Action Lab in 10 years: So I created a Time Machine but it can only send messages back in time that don’t change the timeline.

@Jay_Kay666

Жыл бұрын

"Sorry, I'm late from the party. Come and meet me in the future?"

@grapehool

4 ай бұрын

D-mail?

@nickduplaga507

Ай бұрын

Which timeline won’t change? Past, present, or future (universe branch)? Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics fixes the paradox.

@AM-jx3zf

Ай бұрын

well 9 years left

@milkwater1204

4 күн бұрын

FG No. 8: Phonewave (name subject to change)...

It reminds me the joke where scintist doing experiment. He cutting insects one leg an then making noise, the insect is start running. After that he cut another leg then make noise and the insect does running. The scintist repeat the cutting the legs of insect until he cuts the last, and then after making noise the insect does not running. The conclusion that scintist did is that insect without legs does not hear:) Good experiment, interpretation could be more.

Even without the second beam splitter, the light still goes into a superposition of taking the red path and the blue path. A wave with half amplitude hitting the detector doesn't mean it would try to produce half a photon, it still produces a whole photon but only has half probably of doing so. Detecting photons at the detector doesn't mean they must have traveled as particles. The beam splitter still splits the photon into a superposition of going either way, and half of the photons end up hitting where that side-beam is pointing and don't hit your detector.

@rotorblade9508

Жыл бұрын

yes, the explanation seems hard to accept because it makes you think there is instant action at a distance, but it just works

@jonaohana3376

Жыл бұрын

Yeah most def the left atoms quark nuetron start def will lead to orange juice

@JNCressey

Жыл бұрын

@Bobby T, in the double-slit experiment, particles are detected on the screen. Are you saying that means they travelled as particles even when producing interference patterns?

@JNCressey

Жыл бұрын

@Bobby T, if it had to be a particle some amount of time before hitting the screen, wouldn't that change the pattern? is the diffraction pattern on the screen not consistent with it travelling as a wave all the way up to the screen?

@JNCressey

Жыл бұрын

@Bobby T, if they travelled along straight trajectories, wouldn't there be a shadow in the middle because of where there is opaque between the two slits?

Yooo i remember learning this in my quantum mechanics class. Literally blew my mind

@jamessidis4298

2 жыл бұрын

LoL

@lotsoffreetime8392

2 жыл бұрын

What happened to your brain matter after that happened 🤔

@chrishbeatboxing2291

2 жыл бұрын

@@lotsoffreetime8392 it blew even harder after i had to write two 2000 words paper on different interpretations of quantum mechanics + the quantum erasor

@mickyr171

2 жыл бұрын

@@chrishbeatboxing2291 My guess is, you didn't pass the class, or did you?, we cant know until you show proof of the certificate

@lotsoffreetime8392

2 жыл бұрын

@@chrishbeatboxing2291 after reading your comment i lose some of brain cell 🙃

I was losing my mind because I watched like 20 double slit experiment videos and NONE of them could show the wave function collapse in an actual real life experiment, it was always an animation or something. I thought this was a complete paradox, if it is easily verifiable why is there not a video of it happening? This is the first video I've ever seen that actually demonstrates the collapse in real life, thanks!

If you add the beam splitter, you simply can't tell which photon went which way. The interference pattern is one half of the sum of the photons seen without the beam splitter. You just can't tell which beam it is. When both interference patterns are combined they show the same image as without the beam splitter. There is no going back in time, sorry folks.

The destructive interference pattern comes when the wave function of the to beams of light are split, dis-aligned and recombined. The beams of light behave like a wave function all the time.

@Mr.BobsDog

2 жыл бұрын

@@InstagramUser2 you wish jelly fish

@joaofelipecamargopinheiro4230

2 жыл бұрын

Exactly, but Quantum mechanics is open to interpretation. Even though they all agree on the predicted outcome of experiments, they disagree on what the wave function represents. And then you get, in my point of view, ridiculous interpretations, like the one presented on the video or many-worlds interpretation.

@DaP84

2 жыл бұрын

So why does the interference pattern appear in the double slit experiment, even when shooting separate particles, one by one?

@joaofelipecamargopinheiro4230

2 жыл бұрын

@@DaP84 It's the same reason. The particles behave as wave functions, I mean each particle individually so it doesn't matter if it's one at a time or one billion at a time, and this wave function, for each particle, spreads over all space. You could imagine It like a water wave, even though they don't behave exactly the same. So this wave function interferes with it self, causing the interference patterns, the analogy with other types of waves here is basically perfect. I don't think anyone disagrees with what I just said, but the problem is: "what does the wave function represent ?". Roughly speaking, the answers to this question are called interpretations. The most popular one is the Copenhagen interpretation, where the wave function represents an amplitude of probability, but there are many many others. A very interesting one is the de Broglie-Bohm interpretation.Truth is that it doesn't really matter, since they all agree on the outcome of the experiment and can't be tested, but it's interesting conversation

@jamiebaxter9360

2 жыл бұрын

@@joaofelipecamargopinheiro4230 exactly. Why do people always make it sound more complex than it is?

