But why wavefunctions? A practical approach to quantum mechanics

Подписаться 159 тыс.

Просмотров 172 тыс.

50% 1

Discover how the behavior of a quantum particle is described by its wavefunction! 📝 Get the notes for free here: courses.physicswithelliot.com...
✉️ Sign up for my newsletter for additional physics lessons: www.physicswithelliot.com/sig...
📺 Watch part 2 on Feynman's path integral formulation of quantum mechanics:
• How Feynman did quantu...
📺 More quantum mechanics:
• To Understand the Four...
👨‍🏫 Enroll in my course on Lagrangian mechanics:
courses.physicswithelliot.com...
🅿 Become a patron to help make videos like these possible:
/ physicswithelliot
⚛️ Feynman's classic lectures on quantum mechanics:
www.feynmanlectures.caltech.e...
www.feynmanlectures.caltech.e...
🙋‍♀️ "What software did you use to make this video?" and other FAQs:
www.physicswithelliot.com/faq
📖 Summary:
Quantum mechanics deals with the laws of physics on the smallest scales. And tiny particles like electrons don't behave at all the way we're used to in classical mechanics. Instead of following a well-defined trajectory, a quantum particle is described by a wavefunction that's spread out through space, and that evolves over time.
In this video, we'll discover why we need wavefunctions to describe quantum mechanical particles by investigating a classic experiment called the double-slit experiment. The results will reveal that quantum particles share properties of both classical particles and classical waves---what's sometimes called "wave-particle duality."
It's all very counterintuitive. But the math that's involved is actually very simple! And the consequences of the experiment will lead us directly to the idea of the wavefunction.
Double-slit laser interference pattern:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-...
Electron interference pattern:
www.hitachi.com/rd/research/m...
0:00 Introduction
3:39 Classical particles
5:01 Classical waves
13:35 Quantum particles
17:47 Wave-particle duality
19:04 The wavefunction
20:47 Summary
If you find the content I’m creating valuable and would like to help make it possible for me to continue sharing more, please consider supporting me! You can make a recurring contribution at / physicswithelliot , or make a one time contribution at www.physicswithelliot.com/sup.... Thank you so much!
About me:
I’m Dr. Elliot Schneider. I love physics, and I want to help others learn (and learn to love) physics, too. Whether you’re a beginner just starting out with your physics studies, a more advanced student, or a lifelong learner, I hope you’ll find resources here that enable you to deepen your understanding of the laws of nature. For more cool physics stuff, visit me at www.physicswithelliot.com.

Наука

Опубликовано:

16 июн 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 317

@AnakinSkywalker-zq6lm 10 месяцев назад

Yooo the King of Physics education has returned!

@PhysicswithElliot 10 месяцев назад

Thanks Anakin!!

@prandihingia761 10 месяцев назад

@@PhysicswithElliotCould you please explain why the curl of an electric field due to a dipole is zero even though the field lines bend?

@unflexian 10 месяцев назад

i'm honestly thanking you from the bottom of my heart elliot. just got an excellence scholarship for my first choice uni studying physics, wouldn't have had the guts to choose physics over engineering without your videos specifically. science communication is amazing and you are one of the best people that do it. so thanks. :)

@PhysicswithElliot 10 месяцев назад

Thank you! So glad to have helped :)

3 месяца назад

I am really happy for you. I chose engineering over physics many years ago and although I am happy with my career, I would’ve loved to be a physicist. Now I am 52 and living vicariously through these videos.

@ashishkiift 9 месяцев назад

Elliot you deserve a billion subscribers ! Truly .. the ultimate teacher and the ultimate pure Physics content creator. No BS ! Such a fan of yours . Keep up the good work

@syedabuthahirkaz 10 месяцев назад

Beautiful. Finally Physics got its 3B1B . Fantabulous. Kudos From A Theoretical Physicist. By the by, I've downloaded your dissertation "Stringy ER == EPR" [Note the Double Equal Sign, I'm a born coder], hope I shall find time to read it one day. It turns out to be one of the problems I'm working on and I've my own strange theories.

