e. mechanics that do not perform a function in a continuous manner. The study of various different phenomena such as cathode rays, blackbody radiation and the photoelectric effect all contribute as the major underpinning point that is quantum mechanics. Case in point, THERE IS NO HIPPY BULLSHIT YOU FOOL. oh and lrn2quantummechanics
@lalva1@lalva1 Ok, first of all, allow me to give you a quick run down of quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics simply put is the study of quantised phenomena i.e. mechanics that do not perform a function in a continuous manner. The study of various different phenomena such as cathode rays, blackbody radiation and the photoelectric effect all contribute as the major underpinning point that is quantum mechanics. Case in point, THERE IS NO HIPPY BULLSHIT YOU FOOL. oh and lrn2quantummechanics
@LilFaerl "The hippy bullshit is about when "they" say that particles change behavior if we look at them. Which is just silly."
Silly or not it is consensus opinion of professional physicists based on the overwhelming evidence of over 50 years experimenting. They all agree is it is "silly", however, the evidence shows that this is how things are.
Having said that, this video appears to offer neither explanation, interpretation or even sufficient description to be of much use to anyone.
@Wittgensteinism I think Schrodinger was pointing out the craziness of either quantum behavior or our grasp of it. Theres a tendency in science to sidestep unresolved issues, such as set theory.
Until such time that we can resolve issues with better experiments or new information.
The consciousness implication for quantum behavior is "interesting" and thats always a good thing.
It might be wrong, but it is fascinating for now,.
@jonesgerard What's curious is your reference to Schrodinger. What exactly are you referencing when you talking about Schrodinger pointing out some craziness? Schrodinger's Cat thought experiment? The problem with his cat experiment is that it wouldn't work, because the gieger counter is what would collapse the wave function in order to measure (therefore releasing the hammer, poison, etc.) the radioactive particle decay. So the uncertainty he sought to exploit for the cat just wouldn't work.
i think this is the version with the Bullshit, not vice versa.......the greatest minds ( im sure they're greater than you yes) agree about a concious reality.....
This guy says "um" and "I think" for someone who is supposed to be clarifying all the new age hippy dippy BS about quantum physics. I'll stick to the professionals advice. Jackass.
Evidently, you didn't read my second post. And by the sound of it, porn most likely gave birth to the title track of this video. Also, I hate music videos about as much as you love japanimation.
Otherwise, decent video but I (as well as others who posted here) still believe it would be more understandable if "dumbed down." When I hear a title like "Quantum Physics without the BS," I think of a popular theme of books that tries to educate others from basics... Idiot's Guide. Sound Familiar?
Very well done! If anybody is interested, the act of measuring a quantity of a state forces the state to change to another state associated with that measurement. (each measurement has a state that is innately tuned to it). So if you have some state that is full of random information, and you measure it and get a value, you know what the state of that particle is now (and the previous state can't be found now). Measuring it again, changes it to the state associated with that measurement, etc...
im not sure we even have the right language to understand the impetus behind what these principles mean, at present. Though most of the way we interpret understanding of a thing has to start at some point.Thats what i find facinating , where will it all lead in say ....50 years.
Fuck you nigga. Stopped watching this shit after about a minute. Right when you decided to take consciousness out of the explanation. Consciousness plays a vital role in understanding reality. Quantum physics can't be described accurately without including the tools used in the experiment, even if its your own nervous system. The reality we perceive depends on the signals we receive and interpret through our brain. Hippie Dippie shit my ass. It's fucking reality nigga, get over yourself.
The assumptions are done in 3D and the elements in the experiment are arguably but still very likely using more dimensions than 3 so I think that might be the problem.
@denito9474. why didn't you label the magnets and atoms? when you were a kid, didn't you ever play with magnets? I watched the atoms pass through the two magnets, and i understand the atoms revolvement, however, you completely dismiss the effect of the third magnets affect on the top atom. It would have been to powerful to just let it pass. revolvement wouldn't save it from spinning off. nextbid.
gyroscopic precession - your using a magnetic test item - silver atom, and magnets. the "spin" of the atom will be a left or a right for a verticle set of magnets, induced from the magnets depending where is passess through the magnetic field, as gyroscopic precession acts at 90' to the angle it will either go up or down. if another verticle set of magenst was placed immediately after, you dont see another dual 'split' because of the angular momentum of the atom, which is also magnetic.
NO! NO! NO!, you have forgotten two MAJOR FACTORS, resultant polarisation, ie, firstly at the second magnetic field the electrons are not oriented pefectly parallel left or right facing, they still have up and down components, and secondly, the silver ions have an entropy that results in a variation of the orientation. hence the atom itself interacts with the electron and can change its state as determined after the magnetic field.
What happens if you skip the horisontal magnetic field (step 2), and only have to consecutive vertical fields? Wouldn't the "only spin up atoms" again split into spin up and spin down? Meaning that the horisontal field wouldn't be responsible for the interference leading to a disturbed pattern, but that any magnetic field would arrange the randomly spinning atoms into systematicly opposed type of spinning.
if you have two sets of horizontal magnets, you only get one stream coming out of the second pair. The horizontal measurement destroys the information we had about the original vertical measurement.
Yeah, you're right (looked it up). But I still can't digest the fact that the apparatus (ie observer) alters the state observed. Thanks for the upload by the way.
@denito9474 Has there been an experiment that tests every angle down to a certain point of a circle? I"m curious as to whether there is a possibility that another force could be in affect which allows the atoms to have a property that allows it to have an infinite number of angles that it could go(eliminating the exact opposite of every angle on a circle)
"The horizontal measurement destroys the information we had about the original vertical measurement."