I've heard about this several times, but it's really cool to se a real life experiment of it!

@marcin4xm

2 жыл бұрын

where do you see real life experiment ? any single foton emiter ? any foton detector ?What about 1000 kilometer long photon of 300hz frequency ?

@1998ichigokurosaki98

2 жыл бұрын

@Eric C pseudo intellectual detected. Do u even realize that the point is to use 1 photon because it cant take 2 paths at the same time? If u have more than 1 than each of them can take different path

@kermitthedarkness1388

2 жыл бұрын

@@InstagramUser2 I'm better than Instagram User, My content is better fr

@thehulkamaniabrother2.089

2 жыл бұрын

Have you ever heard of Breaklife???

@thehulkamaniabrother2.089

2 жыл бұрын

@@kermitthedarkness1388 I'll make sure I see you down here at Breaklife!!!

When you don't see an interference pattern it doesn't mean light photons are not behaving like a wave. It just means there's no interfering wave because there's only one path.

@muffininacup4060

2 жыл бұрын

Doesnt even have to be one path, the interference is due to the two waves being misaligned, not due to the existance of two waves by themselves

I have a vintage beam splitter Prism from an atmospheric mass spectrometer my grandfather designed and built with his team in the early 1970s. I have all the mirrors and lenses from the original device too. It was used to measure diffrent gasses in the earth's atmosphere. I only have the optical parts for it though. I don't know what happend to the rest of the original machine. I do, however, have the original manual and the pamphlet that gives a brief description along with credit to the team who built it aswell as photographs. It's pretty sweet.

Superdeterminism is another way to explain the retrocausality seen in this experiment. In a superdeterministic universe the photon either propagates as a wave (when the 2nd splitter is in place) or as a particle (when the 2nd splitter is removed) because the future placement of the splitter is already determined.

I'm not sure your explanation is quite right: without the second beam splitter your setup is just detecting that the photon traversed the blue path, not if it's a particle or wave. I think you might have mixed that this with adding polarizers in the paths after the first beam splitter to detect which path was traversed.

@Tore_Lund

Жыл бұрын

I'm not sure either that this gives any meaningful result in air, it has to be done in a vacuum. I suspect this experiment is an explanation model, not indented to be used to test anything.

@mduvigneaud

Жыл бұрын

@@Tore_Lund As far as I understand it's equally valid in air as in vacuum. The experiment is to test if photons are particles or waves (spoiler: they're ALWAYS waves, even when you measure them as particles.) The problem with removing the second beam splitter is that it doesn't tell you that it's NOT a wave and only transited one path as a discreet particle. It only tells you that it DID transit the blue path.

@Tore_Lund

Жыл бұрын

@@mduvigneaud Air does interact with photons, there is diffraction which means that the are absorbed and reemitted. However as the distance is short, the majority of photons might not interact with any air molecules?

@mduvigneaud

Жыл бұрын

@@Tore_Lund From what I understand that's a bit of a misconception: they aren't absorbed and re-emitted. They're diffracted because they are waves. The interaction with air molecules is also not relevant to trying to determine if they are particles or waves.

@Tore_Lund

Жыл бұрын

@@mduvigneaud It depends of the molecule; like with spectrography, specific wavelengths are absorbed and reemitted, in this case, green might be be able to pass through, but if there is an interaction, the result is the same as when the light hits the screen, the wave function collapses before it ever reaches the screen.

There are so many awesome experiments with light. Somehow still unbelievable how it is a particle and a wave at the same time.

@howiegruwitz3173

2 жыл бұрын

It's not. That's like saying an mp3 and a singers voice and the microphone and the speaker are one.

@anywallsocket

Жыл бұрын

@@howiegruwitz3173 exactly. the wavefunction models quantum behavior BEFORE it is measured. measured quantum behavior is necessarily eigenstates of the wavefunction, which are particle-like in a sense.

“A simplified diagram looks like this” *proceeds to show literal wizardry on screen and call it simple*

Adding/removing the second beamsplitter doesn't change how the photons travel. With a second beamsplitter: both red and blue path reach the beamsplitter, get split, and in both directions a mix of 50% red + 50% blue comes out, so when one reaches the target, there is an interference pattern between them both when they excite electrons in the target, making them emit "reflected" photons. Without a second beamsplitter: only one path (red or blue) reaches the target, and has nothing else to interfere with.

@RomanPawleta

Жыл бұрын

True

Wheeler's Delayed Choice is usually not done with light.It's done with electrons and full atoms.

God I really wish I was smart

😊Found myself smiling the entire video!! ..Luvd it🙌🙏

Your way of explaining something is brilliant and you help me understand things that I never could have imagined, keep it up dude.