@darkfox8101 10 месяцев назад

Good luck with formulating your theory!

@syedabuthahirkaz 10 месяцев назад

@@darkfox8101 Thanks

@menyasavut3959 10 месяцев назад

yes, beautiful, and it even comes without elevator music (unlike 3B1B videos) playing in the background, to distract the viewer from the content.

@hakl4398 9 месяцев назад

Best channel with proper explanation. I was sick of seeing other channels hyping every concept to philosophical level without providing basic math or explaining realistically. Thank you.

@toradoraization 10 месяцев назад

Great video. Looking forward to the those coming next. Would like to add for those that are interested in the equations that h-bar isn't technically just Planck's constant but the reduced Planck's constant, i.e., Planck's constant, h, divided by 2pi.

@peterdegroot466 10 месяцев назад

Elliot, you're simply the best physicis teacher I ever had !

@HighlandHellboy 10 месяцев назад

I’m studying physics at university and still struggle with the maths for quantum, so I am very excited for this series and this was a fantastic start! Thank you!

@LoyalZen0x 10 месяцев назад

Good luck on your studies, you’ll miss them when they’re done but happy you did them! Wonderful times to dedicate full time to learn for the joy of it.

@HighlandHellboy 10 месяцев назад

@@LoyalZen0x For sure, its part of the reason I’m going to stay in academia once I’ve finished my masters! And thanks!

@VolodymyrLisivka 10 месяцев назад

It's better to watch something like that instead: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Q2OlsMblugo.html However, all that is a bit outdated now, after Hydrodynamic Quantum Analogs are invented. It just interference of the Pilot Wave.

@robertschlesinger1342 10 месяцев назад

Excellent video. Very interesting, informative and worthwhile video.

@Urgleflogue 10 месяцев назад

Great visuals, and great explanation! Looking forward to the Path integral :)

@oanminhkhoi6584 10 месяцев назад

I enjoy every second of this video. Absolutely brilliant!

@zord1352 Месяц назад

I have just found this channel, weeks before QM exams. Your videos really helps to patch the fragments. Thank you the video!

@robertwalkley4665 10 месяцев назад

Wonderful Elliot, thank you so much for your awesome work.

@dakshsingh576 10 месяцев назад

i dont usually comment but this is probably the best channel to learn about physics!!! I hope we get more videos frequently

@baruchba8494 2 месяца назад

Another fabulous video that clearly and succinctly examines another concept in physics. I make use of your videos often to help my studies. Congratulations!

@lepidoptera9337 2 месяца назад

Also completely false. There are no flying particles in quantum mechanics.

@christiananselm6765 9 месяцев назад

Its the clearest explanation I have ever come across even as a physicist. Congratulations and thank you so much!!! Christian

@Martin-ph9yi 9 месяцев назад

I had my first lecture in quantum physics today, seems they introduced the same topics that were discussed in this video. Really looking forward to your upcoming videos in the "series"!

@elektrode4585 10 месяцев назад

he’s back with another banger!

@PhysicswithElliot 10 месяцев назад

😁

@akmzahidulislam2764 9 месяцев назад

A great explanatory video! Thanks a lot.

@HowardS185 10 месяцев назад

Also, when I was an undergrad we worked with the Schrodinger equation, and solved it for the hydrogen atom, which I found fascinating. But we never discussed the Fenyman approach, so I'm very anxious for your next video on that method.

@fbkintanar 10 месяцев назад

Physics should be taught Feynman diagrams first, with no artificial boundary between QFT, QM and behavior at the classical limit. Schrödinger equations can come after Feynman diagram, to build quantitative skills on a conceptual foundation. It turns out that the math of Feynman diagrams, at a certain category-theoretic level of abstraction, is much simpler than the math of wave functions. See the 2017 book by Coecke and Kissinger __Picturing Quantum Processes__. Or Coecke's even simpler 2023 picture book __Quantum in Pictures__.