This is poor language. It is more precise to say that when one applies an alternative and intermediary measurement it destroys the immediacy of the repeated measurement. Mathematically, when one applies the x B-field the state is projected into a new eigenbasis thus changing the wave-function of the system. If you want no BS then you need to consult a Physics text.
@izemayati There is a given relaxation time that also allows the "separation" of spin up and spin down atoms to be reset. The interaction with an orthogonal field simply causes a perturbation of the system which promotes the system to reset itself.
No, because the atoms have endured an act of measurement projecting the state onto the relevant observable's eigenket. Reimplementing the z field at this point does not constitute an event to the system. This is a postulate of QM. An immediately repeated ideal measurement yields the same result.
However, this experiment is idealized in the way it is presented. In reality the wave-function might have some time variance or other such influences.
Someone also mentioned that the orthogonal B-field perturbs the system and allows the z spin configurations to reset, that explanation works even if you don't believe in the literal "collapse" of the wave-function. I like it.
Finally, a method to duplicate silver! Watch the stock prices dropping...
ThaFacka 1 week ago
Regardless of any partisan spin, here's what Erwin Schrödinger had to say about our relationship to an objective reality.
"What we observe as material bodies and forces are nothing but shapes and variations in the structure of space."
The implication here seems obvious to me.. material bodies and forces (inclusive of the phenomena observed during an experiment or any form of lived experience) are a departure from something more fundamental than we can ever know. That's enough, for me.
bishoptutuspants 2 weeks ago
what i don't get about this demonstration is why SHOULDN'T the atoms split in 2 beams the second time around as they did the first time. same set up, same magnets, same projection of a single beam. so why shouldn't the atoms split in to 2 beams again? the same way flowing water splits in to 2 streams if offered 2 directions in which to go, & then each of these streams of water splitting yet again in t0 2 streams. wouldn't it be more weird if the atoms DIDN'T split in to 2 beams the second time?
qwyzl 1 month ago
rubbish
IsaacRemnant 1 month ago
Interesting video!
This is an invitation to everyone or anyone to see an artist theory on the physics of light and time!
This theory is based on two postulates
1. Is that the quantum wave particle function Ψ represents the forward passage of time ∆E ∆t ≥ h/2π itself
2. Is that Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle ∆×∆p×≥h/4π that is formed by the w- function is the same uncertainty we have with any future event that we can interact with turning the possible into the actual!
nickharvey7 1 month ago
pretty cool....any more suggestions?
awakeFemale 1 month ago
Part way through this video strange curlicues and butterflies appear for no apparent reason. This, to me, proves that up equals down and the square root of 17 is Tuesday.
NeosimianSapiens 3 months ago
so whats he saying?
dbossmx 3 months ago
@dbossmx basically he is saying that you don't exist, have a nice day!
dietrich1529 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I Like Ice Cream
GooseMooseLooseJuice 3 months ago
Blablabla!
Xscape4 4 months ago
con'td: Now how about have everyone in the line rotate right or left. Wouldn't matter, the people at the door can still take each one as they pass through. Now imagine having two more doors for the new lines of people, repeat the process. It also wouldnt matter if they are horizontal or on a very steep hill. You can't expect to have only one magnet to have magnetic pull and the other to have ZERO effect do you? :)
Either way, nice vid. good discussion on the topic. :D
gredangeo 4 months ago
I find this odd. Is this stuff really hard to understand? The reason why the stream of particles split like that is because of the two magnets themselves. They're always going to split. It's like this, try this experiment: take a long line of people each one representing a particle. Have two other people at a door to represent magnets. Have the line walk through. Then, each person grabs somebody from the line Each "magnet" will get their own "pull"...
gredangeo 4 months ago
Unification of Isolated science and GOD particle exist within Human body which is CERN Laboratory of Nature.for details see YOU TUBE VK SONAKIA and read article on all voices.com -certainty-tool-is-higgin-boson-or-god-particle-which-exist-in-human-body.We have already developed next generation easy to learn unified science.world scientist are welcome to see and test FIT-Future Imaging Tool technology
vk sonakia
unified field scientist
bhopal
INDIA
vksonakia@yahoo.co.in
vksonakia 5 months ago
I appreciate an explanation of QM using scientifically verifiable evidence. Although I like to entertain the idea of combining consciousness with QM, I must realize it is simply pseudoscience at this point in time. I wonder if you've seen the video "Athenes Theory of Everything." It shows an equation of consciousness with wave function. Do you consider that BS as well? Its an interesting video nonetheless.
FarmacyPhlaverd 5 months ago
you only are creating paths any measure or experiment of human mind do already know that there are paths or diferents types of results so the atoms just go to all viable solutions or possible paths all at the same time creating a interference pattern or odds. Only if you look you manifest the wave in to a visible particle. But is not a wave is more like a assosiation between the atoms cuz all atoms are the same in some point they reflect one another under the eye of a observant is particle.
vampirelord1217 5 months ago
You mention there can be no hidden variable interpretation of quantum mechanics. Well, I don't understand. I understand that local hidden variables are impossible. Do you think that you can prove/argue that a non-local hidden variable interpretation is impossible?
WhiteFang5285 5 months ago
no BS? you mean no Bachelors of Science?
bambamboom2 6 months ago
How are the particles splitting? Is it up-down-up-down and so forth, or are there examples of up-up-down-up-down-down?