@howiegruwitz3173

2 жыл бұрын

It sounds like he's being molested as he talks

These kinds of experiments are so interesting. I wish I could simply implant some doctorate level particle physics knowledge into my brain. These are the kinds of things that start blending reproducible experiments with philosophy and causal finitism and how we know what we know, ya know? Sounds like hippie stuff but to me its fascinating.😁

@samlevi4744

2 жыл бұрын

You can. It just takes a while.

@mr.loveandkindness3014

2 жыл бұрын

@@samlevi4744 true that😂

@thehulkamaniabrother2.089

2 жыл бұрын

Derp

@JustinL614

2 жыл бұрын

@@mr.loveandkindness3014 We know what we know based on reason and evidence. Empiricism is the branch of philosophy for these scientific discoveries.

@mrfashionguy1

2 жыл бұрын

Why can't you? Apply yourself. With the plethora of great KZread channels on the subject it's actually mot as hard to get into Quantum Physics anymore. Just gotta open your mind to some crazy shit haha

The same thing happens in Davison and Germer experiment and young double slit experiment the only difference is instead of photons electrons interfere with each other.Thank You action lab for refreshing my concept.

It's kind of mind blowing when you try to imagine it from our perspective. I personally like to look at photons from thier own perspective. Because of the relativity, they exist in all points of their trajectory simultaneously within a single point in time. In other words, from a photon's view it doesn't experience any time, so the second beam splitter either is in its path or isn't. There's simply no time for the beam splitter to move once the photon started its journey.

@ninehundreddollarluxuryyac5958

2 жыл бұрын

very few people see how relativity requires the photon to have simultaneous contact with the emitting atom and the absorbing atom even though we see time pass, the photon does not. If time doesn't exist for the photon, why do we see it as having a frequency and a wavelength? I never understood that.

@fatalwir

2 жыл бұрын

@@ninehundreddollarluxuryyac5958 Well, you can look at frequency or wavelength as properties which describe the amount of energy transported by the photon. The higher the frequency is (shorter wavelength) the more energy is being transported.

@renedekker9806

2 жыл бұрын

_"There's simply no time for the beam splitter to move once the photon started its journey."_ - it is more correct to state that the photon _does not notice_ the beam splitter moving, because it happens in the same instance of time.

@jdtv50

Жыл бұрын

“They exist in all points of their trajectory simultaneously within a single point in time” what does that say about a video.. I mean , when a camera captures video footage, it’s splitting the incoming light into individual photons that are recorded and stored as a series of frames… You’re compactifying time. Like putting your finger in a laminar flow..

It's the most magical thing i know in physics. More magical than sci fi or other fantasy genres.

Best explanation I came across! Thanks!

The follow up Huygens optics videos cleared it up for me. Single photon levels are a misconception

plot twist: from the pov of light, there is no paradox, since there is no time

Tbh, I'm impressed! I haven't seen a science experiment like that b4!

To understand why the delayed choice quantum eraser does not imply time travel (or retrocausality), I recommend Arvin Ash's video on it. Sabine Hossenfelder also did a video on the subject. In the defense of The Action Lab, which often makes great videos, this is a very technical and tricky subject.

@markfernee3842

9 ай бұрын

This is not the delayed choice quantum eraser, but rather Wheeler's delayed choice experiment. The retro-causal nature of the experiment depends on there being a choice in the first place. The phenomenon being explored here is called "contextuality". That means the measurement itself determines the property of the quantum object being detected. This is a central property of quantum theory.

@user-kq1tz1qf8h

9 ай бұрын

пока что нет правил запрета передавать информацию во времени обратно!)))) биткоин в помощь!)))

Thank you for these videos

But a photon travels at the speed of light, meaning it cannot have a property of time, past and future is the same singular timeframe for the photon. So technically a photon's state can never be different between two sets of time frames for an observer, it's either always a particle or always a wave. If it needs to be a wave, it was always a wave, since "always" is only valid if you're an observer.

Would you be able to demonstrate the quantum eraser by any chance? I genuinely have no idea how the scrambling process works.

@calebpoirier751

8 ай бұрын

yes, more about the quantum eraser please!

thats not really the delayed choice experiment. That involves a special crystal, called a non-linear BBO crystal, that actually does split the photon into 2 entangled photons each with half the energy of the initial photon, and it is also a continuation of the double slit experiment, so you would need that in there as well.

@jamesedgewood4643

Жыл бұрын

You're talking about a different experiment. The Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser experiment. This one is the Wheeler Delayed Choice experiment.

A different interpretation is that the photons are reacting directly to consciousness , and that they are not going back in time, but are instantly changing according to ones awareness.

Finally! I looking for this experiment.

Look further into this. He did not fully describe the retrocausal effect probably because it's very nuanced. The people who first performed the quantum eraser experiment call it "causally disconnected" this is inclusive of instantaneous action at a distance aswell as retrocausal effects. Its important to note no information can be sent back in time but you can observe the effect after sending alot of individual photons through.

