"I've been trying to extract the world from the quantum wave function". I...I've been giving serious thought to organizing the garage, so I guess you win, Sean.
This is probably the fifth time i’ve listened to some version of this talk. Every time, i’m convinced that i’m mostly understanding him… until an hour later, and then i’m lost again. 😆 That’s a testament to his speaking and an indictment of my learning.
Loving the Mr Rogers attire here! 😎 I must say that I so much love & appreciate the patience he has with audience members during the Q&As following his talks, as folks ask him the same questions again & again, and he responds with such warmth & kindness to each & every one ❤️ many thanks to the university staff for sharing this one with us as well 💕
Is it possible to state this all in layman’s terms as this: that classical physics is a subset of quantum physics and so we have to make classical physics obey the rules of its “parent” not vice versa. And related to that, we might say that Einstein’s inertial frames of reference are only tools to allow us to understand the universe, but aren’t really real. In other words you have to think of the observer as “static” to measure the rest of the universe, even though everything including the observer is in “super position.”
I had a friend who was a Rhodes Scholar and had visited Schrödinger in his home. I told her his cat was obviously a tabby as the stripes were a diffraction pattern. She agreed.
I had a dream where my dog was explaining quantum mechanics over coffee and a cigarette. When I woke up I told him that if he was going to smoke he'd have to do it in the garage.
Speaking absolute nonsense with great confidence and perfect coherence to a math equation and you still have nothing but absolute nonsense, but you will gain a boat load of followers with no gifts of critical thought, and who are not nearly as bright as they think they are.
The waves are litearlly orthogonal, so 'parallel universes' is just a misnomer. They are just part of the same universe but waves that are independent of each other. And believing in orthogonal electrons and not believing in orthogonal entire 'universe waves' is just oafish; you cannot believe in quantum mechanics without also believing in 'many worlds' unless you are so low IQ that you don't see this blatant contradiction.
31:00 Don't get me wrong, I admire Professor Carroll and have read a number of his books with thorough enjoyment and much learning - but, what I still can't digest is that quantum behavior is observed at the tiniest scales, but even the smallest particles we can discern with our eyes, like a grain of sand contains more atoms then the universe contains stars. Scale matters. For instance, Individuals are thoughtful and considerate, but put hundreds or thousands of individuals into a town square listening to a passionate orator and they become an unthinking mob, ready to behave in ways, the individuals never would. Scale matters, why is that aspect so often glossed over in these discussions?
Scale is the last thing that matters for the observation of quantum effects. You were simply not paying enough attention in high school when they explained the photoelectric effect to you. ;-)
@@schmetterling4477 Rather then insult, why not try a little explanation? As for scale doesn't matter - look around, that's being even sillier than I am with my question. Have anything substantive to share?
@@petermiesler9452 The photelectric effect can be measured with nothing but a macroscopic metal plate, a macroscopic UV light source, a macroscopic battery, a macroscopic potentiometer, a macroscopic voltmeter and a macroscopic amp-meter. The Planck spectrum requires nothing but a macroscopic hot body and a macroscopic spectrometer. The yellow sodium emission lines can be seen with a macroscopic flame, a macroscopic pinch of salt and a macroscopic prism. Dude... if all you want is attention, just ask me. I will give you as much of it as you want without having to go through physics bullshitting. :-)
@@schmetterling4477If you’re going to comment, you should understand the damned question. If this happens at the scale of the photon & smaller, why TF would it have macroscopic real-world effects?
@@christopherhamilton3621 Photons don't have a scale. We taught you in high school that photons are small amounts of energy. Energy is a system property. Conserved properties don't have spatial scale/size. Absolutely everything you see around you, both matter and radiation are quantum effects. They can not be explained with classical physics. Why any of that exists at all was the great mystery of the 19th century that got resolved with the discovery of quantum mechanics in the early 20th.
Sean Carroll is genius, shining the light on how our world actually works. We shouldn't exist, because far too many things have gone exactly our way many times each and every second since T=0, but many worlds explains how we all got just so dam lucky.... If you don't understand it yet, keep learning.