@alphalunamare 10 месяцев назад

Feynman's approach is fine as long as you know everything, it is simply adding up all the options times their individual probabilities. Physics today has a problem: As soon as some result doesn't work out quite as expected they assume that Feynman didn't 'cover' everything and hence 'There Must Be A Fifth Force' ... what absolute bollux :-) There is a great deal wrong in the mathematical basis of Feynman's wondeful approximations, but that is not new Physics, rather an unforgivable lassisitude amongst Mathematicians. I think I am saying that if there is a God then Feynman's precocious analytical methods will be redeemed by the end of this century and a better understanding of Physics be achieved. I would say QED but non Geometor's would read that as that other farce 'Quantum Electro Dynamics' I appologise for landing on your fine post .... I just had to get it off my chest :-)

@tretolien1195 7 месяцев назад

I personally feel like throwing an infinite amount of integrals as well as green's functions at undergrads as their first introduction to quantum mechanics is a little unwise. Everyone should learn about the feynmann approach but it should be reserved for a secondary or even third course. The intuitive part is pretty pedagogical though :)

@coursefacilitator2342 8 месяцев назад

I watch these videos to relax. Awesome scholarship and presentation. Thanks.

@siddheshsharma22945 10 месяцев назад

You came at a time when I needed it the most !!

@ademanou4708 10 месяцев назад

hello doctor ngl i think you're one of if not the best at explaining physics in youtube without shying away from the complicated spots lool but i would like to ask ( i'm sure lots of us do ) which software you use for your animation ..... it would be great if you make a series of lessons about it loool 😁😆🔥🔥🔥

@jackpope4917 10 месяцев назад

Yes!! You're back!

@anxious8393 10 месяцев назад

Babe wake up… Dr elliot just dropped a QM vid 😮

@PhysicswithElliot 10 месяцев назад

🤣

@rahulsarmah4089 10 месяцев назад

*Daddy Elliot

@johnchessant3012 10 месяцев назад

Once you realize you need a mechanism for "how can the sum of two things be smaller than either of them individually" the idea of using complex numbers is utterly reasonable. Can't wait for the next videos in this series!

@PhysicswithElliot 10 месяцев назад

Thanks John!

@APaleDot 10 месяцев назад

I think the concept of negative numbers suffices for this purpose.

@CharlieVegas1st 6 месяцев назад

@@APaleDotPositive numbers are addition, and negative numbers are subtraction. Sometimes we need something that is both and neither lol. Complex numbers give us an operator that sort of hovers between addition and and subtraction...

@APaleDot 6 месяцев назад

@@CharlieVegas1st I don't know if you know this, but you can in fact add two negative numbers.

@CharlieVegas1st 6 месяцев назад

@@APaleDot What I meant was adding complex numbers is sort of like adding two vectors, where phase information plays a role. If the two vectors (complex numbers) are in phase, we're adding to real numbers. If they're perfectly anti-aligned (opposite phase) this corresponds to subtraction. Any other phase orientation is like an amalgamation of addition and subtraction. It's like in between the two. Adding two negative numbers (same phase) is adding two positive numbers and slapping a negative sign on the result. Besides my answer was just sort of an oversimplification of why complex numbers are useful in addition and subtraction. They carry more information than merely "walk three steps right (addition), now walk 2 steps left (subtraction)". Being able to now move "up" and "down" gives us an operator that is "richer" in information.

@sergey5561 9 месяцев назад

This is the best explanation of wave-particle duality I've ever come across!

@schmetterling4477 9 месяцев назад

There is no such thing as wave particle duality. That was already pointed out by Dirac in 1930. Some people simply haven't gotten the message, yet. ;-)

@antoniocotarodriguez5732 8 месяцев назад

Excellent channel! Thanks!

