I am a high school physics teacher. I would say this is the best animated video on Feynman diagram I have ever seen on RU-vid. This will certainly be played in my lessons.
@-GinPi Gamma Any desserts left is good for me - strawberry in particular. Why is it that these folk with interesting alternative explanations and theories so often seen semi-literate? Curious, that. Old duffer her. If you're going to troll me, at least spell check first :)
This is too easy for high school, I suggest looking at the formulation of the Lagrangian to obtain the Euler-Lagrange equations or imposing the Lorenz gauge condition to reduce the equations to form the QED classical Maxwell equations. This exercise also includes the D'Alembertian operator and the Dirac equation which will undoubtedly be of interest and of use to students nowadays.
Having spent a significant fraction of 35 years getting education in related STEM fields and having read many books or watched many popular science talks with famous people, I have to say you are the first to make it crystal clear.
no shade or disrespect intended for the content creator, their contribution is phenomenal :), but i'd like to mention the way our understanding works is somewhat incremental, especially on complex or abstract topics... bits and pieces need to be gathered for the puzzle to 'fall in place'. (it has helped me w/ being patient w/ myself, hope it helps someone else too)
My man, your animations interact perfectly with your explanations making very conceptually difficult subjects easy to understand. Keep up the good work, we believe in you
@Science Revolution You should know Quantum is called Quantum because particles at Quantum level don't behave as Classical mechanics. Imagine having to exist at two places at the same time, it defies our common sense and intuition beacuse we know we haven't experienced or see that phenomena with our naked eyes. Everything at quantum level doesn't behave as we expected them to be and the only way for us to understand them is by using mathematical equations and stuffs. That is why theoritical physics exist, just because they are theoritical doesn't mean they are not real.
@Science Revolution You sound like a fool. You decided it was bullshit just because you don't understand it and that is so incredibly ignorant. For the record, quantum field theory has worked just fine in spite of our lack of complete understanding of why tiny things behave the way the do. Without knowledge of quantum field theory, we wouldn't have the computers and/or phones that we are using to post these comments. RU-vid wouldn't have the servers and computers needed to run and maintain this website. We wouldn't even have the internet were it not for our understanding of quantum mechanics. Not only that, if quantum mechanics was bullshit, then none of the science that particle physicists, astrophysicists, or nuclear physicists do would be happening. Oh and also, we wouldn't have the understanding of chemistry that we have without quantum mechanics either. Our current technology would be non-existent if we hadn't figured out what we've already figured out about quantum mechanics. Our unanswered questions about quantum mechanics don't really matter quite that much when what we do understand has allowed us to have what we have now.
As a layman with years of fascination with physics and especially quantum physics, can you verify that I've grasped the content in this video? Essentially, electrons do not repel each other due to a 'force' as such. Rather, due to superposition, every possible outcome of an interaction between the two electrons exists simultaneously, and the result is the most probable scenario due to amplitude?
i really love how some parts of your videos are easy enough to get you interested (eg the animations), but also informative enough for you to come back to the video with more knowledge and still learn something new. and the more complex the topic is, the more times you can rewatch the video! honestly amazing
You guys keep knocking it out of the park! Amazing description, with no fluff. I've been consuming popular physics media for decades, and this is some of the best!
@Science Revolution A discrete quantity of energy proportional in magnitude to the frequency of the radiation it represents, is the definition of quantum, but I'm pretty sure that's not what you're asking? Why do you think it is BS, do you have a real reason or do you just think that everyone is out to get you?
@Science Revolution Okay, let me get this straight, you responded to my question of why you think it is BS with "copy and paste BS?". Are you saying that all scrabble games and boggle games are fake because they use a dictionary same as how my response to your question asking what quantum is was wrong because I told you exactly what quantum is? I could have wasted your time and mine by making up my own definition that wouldn't be correct, and wouldn't provide a useful answer. Copy and Paste, YES BS, NO
You are a gifted scientist, but also an artist. Rare combination of animator and physicist. Here is my praise for this gift: You are destined for sparking a virtual qft and physics interest, much like the elegance found among the particles in our universe which you've animated so creatively. This video, as well the previous ones, serve to rekindle an interest in learning new physics that I never could grasp. Awe-inspiring content. Quantum Art. 🎨
As an architect who is curious about physics, I’m grateful of your creations: the combination of visualization graphic, your music, your voice and especially your own way of explaining. Thank you.
@@professorfrog7181 Hey, can you please tell me the fundamental notions that you mentioned in your comment? I'm in grade 9, so could you please tell the only ones necessary to understand this video full?