Many universes NOT many worlds. Cannot be tested. Cannot be proven. Makes no testable predictions. You may as well be lecturing Star Trek Warp drive, you are speaking Science Fiction.
@@JerseyLynne Prof Neil Turok once of Perimeter Institute has a great theory, nuch of which was put together in the 1970s but Dr Turok has developed a mathematical rigor and the theory solves the issue of Dark Matter CPT broken symmetry and other issues and IMO explains why Mass exists (the existence of Mass requires a broken symmetry)
He did a series of lectures from home early in the COVID crisis called The Biggest Ideas in the Universe. He explains relativity and quantum mechanics in increasing detail, but he starts from a basic physics level. Here's a link to the first video in the playlist of that series, in case you're interested: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-HI09kat_GeI.html
I can only assume you've based this assertion on your lifetime of serious quantum physics study and numerous papers exploring and quantifying alternative theories?
Many worlds makes the most sense when you look at quantum entanglement. It opens the door to the next level of information science. I dont like term multiverse because it implies something bigger than universe which is everything including all we dont know. Mzny worlds combined with a good assumption of an infinite universe, implies " everything that is possible happens" which has enormous practicle applications which we as humans use routinely, but is greatly being expanded by the internet, computers and AI software. Its a vehicle that allows us to explore this realm of possibilities and bring practical applications into the "real" world to improve everyones life.
I have to think more about Triad of Entanglement, Geometry, and energy. I never seen that before. I do think about a similar Triad that relates to those three of information/entanglement geometry/mass and energy/ movement. I also think i have idea about why universe seems to be expanding, i think its an illusion and cosmic background microwave radiation is likely misinterpreted as requiring a big bang explanation. Its an illusion brought about by gravity and our position in center of observable universe. Yes i know i am just some yahoo, but arent we all.
I like your videos, I am RF engineer with physics education, after years of work i see literally everything made of waves, so i cexplain "photon interaction" in terms of waves. Photons are useful perspectives when modeling at times but are not fundamental and explain very few things generally the interaction of waves with matter and detectors.
Penrose is brilliant but can be wrong. Clever slogans can only lower credibility in a "belief". We all have beliefs we try to prove or we get new beliefs and so we progress. Schroedingers cat shows that the cat, and everything exists in this superposition. Because of experiments and the " infinite" universe, any noise in our system makes a huge number of possibilities that happen. Sean Carrol explains very clearly that in your specific universe the cat has definite state, and you see that, however in another universe far away in either space or time the cat and your observation is in another state. Interestingly our brain seem to work on the most probable emergent states, we often remember things that never happen, i think this is because what is likely to happen is often more important than what actually happens. This ties into information theory, code breaking, encoding in fact our multi worlds "codes" or what happens in them can be hacked into. The same for the future, or what the person next to you is thinking. Huge number of possibilities even traveling by using thought. We as humans already do this with science predictions on small things, stories movies, etc but now we have tools to build vehicles ie.. AI, computers and linking of billions of minds, we need to figure out better ways to do this.
Universe splitter - app that will branch the universe into several copies!! What an amazing lecture, the connection between entanglement and energy was very pleasantly brought up.
A passing thought should also cause all kinds of new universes to appear, if we assume neural function is part of thinking. Sean says each quantum event causes two universes to be split off - one in which the event happened and one in which it didn't. Neural transmission involves all kinds of quantum events.
@@beenaplumber8379 Our thoughts would be an unreliable source of quantum randomness as they are an unreliable source of randomness in general. We don't produce all possible thoughts with equal likelihood, which is a good thing. The whole reason our brains are useful is they are more likely to produce certain thoughts than others.
