The internet has me locked in a superposition of wondering _“How could humans be so unbelievably stupid?”_ and _“How could humans figure out something so brilliant?”_ at the same time

@Serasphiel

2 жыл бұрын

The human condition?

@okidam

2 жыл бұрын

Hahaha. I think of it as for every person that exists is another possibility for as much wonder or horror as one can imagine, and potentially everything in-between XD hahaha

@toni8675

2 жыл бұрын

The answer to your questions is also a superposition of "education" and "lack of education".

@winterphilosophy3900

2 жыл бұрын

Skepticism

@SolidSiren

2 жыл бұрын

@@toni8675 education /= intelligence though. Informed and smart are different things. And common sense is considered intelligence to some, but abstract thought is to others.

Thanks to PBS for continuing to produce a high-quality stream of content that will inspire the generations to come to seek out truth and understanding

@Feefa99

2 жыл бұрын

*Highest-quality

@benjaminhawkins6386

2 жыл бұрын

Eh. The physics is good but they also produce a lot of garbage propaganda.

@francaisdeuxbaguetteiii7316

2 жыл бұрын

Shut up

@francaisdeuxbaguetteiii7316

2 жыл бұрын

@@benjaminhawkins6386 source?

@olbluelips

2 жыл бұрын

@@francaisdeuxbaguetteiii7316 mr. Friedland!

I like how this theory explains why gravity can't be quantized like the other three forces because it isn't quantum. And, it makes sense since gravity isn't supposed to be a force when following General relativity.

@NLwino

2 жыл бұрын

What I like most about it is that we can actually test it. Theories like string or m theory are interesting, but there are no real test we can do to confirm it as far as I know. If a graviton does exists then we will probably not find out in our lifetime.

@1ManNamedDan

2 жыл бұрын

@@NLwino Gravity might be the residue of time moving through matter - If a graviton does exist it's probably entwined with a chroniton and in our current technology we have yet to come up with a method of studying a planck length of time or how to experiment with it so for now it can't be quantified.

@Denis-ue2nz

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah, gravity is probably not a force. Its curvature is an emergent property of travelling through spacetime.

@kalokajoe357

2 жыл бұрын

Yes but, we collapse wave functions by detecting them. By only being detected, the wave is collapsed. We dont give mass to it, and they are already inside a gravitational field before while uncollapsed…

@ThePowerLover

2 жыл бұрын

@@Denis-ue2nz Quantum forces too, just not of spacetime, but a given quantum field.

I always get a deep appreciation for Matt as he breaks down these ideas for everyone. Truly one of the great resources for curious minds in the world.

@joachimhalbach9363

9 ай бұрын

He only collapses the wavefunctions 😂

@Van-xk7gn

4 ай бұрын

If you haven't checked out Dr. Becky from Oxford, she's really good at explaining too.

Wow! Diósi-Penrose model makes a lot of sense! The fact that the more particles implies the greater the curvature of space-time in a specific point in space it "forces" the wavefunction to collapse and to define a position. It explains why gravity cannot be quantized because gravity is curvature of space-time.

@blinded6502

2 жыл бұрын

We don't know if gravity can be quantized or not.

@megajor232

2 жыл бұрын

@@blinded6502 you guys might not but I do

@condor6222

2 жыл бұрын

@@megajor232 ikr it's so simple

@tonyblackops

2 жыл бұрын

So how does gravity come to being in case of quantum field theory

@smallpeople172

2 жыл бұрын

But then isnt it quantized in the form of the particles?

I really wish I had had a professor like Doctor O'Dowd back when I was in school and thinking about what I wanted to do with my life.

@iambiggus

2 жыл бұрын

@@ChildOfTheLie96 Irony is a theist complaining about something from nothing.

@olbluelips

2 жыл бұрын

@@ChildOfTheLie96 you're just spouting words you've heard. Please stop

@stevespain6445

2 жыл бұрын

I used to be involved in a university for some time where I'd attend a lot of graduation ceremonies. One of my favourite group of memories is of the women in their 70's or older who were finishing their first degree. For most of them their husband died, and after raising children and grandchildren finally did something for themselves. If Science inspires you, go for it if that's within your reach!

@iLLeag7e

2 жыл бұрын

Dr. Matt is pretty awesome, agreed. Not everybody can get in front of an audience and do this stuff, although professors admittedly do it more than most. I've been a fan of this channel since day one. By the way Dr. Matt I'm sorry I called you skinny Thor in my first comment all those years ago. you just looked like Thor with your accent flying around out in space like a Thor do

@olgasnelling3527

2 жыл бұрын

@@ChildOfTheLie96 (1) Please explain to me what a communist is, in your own words. (2) Why would you seek out a Astrophysics channel if you denounce it so strongly?

I don't always fully understand everything in the videos, but I'm happy you make them in a way to bring it down to laymen terms. I find this stuff absolutely fascinating and have been binge watching your quantum videos.

Penrose's idea sounds so elegant that it feels like it must be close to the underlying truth...

10:32 "Unlike the interpretations that we've discussed, for example Bohmian mechanics or many worlds, OCMs can actually be tested." FINALLY. This is the most exciting part of this video, for me. I was thinking, from the very beginning of the video, "Yeah, new theories are great, but... do they agree with the data?" and it took 'til halfway through for that discussion to start. That was a super long ten minutes. :P

@Deltexterity

2 жыл бұрын

i never heard of objective collapse theory before but now im STOKED, if it proves true it could be a pretty big step towards a theory of everything right? since it would explain why general relativity and the standard model are either accurate or not depending on the scale?

@EnglishMike

2 жыл бұрын

Of course, they could all be ruled out within a few years, and then we'll be back to square one.

@PhiltheMoko

2 жыл бұрын

@@EnglishMike that's just as important to science as proving something correct.

@loganx833

2 жыл бұрын

But i believe there's something missing in Quantum mechanics ☹️ may be a good interpretation will give new insights

@rileybrown342

2 жыл бұрын

@@kendrickmcelfish2805 The closer we get to the truth the more care we have to take to ensure we're not fooling ourselves based on background noise.

I like how Roger Penrose uses a ceramic cat and a hammer attached to a detector. Instead of a living cat and a vile of poison attached to a detector. So as to avoid the absurd spectacle of the thought experiment.

@thomashenderson3901

2 жыл бұрын

Vial.

@larsalfredhenrikstahlin8012

2 жыл бұрын

And Sean Carroll always switches out the poison gas with sleeping gas! Much preferred.

@Breakfast_of_Champions

2 жыл бұрын

because of course a real cat is a conscious observer just like the experimentator

@davidtatro7457

2 жыл бұрын

Not to mention that a ceramic cat is a lot easier to place inside a box it doesn't want to be in.

@martianhighminder4539

2 жыл бұрын

Let's not forget the third possible Schrodinger outcome: the cat desperately claws a hole in the box and releases the poison gas into the room. Everyone dies, nothing is learned, other than yet another confirmation of the human condition being one of foolishness.

I'd love it if there was an episode going deeper into the experiments that can be done to probe and constrain objective collapse models, e.g. getting deep into literature on things like dual slit experiments with ever larger molecules, the experimental set up and connecting it to theoretical work. Love PBS Spacetime!

@Li-yt7zh

2 ай бұрын

An update or follow-up video would be awesome¡ Been a year since these experiments and initial results were discussed in the video 😊

Wait, wait, wait. So if I have this right. The Higgs field gives particles mass, that mass causes particles to warp space time, that warping of space time gives the appearance of an attractive force, that attractive force cause the density in an area to increase, that increased density causes a higher chance of particles to collapse, and that gives us a solid non-superposition reality?