@lucbloom

2 жыл бұрын

So I’m not the only one who felt like this could have been explained better? Mind you, still grateful for the otherwise excellent and free videos! :-)

@williamcrosby1061

2 жыл бұрын

@@lucbloom just look up "john wheeler" on youtube the first video should be a 2 min video of him talking about the delayed choice. He puts it in plain English.

@goldenalt3166

2 жыл бұрын

@@williamcrosby1061 I find the videos putting it in layman's terms make it sound more magical than it appears to actually be.

@williamcrosby1061

2 жыл бұрын

@@goldenalt3166 right... because retrocausality is very non magical... you obviously didn't watch john wheelers video either or you definitely would not have said that.

@renedekker9806

2 жыл бұрын

@@williamcrosby1061 _"just look up "john wheeler" on youtube"_ - I did that. The video does not make it very clear at all. _"because retrocausality is very non magical"_ - no retro-causality is necessary, unlike Wheeler seems to imply.

Thank you for these videos....love your videos.....

Describes my life perfectly. My wife always retroactively blames me for everything

Wow! Amazing content! I was just discussing with my friend a few months ago that I wanted to perform this exact experiment, but didn't know how. Gotta love action lab! Some of the best content and in digestible chunks.

What is shown here is just a classical Mach-Zehnder interferometer. So it is not surprising that the interference is a function of the presence of the second beam splitter. This is just explained using the wave nature of light. It is only at the single photon level that this experiment explores quantum properties. At that point the beam splitter seems to "decide" whether the photon is a "particle" or "wave" before the wave/particle choice is made later in the experiment. This highlights exactly why a photon cannot be considered to be either a particle or a wave. Rather, it is a quantum object.

It seems more likely to me that the photon is not switching between a wave or a particle, but instead there is something we still don't understand about photons.

@direvosabostien3565

2 жыл бұрын

I agree, there must be something else, though QM explains it well.

Thank you, I remember asking for this video.

Photons aren’t exactly point particles, they just exhibit particle like behaviour. They are waves and the photon energy equation contains frequency.

Wow, Thanks alot for your effort. That was a really nice video.

When we detect a "photon", we are actually measuring the change in energy state of an electron. This electron is local to the measurement device, it has not moved. The wave in the electric field has caused the local electron to change energy state. If we wish to be esoteric, we can argue that a "particle" is anything that transports energy, and so fluctuations in electrostatic force (i.e. waves in the electric field) can become "particles". However, this is our choice of perverse use of language, not some profound condition of reality. The reason i say it is "perverse use of language" is because the word "particle" already has a pretty well understood definition. It means a substantive thing, occupying 3 dimensions of space, having mass, and being capable of exuding force, whether that force is gravity from mass or electrostatic force, as charge. Now it's important to note that this perversity is not limited to the layman's use of everyday terminology. It's perverse with regard to Maxwell's laws of electromagnetism. Maxwell has it that there is an absolute distinction between, on the one hand, a "thing" that occupies space and 3 dimensions, and which exudes force such as charge, and, on the other hand, a mere fluctuation in the strength of a force field that is exuded by a substantive "thing". Maxwell called the movement of the former a "current", and said that this movement creates a magnetic field. He stated that the movement of the other, a mere wave in the field, did not create a magnetic field, and was not affected by a magnetic field. Indeed, it was Faraday who first established this fundamental difference between moving waves in an electric field and moving charge carries in space. The former is light, the later is current. Describing light as a "particle", therefore, contradicts Maxwell's laws, and has it that light waves are actually currents, carrying a source of charge across space. This is manifestly not so, and thus we might begin to question why the issue of light being a "particle" is so culturally resistant to disproof. Perhaps some people are just particle folk, to the very end, and cannot abide a world view that contains such things as "waves". Waves are pretty strange. It's almost as if they transport pure information across space and time, existing as metaphysical messengers in a physical world. If waves are not magic, they will do until the magic gets here.

@arifbagusprakoso2308

2 жыл бұрын

Wow... how can I miss this core concept during college!?

@dineshvyas

2 жыл бұрын

A well known fact but never it had been stated so beautifully. Amazing.

@simengfu7352

2 жыл бұрын

You make physics enjoyable like art.

@JohnTan

2 жыл бұрын

Light is both wave and particle. Wave-only explanation fails to explain photoelectric effect, especially the threshold frequency part.