Phariadify 6 months ago
could you please explain to me or more so yourself how something based on theory can be misrepresented, really think long and hard about that my friend, it may start to free your mind if you do so. also keep in mind the only truth you will ever know is who you are, peace bro
rondowgs 6 months ago
did you ever stop to think calling it bullshit newage hippie dippie whatever, is due to the fact that you might fear the idea. try acid or dmt and you may start to realise that it comes down to feeling and emotion not some science experiment. take from this what you will if you can. please remember words and language are simply symbology which is a form of brainwashing. love and peace to all
rondowgs 7 months ago
@rondowgs Yes, I have stopped to consider that it might be due to fear. And it turned out that its not due to fear. I am OK with most of the concepts often involved, but quantum mechanics is misrepresented and used as a tool to convince people of something, and it has nothing to do with QM. Also, acid trip or no, QM does have to do with science experiments, to deny that suggests that you are the one who is controlled by fear. fear of science. which is probably the result of a misunderstanding.
denito9474 6 months ago 22
@denito9474 In the double slit experiment an electron is a wave when not observed on approach to the double slit but a particle when it is observed. The presence/absence of the observer affects the outcome. Similiarly, when awake the conciousness experiences being the body which is particle-like, when asleep the experience is more fluid & wave-like, past & future merge, locality is transcended, & you dream. This is where free-will comes in, the ability to change past or future & distant events.
Galv140577 6 months ago
@rondowgs
What the fuck is wrong with you? Are you mentally retarded?
andrewyaoauatauabaea 6 months ago
@andrewyaoauatauabaea why do you lash out at others
rondowgs 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@andrewyaoauatauabaea why do you lash out at others
rondowgs 6 months ago
@andrewyaoauatauabaea woops accidentally posted twice, please don't get angry at that
rondowgs 6 months ago
@rondowgs
I was referring to the content of your comment.
andrewyaoauatauabaea 6 months ago
@rondowgs feel or use ur emotions make a million dollars show up in my mailbox. But u cant , u cant even determine when ur next bowel movement will come. And ur the one brainwashed due to u believing ur new age crap which u didnt come up with but were taught. All u know is what someone else told u. You are as dumb as the day u were born, u are no more than a puppet doing the things and believing the things others tell you. then u mention ur so spiritually dead u have to take drugs to learn.
valkour22 6 months ago
@valkour22 take what you just and re-apply it to yourself, good luck my friend. also try and question why your so angry bacause i gurantee it has nothing to do with me. peace
rondowgs 6 months ago
@rondowgs my, take what you just said
rondowgs 6 months ago
@rondowgs im not angry ? lolol. Just laugh at how people are and what they think they believe.
valkour22 6 months ago
Comment removed
UrSoMeanBoss 5 months ago
@rondowgs first off; you need drugs in order to realize that emotions have a large role on just about everything? thats just pathetic.
second off; you do need a scientific experiment or nothing will get tested or proven. everything you are thinking is a mere guess that you are simply adding onto from your own imagination and consciousness to explain what you believe.
the experiments are necessary to determine reality from opinion.
UrSoMeanBoss 5 months ago
@rondowgs I Myself As A Experimental Entheogen User, I Believe That There Is Strong Scientific Research Which Suggests There Is A Human Spirit, But I Can Quite Clearly Say That This New Age Bullcrap Fad Is One Of The Most Stupid Scams I Have Ever Heard Of, And Is Completely Irrelevant, I Have Had Severe Hallucinations To The Extent Where I Had Believed That My Spirit Had Been Seperated From My Body And I Do Not See Any "Unforseen Forces" Or " Magical Faerie Spirit Guides" Out There To "Aid" Us.
EloraPhasma 2 months ago in playlist Quantum Physics without the New Age Crap
Why??? Why does it do it that way? Also when you assume, you can make an ASS-out of -U- and -Me. SO quit making assumptions!
wolfgange63 7 months ago
and on another note, every thing has to do with quantum mechanics, but nothing has to do with it at all, it is what it is and its not what you think it is
wispers187 7 months ago
how about a particle traveling at terminal velocity through the magnet is having its properties systematically changed, given the environmental and spacial air density, friction of the particle against the environment, the speed at which it is traveling and the force exerted upon it through the magnetic wave. and with a non uniform wave we would expect a non uniform result. but you have to factor in the variables meaning a non uniform wave doesn't matter, the fact that the wave is there does.
wispers187 7 months ago
and that your looking at it
wispers187 7 months ago
You are correct - "hippy-dippy" is quite a polite way of characterizing some of the nonsense that is in popular culture and media today. Fraud would be a better word for some of the ridiculous things which are being touted. See my videos for a complete explanation which circumvents the psycho-babble.
HeliumXenonKrypton 7 months ago
Wake up....The Matrix has you.......!
1DreamWarrior 8 months ago
@trakomako And I slit jesus in half. Am I then God?
LilFaerl 8 months ago
The spinning wouldn't give two rays. It would make them come out in a cone.
LilFaerl 8 months ago
Everyone's making the same mistake: They hear how the brain interprets information and then create reality, then they assume we create reality directly and completely ignore the first part: You are influenced by your environment! You may misinterpret the information receive and then think you control your reality, but it simply isn't so. Otherwise there would be a LOT less traffic on the I5.
punkwasher 8 months ago
when i first saw the title of this video , it took me a few seconds to suspend my judgment as a an "airy fairy psychic and lecturer of metaphysics,. But it was very well explained and well presented. it definitely merits consideration and contemplation, i look for ward to the rest of the series
Psychic Tarot Andrew
Douris12 9 months ago
Comment removed
Douris12 9 months ago
around 1:33-2:20
So magnetic moment (i think that's the word you are saying... not sure though), should be "equally distributed in terms of the direction etc..."... BUT shouldn't the same apply for the "quantity of angular momentum?". In real world things happen in 3D, so i would expect atoms spinning horizontally too (not only clock- and counter-clockwise)... ??? I m just saying...
tashows 9 months ago
why does a bunch of crap appear on the screen from 2:25 to 3:16?
Wittgensteinism 9 months ago 31
@Wittgensteinism Maybe he could have put up animations or pictures of what he was blabbing about instead of hippy BS
splitaxis 8 months ago
@Wittgensteinism woah, your right! The new age crap. There it is!