@fragileomniscience7647

2 жыл бұрын

Might have a link to the Heisenberg uncertainty relation: With less space uncertainty, i.e. less gravity as per equivalency principle, you have more and more randomness and decoherence of trajectories of particles.

@bjrunson

Жыл бұрын

Mostly, mass all but guaranties collapse. Once is trillions of year matter can become more quantum i hear

@Latronibus

22 күн бұрын

Most mass doesn't come from the Higgs field. Most mass of our familiar "baryonic matter" (protons, neutrons, and electrons) arises from binding energy inside nucleons being equivalent to mass because of special relativity. This is about 99% of the mass of everyday objects. Besides that, if an OCM is true then yeah what you said is right.

@unfairleyc

21 күн бұрын

​@@Latronibus do you have a recommendation on somewhere that I could read about the difference of mass from baryonic matter? I'm not seeing any differentiation on pages like: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_generation however I do see on the Higgs mechanism that they mention "essential to explain the generation mechanism of the property 'mass' for gauge bosons".

These are my personal favorite "interpretations" of quantum mechanics! I just recently brought this up in our university journal club and nobody had head of these before. So glad to see a spacetime episode on this!

@ThePowerLover

2 жыл бұрын

It's not an interpretation.

@helloyes2288

2 жыл бұрын

@@ThePowerLover this is not a reply.

@icantthinkofaname4265

Жыл бұрын

@@helloyes2288 this Statement is false!

@wizzyno1566

Жыл бұрын

3 pedants in a row...

I wonder if in the future, once we've finally figured it all out, people will remember all the different yet fascinating theories that were competing to explain the weirdness of quantum theory. It also makes you wonder how many amazing ideas that were later proven wrong have been lost to the sands of scientific time. All these quantum theories are in agreement with all the experiments we've ran, and yet only one of them can be true. I mean it must be so, they can't all exist at the same time, in a sort of theoretical superposition of explanation... right?

@a.ielimba78

2 жыл бұрын

Look up [[ earth core superionic ]] Because of the extremes of pressure on the core, also matter takes on interesting effect's. Scientist discovered recently, that the core of Earth, is a liquid and solid at the same time. There are also earth core superionic videos on playlist on my channel as well, its on top of the page.

@drdca8263

2 жыл бұрын

Well, if a collection of “theories” are equivalent, and are just different interpretations, or different but equivalent descriptions of the same thing, they could all be true... or at least, in some sense? Uh, I guess it depends on the details of how the interpretations differ. I suppose conceivably there could be different interpretations which have the same content as far as what they predict about what can possibly be observed, but which also include incompatible metaphysical claims, and in this case they couldn’t both be true ? But if you ignore the parts of interpretations which aren’t even in theory testable, then they could be both true? I guess?

@flix7280

2 жыл бұрын

No, physics is absolute

@drdca8263

2 жыл бұрын

@@flix7280 what do you mean by this?

@lordemed1

2 жыл бұрын

Any quantum theory, by definition, can be both true and not true...haha

The Internet would be a much worse lace without, Matt. This is the most consistent, intelligent science show in YT.

@realzachfluke1

Жыл бұрын

Matt ties our Internet shoes, I absolutely agree. He's like our aglet, the little hard tube at the end of the lace that prevents it from becoming all frazzled, and keeps each lace away from ending up being more effort than it's worth, because you're just gonna want to replace your laces in that case, or even your shoes altogether. So I think you totally nailed it, the Internet would indeed be a _much worse lace_ without our Matt O'Dowd on it 🤍 lol

I have no background in physics nor do I understand half of what you're saying. But it is fascinating trying to wrap my mind around physical theories and the nature of reality they are trying to describe.

An absolute banger of an episode. Its good to see physicists are still working on interpretations of QM. It often feels as though all the issues are just pushed under the rug.

@ThePowerLover

2 жыл бұрын

This is about other theories, not interpretations.

@wulphstein

2 жыл бұрын

@@ThePowerLover With the right interpretation, we would unlock deeper level technology.

@ThePowerLover

2 жыл бұрын

@@wulphstein Yep.

Great episode, I especially loved the breakdown of the experiment on the ball emitting radiation. That was nuts how they were able to isolate it so much, they managed to detect single photons at a time. As necessary and fun theoretical physics is, experiments are the true heart and soul of physics and are the ones that bring us a step closer to understanding the reality we reside in. Just wanted to show some appreciation for the breakdown of an actual experiment and its results.

@a.ielimba78

2 жыл бұрын

Look up [[ earth core superionic ]] Because of the extremes of pressure on the core, also matter takes on interesting effect's. Scientist discovered recently, that the core of Earth, is a liquid and solid at the same time. There are also earth core superionic videos on playlist on my channel as well, its on top of the page.

Excellent! I almost didn't stick with you when you brought up Copenhagen, but hooray! Finally an episode that talks about modern, viable, testable theories that push QM to the next level. My only quibble would be that Many Worlds should be considered a theory as well. It's the null hypothesis. It's linear Schrodinger QM at its leanest and purest. Copenhagen, Pilot Wave Theory, and most others are mere interpretations because they basically look at the simplicity and elegance of the Schrodinger equation and go, "Nah, that can't be right," and bolt on ad-hoc explanations of what they feel needs to be different to make it not so. _These_ theories, as I've mentioned before, are genuine competing theories, with testable hypotheses. That doesn't make Many Worlds _not_ a theory; it just makes it the null hypothesis, the one that's assumed true if the others end up being disproven... until one of them builds up enough evidence to make a convincing case that it _can't_ be disproven, and becomes the new null hypothesis. Calling Everettian Mechanics just an interpretation is like claiming that pre-20th century, Newtonian mechanics was just an interpretation, along with the Luminiferous Aether and Aristotalian Mechanics (an object wants to be at rest, and will return to rest if disturbed, etc). That just wasn't the case... Newtonian Mechanics was the null hypothesis. It was the simplest version of physics that fit the observations that could be made at the time. Luminiferous Aether is very much like Pilot Wave and other hidden variables theories. "Surely that can't be right... action at a distance? Light traveling through nothing, self-propagating? No no, there must be a substrate for light to travel through, to translate gravity from one object to another." And it... wasn't a _stupid_ idea, by any means. It just wasn't the null hypothesis; a simpler theory, without the ad-hoc addition of a substrate, was available, and the burden of proof was on Luminiferous Aether to detect the Aether, just as the burden is on Hidden Variables to, well... _show the hidden variables._ Copehnagen, to me, is very much like Aristotle. Both of them were very early attempts to rationalize and explain the behavior they saw, but with absolutely no evidence. Both are prone to deeply regrettable misinterpretations... objects having _wants,_ for Aristotle, and collapses needing _observers_ for Copenhagen. Both run into paradox after paradox, with more and more bits and bobs having to be added on ad-hoc to explain new observations (why does an object on ice take so long to come to rest? Is the ice providing a force to keep it going? If so, why doesn't it accelerate? - vs the Observer problem, the whole bugaboo about Conservation of Quantum Information, the Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser, which appears utterly paradoxical in Copenhagen but is completely trivial in Many Worlds, etc). Many Worlds is like Newton. It's probably wrong-or, more precisely, it's probably a simplification with validity within the proper domain destined to be seen beyond-but it's the simplest theory, the one that doesn't _need_ to prove itself. It's the one that other theories must supplant. It is very much _not_ "just another interpretation". It's the ultimate distillation of everything we can currently _prove_ about the universe around us, with no ad-hoc additions or stubborn concessions to our own intuition that says "but I don't see many worlds around me". It's just a huge and very long-lived sort of crowd-think that so much of the scientific community mistakes Copenhagen for having that spot... but that's okay. Nobody realized how silly Aristotle's ideas sounded for quite a long time, either. Edit: Actually, quite amusingly, it just occurred to me that the Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser is _exactly_ the same sort of paradox as the "why do objects on ice take so long to come to rest" quandary in Aristotle's world-view. To make ice and other low-friction surfaces work in that interpretaion, you have to ad-hoc some kind of force, or maybe even motivation that ice wants objects to keep moving, or some nonsense, then maybe add on something to explain why it doesn't want things to move if they aren't already moving, or that the object's will to remain at rest is stronger than the ice's will to keep it moving, but only just barely... I see basically no difference at all between that and having to accept and come up with explanations for why entangled particles can communicate backwards through time, and then maybe adding on something to explain why they don't _normally_ and so on. Quite amusing. xD Actually, I might even go so far as to say that the Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser is the nail in the coffin that once and for all disproves Copenhagen and shows it for what it really is: an early attempt to deny what science was telling them and make sense out of it to our macroscopic intuition, but that has very little basis in reality, and no evidence at all.