@tobystewart4403

2 жыл бұрын

@@JohnTan You are making the absolute declaration that the photoelectric effect is proof of the existence of particles. So, you claim that the photoelectric effect is evidence of a 3 dimensional substance, travelling across space and time, and itself occupying space and mass. A "particle" of matter. OK, so what is the photoelectric effect? The photoelectric effect is the phenomena of electrons changing energy state by quantised steps, and not according to an infinitely variable scale. When electrons change energy state, either absorbing or emitting energy, they do so in strictly quantised amounts. Why do we believe that this behaviour is associated with particles? Well, it can be. If we take a bullet with a known mass, and we shoot it with a known velocity at another object, we can calculate the kinetic energy in imparts to the other object. Both bullet and object are "particles", in effect. So, by using a kinetic model of energy, where mass and velocity are deterministic of all reality, we can understand "particles" as capable of transporting energy across space, and exchanging energy with other particles. This is why we suppose that the photoelectric effect might be the result of particle interaction. It fits the kinetic energy model of the universe. Yet, it is demonstrably wrong to declare that all exchange of energy in quantised form involves the interaction of particles. Consider the humble raindrop, and phase change. Water vapour condenses into droplets, each droplet representing a quantised amount of energy. That is to say, it takes an exact and quantised amount of energy to make one droplet of a given size from water vapour. Even though we understand that many millions of water molecules are combining to give each single quanta of energy emitted by the condensation of each individual rain drop, we describe the cumulative effect of all these molecules as a single quanta of energy, that being equal to one raindrop. And this is, in fact, a quantised event. Each droplet actually exists, and each droplet really does have it's own "quanta" of energy that dictates it's state, as either a liquid or a gas. And thus, every droplet of water has it's own "photon" particle, if we accept that quantised exhibitions of energy are hard proof of particles that transport this energy exchange. It's rather magical a mysterious, the way phase change between gas and liquid exhibits apparently arbitrary examples of quantised energy. Even so, for the purposes of the discussion of light, we have now established that water droplets must have particles associated with them, particles that hit water vapour and cause it to change energy state. Why? Well, we've established that any quantised exhibition of energy exchange is hard proof of the existence of particles, objects with 3 dimensions and mass and so on, carrying this quanta of energy from one place to another place. Therefore, as we have raindrops occurring, we have proved that raindrop photons must exist, and thus there must be these particles, with specific size and mass, capable of exchanging the energy needed to vaporise and condense water droplets. We are not permitted to argue that phase change occurs due to temperature and pressure. No, we have a quantised exhibition of energy, and we have declared that such a thing is hard proof of particles that transport the whole sum of this quanta of energy as kinetic energy. Now, a thoughtful person might try to argue that a change in temperature causes the droplet to form (or to disappear) because many "photons" of energy are being exchange by molecules. This argument does not explain why, or how, many small particles can suddenly exhibit the behaviour of one single large particle, but even so it does bring us back to discussions of particles being the carriers of energy, to and fro, and so it cements the idea that where we see energy exchange, we see particles hitting each other. Yet, what if we cause the phase change and water droplets formation by changing pressure only? How does the interaction of particles now explain the quantised change in energy state? A change in pressure doesn't even involve the exchange of many photons. Suddenly, we are faced with quantised exhibitions of energy exchange, without any apparent interaction of kinetic energy between particles. The point here is that "quanta" of energy, or discreet packets of energy, are analogous to the exchange of kinetic energy between particles of known mass, but they are hardly proof of such things. Yes, it is true, when we examine particles in the world, we can observe quantised transfers of energy. It is a bold claim, however, to argue that every quantised exchange of energy is hard proof of one particle striking another. This desire to perceive the world as substantive objects striking other substantive objects, this article of faith in the kinetic reality of things, is very ancient. Newton was criticised for suggesting the existence of gravity, because gravity violates the idea of a mechanical universe, a place where all things touch other things, and all exchange of energy is always kinetic. So does electrostatic force, but gravity violated the mechanical universe worldview long before electrostatic force did so. Anyway, that's what I think about that. I don't think one can convince the hard core particle people. Those folks are extremists. They are beyond reason. The believe in neutrons, and pineapple on pizza, and every other kind of perversion and wickedness. We just have to make the sign of the cross when folks get their particle fever on, and say "There, but for the grace of god, go I."

Light can act like a particle or a wave simply because _everything_ is based off the principles of fluid dynamics. It's the same reason why a large flock of birds look like it's a massive wave form. Naturally, size matters, the larger the the particle (i.e. a single bird) the more space required to create the wave. An impossible amount of individual molecules creates our entire ocean, and each individual molecule would act very differently independently than it would in the whole.

@jpe1

2 жыл бұрын

I’ve never seen a flock of birds fly through two different openings and then interfere with itself. I don’t think your analogy scales bigger than small atoms.

@joshdavis416

2 жыл бұрын

@@jpe1 that's where visualization is key, and observation of the behaviors of birds in flocks would help. Just because you haven't seen birds flying through any type of opening before, or two flocks of birds colliding, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. And it's backed up by video evidence as well. I will add the caveat there are slightly skewed behaviors as a result of neural processing being a factor, so I probably should have used a more inorganic example.