UnowMe00 7 months ago
@Wittgensteinism It's his subconscious trying to tell him that it actually does have to do with the mind...
TimJSwan89 3 months ago
I think that they are hiden variables but they actualy don´t exist until the particle or the sistem gets the chance to expres them.
I love people that like to think about the crazyness of quantum paradoxs, lets chat some time.
manuxsxs 10 months ago
@manuxsxs
"I think that they are hiden variables but they actualy don´t exist until the particle or the sistem gets the chance to expres them."
Non-local hidden variable theories may one day yield a more sophisticated quantum theory.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
My thoughts
In the case of the observer affecting the reality it is wittnessing ( documented ) on a sub atomic level we find the philosophical theory of conciousness affecting reality.The higgs boson is the predicted holographic creater of mass,yet this higgs only adds drag to create the illusion of mass,a very interesting thought yet it raises the idea that we are not here,only a projection of 2d infomation manifested as a 3d reality...interresting im sure many will agree
peace
TheCODjihad 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheCODjihad
"In the case of the observer affecting the reality it is wittnessing ( documented ) on a sub atomic level we find the philosophical theory of conciousness affecting reality."
No we do not. You cannot substitute the word "consciousness" for "measurement" and expect it to hold any grain of scientific merit. Measurement in quantum mechanics is a very precisely approached topic, it is not reconciled with philosophical hand waving.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
BTW There is a video of an electron made by some Swedish scientists check it out. If I understood it correctly the electron itself is quantized and has concentric rings similar to MF structure and a hole in the middle.
rushwarp 10 months ago
Also I agree with MF being quantized but just think about the implications. Organized quanta with no mass thats donwright metaphysical. :)
rushwarp 10 months ago
Classically, the spin angular momentum (angular momentum about particle's central axis) of a particle with charge distribution implies some magnetic moment dictating its angle of deflection through an external magnetic field.
The problem with the electron (aside from the fact that it is not a classical particle!) is that the magnetic momenta are clearly quantized implying that the spin states are not a possible product classical electrodynamics, even if it might "spin" about a central axis.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
And let me clarify, by non-magnetic origins I mean that classical electrodynamics would not account for the phenomenon.
The issue is actually resolved well with quantum field theory, i.e. the magnetic field itself must be quantized. You can certainly discuss the implications of particle spin in non-relativistic QM, but in order to really approach its origins you need quantum electrodynamics.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
"My thinking is that if particles have poles it means that there is a magnetic field moving in and out of the center which in turn generates the perpendicular "physical" spin."
This is easy to imagine with something like a hydrogen atom, as the electron (being a moving charge) constitutes an electric current providing a magnetic moment vector perpendicular to the plane of motion. The motion of the electron is non-deterministic, apropos the magnetic moment.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
I think this experiment shows that particles are polarized and are attracted to either side based on probability and not on spin.
rushwarp 10 months ago
@rushwarp
The spin angular momenta of photons are not defined classically, so in a way you are right.
The spin angular momentum is some intrinsic property of the particle and is clearly not as simple as the rotation of said object around it's central axis.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@DavidAlanRogers
My thinking is that if particles have poles it means that there is a magnetic field moving in and out of the center which in turn generates the perpendicular "physical" spin. Just like with Earth and planets or an electic motor. Lorentz force I think its called. The real question is where does the magnetic field come from? The cause and effect here is really something to ponder.
rushwarp 10 months ago
@rushwarp
However, the electrons evidently possess some intrinsic spin property and in terms of classical electrodynamics we would then infer the presence of an intrinsic B-field; that's certainly true. The problem however is that relative to the motion of the electron, only an electric field exists; the magnetic field exists only relative to the stationary frame. So clearly the phenomenon of particle spin must have non-magnetic origins. The magnetic moment's origins are perplexing.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@DavidAlanRogers
I think most people misinterpret "angular momentum". Angular momentum is only generated when the particles move in the same direction but in order for them to do so they need to be polarized so here again the magnetic field is required. Without it there would only be a chaotic movement and no momentum would be genereated. So here again we go back to chicken or the egg situation. I think that magnetic field is the primary force in matter formation but where does it come from?
rushwarp 10 months ago
\\@rushwarp
"Angular momentum is only generated when the particles move in the same direction"
I don't understand what you're saying here; all moving particles have orbital angular momentum angular momentum relative to SOME point. Theoretically speaking, you can even imagine that a particle moving in a straight line possess infinite angular momentum relative to the center of a circle of infinite radius.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@DavidAlanRogers Lets think about angular momentum for a moment. If the center of an infinite radius is a single point wouldn't that mean that all particles in that radius would move in the same direction toward that point? Wouldn't it also imply a collapsing universe not an expanding one? Also are you thinking in a ucledian space or 3D?
rushwarp 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rushwarp
"Lets think about angular momentum for a moment. If the center of an infinite radius is a single point wouldn't that mean that all particles in that radius would move in the same direction toward that point?"
What? If the particle moves directly towards the point it's motion is directed radially and L = r cross p is clearly zero. If the radius is "infinite" then a particle moving in a straight line always has momentum at right angles to level arm w/ respect to the center.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@rushwarp
"Also are you thinking in a ucledian space or 3D?"
A Euclidean space is just one with Euclidean geometry. It can be 3-dimensional, in any case I don't care what space you use.
"Organized quanta with no mass thats donwright metaphysical."
I don't think so, you wouldn't call an rigid body's moment of inertia "metaphysical" but it is purely a defined property of natural objects. Who is to say that "physical" things are things which have mass, charge, etc anyways? We defined those terms.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@rushwarp
"If the center of an infinite radius is a single point wouldn't that mean that all particles in that radius would move in the same direction toward that point?"