@davedsilva

2 жыл бұрын

Bravo

@harmonicpsyche8313

2 жыл бұрын

Woah. Excellent argument. I'm commenting here because I want to see how MW opponents respond to you.

@Grrrnthumb

19 күн бұрын

MW is the simplest theory? Sorry, not a theory (no evidence) and not simple at all. It makes the outlandish claim that whole universes are instantly created. How?? Where does all the energy come from? There is no evidence to think that what we see in this universe points to there being other universes, none. It's NOT simply a continuation or simply believing in the Schrodinger equation as commonly proposed. It makes the HUGE, outlandish, preposterous leap of religious faith to interpret what we see during a measurement as a branching of universes. NO EVIDENCE. You can't pretend like that is not an assumption (even tho I know you will) It's just an idea that magic could happen (cloak it as a theory instead of magic) to make every possibility happen in unlimited universes and explain away any difficulty I can't explain in this world.. Even the very word "universes" is itself a one-word oxymoron, so you have to say "worlds" instead, otherwise it becomes more obvious how silly this is. Claiming you have knowledge of a universe outside our universe is also oxymoronic, in a sense, if not obviously farcical. We'll forgive you for the Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser proposition since it has been debunked, and yours is an older post.

Wonderfully made video and I am very proud so many fellow Italians and Italian laboratories are involved in this line of work.

I’ve always been frustrated by the “mystical consciousness” reason for collapse and was delighted to learn more about other testable theories! After all, why should a wave or a particle care about our cognitive processes? Kind of implies consciousness is made of the same “fabric” as the quantum field, and when we observe, it’s like giving that fabric a shake. Neat to think about, but this is way more exciting! Best video yet!

@ThePowerLover

2 жыл бұрын

The problem is that solipsism is not a falsifiable hypothesis, there does not seem to be an imaginable disproof.

@TankSenior

2 жыл бұрын

@@ThePowerLover That is until we figure out how and why consciousness arises, if there is some kind of physicality to it beyond the obvious "Brain=complex processing system=consciousness" we may be able to falsify it. (That is unless you're talking about solipsism purely from a philosophical pov)

@Mernom

2 жыл бұрын

The problem is the problematic definition of 'observation'. The most likely one is 'any interaction with anything', but people keep defaulting to the more ubiquitous definition, especially those out of the know.

@Airsoft0skater

2 жыл бұрын

I agree that it is a bit of an annoying explanation from a scientific perspective. However part of me really wants this to be true because it's a far more fascinating answer in my opinion.

@bean8287

2 жыл бұрын

i like to think that consciousness simply is born out of the underlying quantum physical processes. i.e. consciousness is quantum in nature you could even go further to suggest how our consciousness is entangled to our environment, and thats why we all consciously observe the same events, however, i predict that as we approach the ability to measure near the planck scale, we will actually have different conscious experiences of a minute detection in an experiment, as we arrive at a degree of precision not agreed upon by our individual conscious compositions.

If gravity can collapse a wavefunction, does this mean that acceleration can as well? I.e. can an atom tell the difference between a rocket sitting on the surface of the earth and a rocket accelerating in empty space at 1g?

@a.ielimba78

2 жыл бұрын

Scientist discovered yesterday, thatthe core of Earth, is a liquid and solid at the same time. Because of all the pressure on core, matter takes on interesting effect's, look up [[ earth core superionic ]] There are also earth core superionic videos on playlist on my channel as well, its on top of the page.

@FredPlanatia

2 жыл бұрын

@@a.ielimba78 this has nothing to do with the comment of Rutvik.

@Tore_Lund

2 жыл бұрын

Einstein said that gravity is acceleration so they are the same. Likewise a gravity wave is a ripple of deformation of space time travelling at the speed of light, so that ripple is a bending of space as it passes which is the same as mass does to space so it acts as mass passing at the speed of light. So the concentrated gravity wave Matt is talking about, must be in phase like a laser to make the ripples add constructively to an intensity that forms an event horizon. so it would require a form of lens, like concentric rings of large masses or even black holes of various sizes to form and focus a coherent gravity wave. Following the naming convention: A Laser works with light, a Maser works with microwaves, so a gravity laser would be called a "Graser". This should be enough for an entire Netflix series about a type III civilization!

@Dragrath1

2 жыл бұрын

@Rutvik the point related to acceleration might be a very important piece to the puzzling whether or not objective collapse theory pans out since in Wolfram's physics model it appears that in the large scale limit it can be shown that for any Turing complete system this limit when computational irreducibility is applied always reduces exactly to the generalized Einstein field equations with the catch that if super positions are used to resolve all possible orders for updating the system then addition to the normal causal space you also automatically get quantum field theory in the form of a universal Feynman path integral within an additional type of space that represents all possible states or outcomes for which a system can evolve which wolfram refers to as branchial space. This name comes from how it is effectively analogous to the configuration space of Quantum field theory under a softer variation of a many worlds interpretation where said worlds are not independent but rather branches of a single wavefunction which gravitate warping the local geometry of branchial space. Importantly the wave guide equation for pilot wave theory becomes a limiting case for the local metric tensor components within branchial space. In this case the probability of a quantum outcome becomes represented by the degree of local curvature of branchial space around said state in branchial spacetime. Likewise it means that a quantum measurement rather than changing the physical system merely represents the acceleration of an observer's frame of reference within branchial space. The higher the probability of an outcome the more paths are bent by the curvature towards that outcome so by extension a definite wavefunction collapse becomes equivalent to falling into a state where all possible trajectories lead to the same outcome, an event horizon within branchial spacetime. It is a lot to take in yet alone understand but it effectively means that all of quantum field theory can be described within the full geometric framework of general relativity with an observation of a quantum system becoming equivalent to accelerating your frame of reference within the configuration space of quantum field theory which is just as real as "normal" spacetime except that the units of this space are energy eigenstates of the Hamiltonian. A.k.a., rather than measuring distance in "meters" like normal spacetime the units of distance in this separate type of space are measured in joules. And hence the branchial components of velocity are measured in units of power which is interesting as we can now equate the Heisenberg uncertainty principal with a relativistic Lorentz transformation of the observers frame of reference. Also those infinities you get when you try and mix regular GR and QFT conventionally make perfect sense here as you are effectively trying to crunch a hyperbolic number of spatial dimensions down to 3. You are going to get infinities just like if you try and contract the Schwarzschild metric down to a radius of zero.

@loganx833

2 жыл бұрын

As long as equivalence is correct it should be correct

Such wonderful content, thank you! Gravitational Decoherence makes a lot of sense to a layman like myself, but as always this video has raised several questions that I'll be pondering all weekend :)

It's been a while since y'all put out such a thought provoking episode

I am grateful to be an observer in a relative location that allows me to understand a fair amount of the information coming from this and other Space Time videos. Videos like this let me scratch the QM itch I've had since high school without me having to sweat the math...