@mickyr171

2 жыл бұрын

I wouldn't say that things are based off our understandings of fluid dynamics, we based fluid dynamics off what we observe in reality, also, its not an impossible amount of individual molecules that creates our ocean, clearly the ocean exists so has a finite number of molecules, the real question is, what are the molecules atoms protons quarks made from? they're ideas we created to grasp the infinite complexity that is reality, we base everything on our perceptions of what we can observe but we truly have no idea, we created the entire concept of science from the ground up, this is why movies like the matrix exist, why religion exists, and what science as a whole was created for, its our modern attempt at explaining our existence, there are many others that also could be true, my guess is none are true and the actual definition of our existence is beyond our comprehension

@joshdavis416

2 жыл бұрын

@@mickyr171 first off, I intended to imply it's impossibility to comprehend the amount of molecules that make up an ocean, apologies for the confusion. You're absolutely right, those questions are pretty important, but they aren't unknowable. Science was created, but unlike religion science seeks _answers_ . It shows that the mere presence of something is in itself proof that there is more knowledge to be obtained. One day, we may solve the big bang, and I guarantee it will raise more questions than answers. Science is an ongoing pursuit to understand the world around us, accept what we see, then keep persevering. Religion on the other hand, well, you know.

@jpe1

2 жыл бұрын

@@joshdavis416 you are quite correct when you point out that just because I haven't seen something doesn't mean it cannot have happened. When I wrote my comment I knew I was being intellectually lazy by saying that I've never seen birds interfere with each other, and I knew that that wording was suspect for the reason you point out: my observation, or lack thereof, of any phenomenon is nothing more than an anecdote. Let me phrase my point more strongly: birds, whether flying in a flock or singly, cannot exhibit wave properties, they are far too massive. De Broglie showed that the wavelength of a matter wave is equal to the Plank constant divided by the momentum of the particle, and for a bird that momentum is enormous relative to the Plank constant, the wavelength would be minuscule, something on the order of 10^-21m or so (again, I'm being lazy, I don't feel like doing the math, but feel free to do the math and prove me wrong). I have absolutely no idea what "video evidence" you refer to, but I am certain that it is *not* showing birds in a superposition interfering with themselves. The largest matter wave observed (and done in very carefully controlled conditions) was a molecule of fullerene that massed about 25,000 daltons.

Amazing!!! I like the “back in time” theory.

A time traveler won't be going to parties coz they know they're experiments. It'll expose them lol

My favorite experiment in the history of Physics. 👍

Good experiment! Light(A comparison picture with examinations can not be included here) Left- reflect by splitter, mirrow and splitter. Right- pass splitter reflect by mirror and pass splitter a. no blocking b. right side block c. left side block I look at the results of video A Real Life Quantum Delayed Choice Experiment by The Action Lab. If examine carefully, b and c have already almost invincible patterns. b is brighter than c since c passed splitter twice The splitters and mirror influenced the qualities of light differently. Without blocking, the dark places are not darker than the blocked events. The brighter places are much brighter. So pattern is not because of waves interference.

Retrocausality? But... but... a curious thing about light is that its speed literally defines 'now' - travel slower than light and you're moving into the future, travel faster than light and you're moving into the past. It's called 'the light cone'. And this is from a *human* perspective. From light's perspective this 'delayed choice' would not involve any going back in time, it *is* time - from the photon's perspective, the time it takes from being emitted by the little laser pointer to the point where it reaches the target took exactly 0 seconds and the light traveled exactly 0 meters; the target, from light's perspective, is plastered up against what emitted it. There's no room in there to go either back or forward in time. What this shows is less a matter of light actually doing something strange, more a matter of our own snail's pace presenting us with optical and temporal illusions. Fun experiment. Thnx! 🙂

I am a fan of my idear: -lightspeed is not a real Barrier just the point where you bend space so much that you slow your Existence in space. -light punches infinit against that Boundary, so is infinitly slowed down. -so the light experiences no time and no Choice. The instants it hits the Detektor is the same as the start. But the light the Detector remits has that choice.

I fucking love this youtube channel. Thanks for these videos

Nice to see it in the flesh. If you think about it like an Everetian its so much less weird. No time travel, no changing the physics of things based on observations, just seeing what you would expect to see based on the fact you can only observe things for your own branch of the wave-function.

I always thought this experiment was astounding.

Could it be that all the photons are Trolls in disguise? Thank you for showing this famous experiment...

Quantum particles are always waves. We just call them particles because they come in discrete amounts of energy.

The only mistake here is that in general relativity it says our perspective of light makes it travel through time but light's perspective makes it travel in 0 time

Appreciate info. 👍

Wouldn't a simpler explanation be when the splitter is removed, they're still traveling as waves, but since the two beams are perpendicular not parallel they don't interfere?

@Ranstone

2 жыл бұрын

@Rutger Ockhorst I see no evidence of that.

@jarnevanbec2886

2 жыл бұрын

Indeed seems plausable to me and as the simplest explanation is always the better one if it can't be disregarded, I will currently think further on this path.

@anywallsocket

Жыл бұрын

@Rutger Ockhorst A 'single photon' does not make any sense - you can produce enough energy to emit a wave packet of particular energy, but since they are bosons, they are not classically countable.