What? If the particles' motions are directed radially inward then there is NO orbital angular momentum; L = r cross p is clearly zero. If a particle moves in a straight line then it's momentum is always at right angles to an infinite lever arm. I'm not arguing that this situation is realizable, it's just an aside.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@DavidAlanRogers @DavidAlanRogers
Ok lets take this step by step since there are a few definitions for angular momentum. The force behind it in classical terms is gravity. Normally the AM of multiple particles adds up to a whole rigid body AM. This denotes that particles are moving in the same direction. The acceleration comes through conservation. Isn't it a radially inward vortexial movement? There is also a spherical harmonic component to it that results in a sphere.
rushwarp 10 months ago
@rushwarp
"The force behind it in classical terms is gravity."
Angular momentum is just the cross product of a particles momentum and a level arm with respect so some origin. Any force (not just gravity) can CHANGE the angular momentum of a system, but a system need not have an external force acting to possess angular momentum.
"Normally the AM of multiple particles adds up to a whole rigid body AM. "
Normally? This is always true. The total angular momentum is always a vectorial sum.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@rushwarp
"This denotes that particles are moving in the same direction."
What? A system of two oppositely rotating particles of same mass about a common axis with non-equal angular speed possess a vectorial sum of angular momenta that is non-zero. The particles don't need to move in the same direction to have angular momentum.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@DavidAlanRogers L is a vector quantity. when you reverse rotation you reverse the vector. So if you have particles moving in opposite directions you subtract the Ls you don't add them. Thats what I meant.
rushwarp 10 months ago
@rushwarp
Yes, L is a vector quantity, ergo you merely sum over all L to get net angular momentum for a system.
If the particles move in opposite directions you don't need to "subtract" the corresponding Ls. L is directional by virtue of it being a vector, you sum all the same. The "subtraction" comes from the fact that the Ls are antiparallel.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@DavidAlanRogers So that means they cancel each other out?
rushwarp 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rushwarp
"So that means they cancel each other out?"
If they are equal in magnitude. There is some remainder if they are not. That's precisely my point; the angular momentum can be non-zero even in a system of oppositely rotating particles.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@rushwarp
"The acceleration comes through conservation."
I have no idea what you're saying here. If a system accelerates then there is an applied force (actually a net torque) and then dL/dt is not zero. If the system is conservative then there is NO angular acceleration. Also, if you change the modulus of the lever arm you may think that because a particle spins faster you've violated conservation of angular momentum, but in reality you've applied net torque in changing the system parameters.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@DavidAlanRogers You don't understand a damn thing Im saying, Do me a favor flush your toilet and watch angular momentum and velocity in action a couple of times maybe you'll get it. There is no force applied there other then gravity..
rushwarp 10 months ago
@rushwarp
"You don't understand a damn thing Im saying"
You don't seem to understand basic physics, maybe you should consult a text on classical mechanics.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@rushwarp
"Do me a favor flush your toilet and watch angular momentum and velocity in action a couple of times maybe you'll get it. There is no force applied there other then gravity.."
First of all, there ARE other forces at work there, namely the normal force of the toilet bowl allowing outer water molecules to execute circular motion. This is an electromagnetic force, not gravitational.
Second, angular momentum can be generated by ANY external force applying a net torque. You need to study.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@DavidAlanRogers Same thing happens in open sea or a lake. Toilet geometry is irrelevant here
rushwarp 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rushwarp
"Same thing happens in open sea or a lake. Toilet geometry is irrelevant here"
You think that vortexing in fluids is a gravitational effect? If you poke a hole in a pool then gravity does drain it, okay... But then the "swirling" comes from the electromagnetic interactions of the molecules themselves. The centripetal forces come from that, NOT gravity.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@DavidAlanRogers You should read what I write carefully I said in "classical terms" gravity is the force. remember? We were going step by step, and youre stumbling already.
rushwarp 10 months ago
@rushwarp
"You should read what I write carefully I said in "classical terms" gravity is the force. remember? We were going step by step, and youre stumbling already."
In "classical terms" gravity is NOT the cause of angular momentum, torque in GENERAL is the cause of angular momentum. Any force can create angular momentum. Just because it's "classical" doesn't mean that the applied forces are gravitational, if anything the vast majority of classical problems are electromagnetic in nature.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@DavidAlanRogers I don't dispute any of this we werent at that stage yet.
rushwarp 10 months ago
@rushwarp
You need to know what angular momentum is before you can explain anything to me.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@DavidAlanRogers Don't be a wise ass. When I said particles need to move in the same direction to build angular momentum you jumped all over me Yet it is clearly true. So maybe you are learning something afterall and its physics 101.
rushwarp 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rushwarp
"When I said particles need to move in the same direction to build angular momentum you jumped all over me Yet it is clearly true."
Again, this is wrong. More generally, you can build angular momentum without rotating particles in the same direction.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@rushwarp
Particle don't need to rotate in the same direction to build angular momentum. They build angular momentum faster in that case, but it is not a necessary condition.
The Lorentz force is analogous to angular momentum merely because it is a cross product, but the Lorentz force and angular momentum are very different physical quantities.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@DavidAlanRogers All im saying is that you should visualize stuff to understand how it works not just crunch numbers. I didn't say theyre the same quantity, they exhibit the same behavior. Just picture electrons moving around with magnetic field as a vector. Reverse the charge you reverse the vector. Increasing frequency increases velocity. Sounds familiar?
rushwarp 10 months ago
@DavidAlanRogers Youre fighting it but you need to think this through. Just don't let your ego stand in the way of progress.
rushwarp 10 months ago
@rushwarp
"Just don't let your ego stand in the way of progress. "
Well thanks for the incite, everything I know about masses tied to strings executing uniform circular motion has been shattered! I now see that gravity is the cause of the motion, not the electromagnetic properties of the molecular interactions composing the material of the string. Maybe I can get published with progress like that.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@DavidAlanRogers Don't be down on yourself. Nobody knows what gravity is so it may very well be a byproduct of electromagnetism. :)
rushwarp 10 months ago
@DavidAlanRogers Think about the bright side. Now when you contemplate the universe you can picture a huge toilet bowl with infinite radius with us being the little shits sliding down. :)
rushwarp 10 months ago
@DavidAlanRogers at quantum levels you can try to visualize Lorentz force as a EM equivalent of L.It will help alot. :)
rushwarp 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rushwarp
"at quantum levels you can try to visualize Lorentz force as a EM equivalent of L.It will help alot. :)"
The Lorentz force is always vaguely analogous of angular momentum merely because it is a cross product. They are mathematically related, but certainly not "equivalent."