So, wait... If we assume that the mutual gravitation of particles leads to collapse, then how are we able to maintain superpositions here in the Earth's gravity well? Wouldn't the environment inside a quantum computer be subject to the same superposition-collapsing effect as the rest of the macroscopic Earth? Wouldn't this be testable by measuring the error-rate of a QC device at various altitudes?

@olbluelips

2 жыл бұрын

Hmm good question. I must be misunderstanding slightly

@csmarkham

2 жыл бұрын

Not strength of overall gravity of some localized spacetime, but the specific gravity of sufficient wave function interactions to cause collapse due to gravity within interactions. Finding that “Penrose Constant” (to coin a phrase-and which already may need more theoretic distinction following the experiment described in the video) for the nonlinear term for Schrödinger is a micro-, not macro-paradigm task.

@csmarkham

2 жыл бұрын

Gravity field continuity between micro and macro through… worth exploring. The QC measures may give insights into the scales. Interesting.

@Corbald

2 жыл бұрын

@@csmarkham Forgive me for still being kind of bull-headed about my ignorance, but _why_ does such an effect restrict it's self to the micro scale, when it does not do so in any other circumstances? I think many-worlds and the "no collapse" idea makes more sense than trying to differentiate between micro-scale gravitational effects and large-scale gravity wells. It would, otherwise, imply that the gravity well of a black hole is less likely to be quantum than that of Earth, unless I'm misunderstanding even more than I think I am (fully possible). Furthermore, doesn't the Sun discredit this idea? It's constantly undergoing quantum tunneling at a fairly well known rate, yet the matter in there is *much* more densely packed than in a quantum chip, or any lab for that matter. Such proximity should make quantum effects impossible, if short range gravitation effects cause chain-collapse.

@bastadtroll8922

2 жыл бұрын

in the absence of electromagnetic waves everything is in superpoistion. Obviously the collapse is due to influence from em waves. Its probably why dark matter exists and doesnt exist because it doesnt interact with em. Dark matter is matter in perpetual superpostion state with no way of collapse but it still has a gravititional effect because it is still matter. Wording is a bit loose there but you get my point. Mysteries of the universe and potentially quntumn gravity solved. Case closed.

This is the best channel on KZread. Full Stop. You approach the impossible, and not only make it real, but make it understood!

This is one of your best episodes, please go into more detail on this subject!

Am I the only one who had a major mind blown moment by his definition of the wave function collapse in 1:16?

@MrDubyadee1

2 жыл бұрын

Hard to tell. My mind is constantly blown while watching this series.

@miker252

2 жыл бұрын

Why are we always killing cats.

@eveie210

2 жыл бұрын

@@miker252 😂🤣😵😉

@penguinista

2 жыл бұрын

Nope, me too. It reminded me of science itself: we know only as far as we measure. There could be another explanation that fits the facts and fits inside our measurements that is actually the truth

@TheMathias95

2 жыл бұрын

@@miker252 Better we kill them before the kill us. It's is a scientific fact that we are already aware of what they are plotting.

This is amazing! Why isn't everybody talking about objective models more?! With such explanatory power, this could be a theory of everything. It's deterministic, no more quantum mambo jambo, it may connect gravity to the other forces. I got excited watching this, after so many years of frustration trying to understand the world.

@a.ielimba78

2 жыл бұрын

Look up [[ earth core superionic ]] Because of the extremes of pressure on the core, also matter takes on interesting effect's. Scientist discovered recently, that the core of Earth, is a liquid and solid at the same time. There are also earth core superionic videos on playlist on my channel as well, its on top of the page.

@theresnothinghere1745

2 жыл бұрын

Simple because by bell's theorem objective models (realism) and relativistic limits (locality) can't both be true in Quantum Mechanics. We have a lot of evidence behind locality and not much for realism.

I've noticed you have expanded you mind to possibilities beyond your classical science training full of "no's, not's and never's". Possibilities are exciting!!

Just discovered this channel, got a lot to catch up on. Thank you for the very understandable explanations of complicated ideas.

@fbkintanar

8 ай бұрын

kudos for removing the woo-woo about quantum mechanics and the classical limit

Matt, you’re awesome at making me think about things I already know about in a completely different way, or introduce aspects of concepts I didn’t know existed at all. Thank you!

@krikeydial3430

2 жыл бұрын

My brain almost split into two realities. This is mind-blowing.

I love this! I never really liked the ideas of many worlds or quantum gravity. This feels more intuitively right. Can't wait to hear how the testing goes. It's crazy that we can even test some of these theories.

Man, this channel is the beast!!! just amazing guys keep goinglike that

I understand everything from every episode of PBS Space Time, just barely. It's the perfect carrot to chase down the search engine rabbit hole. It forces me to learn and to understand more, and it's addicting. Thank You!

"Instead of gravity being quantized, Penrose theory predicts that Quantum Mechanics will be gravitized" Penrose's way of thinking just fascinates me.

@a.ielimba78

2 жыл бұрын

Look up [[ earth core superionic ]] Because of the extremes of pressure on the core, also matter takes on interesting effect's. Scientist discovered recently, that the core of Earth, is a liquid and solid at the same time. There are also earth core superionic videos on playlist on my channel as well, its on top of the page.

@PADARM

2 жыл бұрын

Agree, I'm so glad he got the Nobel Prize

So exciting to learn about this stuff! Feels like we're on the brink of understanding reality

@therflash

2 жыл бұрын

Yea. Haha. Just for long enough for somebody to ask ...but why?

@onbored9627

2 жыл бұрын

That's what the greeks said too, back when.

@lunasophia9002

2 жыл бұрын

@@onbored9627 And, more germane to a discussion of quantum mechanics, what scientists thought in the mid-late 1800s.

@evilsatyre8732

2 жыл бұрын

And this is where u are wrong. I'm mean sure its exciting, but there is so much more to know.

@MadameWesker

2 жыл бұрын

Or how about the line where quantum mechanics and philosophy start blending

This channel has fed my curiosity of space so much that now im taking every possible science class in my high school and hopefully going to Boston university for a degree in planetary biology or astronomy to become a astronomer or astrobiologist

Thank you so much, everyone at Spacetime, for these videos. You structure and write them in such a way that both a layperson and physics students with varying levels of understanding can grasp and enjoy the videos. In my opinion, you include just the right amount of technical information, equations and concepts to keep the interest of someone who has already learned about many of these topics, but not so much that you lose them entirely, and not so much that a person with much less understanding grows bored and confused to the point they turn it off. Goldilocks zone videos. Love them.