@martipardo2473 10 месяцев назад

Woah, already hyped about the other videos

@PoeMisHere 10 месяцев назад

I've been waiting 7 months for this video. Time to get my pen and paper and study w/ glee. Thanks for the upload!

@punditgi 10 месяцев назад

Awesome video! 😊🎉

@PhysicswithElliot 10 месяцев назад

Thank you!

@glory6998 10 месяцев назад

I was waiting for your video from long time plz make videos more frequently these are very helpful

@juniorcyans2988 10 месяцев назад

Love you! I took Modern Physics last semester and didn’t understand well. Hopefully I’ll make it up and be ready for Quantum Mechanics next year!

@Musi_012 10 месяцев назад

No way this came out 4 days ago. It’s like perfect and I need it right now. But what a coincidence. If I needed it a week ago I wouldn’t have found this video. Thank you

@saad_ghannam 10 месяцев назад

Outstanding work

@kiranchannayanamath3230 10 месяцев назад

I can only imagine the effort it takes to create such intuitive animations.

@PUMAMicroscope 10 месяцев назад

One of the better vids on this topic. In particular I'm glad that you emphasised two points: 1. A quantum particle is quite a different 'thing' to a classical particle and 2. It makes no sense to think that quantum scale events / structures should be analogous to macro ensemble events / structure (i.e. the Greek atomists were wrong - but we had to start somewhere so kudos to them anyway). If educators (also on YT) went into those points more often and in more detail then all this lay confusion and quantum mysticism would fade away and people could concentrate on the more important unknowns. One thing would would make this video even better IMO - not showing quantum particles moving through space. I think that perpetuates another common misunderstanding about QM and perpetuates the outmoded notion of 'wave-particle duality' which we really need to put to bed now - it had its time.

@DeepLyricist 10 месяцев назад

I can see Elliot being the true Physics 2 professor for a grneration of students that grew up on YT.

@RARa12812 9 месяцев назад

Amount of work goes into these videos are mind boggling

@mrshodz 3 месяца назад

Amazing work.

@muhammada.muhammad6287 10 месяцев назад

extremely good job. wonderful

@shinlee2579 9 месяцев назад

One of the best explanations

@niharpawar684 9 месяцев назад

sehr gut video freund, waiting for next video

@STUDYSSINGH 5 месяцев назад

Love from india.. your way of teaching is fantastic. Please upload more lecture.

@General12th 10 месяцев назад

Hi Elliot! Very cool!

@taj-ulislam6902 4 месяца назад

Very lucid. Great animation

@Dan-sr6oe 10 месяцев назад

Great video, will you be explaining the collapse of the wave function, and the measurement problem in subsequent videos?

@atiqrahman7289 3 месяца назад

Good explanation.

@agustin9850 10 месяцев назад

Excellent!

@PhysicswithElliot 10 месяцев назад

Thanks Agustin!

@roncho 9 месяцев назад

What can I say... Suscribed!! .you need more followers. Great job man.

@JoeBob79569 10 месяцев назад

I always like to think of wave-particle duality as simply that it's a wave when it's in motion, but when it hits something it becomes a particle. Almost like an explosion running backwards and forwards in time, depending on whether it's "free" or "captured".

@malectric 10 месяцев назад

Maybe because the energy excites/interacts with a single atom/electronic orbital in the detector?

@israilisrail4413 9 месяцев назад

Excellent sir

@brunonikodemski2420 10 месяцев назад

For next videos, please talk about non-linear slits, shaped ones, like the integrated circuit designers use, to produce diffraction-limited masking correction. This is already a well known technology. Now being used for attempts at Moire pattern Qbits.

@HighWycombe 10 месяцев назад

Great videos. You have a very clear way of explaining things,and the graphics get better all the time. I'm having problems with the NOTES though. If I print them onto paper, the font comes out so small that I can't read it. (Although I am very old!) I tried copy and paste into WORD, but the formulae just come out as "?" symbols.