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@rushwarp
"youre stumbling already."
Oh... Well then. Looking back, maybe I didn't deserve that "A" in classical mechanics.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@rushwarp
"Isn't it a radially inward vortexial movement?"
Again, I don't see what you're saying. If a particle is executing circular motion then there IS a centripetal force in the r-hat direction responsible for the curvature of the path. Maybe this is what you're thinking of.
DavidAlanRogers 10 months ago
@DavidAlanRogers If you want to be impressed search this video on youtube "The geometry and probability of Time within Quantum Mechanic"
rushwarp 10 months ago
why the butterflies and flowers??? I'm so confused now.
blackranger00 11 months ago
If one thinks about the "particles" as plasma and ponders a bit on those dynamics.. a charged "thingy" moving in a field will affect and be affected, repel and attract, change direction.. find the simple rule.
Important question: Why would anything rotate? Is anything making it rotate? What is that force? Why would a "particle" rotate, why do planets and stars rotate? There is an answer in there somewhere, right under everybodys nose.
Kenzofeis 11 months ago
I really appreciate your effort. I love hearing everyone's point of view. I must say the The Stern-Gerlach experiment is a little funny. It took me a few attempts to understand, but yes. AMAZING! Absolutely love the concept! :)
Love Tali
TaliWithinTheDaisies 11 months ago
@TaliWithinTheDaisies
"It took me a few attempts to understand, but yes. AMAZING! Absolutely love the concept!"
You should be careful when assuming you "understand" any natural phenomenon. It is safe to say that no one can answer the "why?" questions of QM (or even CM!), but understanding the postulates and mathematics is fairly easy. Knowing more about the behavior of nature is the ultimate goal, answering the ultimate "why" questions seems impossible. Maybe one day things will change.
DavidAlanRogers 11 months ago
Dude, you know nothing about quantum mechanics. Go read a REAL book on the matter and stop deluding yourself into thinking you know the subject because you read a children's picture book on the matter.
MathDoobler 11 months ago
@davidalanrogers ha i can write a lot of letters and make equations too. not impressing me.
lalva1 11 months ago
@lalva1
I'm not trying to impress anyone, I'm hoping that you might impress me. So far you are failing.
DavidAlanRogers 11 months ago
Very... Interesting.... Can't say I was expecting this... Job well done.
xIndca 11 months ago
In another universe the particle is in another state and so chance is an illusion. :]
S0laced 1 year ago
Quantum Mechanics is not the only game in town. A competing theory called the Reciprocal System can explain this gentleman's video, as follows. The neutral atoms (silver, hydrogen, whatever) in the experiment do not initially have a magnetic moment or charge at all. Upon passing through the first magnet, each atom is induced to have two charges (one N and one S). Consequently, the beam splits. Upon leaving the first magnet, the induction ends, the charges revert to thermal energy, etc...
Transpower 1 year ago
I'm confused... You burn the hippy dippy new age quantum physics philosophy right at the beginning, then immediately start talking about an experiment already proved and not pertaining to the new age hippy dippy philosophy at all... Isn't the goal of criticizing to prove ones criticisms? This was like reading a book called murder mystery and learning about rainbows .... lol like wtf... is this just me here that's thinking this lol??
AyoForYayo1990 1 year ago
No, I want to learn both the math and experimental evidence for various phenomena resulting from quantum mechanics, NOT the "philosophy" of it. Philosophy of it IS the bullshit. Also, do you categorize the emerging field of "quantum biology" as "hippy new age" stuff? I don't. String theory - with no experimental proof whatsoever - should be placed firmly into that dumpster.
In contrast, others are at various levels of construction of solid theories and experimental proof for how ...
deskset24 1 year ago
@deskset24 .. consciousness interacts with matter, and how it all relates to quantum mechanics and relativity and nonlinear partial differential equations.
There are the true 100% bullshitters, like Deepak Chopra and Michio Kaku (doesn't matter if he DID serious physics in the past, he is NOT doing it NOW - all he is NOW is a pop TV physics philosophizer), and then there are those working underpaid and underappreciated like the PEAR lab in Princeton did.
deskset24 1 year ago
You and Sir Isaac are in for a big surprise ... three-dimensions are only part of a larger energetic frequency network called the unified field which is more 'airy' than the illusion of matter in 3D hominid boy, but then primates always balk when you rattle their cage.
FightOrFlightFilms 1 year ago
is there an alternative to the word spin because saying positive and negative spin isnt working for me
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa78815 1 year ago
thanks for this
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa78815 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I don't like the fact that you're bullshitting an interpretation of quantum physics in the beginning of your video, which you have no clue about. Maybe there is a possibility that consciousness does play a role here.
TriKri 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I don't like the fact that you're bullshitting an interpretation of quantum physics in the beginning of your video, which you have no clue about. Maybe there is a possibility that consciousness does play a role here.
TriKri 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I don't like the fact that you're bullshitting an interpretation of quantum physics in the beginning of your video, which you have no clue about. Maybe there is a possibility that consciousness does play a role here.