I've been watching this channel for about a year, and it's starting to pay off. I'm actually starting to understand at least 30% of these videos. I'll keep watching till it's 100% 😁

@harmonicpsyche8313

2 жыл бұрын

I've watched for 6 years and still have not reached 100% lol

10:05 (image reference) I still think wave function is somehow tied to 4th dimensional shapes and objects. We are only seeing a fraction or shadow version of most objects, passing through our field of 3 dimensional view. And when it's in our window of view, we say the wave collapsed so that's where it is for real. But maybe it is in more places than we can tell. Things can be both inside and outside our window of view. And the part outside our view, we call a "wave of potential". The image of the planet moving through the gravitational wave at 10:05 in the video, is a good example of a 4th or 5th dimensional object moving through space/time. We cannot see the shape in it's entirety. Only the portion within our 3D view but, we can slightly detect there is or was more to it. So we call that the wave collapsing

@yerpderp6800

2 жыл бұрын

I don't see why it can't be argued that everything is occurring in a single dimension and the mind extrapolates extra dimensions. There's still a human component when it comes to science, mainly the observation and classification of phenomenon in order to derive laws. Who's to say that in the process of classifying things, we've accidentally assumed there were extra dimensions in order to simplify the process of understanding reality? For example, suppose we take the natural numbers. Trying to encapsulate each and every member as a single entity is simply not mentally feasible. It's more practical to view the elements through the lens of base 10 (or whatever base, I'm using 10 as an example) since we can establish a finite number of groups (each group being a digit with a number being a combination of these groups). While this enables us to represent the natural numbers in a finite manner, we can't forget that natural numbers are not fundamentally defined to be in base 10; this was a human construct, with each group being a "dimension" to represent a number in 10 "dimensions". To then assume that some numbers are shadows of higher dimensions (if we can only view numbers that do not contain the digit 3) is completely missing the point. Who's to say we're not doing something very similar with our reality? What if length, width, height, time, whatever, are merely "groups" we extrapolated in order to understand our sense of experience? Memories, sensations, what if they are just extrapolations of something more fundamental? If anything is to be labeled as a shadow, it makes more sense to me that this notion of there being multiple dimensions is merely a shadow projected by rationality of something that's more intricate.

@jeromebirth2693

2 жыл бұрын

Yyoouu hhiitt tthhee nnaaiill oonn tthhee hheeaadd ii tthhiinnkk yyoouurr oonn ttoo ssoommeetthhiinngg Pplleeaassee ccoonnttiinnuuee wwiitthh tthhiiss lliinnee ooff rreeaassoonniinngg Tteesssseerraacctt

Knowing that there are actual experiments we can do to test these is quite exciting!

"But maybe that is our mistake: maybe there are no particle positions and velocities, but only waves. It is just that we try to fit the waves to our preconceived ideas of positions and velocities. The resulting mismatch is the cause of the apparent unpredictability." (Stephen Hawking, 1988) spaceandmotion

@fluentpiffle

2 жыл бұрын

@@EA-tc6kb Action, reaction, ‘time’ and observation, are all wave-motions of space/energy..because that is what exists..

@fluentpiffle

2 жыл бұрын

@@EA-tc6kb Keep it. You only repeated what I said..

@fluentpiffle

2 жыл бұрын

@@EA-tc6kb At least you didn’t say that Stephen Hawking’s quote is wrong!

In music theory the more basic the harmony is, the more potential connections it has The more vague you are, the more avenues you can take But as soon as you bring in more notes, you collapse any avenues that are no longer possible As you drag it through time, it becomes narrower to maintain a strong structure Apart of this is a natural inclination to do so but also lives within our expectation Maybe the two theories could work simultaneously, maybe potentials exist in the physically world and interacts with the observer aswell similar to how notes parallel to each other aren’t harmonious but are apart of a parallel stream that connects at some point They go in opposite directions, but it doesn’t feel that way as it feels forward but in a minor equivalent But if you try to compare both perspectives, you see an opposing forces, that are not compatible unless you go with the flow or limit your perspective/expectation Chords consists of a series of notes, but these notes are not married to the chord It shares homes with many, many other chords That you may not be able to hear at the moment Maybe superposition is the process of sharing particles Maybe the observer part of us is connected to the universe in a physical sense The thing that seems the most disconnected yet the most harmonious I feel this would connect with how they say there’s an opposite universe going backwards in time Maybe they’re the inverses perspective on everything Viewing the same but opposite particles from the same but different angle Making backwards feel forwards

I think it's one of your best videos in the past year. It's sad you're getting so few views, I really hope it won't discourage you from making more in the same vein.

00:00 / 04:21 I paused it here to appreciate the depth and detail of that introduction to 'the interpretation of quantum mechanics'. Wonderful

This is now my favorite interpretation/explanation for the collapse of the wave function!

Another truly fascinating episode which branches into Objective Collapse Theories. There's nothing better than being surrounded by a whole slew of science magazines and periodicals while interspersing between the articles videos such as this. ✌️

We need to sign a petition to stop the torture of the Schroedinger's cat.

@Feefa99

2 жыл бұрын

It would be 50/50 so you cannot expect reasonable resolution

@loganx833

2 жыл бұрын

😂

"If you can't quantize gravitation, then gravitize the quantum." Seems very practical solution.

I always think of the wave function as a formula that describes how to cook every variation of every type of food, in every type of oven, in every possible container, with every possible visual presentation in every possible kitchen in every possible place a kitchen could be. Only, we aren't talking about food, we're talking about the matter and forces of the universe.

Love this program, value what it contributes to our collective curiosity, and since I've not yet commented I thought it might be time. For whatever reason--and I'll have to think more deeply about why--this was my favorite episode yet. Cheers!

@a.ielimba78

2 жыл бұрын

Scientist discovered yesterday, thatthe core of Earth, is a liquid and solid at the same time. Because of all the pressure on core, matter takes on interesting effect's, look up [[ earth core superionic ]] There are also earth core superionic videos on playlist on my channel as well, its on top of the page.

@ThePowerLover

2 жыл бұрын

There is no "multiple realities" interpretation, there is multiple universes interpretation, all of them making up reality. And is only grandiose if you believe beforehand, that reality doesn't exceeds our universe "so much". That's religion, not science.

It's fascinating that the two biggest mysteries of our time both have powerful (but fringe) solutions from Roger Penrose. Wave function collapse being one, and the Big bang being the other (via his CCC). Penrose's imagination and independence of thought is truly remarkable. Also notable: his theories actually make predictions, unlike some other popular theories we don't need to mention...

@PADARM

2 жыл бұрын

That's why Sir Penrose is a Nobel Prize laureate very well deserved

@ihsahnakerfeldt9280

2 жыл бұрын

It shocks me how much creativity is involved in coming up with a scientific theory. It's almost like creating a piece of art.

@jakewilson487

2 жыл бұрын

Unbelievable human being. Probably my favourite physicist

I love listening to you Matt. Absolutely fascinating stuff. Mind-blowing....Now just understanding anything at all,all the time...now that therein is the problem...😁

@Graycy808

4 ай бұрын

Well said!

This episode was fire!! I really love the idea of being able to test things there experimentally. Cheers!

4:40 - I have always had an issue when physicists say the waveform collapses when it is "measured" or "observed." Please mention that when someone measures or observes the collapse they do it by interrupting the waveform with matter, and the result is the observation. So instead, say that the waveform collapses when it interacts with matter (or whatever else), not when it is observed, because it would still collapse if we weren't paying attention to the results. Saying it this way removes any human agency in the phenomenon.

@Harkmagic

2 жыл бұрын

Every collapse is an instance of particles becoming entangled. It is really shocking that this isn't the language used. Terms like "observed," and even "measured," in this case only serve to add to the mysticism around quantum mechanics that confuses people.

@ThePaulsen1992

2 жыл бұрын

Actually, not every interaction with matter/energy causes the wavefunction to collapse (assuming it's a real thing); some interactions just result in a larger quantum entangled system. The term "measured" is used to delineate between interactions that cause the wavefunction to collapse and ones that do not. The exact mechanism behind why certain interactions are measurements while others aren't is still a fervent topic at the forefront of physics (it's known as "The Measurement Problem"). While I agree the terms "measured" and "observed" can yield confusion when compared to their colloquial counterparts, they do have a certain utility in the context of quantum mechanics. In an ideal world an entirely new word would have been used to define the aforementioned distinction; one that didn't invoke a sense of agency. But alas, it's probably too late for that now.

@ThePowerLover

2 жыл бұрын

The problem is that solipsism is not a falsifiable hypothesis, there does not seem to be an imaginable disproof...