@@zamilhoquesiddique3249 not OP but honestly it would be hard to point them out concretely, one by one. I think of you keep going and watch and read more of more material you'll slowly be able to connect together everything and build a more comprehensive understand and a broader picture of everything. At least that's what I did personally. After an year or so I thought I understood most things now but in reality I'd just become more familiar with them and my understanding was not even half of all there was to understand. So that's also important to keep in mind, that if you're a beginner no matter how you feel in the moment, your understanding almost certainly, is wholly incomplete. Why I stress this, is because two of my friends who previously were interested in this kind of physics left after just a surface level understanding thinking they've understood most stuff (which probably represents the majority of people)
I'm happy there is now an english version of this channel. I watch both, because I have the feeling that although both have the same information, I get a fuller understanding than if I were to watch only one of them...
The art of combining the theory with the visual makes this explanation superb to anything I have heard or seen to date. You are truly the JSBach of physics - combining the what with the how and making it fascinatingly interesting and beautiful!
I'm there with you bud. Sometimes you are so close to understanding something and a video like this can sometimes help to make it 'click' together. Also idk what that other dude is on his high horse about, went off on some tangent. If there is anything I dislike its people who gatekeep physics.
@@ferp.2078 Gamma is spewing jargon that he thinks makes sense but, in fact, is bumbling on about simple things in a way that tries to pass them off as complex and insightful. Just another "RU-vid physicist" that thinks he knows what he is talking about, but in fact make little sense at all.
@@jarredgrant1 Yeah but they talked about Gallileo in the same way "thinks he knows what he is talking about, but in fact make little sense at all" etc.
@@alwaysdisputin9930 I mean, all the guy said was "changing the position of a mass in a gravitationally bound system alters the angular momentum" but he said it in 100 words and in a very confusing way. He just wants to sound profound.
@@alwaysdisputin9930 also, he never finished a full thought. He got halfway through saying something as if he was leading up to something and then just stopped. Basically, "yeah but don't forget that the angular momentum of the system is altered!" Which doesn't link what he's saying with the original comment. So, again, makes no sense at all.
I was hoping you'd mention the fine structure coupling constant as an explanation of why we can neglect higher order diagrams (perhaps also why "higher order" is intuitive language). This could lead into a nice future video explaining the computational differences between QED and QCD, where the coupling constant is much larger so we cannot neglect the higher order diagrams.
I'm necroposting but I agree. Mentioning that more complex diagrams are orders of magnitude less likely to occur and naturally give rise to the simple diagrams nearly completely describing the overall behavior would have made a nice conclusion to his layer overlapping animation and the general "repulsion" we experience
This channel is amaze-balls: 1. Great summary explanations -not too complicated, not too simple 2. Great graphics and representations 3. Great connections between branches of science
This week I had a Quantum Mechanics 2 exam. That was basically quantum field theory. I actually had enough of it. But when Sciene-Clic makes a video. Good summary of the principle of QFT.
@-GinΠΓ Τάο What are you ever trying to say? Of course, the complexity of every consecutive science is much bigger. Physics is very complex, and imagine the complexity of chemistry that is based in physics, biology that is based in chemistry... That is why medical doctors have to spend 10 years learning about a specific part of one type of animal, Homo Sapiens, to get a degree. And what is that "Nature is the Universal purpose"? You are putting some teleological meaning to Nature? There is no purpose, some think that evolution has a purpose, but that is wrong. No purpose, only adaptation to the environment.
@-GinΠΓ Τάο You are talking in general, or you are insulting me? I actually teach something, and I have a Master's degree, but if you think that I am stupid without knowing anything about me, such ad hominem attacks speak only about the person who does that.
@-GinΠΓ Τάο You should make difference between stupidity and ignorance. Ignorance can be cured, stupidity can't, that is why in the time when we have so much info under our fingers there are flat-Earthers, anti-vaxxers, and many who think that 20 videos on youtube are equal to 200 years of medical science, or 200 years of physics.
@-GinΠΓ Τάο I am not impressed with your simplistic explanations and incredible hubris which is an indication that you are under the Dunning-Kruger effect. Maybe my degree is not impressive for you, but it is impressive enough for people that matter. Grow up, and try to learn, I know it is hard, but that is the only way, and stop thinking that you are something special.
I have consumed science media for the layman for as long as I can remember. This is absolutely top-tier among some truly excellent competitors. Thank you!
This is really really really excellent. I very much appreciated that you allow pauses for my brain to process information between the animation and the explanation. I have always wanted to know more about this field.