TriKri 1 year ago
Comment removed
TriKri 1 year ago
Wow. this was a terrible explanation of quantum physics. Hippy dippy new age rubbish? give me a break. You are a fool if you think that you can explain quantum physics without going into an explanation of consciousness. Do some more homework then post a video. Become an expert, then post a video. Better yet, don't ever post another video about this subject.
lalva1 1 year ago 3
@lalva1 You are the one who should do his homework. There is no direct connection between quantum physics and consciousness.
MrRobotoToo 1 year ago
@lalva1
"You are a fool if you think that you can explain quantum physics without going into an explanation of consciousness."
... So the enumerable Physicists that see no correlation between consciousness and QM are fools?
"Do some more homework"
Why don't you? Show me that if [A,B]=0 then A|a',b'>=a'|a',b'> and B|a',b'>=b'|a',b'>. That is operators A and B share a common eigenket |a',b'>. An elementary proof... Shouldn't be hard for an expert such as yourself. :]
DavidAlanRogers 11 months ago
@lalva1 Ok, first of all, allow me to give you a quick run down of quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics simply put is the study of quantised phenomena i.e. mechanics that do not perform a function in a continuous manner. The study of various different phenomena such as cathode rays, blackbody radiation and the photoelectric effect all contribute as the major underpinning point that is quantum mechanics. Case in point, THERE IS NO HIPPY BULLSHIT YOU FOOL. oh and lrn2quantummechanics
8roper8 8 months ago
@lalva1 @lalva1 Ok, first of all, allow me to give you a quick run down of quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics simply put is the study of quantised phenomena i.e. mechanics that do not perform a function in a continuous manner. The study of various different phenomena such as cathode rays, blackbody radiation and the photoelectric effect all contribute as the major underpinning point that is quantum mechanics. Case in point, THERE IS NO HIPPY BULLSHIT YOU FOOL. oh and lrn2quantummechanics
8roper8 8 months ago
@8roper8 The hippy bullshit is about when "they" say that particles change behavior if we look at them. Which is just silly.
LilFaerl 8 months ago
@LilFaerl "The hippy bullshit is about when "they" say that particles change behavior if we look at them. Which is just silly."
Silly or not it is consensus opinion of professional physicists based on the overwhelming evidence of over 50 years experimenting. They all agree is it is "silly", however, the evidence shows that this is how things are.
Having said that, this video appears to offer neither explanation, interpretation or even sufficient description to be of much use to anyone.
chrisofnottingham 7 months ago
@lalva1 "You are a fool if you think that you can explain quantum physics without going into an explanation of consciousness."
So then, i guess you're calling Heisenberg, Bohr, Pauli, and Schrodinger a bunch of fools then?
Lol, do some more homework before posting another comment on quantum mechanics. Better yet, don't ever post another comment on this subject again...
Wittgensteinism 8 months ago
@Wittgensteinism I think Schrodinger was pointing out the craziness of either quantum behavior or our grasp of it. Theres a tendency in science to sidestep unresolved issues, such as set theory.
Until such time that we can resolve issues with better experiments or new information.
The consciousness implication for quantum behavior is "interesting" and thats always a good thing.
It might be wrong, but it is fascinating for now,.
jonesgerard 7 months ago
@jonesgerard Bohr's way of calling an idea complete rubbish was to call it "very interesting".
So strictly in that sense, i agree---consciousness having an implication in quantum mechanics is very interesting.
Wittgensteinism 7 months ago
@Wittgensteinism hahah and your comment is very interesting.!
In fact its almost suspicious.
jonesgerard 7 months ago
@jonesgerard What's curious is your reference to Schrodinger. What exactly are you referencing when you talking about Schrodinger pointing out some craziness? Schrodinger's Cat thought experiment? The problem with his cat experiment is that it wouldn't work, because the gieger counter is what would collapse the wave function in order to measure (therefore releasing the hammer, poison, etc.) the radioactive particle decay. So the uncertainty he sought to exploit for the cat just wouldn't work.
Wittgensteinism 7 months ago
i think this is the version with the Bullshit, not vice versa.......the greatest minds ( im sure they're greater than you yes) agree about a concious reality.....
11Firat58 1 year ago
This guy says "um" and "I think" for someone who is supposed to be clarifying all the new age hippy dippy BS about quantum physics. I'll stick to the professionals advice. Jackass.
JamieLookingForChris 1 year ago 2
Evidently, you didn't read my second post. And by the sound of it, porn most likely gave birth to the title track of this video. Also, I hate music videos about as much as you love japanimation.
Otherwise, decent video but I (as well as others who posted here) still believe it would be more understandable if "dumbed down." When I hear a title like "Quantum Physics without the BS," I think of a popular theme of books that tries to educate others from basics... Idiot's Guide. Sound Familiar?
theSnakeJakeRoberts 1 year ago
interesting video, liked it.
SammySpeaksUp 1 year ago
the person who made this video is a tard
AEVautomatic 1 year ago
@AEVautomatic why?
SammySpeaksUp 1 year ago
Very well done! If anybody is interested, the act of measuring a quantity of a state forces the state to change to another state associated with that measurement. (each measurement has a state that is innately tuned to it). So if you have some state that is full of random information, and you measure it and get a value, you know what the state of that particle is now (and the previous state can't be found now). Measuring it again, changes it to the state associated with that measurement, etc...
cutepanchan 1 year ago
Jesus controls the spin !
mallamoozoo 1 year ago
ok good job, but can we have a serious discussion without the flowers?