@eriknelson2559

2 жыл бұрын

@@ThePaulsen1992 Wavefunction "collapse" or "reduction" resembles matter-antimatter annihilation, which process also eliminates previously existing wavefunctions, reducing them to zero. Perhaps every time a wavefunction bifurcates, into "half going left" (L/2) and "half going right" (R/2)... that bifurcation is associated with the co-creation of virtual matter-antimatter pairs "another half going left + anti-half going right" (L/2 - R/2) and "another half going right + anti-half going left" (-L/2 + R/2)... such that emerging from the "split" would not merely be "half going left + half going right" (L/2 + R/2)... but rather otherwise instead "half going left (real) + another half going left (virtual) + anti-half going left (virtual)" (L/2 + L/2 - L/2) and symmetrically (R/2 + R/2 - R/2). If the particle "collapses" going "left", then the left's virtual particles are "promoted" to reality, L/2 + L/2 = L on the left, along with R/2 - R/2 = 0 on the right. The real R/2 right half wave is annihilated, along with its virtual states also, which are never "promoted" to real but "fade away". This annihilation-like process could possibly produce "virtual radiation" of the sort that Casimir plates could detect. Wavefunction collapses could perhaps "jostle Casmir plates back & forth" or something vaguely like that

Interesting. I'd been thinking the collapse was a result of interaction with other objects, and the more interactions, the more likely the collapse, which was why they tended to collapse when measured, as that required subjecting it to more interactions.

@juzoli

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah it collapses upon interaction. But every interaction IS a collapse, not just likely. But mind that “collapse” is not literal, it doesn’t stay collapsed. After the interaction, it is a wave function again, but that function carries the information of the interaction.

@Yogarine

2 жыл бұрын

Same. My amateur-theory is also that these wave function collapses are what _cause_ gravity. They warp time, which in turn causes diverging geodesics which then causes "torque" which manifests as gravity (as has been explained before here on PBS). c (speed of light) could simply be interpreted as an interaction/wave function collapse budget. The more interactions happen within a physical space, the more time is warped because the interactions take a way from time budget. More mass means more interactions, hence more mass causes more time warping which manifests as stronger gravity.

@ThePowerLover

2 жыл бұрын

@@juzoli The problem is that solipsism is not a falsifiable hypothesis, there does not seem to be an imaginable disproof.

@juzoli

2 жыл бұрын

@@ThePowerLover I think you commented this on the wrong thread, because your answer is not even remotely related to the topic here. What I said is easy to prove, and considered trivial in science, but lot of non-scientists misunderstands it.

@ThePowerLover

2 жыл бұрын

@@juzoli Is very related, as we can't test is a tree falling make sound when there is no one to "observe", interactions are like trees falling.

I'd definitely like to learn about white holes. I know nearly nothing about them, but the concept is so interesting.

This may be the most useful chapter in the Space-Time series. I keep wondering about the stark differences between Quantum activity and the real world we all live in. The approach laid out here starts to tug at the fact that the 2 systems are, and will forever be, distinct from each other even though they interact together.

@alexpearson8481

Жыл бұрын

Agreed. Although it feels incoherent and unnatural. Meaning humans don’t quiet have the full grasp on it…… I think (hoping?) there is significant refinement coming in the future…..

@GameDevMadeEasy

7 ай бұрын

It very much could be that we have the math wrong with some correct answers. In theory, we should be able to have a single, simple and elegant solution that works with both Quantum and the real world.

I’ve been watching Sir Roger Penrose’s career for 20 years. He’s got so many cutting edge ideas on quantum mechanics, consciousness and cosmology which make intuitive sense to me. It’s amazing to watch the scientific community come around to agreement with his theories. I believe History will regard him as an intellectual giant on par with Einstein. There is a whole episode of material around one point this video left out: Penrose doesn’t think consciousness causes the collapse of a wavefunction, he thinks the collapse of a large enough complex wave function IS consciousness.

@ardekakka

2 жыл бұрын

that literally doesn't make sense

@eenkjet

2 жыл бұрын

OrchOR was falsified in 2016 by Penrose's experimentalist. The "bing" turned out to be a gestalt counting space (start/stop) for a biological language then named GML (geometric music language).

@tehdreamer

2 жыл бұрын

@@eenkjet Hameroff have answered all of supposed "refutations". Nothing was debunked.

@eenkjet

2 жыл бұрын

@@tehdreamer I debated him a while back. He's a complete hack at this time.

@tehdreamer

2 жыл бұрын

@@eenkjet What do you mean? You have a recorded debate with Stuart Hameroff, the main man along with Penrose who propose OrchOR?

I like this explanation. Makes more sense to me than anything else I've heard.

@a.ielimba78

2 жыл бұрын

Look up [[ earth core superionic ]] Because of the extremes of pressure on the core, also matter takes on interesting effect's. Scientist discovered recently, that the core of Earth, is a liquid and solid at the same time. There are also earth core superionic videos on playlist on my channel as well, its on top of the page.

@gustavocvieira8584

2 жыл бұрын

It also removes the "magic" of the quantum.

Awesome work as always Matt. Great to hear a down under twang bro.

Matt O’Dowd is the very best explicator of quantum scale phenomena, dynamics and plausibilities, by an indeterminate but visceral certainty. You illuminate and clarify my window on the world, Matt! Thanks for your sequential, genuinely delivered logic.

@michaelelbert5798

2 жыл бұрын

No he ain't. I am.

@michaelelbert5798

2 жыл бұрын

Just kidding. This is where I learned a lot of things. But I wouldn't say he is good at that because he can't seem to make up his mind.

I wish I was smart enough to understand the total depth of everything he said. That being said he's one of the best communicators for physics related topics.

I already had this question, and this episode reminded me of it. as sir Penrose has proven that according to GR there is a singularity at the center of a black hole, would the uncertainty principle affect the black hole?

Even though I've watched this episode 3 times... Our Pre-Deterministic Universe keeps me guessing

It sounds like a great theory that explains a lot, but I’m wondering why the curvature of spacetime itself cannot be in a superposition. From an earlier spacetime video, I understood that mass/energy causes time dilation, which in turn makes masses attract (gravity), and that this is what “curved spacetime” is. Is that the reason why it cannot be in superposition? Because if it could, time could be running at different speeds in the same reference frame, which I imagine would break causality and give us some spicy paradoxes.

@cbeezy4733

2 жыл бұрын

IIRC superpositions of valid solutions to the Einstein Field equations are not always themselves valid solutions to the field equations. That's the mathematical justification for Penrose denying this possibility.

So, I had an initial question, and it cascaded into other questions as I was typing. I don't really expect anyone to answer the entire train of thought. But I really hope that Matt would address at least some part of it. His beard always looks so good. Grow it out, Matt. Anyway.... If gravity collapses the wave function, that's binary, right? It's either collapsed or it isn't. Is that absolute? Does any amount of gravity at all cause the collapse? Or is chance of collapse increased with higher gravity? There's still *some* gravity in deep space. Galaxies affect each other's velocities. Is it enough that there is *some* amount of gravity felt at the barycenter between the Milky Way and Andromeda? Or is space there "more quantum" due to the extremely small pull? If that's still sufficient gravity, would you then need to go deep into the voids between threads of the galactic web to find a region of space that's fully quantum? Wouldn't it then collapse from the signal used to measure it? And if gravity collapses the wave function, what does that mean for the role of an observer in descriptions and explanations of quantum mechanics? There's certainly gravity in the box with Schrödinger's cat. And assuming gravity collapses the waveforms of each particle that that feel it's force, that would make all particles that we experiment on permanently collapsed, wouldn't it? That seems to imply the pilot wave theory to me. That even is we can't know a particle's absolute physical properties, they do *have* absolute values, but the measurementitself perturbs them according to the Heisenberg principle.