@GustavoMunoz 8 месяцев назад

Love your videos

@kenkramer4830 10 месяцев назад

So great… can’t thank you enough.

@darkfox8101 10 месяцев назад

Thanks so much Eliot! I loved the video, and I can’t wait for the next! Also, any tips for an eighth grader to learn more about physics outside of youtube? Possibly places to volunteer or places that teach what you are doing other than universities or colleges. I’ll be honest I love watching physics videos, and the information goes straight to my head but the variables and math I haven’t learned go right over my head? Again any tips as to where I can learn this math on my own? Thanks again!

@PhysicswithElliot 10 месяцев назад

Thanks darkfox! It takes time to learn the math. Keep exploring all the concepts while you gradually learn the math you need to understand the details. Try finding a book at the right level and work through it---ideally with a friend too!

@darkfox8101 9 месяцев назад

@@PhysicswithElliot Thanks again Eliot!

@HowardS185 10 месяцев назад

Very well done! (from an ancient physics major)

@mohammedpatel3051 10 месяцев назад

Excellent 👌

@PhysicswithElliot 10 месяцев назад

Thanks Mohammed!

@EW-mb1ih 9 месяцев назад

Nice video! Where does the square for the intensity come from?

@L1pTEr 9 месяцев назад

Thanks for the great video. I have a follow up question. I didn't catch why are the profiles at 8:47 already in a waveform? At 7:46 it seems to me like the each should be in form of a normal distribution curve.

@sherinagnus7949 9 месяцев назад

Your videos are great. This fuels interest even to those who avoid physics. Could you please explain on Lagrangian concepts. When deriving conservation laws, why we we can't use Noether’s theorem for some differential equations where Lagrangian does not exist.

@schmetterling4477 9 месяцев назад

Did you look at the proof of Noether's theorem? Why not? :-)

@sherinagnus7949 9 месяцев назад

@@schmetterling4477 can you share possible link? Thanks 😊

@scootndute579 9 месяцев назад

Excellent

@subhadipnandi6044 10 месяцев назад

A tiny request to discuss mathematics behind physics like videos . Like the important part of maths with details that are required in physics. Btw this is a fantastic video ❤️❤️❤️

@pyrokinethic 10 месяцев назад

Awesome. I guess the notes are still not posted on the page (or I couldn't find them)

@PhysicswithElliot 10 месяцев назад

They're posted now!

@sciencetechnology2683 8 месяцев назад

Bro , I just comes to know about you bro ,And you are just insane bro ,Unbelievable bro ,Aswsome bro 🙏🏼 You teaches things so good bro , Another level bro 💯 🙏🏼 Thank you so much for giving notes for free so that A middle class student like would able to get to know about Quantum Physics Don't leave it bro. PLEASE continue this bro until you can possible do bro Thanks from an Indian ❤❤❤❤❤

@jensphiliphohmann1876 10 месяцев назад

14:00 _... with a big bump in the region behind the hole._ However, there are already smaller bumps at the sides.

@vishalv9699 7 месяцев назад

What softwares do you use to create these videos?

@tsunningwah3471 10 месяцев назад

I am more interested in how do you make such smooth animation 😊

@Musi_012 10 месяцев назад

When will we get the other parts ?

@paveltsvetkov7948 5 месяцев назад

Light behavior in double slit experiment is in line with reflection / refraction situation when the resulting wave is the sum of original wave plus waves produces by electrons in the medium the light is passing through. Maybe the electrons also produce some kind of waves which "excite" the matter around them. And the observed behaviour is the sum of the original wave plus the waves from the excited matter?