Sorry if that sounded grumpy.
toddmorrow1 1 year ago 16
im not sure we even have the right language to understand the impetus behind what these principles mean, at present. Though most of the way we interpret understanding of a thing has to start at some point.Thats what i find facinating , where will it all lead in say ....50 years.
mikevern69 1 year ago
did they try this same experiment using atoms with an even number of electrons???
akaskyscraper 1 year ago
Fuck you nigga. Stopped watching this shit after about a minute. Right when you decided to take consciousness out of the explanation. Consciousness plays a vital role in understanding reality. Quantum physics can't be described accurately without including the tools used in the experiment, even if its your own nervous system. The reality we perceive depends on the signals we receive and interpret through our brain. Hippie Dippie shit my ass. It's fucking reality nigga, get over yourself.
guitarist002 1 year ago
So much hate in these comments. Well I thought it was a pretty good explanation, thumbs up!
runeaam 1 year ago 14
The assumptions are done in 3D and the elements in the experiment are arguably but still very likely using more dimensions than 3 so I think that might be the problem.
Ramiromasters 1 year ago
@denito9474. why didn't you label the magnets and atoms? when you were a kid, didn't you ever play with magnets? I watched the atoms pass through the two magnets, and i understand the atoms revolvement, however, you completely dismiss the effect of the third magnets affect on the top atom. It would have been to powerful to just let it pass. revolvement wouldn't save it from spinning off. nextbid.
nextbid 1 year ago
gyroscopic precession - your using a magnetic test item - silver atom, and magnets. the "spin" of the atom will be a left or a right for a verticle set of magnets, induced from the magnets depending where is passess through the magnetic field, as gyroscopic precession acts at 90' to the angle it will either go up or down. if another verticle set of magenst was placed immediately after, you dont see another dual 'split' because of the angular momentum of the atom, which is also magnetic.
MrJackAttack13 1 year ago
Great video but just one comment ... from 2:22 to 3:14 the person in charge of the graphics decided to take a little LSD trip ?! Haha.
Snootwaller 1 year ago
this guy is just ignorant because quantum physics goes hand in hand with consciousness. what an idiot.
freeballa9876 1 year ago
what's with all the shurbbery that appears over the diagrams? lame
foxx0775 1 year ago
also, the shape of the magnets was to saturate the magnet to attain a high enough field in order to observe this effect.
daenumen 1 year ago
NO! NO! NO!, you have forgotten two MAJOR FACTORS, resultant polarisation, ie, firstly at the second magnetic field the electrons are not oriented pefectly parallel left or right facing, they still have up and down components, and secondly, the silver ions have an entropy that results in a variation of the orientation. hence the atom itself interacts with the electron and can change its state as determined after the magnetic field.
daenumen 1 year ago
I could listen to you talk this quantum physics junk to me all night. I think I'm in love.
jodijam 1 year ago
this is good video
yaswanth10 1 year ago
surley there are better experiments then this flawed p.o.s?
yourboycal 1 year ago
It's pronounced "a-gan" not "a-gain" lol
NutsandGuts 1 year ago
@NutsandGuts its pronounced however u wanna pronounce it
freeballa9876 1 year ago
What happens if you skip the horisontal magnetic field (step 2), and only have to consecutive vertical fields? Wouldn't the "only spin up atoms" again split into spin up and spin down? Meaning that the horisontal field wouldn't be responsible for the interference leading to a disturbed pattern, but that any magnetic field would arrange the randomly spinning atoms into systematicly opposed type of spinning.
izemayati 1 year ago
@izemayati
2:50-3:20
if you have two sets of horizontal magnets, you only get one stream coming out of the second pair. The horizontal measurement destroys the information we had about the original vertical measurement.
denito9474 1 year ago
@denito9474
Yeah, you're right (looked it up). But I still can't digest the fact that the apparatus (ie observer) alters the state observed. Thanks for the upload by the way.
izemayati 1 year ago
@denito9474 Has there been an experiment that tests every angle down to a certain point of a circle? I"m curious as to whether there is a possibility that another force could be in affect which allows the atoms to have a property that allows it to have an infinite number of angles that it could go(eliminating the exact opposite of every angle on a circle)
sensemouse 1 year ago
@denito9474 u r a tard.
AEVautomatic 1 year ago
@denito9474
"The horizontal measurement destroys the information we had about the original vertical measurement."
This is poor language. It is more precise to say that when one applies an alternative and intermediary measurement it destroys the immediacy of the repeated measurement. Mathematically, when one applies the x B-field the state is projected into a new eigenbasis thus changing the wave-function of the system. If you want no BS then you need to consult a Physics text.
DavidAlanRogers 11 months ago
@izemayati
electromagnetic field is undividable though, a moving electric current creates a magnetic field and vice versa
you´re probably right somewhere down the line i just think this is how it works
ibajem 1 year ago
@izemayati There is a given relaxation time that also allows the "separation" of spin up and spin down atoms to be reset. The interaction with an orthogonal field simply causes a perturbation of the system which promotes the system to reset itself.
PlaguedMaggot 1 year ago
@izemayati
No, because the atoms have endured an act of measurement projecting the state onto the relevant observable's eigenket. Reimplementing the z field at this point does not constitute an event to the system. This is a postulate of QM. An immediately repeated ideal measurement yields the same result.
However, this experiment is idealized in the way it is presented. In reality the wave-function might have some time variance or other such influences.
DavidAlanRogers 11 months ago
@izemayati
Someone also mentioned that the orthogonal B-field perturbs the system and allows the z spin configurations to reset, that explanation works even if you don't believe in the literal "collapse" of the wave-function. I like it.
DavidAlanRogers 11 months ago
Yeah! QM doesn't explain everything!
For instance, it says nothing about how many morons can spew idiocy on one thread. QED.
(quod erat demonstrandum, not quantum electrodynamics, that is.)
FetchUnadvise 1 year ago
i got how it works :D.EACH SILVER ATOM contain BOTH SPINS. :DDDDD
sesshoumaru3st 1 year ago