@olbluelips

2 жыл бұрын

Good questions i think

Wow, this is a really amazing theory. I hadn't heard of objective collapse theories before this!

I love these videos on the quantum wave function. Thank you for another fascinating one. It's exciting to have some actual testable theories on the table!! Stay well out there everybody, and God bless you, friends. :)

When I was watching The Launch Pad LIVE, one person suggested me about your channel. Found Great Channel !

The universe is like a giant sudoku puzzle. The more restircted the squares possible values have the closer you get to a single answer to the Sudoku. Just my way of thinking about the quantum.

Also, objective collapse theory introduces an arrow of time independent of entropy.

@kevin42

2 жыл бұрын

Really??

@YossiSirote

2 жыл бұрын

@@kevin42 yup

@kevin42

2 жыл бұрын

@@YossiSirote you've peaked my interest. elaborate.

@robsosno

2 жыл бұрын

That's simple: collapse is irreversible giving us an arrow of time. And it is independent from the fact that in the past entropy was smaller. This causes some problems: it violates rule of conservation of energy and momentum according to Noether's theorem. However any form of collapse is such a violation. It is unavoidable as any measurement requires collapse. So if any measurement causes conservation energy violation then I don't think that this is argument against objective collapse. Because objective collapse is so rare then this violiation was not observed yet. Also: any arrow of time have problem with energy conservation.

It is indeed the superposition of almost infinite locations within the wave-function of each particle that causes spacetime to warp. Put the object near Absolute Zero temperature in a BEC and the warping ceases to exist under a high magnetic field (delta spin = 0).

Loved this chapter, it explained so many things to me.

I greatly like the new ideas although I doubt that they are due to gravity in anyway ... perhaps 'Collapse' and Gravity have something more fundamental in common?

This is one of the most important areas of physics study I can imagine. Unifying quantum and Newtonian mechanics in the same universe is a rationale I’ve been wondering about for 40 years.

@planexshifter

2 жыл бұрын

I hope you have another 40. Maybe, we can solve this mystery.

As somebody who's been to the ICTP in Trieste, it warms my heart every time I hear the name "Gran Sasso" :)

Absolutely loved this week's episode!! Really exciting stuff!!

@loturzelrestaurant

2 жыл бұрын

Ever heard of the fun-fact that theres MANY MORE Science-KZreadr? Professor Dave, Sci Man Dan, Joe Scott, Tom Scott, Sci Show, Seeker, Tier Zoo, theres so many more to check out. Waiting for you.

Very interesting. To me, this make sense and gets the 'mysticism' out of quantum mechanics. Looking forward to seeing what the experimental evidence can tell us. Oh yes, never full trust a physicist with taking care of a cat. We're looking at you Matt!

@tailong9548

2 жыл бұрын

The 'mysticism' is advanced science, we just aren't there yet. Electricity was once thought of as only 'mysticism' and fictional. Arrogance leads to ignorance.

@ThePowerLover

2 жыл бұрын

@@tailong9548 This.

@tailong9548

2 жыл бұрын

@@ThePowerLover You might like. kzread.info/dash/bejne/qWSu1s6Ccby6c7g.html

@simonO712

2 жыл бұрын

@@tailong9548 When was electricity ever thought of as fictional?

@tailong9548

2 жыл бұрын

@@simonO712 When people thought that electricity was only the stuff wizards could produce. It was science but people believed it was myth or 'fiction'.

I've always been a little uncomfortable with the collapse of the wavefunction, why should the fundamental constituents of the universe "collapse" and change? Could it not be that the wavefunction doesn't collapse, but the percieved collapse is simply the nature of limitations of measurement and interaction?

@ScottLovenberg

2 жыл бұрын

Seems it would be more efficient to seed a function and generate it at interaction rather than rolling and "recording" every value from that virtual interaction to a real interaction. Why calculate something that may never be used?

@KKH808

2 жыл бұрын

That is what makes sense intuitively. The double-slit experiment made me think otherwise.

@AmericanBrain

2 жыл бұрын

​ ​ A man was arguing for you to defend you and said something about the brain is firing on some cylinders. I replied to him ​ @Randy Terry you are defending the other guy? I wrote him but look -this is part 2. I just answered you - and him - in "depth" but missed out [my apologies] on a critical word/phrase/sentence you used. You said "brain is not firing on all cylinders". My response: who the h*** cares - all cylinders, no cylinders, some cylinders [e.g. distributed cognition] - in the context [keyword : context] that 1. The mind [the one with free will] is NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT the brain The mind is a separate, independent , non mystical "SPIRITUAL" quality but with potency [i.e. free will : the ability to amazingly "re-program" the brain within limits . N.B. The word "Reprogram" is a metaphor to represent the actuality: neuro-plasticity by deliberate choice]. Interesting fun fact. Jeffrey Schwarz, M.D. , UCLA worked with quantum physicist Henry Stapp (Berkeley) - the earlier showing how frameworks helped x% of O.C.D patients overcome their ailment and outright change the neuro-plasticity of their brain using "mind power" . The background theory they proposed is ORCH S.R. (as I call it to distinguish it from Sir Roger Penrose's ORCH O.R.) . ORCH S.R. : subjective reduction of the quantum wave function at the ion channel (between neurons, in the gap) where man's brain, nature and the relational component work together. ORCH O.R. : objective reduction is a Penrose Physicalist theory where microtubules self-collapse (resolving the tension between General relativity and Quantum mechanics in the universe) generating proto-consciousness 4 times per second. NOTES: all notes on quantum theory above are hypothesis, fun and interesting - NOT truths. The ONLY TRUTH as in ABSOLUTE TRUTH is you have free will and therefore can use "reason AND logic" [two different words, elements] . Computers have blazing speed precision logic that can do "so much" but are unable to reason; can not "induct" nor "abduction/abductive inference". Only man has these "qualities" of mind . HOW? The technicality is NOT known: what is known is it is ABSOLUTE TRUTH because consciousness can identify existence [no A.I. can; nor mental patients nor animals. Only man. But what about you? AND then there are PEOPLE LIKE YOU THAT HAVE "RATIONALITY" use free will TO deny it . You can Not deny one or more of the three: Existence [then where are you?]. You can validate this by pointing to things or touching or smelling things: making a "decision amongst alternative options" if rational - about whether you are in and of existence. If there is existence then you auto-validate consciousness for it identifies the above. And if there is existence and consciousness : one identity identifying another identity then you autovalidate "truth: identity" [Aristotle' law of identity]. So the moon exists regardless of whether you do or whether you look at it or not Therefore the three "axiomatic' concepts upon which the ENTIRETY OF SCIENCE AND MATH AND ALL OTHER SUBJECTS OF ACADEMIA AND BEYOND ARE DEPENDENT are existence, mind and identity [by mind it means full fledged free will - NO CONSTRAINTS - a separate spiritual identity altogether -it's own cause; and you are the cause of it as one unified entity over your life span].

@Nukestarmaster

2 жыл бұрын

That's what the many worlds interpretation claims.

@MrCmon113

9 ай бұрын

That's pilot wave theory.

Brilliant, a great show of our cutting edge knowledge of "what is this place called the universe and what is this stuff doing, and how does it do it!" I freaking love this channel!!! And Matt the narrator, seemingly brilliant, I mean genius level!!! And yet the humble, good willed teacher, who just wants to share his deep understanding with us curious and yet less informed neophytes , who (at least me, anyway) sometimes struggle to fully grasp the concepts, but are utterly fascinated with these subjects!!! Bravo, great job!!! And thanks!!! And Matt , you're a rock star brother!!! All the best!!!

If you have a quanta that is tunneling, when it's half way is it in one place or two? Maybe similar to the ladder paradox if the barn was absent of time, or maybe it's set theory.