@IncompleteTheory 9 месяцев назад

Thanks for sharing this, at least for me you have the perfect speech/thought ratio to follow along. I did bring a fair bit of previous knowledge, but your pace of explanation helped to bring some more intuition into my understanding. So, thanks again, and of course: ++sub;

@wayneyadams 10 месяцев назад

One more weird phenomenon he did not mention is that a detector placed at either hole, so we know which hole the electron passed through results in a pattern that looks just like the pellets. In other words, the interference pattern is gone, and the electrons act like classical particles. If we turn off the detector the interference pattern re-appears.

@gcewing 10 месяцев назад

I would say "remove" rather than "turn off". As long as the detector is present, it will disturb the electrons enough to destroy the interference pattern.

@johanligt5677 10 месяцев назад

@@gcewing I think that "turn off" is rightly formulated. We don't speak about electrical disturbances here. The fact that the detector is on and MEASURES the going through of the electron, makes the wave function "collapse" and makes the electron a particle. Turning off the detector makes measurement impossible at the slit hole, and therefore the electron can continue to behave like a wave. Greetings - Johan

@johnsnow7090 5 месяцев назад

Every time you explain, I actually understand 😂

@waynelast1685 8 месяцев назад

19:55 : so interesting that in the classical wave sense you need to square the sum of functions only because we are using a math trick ( taking only the real part of complex numbers) , but in the quantum sense, nature is telling us that nature itself is using something similar to a "math trick" by squaring the sum of the quantum wave functions in order to produce "the real part" , ie, what we see. What is the interpretation of my statement? Does it have any significance, is it a coincidence, or is there some deeper meaning?

@abebeRed95953 5 месяцев назад

Thanks

@johnnytass2111 10 месяцев назад

Is the wave function the attempt to locate a particle in the future (Quantum Mechanics) and a particle when it can be observed in the present/ past (Classical Physics)?

@halfameerkat1296 10 месяцев назад

your the reason i can do most things in physics

@joesh8213 9 месяцев назад

I finished an ODE course and learned much about Laplace transform, but I no longer have any math courses in my engineering degree plan. I noticed a load of connections with these ideas and those of waves, signals, and electrical concepts. I am enrolled in a Petroleum Engineering program btw so I’m not sure if I will be able to use mathematics much further than ODES, but I would love to if possible! I would like to learn more and potentially undertake a Masters in something that might be similar to Electrical, Quantum, or even Nuclear! The other day, I watched an interesting video which described how an MRI machine works and it brought up Fourier Transform! Anyways, I was wondering, what is the purpose of PDES, Fourier transform, and Z transform? What about the complex world? (These are some things I haven’t covered much). Also where might I see such things pop up? Also there is one last topic I would like to bring up, which is only tangentially related: Careers. I have about 2 more years until I graduate with my Bachelors degree. Is there anyone who can maybe give some advice on what path to take or maybe something I should absolutely involve myself in in order to launch my career? I was thinking of applying to several co-ops as well as internships, but I also noticed that it is possible to join undergrad research opportunities. Anyways there was a lot I wanted to say and it was rather disorganized, but for anyone studying engineering right now, I wish you the best! You got this!

@joesh8213 9 месяцев назад

Also Physics Majors are true Chads

@randalljsilva 10 месяцев назад

When quantum particles are sent through the slits one at a time, does the time between electrons have any effect on the outcome (besides it taking longer for the pattern to emerge)?

@schmetterling4477 9 месяцев назад

Not due to the reason you are suspecting. Electrons are not a good system to test that, though. Light is a much, much better one. In the optical double slit the intensity of the light doesn't matter at all (assuming that it's not so intense that it destroys the matter the apertures are made of, of course).

@foxhound1008 10 месяцев назад

When they describe the wave function, isn’t it more of a wave pulse, and not a periodic wave? When you fire one electron at a time at the two open slits, the electron appears in some location on the back wall in a “building wave interference pattern”……how is momentum conserved in the one electron case?