I am studying electrical engineering. I had a quantum physics class. Passed it with a pretty good grade. Understood almost all phenomena, aside from why two of the same charge repel from eacother. I just thought it was a given thing that we can’t prove. This video made me understand this very simple concept if a very beautiful way. Thank you.
I love how quantum theory makes me see things in a deep different way, making me ask what is real, and if asking such a question makes sense in the first place
Please keep doing what you're doing! Through your videos, I am learning things that I never had any idea about before, and even if I'd looked into it (and I do like science), I probably wouldn't have understood nearly as well as with your videos. You are opening up a new world to people like me! Thank you!
It doesn't matter how good the animations, voice, sounds and author's understanding of topic are, because it's even more frightening more simple explanation more difficult to understand the complexity of the place we are living. Great job, Alessandro!
Excellent presentation. I am a retired Physics teacher who taught the subject for 33 years, and appreciate the simplicity with which the topic is introduced at an elementary level.
This music is so incredibly awesome that you play I hope you never stop using it because it helps me learn because it's just so incredible to have playing in the background while I'm thinking
Few times am I genuinely impressed by an explanation that is truly informative, visual, and summarizes much that others fail to clarify. In other words, all these years and you've shown me what a Feynman diagram is in rich variety what no one else has every done via video or writing, that I've come across.
This is, hands down, the best visual explanation of QED and Feynman Diagrams I have ever seen. It's amazing to try to wrap your mind around the fact that the electron and these processes drive almost every single thing every created and experienced in our cosmos, "physical" or otherwise. If we're not in The Simulation (TM), I'll kiss everyone's arse and give you all two weeks to draw a crowd, LOL! Well done!
Yeah, actually. it's like every instant there's a chance of emmiting a photon, the universe then sums up all the possible outcomes according to that probability.
Although different than the topic of this video, particles (say, an excited electron in an atom) can be triggered to emit a photon (i.e. fluorescence via spontanous emission), initiated by a perturbation from the fluctuating vacuum. Granted, this is a real photon and not a virtual one. And QED deals directly with the vacuum fields, so it still leaves the question of what triggers the virtual interaction amongst the fields..I suppose it really comes down to a probability game as the above commenter noted.
It both decides to emit it and to not, for each second the electron does both, and for each emition the photon is emited in all possible direction and decides to emit electron positron pairs or not at the same time, superposition is the answer
Feynmann diagrams do not try to answer this question, you could try to give a meaning but is more honest just to say that we dont understand the reason if there is a reason in the human understanding of what a reason is
As already stated it's based on probability which increases based on the energy state the electron is in if it's in a high energy state it has a higher probability of emitting a photon which will cause it to fall to a lower energy state due to conservation. If it's in a low energy state it has a lower probability etc.
So glad this is the first video I clicked on QED. Haven't touched theoretical physics since high school besides occasional pop science books. The clean visualization and no-nonsense explanation makes it so easy to digest. Much appreciate the work!
As a Chemist who understands molecular orbitals, bonding, anti-bonding and the Schrodinger equation, this explanation that there are multiple Feynman diagrams now makes sense. Thanks
Thanks for taking me deep into the rabbit hole of how the behavior of fundamental particles in this case electrons and positrons can be explained through Quantum Electrodynamics! I'm beginning to get the sense of why in Hollywood movies physicists will have these long equations on the board! so at times they are just dealing with a few of the infinite probabilities, and coming up with highly approximate results.
Minor criticism here. At 9:16 you say that virtual particles although intermediary are essential to consider them. This isn’t true. Non perturbation QFT (Also known as lattice QFT) does not use virtual particles at all to do calculations. Otherwise, great vid!
But lattice doesn't work with weakly coupled abelian theories like QED, right? Or at least it gives inconsistent results, both numerical and theoretical for small coupling constants if I recall correctly (I could be wrong, it's been some years since I read this subject). That's why it is used mainly to approach QCD and other strong coupled non abelian theories. Also if you want an analytical results you need to consider the full expansion to a given order so you would need all virtual particles.
Your videos have my favorite visual representations for these ideas! I dream of a full-team collaboration between yall and PBS space-time, on any mechanism in the standard model or relativity! As many know, the "color" analogies used for complex phase-space in QED, as well as for gluon colors in QCD is a compelling narrative to delineate linear amplitudes from modal phases for many charge concepts in physics. But, would you consider making a side-by-side animation where the rainbow diagrams (going from 2:40 to 3:53) are juxtaposed with a grayscale diagram, where the "color" of the rainbow is replaced by a spectrum of thick-to-thin textures? I imagine a visual aid that depicts a low-energy red color expressed by a thinly-textured space, transitioning to a thickly-textured space for high-energy blue colors - flowing through "R-G-B" space for electrons, and "R-B-G" space for positrons would be like flowing through thin-to-thick or thick-to-thin grayscale textures respectively. I think this would both help people with standard color vision transcend the color analogy by seeing an alternate but equal expression for quantum phase, as well as expand the accessibility of the color analogy for people with alternate color perception.