@schmetterling4477

5 ай бұрын

There are no quanta in the free field.

The simple explanation is, particles are manifestations of energy in a wave function that exist in a field. The trick is defining the wave function and the field.

@ecicce6749

2 жыл бұрын

I think waves are always a higher level abstraction. like ocean waves, there is water moving in a particular way to create wavy behavior. sound waves has moving air, springs oscillate in a wavy way because of deforming and interchanging of potential and kinetic energy in the material periodically. wherever there are waves, something underlying is moving creating the pattern

@alwaysdisputin9930

2 жыл бұрын

@@ecicce6749 Yeah. If you wobble an electron then it creates waves in the EM field like ripples on a pond. What was wobbled to create the probability wave described by Schrodinger's equation?

That's incredibly interesting because it's brought a somewhat confusing concept of the quantum wave function into a view that makes our real classical world be brought into perspective. My question is this, is it possible that the ratio of atomic particles to full system collapse, is a fundamental physical constant of our universe?

What a wonderful video to supplement my quantum mechanics exam I had today

Great show as usual ! The concept of small things can stay quantum , but the chance of collapse to classicality increases with size is interesting . The concept of consciousness could not exist in a « quantum existence » since conscious need a precise wave function collapsing to make sense of anything logical at all ( ie: principle of causality?) .

@yerpderp6800

2 жыл бұрын

I don't think it's correct to assume consciousness requires the ability to be rational. There's no obvious requirement for consciousness to also have the ability to discriminate/classify perception into individual components/systems. In fact this idea is not supported by meditators with extensive experience of quieting the discriminatory nature of the mind; are they no longer conscious when they enter samadhi, the state of not discriminating (aka unity)? The fact that they can enter and exit samadhi is a strong counterexample that logic (which is really an aspect of discrimination) is fundamentally tied to consciousness.

@sivi9741

2 жыл бұрын

@@yerpderp6800 Well our consciousness never , up to date, experience a glass repair itself from broken to brand new and stuff like that ? Maybe it’s possible , an unknown consciousness can exist in a quantum state , but not ours .

Wow: a Kugelblitz! Never come across this concept before, but it makes sense as E=mc². Black holes from focussed gravitational waves or light? Mind blown! Thanks for another great episode. 👍🏼

@a.ielimba78

2 жыл бұрын

Scientist discovered yesterday, thatthe core of Earth, is a liquid and solid at the same time. Because of all the pressure on core, matter takes on interesting effect's, look up [[ earth core superionic ]] There are also earth core superionic videos on playlist on my channel as well, its on top of the page.

@CATinBOOTS81

2 жыл бұрын

There's a PBS Space Time about using Kugelblitz for spaceship propulsion, you can watch it here: kzread.info/dash/bejne/d66OqbJ8qdXWg7g.html&ab_channel=PBSSpaceTime

Is superposition a function of the scale difference between the “tools” used to measure and the object under observation?

Hang ten! Surfing the waves through the wormholes! Tasty waves, crunchy tunes.. exciting! Gratitude to everyone that create this revolutionary new theories and scientific advancement! Congratulations peeps! Keep on rocking!

Sounds like forgetting that the model is a model... the wave function gives you the distribution of possible outcomes, if you run the experiment over and over, you will see outcomes consistent with what the wave function predicts. But the universe isn't run over and over... the present moment isn't hypothetical, it isn't a probability... but also, not everything can be "well defined", like the position of a hurricane, you can see it on a satellite picture, you can point to it, but it doesn't have well defined edges... it's an effect that drops off with distance, it is a set of behaviours that interact in such a way as to perpetuate its existence, but it's not "a thing", and any description of it as "a thing" in "a place" is necessarily incomplete, but still useful.

@a.ielimba78

2 жыл бұрын

Look up [[ earth core superionic ]] Scientist discovered recently, that the core of Earth, is a liquid and solid at the same time. Because of the extremes of pressure on the core, also matter takes on interesting effect's. There are also earth core superionic videos on playlist on my channel as well, its on top of the page.

I can't get past the idea of pilot wave theory: Is there a good reason that pilot wave theory is most likely not reality? It seems the most simple way to explain the way things are (as opposed to multiple universes and all other crazy talk).

@schmetterling4477

Жыл бұрын

Bohm is simply a reformulation of Schroedinger. It gives you exactly the same result but asks you to pretend that an unmeasurable, unphysical entity exists that you don't even need. :-)

@DStecks

Жыл бұрын

It (and objective collapse theory) have the same problem: way too good to be true. There's just no way that quantum mechanics turns out to have an underlying mechanism that makes clean intuitive sense.

@schmetterling4477

Жыл бұрын

@@DStecks There is no such thing as collapse theory. There are only people who didn't pay attention in QM 101 class. ;-)

This is some quality content here. Thanks PBS!

I've read so many different papers on wave function collapse, and this is the first time I've been able to put the concept together COHERENTLY. Either one of these possible theories is mind boggling- at this point there's no new discovery they could make that could be "disappointing" or anticlimactic

@schmetterling4477

Жыл бұрын

There is no such thing as wave function collapse. There are only people who don't understand physics. :-)

Oh though I find myself struggling to fully comprehend these theories I am great full of this work. Thank you and keep up with the great work.

The whole idea of collapse has never sat well with me. It just seems a too-convenient theory for something we’re having difficulty explaining. If wave functions simply spread out and interacted forever, to us in the macro world, it would seem like they had collapsed but actually the quantum effects have just fallen below measurement thresholds. If you look at an arrangement of moving fuzzy blurs from far enough away it appears to be a unchanging solid object. Could it be that the underlying nature of reality is actually reasonably simple but scale effects make it seem complicated to us?

i really really appreciate two things about this channel: consistently impressive educational animations, and Matt and co having FAR more humility and open-mindedness than many other professional science communicators that engage in Internet drama and topics way outside their expertise. Refreshing to not have any hints of whiny clickbait from certain public intellectuals buddying up with greaseballs like Jordan Peterson or JK Rowling and talking about science and politics they barely understand beyond skimming pop-sci and wikipedia to get that sweet sweet short term engagement boost and publicity. Always hollering about how all the OTHER scientists are the problem. Just plain good science education for YEARS on SpaceTime. Matt (and Gabe) and perhaps Brian Cox are the true successors to Carl Sagan.

Will gravitational waves contribute to the slowing down on the spin of certain black holes? could a spinning black hole eventually become stationary and simply scrunch up space equally from every direction with the same acceleration omnidirectionally?

What the wavefunction does behind closed doors, we may never know. I'm still curious however how adding this nonlinearity before the collapse justifies the non unitarity of the collapse? Aren't we still subject to Loschmidt's paradox? If the collapse is indeed reversible, then QM should be linear.

@brothermine2292

2 жыл бұрын

I didn't hear Matt say the collapse is reversible in any of these theories. Didn't he say near the beginning that reversibility depends on linearity?

@MrSupergigamoi

2 жыл бұрын

At 5:43, he states that the collapse is non-reversible.

@anywallsocket

2 жыл бұрын

@@brothermine2292 I suppose my point is that the objective collapse theory does not resolve the issue of irreversibility, it merely models the collapse as a physical process, unlike standard QM. The point here is that by modeling the collapse with nonlinear dynamics you're spoiling QM's otherwise perfect linearity. Technically, nonlinear dynamics *can* be reversible, but this 'random hit' appears to the contrary.

@kevinvanhorn2193

2 жыл бұрын

If human behavior is any guide, would guess that what the wavefunction does behind closed doors has a lot to do with questions of reproduce-ability... 🙂

@durnsidh6483

2 жыл бұрын

Unitarity is a property of linear operators. Since the modification is nonlinear, it follows that it is non-unitary.