@hrossaman 10 месяцев назад

In the case of the BBs, the highest hit-rate is dead center? Between the two slits? Whatever happened to 2 clumps? The two single-slit curves wouldn't combine in the way shown in the animation, having one high point.....there would be two high points

@htgazurex1212 10 месяцев назад

20:42 h-bar is the reduced Planck constant? 🤔🤔🤔 it is equal to h/2*pi

@PhysicswithElliot 10 месяцев назад

hbar is almost always used rather than h in physics, so we just call it Planck's constant

@irallydk2453 9 месяцев назад

Thank you very much, this video is brilliant and explains it very well especially for a non physicist like me. However I do have some questions, lets say an electron behave as a particle wave, and the base ball behaves as a particles but at which scale does this transition in the behavior happen, does a simple hydrogen atom with one proton and electron behave the same, what about a bromine atom with 35 electrons, what if it is a macromolecule? 🤔

@schmetterling4477 9 месяцев назад

Then you are simply telling us that you didn't pay attention in high school where we are teaching you that "a quantum" is a small mount of energy. It's not a wave and it's not a particle. ;-)

@coursefacilitator2342 8 месяцев назад

Awesome.

@SampleroftheMultiverse 8 дней назад

Thanks for your interesting video. Area under a curve is often equivalent to energy. Buckling of an otherwise flat field shows a very rapid growth of this area to a point. If my model applies, it may show how the universe’s energy naturally developed from the inherent behavior of fields. Your subscribers might want to see this 1:29 minutes video showing under the right conditions, the quantization of a field is easily produced. The ground state energy is induced via Euler’s contain column analysis. Containing the column must come in to play before over buckling, or the effect will not work. The sheet of elastic material “system”response in a quantized manor when force is applied in the perpendicular direction. Bonding at the points of highest probabilities and maximum duration( ie peeks and troughs) of the fields “sheet” produced a stable structure when the undulations are bonded to a flat sheet that is placed above and below the core material. Some say this model is no different than plucking guitar strings. You can not make structures with vibrating guitar strings or harmonic oscillators. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-wrBsqiE0vG4.htmlsi=waT8lY2iX-wJdjO3 At this time in my research, I have been trying to describe the “U” shape formed that is produced before phase change. In the model, “U” shape waves are produced as the loading increases and just before the wave-like function shifts to the next higher energy level. Over-lapping all frequencies together using Fournier Transforms, can produce a “U” shape or square wave form. Wondering if Feynman Path Integrals for all possible wave functions could be applicable here too? If this model has merit, seeing the sawtooth load verse deflection graph produced could give some real insight in what happened during the quantum jumps between energy levels. The mechanical description and white paper that goes with the video can be found on my LinkedIn and RU-vid pages. You can reproduce my results using a sheet of Mylar* ( the clear plastic found in some school essay folders. Seeing it first hand is worth the effort!

@mikek.1761 10 месяцев назад

5:40 Single slit also generates interference pattern

@buisnessexpertswords 8 месяцев назад

Hey elliot had a problem, I am a young guy interested in teaching physics further in my life but don't wanna do it the traditional way, is the RU-vid way practical? BTW love the work you do

@schmetterling4477 2 месяца назад

What do you think? Can you learn to play American football on RU-vid or do you have to go on a field and learn to throw the ball? How about the piano? Can you learn the piano without practicing? OK... so why in the world do you think that you can learn physics from videos? ;-)

@nickfrate4396 10 месяцев назад

A+ on the vid. content

@stevewhitt9109 10 месяцев назад

I think that it is better to think of electrons as fluctuations in the electron field. The distribution along the detector is determined by probability from the wavefunction. The electron's mass is only confined energy that is manifested on the detector. We should not think that an electron is both a wave and a particle exhibiting both interference and superposition at the same time. Rather we should think that the energy fields are interacting an the "impact" is just the conversion of energy.