The electron quantum particle in the electron orbital field and the photon quantum in the electromagnetic field. Very clear. The electron, positron and photon interaction vertex at the nuclear shell layer. Feynman diagrams. Thank you🌹.
Absolutly astonishing! I admire your talent of understanding so complex theories and producing so detailed and understandable animations noone else on RU-vid could do that.
I am from India .I love your content so much and l respect all of guys . which sacrifice your time to make such content. Special thanks to you r friend who are doing PhD.
@ScienceClic Wow, thank you for explaining something so complex, so well, that it could be quickly and visually understood. I have just a BSME, and mechanical things seem intuitive,,, atomic/electrical/optic& quantum things previously seemed less intuitive, so this is great, with excellent, logical animations! I ask also: does the fact the Ben Franklin and others got the electron flow direction backwards and we keep that mistake currently(no pun intended), i.e. are forced to call charge negative (e-), [cause I know this complicates my understanding of diodes]... What I'm getting at is; that "negative", as when used for numberlines has the idea of debt or lack of something, whereas charge positive and charge negative are just two different real things, and electron flow(vs conventional flow) models for circuits seems to help the intuition to match the actual happenings,,, just curious if there is an alternate/better way to think about "charge"
The place in your QFT video where you described how electromagnetic repulsion represents the superposition of all possible interactions blew my mind. It's great to see you treat just that concept here in more detail.
Yes as long as the momentum and total charge is conserved. For example, If u have two electrons initially moving eastward, and one emits a photon to the northeast and the other to the southeast, then they can indeed attract each other
attraction or repulsion is not a concept in ee-->ee scattering. If you label the electrons e_L and e_R (for left and right) and they scatter to e_U and e_D (for up and down), and you draw an attraction like trajectory, there is a problem: irl, the e_U is going to be a mixture of e_L and e_R, and likewise for e_D, and the trajectory with the final state electrons swapped is going to look like repulsion. Both occur in super-position. (it's called t-channel and u-channel, and it was not discussed in this video).
I am just left mind blown after every one of your videos. You explain things in such an intuitive way. I come back to rewatch your videos all the time, just because they are so captivating to watch.
I cannot thank you enough for this video. Youve told a very exciting story with mathematical precision. This video should be required watching for humanity. Thank you!
I don't think you can explain most physics to 6yo without losing most of the information. This is what pop media does and the theory is interpreted as wrong. Also the quote was by feynman ig. This video had a lot of things which a 6yo wouldn't know.
I never thought I'd understand any quantum physics, but somehow you've done it. You've taught something about quantum physics that I've actually understood, after only like 3 hours of watching your videos. Absolutely amazing, I never thought I'd find physics cooler than chemistry but I do now. I've found a new special interest and her name is physics :)
To be more precise: only if the intitial and final set of particles and momenta are given can we say that nature follows all possible scenarios (between said states) simultaneously, and that the correct S matrix can be computed by adding up all S matrices corresponding to these alternative scenarios.
These vids are so well put together and make perfect sense, also I love the way it's taught in these videos since the abstractions, math etc is spoken of not as the cause of the phenomenon but as a description of a real, physical thing.
This is the BEST video on the entire youtube about Quantum Mechanics. No bullshit, no Quantum woo - just facts and real maths. RU-vid is filled with Quantum bullshit - even well known physicists have been saying all kinds of bullshit about QM on RU-vid and other platforms. We need more videos like these.
Really hatsoff. I have no word to say. I have seen ur general relativity mathematics video. Even as a 11th grader I was able to understand. I really appreciate ur work from the bottom of my heart sir. And for my entire life I won't forget this channel and still I owe u more than just a sub or like sir
About a month ago, I watched this video for the first time. And I'm back. This video really opened up so much to me that I never knew. You illustrate this so well and bring up things that I haven't heard elsewhere, even though I've looked. Things like the nature of the actual fields, how all Feynman diagrams and their amplitudes are added up to come up with a final probability of the movement of electrons, anti-particles seeming to move backwards in time, and more...these were so eye-opening to me! Thank you again!
Thank you, oh great algorithm, for the great ScienceClic! I wish I was born with a brain more suited to the study of QM,QED,QCD,... (specifically, the maths to support it all) but you've helped me understand so much more than any other video on those topics.