Hello, I wanted to ask you to put two different containers, one wide and the other narrow, containing water with the same mass and initial temperature inside the vacuum chamber, so that we can see which one boils faster? . I think that water in a narrow glass will boil faster because it will have a lower temperature drop than the other one due to surface evaporation before boiling. Thank you for doing this test, friend . 💙💙💙

@Josh729J

Жыл бұрын

I think the wider one will boil more quickly because you have a larger surface area in direct contact with the flame.

Insane. The photons are aware when we try to observe them doing photon things. Maybe if we ask them politely, they would share their secrets with us.

I have some insight here, and these are concepts you likely have in your physics toolbox already. I had visions when I was 3-4 years young the only thing of this spirtual type I can really draw any inference to reality besides for knowlege of speech between 2 family members. Where a father passed away, said to me after that, don't you piss on me, but you can piss on ----- a little. Then the son talked to me to inform me of the passing and the discussion led to him pissing on his father's grave, at that point I told him what was said to me by his late father. So this first vision, was at a age of 3, I fell from my bed on the 2nd floor to the living room and shattered the glass coffee table. The strange thing about it is I remember seeing the ceiling and the coffee table and noticed the less than Earth gravity fall at which I fell through the floor and shattered the table. The last vision had to do with a tornado where instead of falling it was the same speed going up, but those circumstances should be verifiable by Missouri because that letter was written in a correctional facility to my mother where I told her and depicted the dream before the Joplin tornado, and the next day I was not in isolation I was in the A unit pod watching the news of the Joplin tornado. So all of these things are... reasonably credible. If you can know what's in front of and behind you at the same time in a state of gravitational anomaly. Then delayed choice may start to make some more sense. Now in current understanding if you muddle with the observation of the light travel, perhaps you occlude in some way the view of both directions. The lord likely views these concepts as elementary, and the kingdom is obviously built upon these concepts as these examples are already put in writing in the last supper with Jesus knowing what to say then regarding what was about to happen and the path to know Jesus and truly live forever with him in heaven. So, just remember that as you approach your soul being pulled around if you don't so happen to be in a part of the society that possibly in the future may substantially serve God in whatever capacity that it's important enough for those passed to pass a message about the sanctity of their bodies here which i'll remind you will be lifted up in a way that the next great miracles of God will be experienced. Obviously you don't do things like look at God you simply serve God and understand that it's really up to God even if you put his flesh on the cross and burn it and eat it, he said he will put those people out from their fire and they will walk in heaven having done no good for themselves or others. So while I do not like the application of physics projects in regards to human economics, I do believe we have a long journey and important journey of discovery ahead, and a somewhat cynical and serious reality we find ourselves in, so much that we must understand there is only one path to heaven, one king, that is God and it is not any man on Earth today or in the future that isn't serving God in whatever capacity.

Red path and blue path... nice

This. Is. Awesome.

I remember watching you years ago, subscribed on my new account, Nice!

how do we know you're only shooting one photon at a time? photons are supposed to be incredibly small, much smaller than electrons, and your laser beam appears much larger than that. the fact we can see your laser beam from the side means photons are being scattered toward our eyes, so your beam isn't 1 photon at a time.

didn't the slow-mo guys or somewhere exists a camera that can film so fast that you literally see the light moving and it looks truly like a wave

I hope it works

The fact that the contraptions werent aligned with the rug drives me crazy 😂😂😂

this video went so fast i couldn’t think lol

So everything in the universe is in the form waves, as if it were a programing code, and when we measure it, the code runs.

it may sound kinda funny but have you ever considered if the beam splitter was causing make the pattern? what i mean is there is no way you can measure with just a single photon. and there is a numerous number of photons that are colliding. so while the interference occurs or adding the splitter, the photons' path is changed by the elements of the splitter as it is also made of molecules. and they can absorb and reflect some of the particles. so i think the photons start acting like wave after it goes through the splitter but before. meaning the splitter breaks the photons from partical to wave

If you only measure the peaks of a water wave you'll get something similar. It doesn't need to collapse. The wave functions that 'collapse' are probability functions.

Maybe photons are discreet points and waves are continuous. Only when a wave ends does it look like a point?

So here's what I want to do. I want to set up the simple double-slit experiment, but use a gamma laser that can fire one photon at a time, but put the slit on an ultra-sensitive piezo crystal and measure the induced voltage. If it traveled through only one slit I should be able to measure the momentum transfer. If it went through both slits there's no momentum transfer. After getting it running, we then put a beam block splitting the left and right sides. We can still tell which side it hit, right? My physics professor back in college seemed to believe the momentum transfer simply averaged out so there was nothing to measure. We didn't have single-photon sources at the time to try exotic setups with.

@diedforurwins

Жыл бұрын

I’m convinced we are simply misunderstanding something at a fundamental level and that all this stuff is far less magical than it seems. If you asked someone from 1000 BC to walk into an air conditioned room in the middle of summer and showed them a box you did it with, it would seem like magic. If you were to show them how refrigerants work it would seem less incredible and interesting.