@orthoplex64 10 месяцев назад

This is good, but I think it's important to stress that the wavefunction is - must be - more than just a probability distribution. It's irresistible, especially for beginners, to think the wavefunction could just be a probabilistic representation of our knowledge of the particle, where the particle goes on 1 path but follows some complicated rule we don't know about. This _cannot_ be the case, because of statistical impossibilities in certain experiments. I know you know this; I just think it should be stressed more.

@PhysicswithElliot 10 месяцев назад

Someday I will hopefully make a video about Bell's theorem!

@pyrokinethic 10 месяцев назад

It also should be remembered that there is deep necessity for the wave function to be complex valued. But explaining this without advanced maths is really not straightforward. Also it really is a probability amplitude distribution.

@se7964 10 месяцев назад

That’s not a consensus opinion in the physics community. Sometimes taking the math too seriously, and ascribing to it too deeply an ontological significance can be just as problematic as not taking it seriously enough. Bell’s theorem has quite a few holes one can poke in it, philosophically speaking, if that’s the matter you’re referring to.

@VolodymyrLisivka 10 месяцев назад

The particle goes through one slit, when it pilot wave goes through both slits. What is the problem?

@Verlamian 10 месяцев назад

@@VolodymyrLisivka The same (main) problem that any "classical model of quantum mechanics"* has, namely "nonlocality" or "spooky action at a distance". Pilot Waves has other conceptual and technical problems peculiar to itself but one should be careful before pursuing _any_ such proposed alternative to quantum mechanics. There are people who have retained a commitment to "classicality" or "Realism_2" [ DOI: 10.1088/1751-8113/47/42/424011 ] despite having acquired a full and up to date understanding of the conceptual and mathematical issues (e.g. the well known quantum foundations researchers Matt Leifer and Matt Pusey) so it's not an _intrinsically_ unrespectable position. * Landsman's more apt term for a "hidden variable theory" such as Pilot Waves / Bohmian Mechanics. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-51777-3_6

@Lila-tw8lw 10 месяцев назад

brillant👍

@nikko2505 10 месяцев назад

Хорошо что есть автоперевод. Очень понравилась подача

@JacobRy 10 месяцев назад

да, этот канал очень хорош

@nikko2505 10 месяцев назад

@@JacobRy согласен!

@mycount64 10 месяцев назад

The probability (wave determining) the pattern the photons will create does not require time as a variable. So, of course you expect the patterns shown in all cases based on wave mechanics. Time is not a QM variable. I don't understand why people have such a hard time with QM.

@waynelast1685 8 месяцев назад

Elliot: your diagram shows a point source of electrions. What if there was a true "plane source"? What would happen? 19:37 why do you show a plane wave source? What I am not understanding?

@Deepakyadav-vp8xx 8 месяцев назад

If screen is displaced consider all cases in obsevation for n sources

@wheredowegofromhere79 10 месяцев назад

Schrödinger and friends, should be a sitcom prequel to big bang theory.

@logosecho8530 10 месяцев назад

Is it correct / fair to say that this isn't mysterious anymore if you consider the electron as something big enough that it does go through both holes?

@mikek.1761 10 месяцев назад

Not mentioned in the video. The slits need to be comparable in size to the wavelength of the light which needs to be also monochromatic.

@Cor97 10 месяцев назад

'they (the lectrons) always hit the detector in discrete lumps, not in waves ..''. What does this actually mean? What is it to hit a detector in waves (or in lumps for that matter)?

@user-ky5dy5hl4d 4 месяца назад

There can be some more to add to this issue. Let's say that we have two slits but we make one infinitely large and then pass photons through them. Phi (r1, t) would not be symetrical to the phi (r2,t) of the vertical coordinate y as a f(t). Also, it is hard to understand this phenomena even in classical manner where x is f(t) but if you consider inverse function such as as t(x) then symetry gets lost again because we don't have the definition of time. Also, this implies that all this stuff was not discovered but invented something like Richadr Feynman did.