Optics and photonics is quite an interesting field to play with, even Einstein struggled with this. Einstein: "God does not play dice with universe"

My brain hurts.

@terrafirma9328

2 жыл бұрын

That should tell you stop doing the drug...science🥴

His experiment setting similar to what I know about interferometer that used in Fourier Transform Infrared or X ray Diffraction. So technically it is possible to measure only photon or another particle in the future.

Reminds me of Michelson-Morley experiment.⚛️

Please confirm that the laser only produces one photon at a time. And lets be clear just what that means in the wave model too.

If you only have one beam splitter, it's like shining a flashlight. There won't be any interference pattern, period, so that's a moot point to discuss the second or first splitter. It's still a wave in that there's energy or quanta "packets" of energy traveling via the electron moving down in energy state to generate that single quanta. As for the interference, it's simply the two beams not in sync because the first splitter broke up the beam... Using a second splitter didn't make the photon go back in time to decide anything. Now, the single photon causing an interference pattern, THAT is the real mystery. Perhaps the beam of light is traveling as MORE than a single photon, and is getting split up and then recombined, but our eyes and the electrons in the air molecules and detectors just can't detect it, so we don't see it, but it's enough to cause an interference pattern. People need to remember a photon is emitted whenever an election drops down from a more energetic orbit to a lower orbit, and to "detect" this energy, whatever electron in whatever atom doing the detecting must require LOWER energy than the photon in question. Otherwise, like the photoelectric effect, we don't see anything and we're all perplexed when in fact we just couldn't detect it.

Thanks for your content! Since the photon is traveling at the speed of light, wouldn’t the time you altered/observed it be the same time as it was released from the perspective of the photon? Asking for a friend.

@ward6238

Жыл бұрын

Photons don’t have a perspective. Considering a photon’s perspective is like considering marshmallowing an umbrella at lamp o’ clock in the morning. There is no discernible meaning to it. Special relativity dictates that the speed of light is the same in all reference frames. If light had a rest frame, it would be moving at the speed of light in its own rest frame, which is absurd.

this is pretty smart! Ha Thanx, now it's possible to do it even at home!

My interpretation is that the wave doesn't collapse without the splitter..that's wagging the dog by its tail. It was always a non-interference pattern, until -un-splitting it created the interference. When the two beams in the upper right corner cross over each other, there is no interference because there is just that much space between the photons. Even though it LOOKS like you'd get collisions because they are at 90 degrees to each other, there is enough space for them to safely zipper without ever colliding. But when you use the splitter, you are now forcing the non-interfering photons to turn at the same spot, which creates collisions...which creates interference patterns.

This is always a fun experiment to think about. But action lab is really bad with quantum mechanics. If you're curious about wave particle duality. Check out Sean Caroll's explanation.

it may help to consider that we only know the detector detected; afterward it is speculation

What if the alternate path is facing the opposite direction? Would the photon appear at the 2nd sensor instantaneously or delayed at the speed of light?

you deserve 10mill subs! ❤️

I think light is just a particle orbiting around around a mass infinitly small and dense in space time like planets that's why we see it as a wave and particle. If you think about it all the Pi in the equations refer to a circular motion and even frequencies translate to the position of a point in a circle. When you stop to detect it's position than you tooked a screen shot for a position in space time and reality colapse from it's continuity to a certainly in time. Just my thoughts light is like the block of reality itself since nothing is faster than light and it literally defines time. Let me know what you think

You can just say "combining [something]," such as "combining both beams," because the combination already _means_ "...together." Much like the "re-" of "recombine" not only already means "again," but also implies the "back" already. So you can just say "recombine at this path."

Complexity level 101

"Here, let me give you the equivalent of a charlie horse on your brain. Well, that's all we have for today, see you next time!"

Cool, it's like throwing a pebble in the water and measuring the waves it makes.

This guy isn't a person.he is a Legend!

@direvosabostien3565

2 жыл бұрын

and in his garage, and his wife is okay with her car sitting outside.

@terrafirma9328

2 жыл бұрын

His youtube bacon is paying her bills. I'm sure she ok with that, she can always get a new car🤣

What if photons travel as streams of particles at angles and diffract by an atomic medium density until they create a wavelike pattern on your backdrop?

Thought this whole installation started burning when saw the smoke😅

After this video, I went out and bought twenty pairs Nike shoes and then time travelled back to watch the video again.

I agree with honeyxm8. It is cool to see the experiment in real life. I've heard about it and have seen many animations of it and have always wanted to see the apparatus in action.

@williamcrosby1061

2 жыл бұрын

If you've seen the double polarizer experiments where you put a rotated polarizer in front of two polatizers completely blocking the light to somehow allow the light through. The physical experiment he set up is not really showing anything different than that because hes not using single photons.

In the one photon experiment, if there was smoke in the room, i wonder if we would see the green trace on both sides or one side only. I guess smoke acts as a kind of detector so maybe there would be no trace at all as soon as the photon interacts with it.

I want a beam splitter. Could do some cool experimentation myself.