@@paulfoss5385 Many Worlds would suggest that our brains do produce all possible thoughts. We only experience a narrow stream of thoughts in the same way an electron is seen as a particle when we look at it. We are in a superposition of thinking everything we can think of, but in our universe, we experience only the thoughts we're aware of. We can have no experience of what our brains get up to in adjacent universes, but there's enough of them to accommodate everything we didn't think here in this one. I realize I'm blurring the distinction between the brain and the mind. My mind is my own, it exists in this universe, and it is only capable of limited thinking, which only I can experience. It is where my identity lies. My brain is what I'm talking about when I say it's thinking of all possible things. It's not part of my inner self, but as a physical object, if we assume it generates or mediates thought, it certainly is subject to quantum mechanics, including Many Worlds (if that turns out to be correct), in which case there is a universe in which every possible state of my brain exists. I'm not sure what randomness has to do with this. I don't think we've found anything that's truly random. I understand nuclear decay is the closest nature gets to randomness.
Fourier transform shows how everything can be broken down into waves in a feild. We see particles but that is a convenient illusion that simplifies emergent macro phenomena. Everything you see, everything ther is can be broken down to waves moving a feild. Everything is immersed in these feilds, if you want to take the perspective of universe as a computer they are like little memory cells for those waves they process those waves, by either modifying them or moving them on.
How many variations of the two slit experiment have been.....ie......3 slits.....round holes...... multiple 2 slit experiments at the same time.....etc ....?
Could the big bang be a critical state in the most fundamental field in which space is broken by a super massive black hole and with inflation caused by the energy of reconnecting field lines?
Hello from Kazakhstan. We can create an educational and practical device and practically master Einstein’s theories of relativity or obtain, for example, new physics: Postulate 1. Light is an ordered vibration of gravitational quanta. Postulate 2. The speed of light, regardless of the source, within the “framework of the dominant gravitational field” This is determined experimentally using a hybrid fiber optic gyroscope (based on Michelson's experiment 1881-2015). Using a hybrid fiber optic gyroscope, the straight-line speed of vehicles can be measured. There is a company in China that makes (fiber optic angular velocity meter) they will be able to create a hybrid device. Please, can you come to an agreement with them? I guarantee payment at cost on my part.
Interesting perspective on time..Leave it to quantum physicists to see the whole universe(s) in a peculiar mathematical construct and then when the subject of time comes up- they run to Thermodynamics (??!!??). They have got to be joking. Yes, the second law describes entropy and things do run down. But is that all there is (I don't think that the twin paradox mentions entropy)? It makes me suspicious that the other grand theories, the many worlds, many universes, many you and I's are just so much stuff. Yes, he can give you explanations- but I don't think there is much in the way of conviction. Do we know or do we not know -that is the question (not "to be or not to be"- sorry Will).
humans have energy, we create and destroy without much thought. id collapse to if i had a fully matured energy specie in front of me trying to measure and poke and prod. also my opinion, if you catch me in tube as im transiting space time. im deff not showing which way im escaping. love the wave shotgun. that lil guy gave you so many possible routes you think its a wave. lol best molecular juke of the Ages. think of energy as animals behave on earth. the Bond every creature shares is because we are all being pulled towards our copy. i will watch, thank you for free knowledge.
Dear Professor, Time-space, is simply motion or relative velocity anything else in the geometric universe? If space is contracted to a certain level where the velocity of any object can be attained the velocity of light then how gravity can be defined? Is gravity simply energy in this time-space while gravity is mass-related in classical mechanics
@1:03:33 a question is asked to which Sean gives a passionate response. I agree. Today's scientists are excellent in general. @1:17:50 Sean intentionally coughs signaling he is only pretending to not know the answer to the question.
Our observation doesn’t really change it the way you think but the patterns in our head can be recreated. Look at all the stuff that used to be “unreal”
I've listened to Sean's voice for so so many hours, that I can tell he's got a stuffed nose for this lecture... idk, slight cold maybe? or hay fever? or maybe a quantum superposition of the two (joking). Sean Carroll Rocks!!! This is a nice simple concise lecture, that's very well laid out. Gr8! Peace ☮💜Love
The Energy argument: if energy of each branch is, "getting less and less" with time (and ONLY the TOTAL energy is conserved, that was some point presumably at the Big Bang), then how is that not an "observable" effect? It would be strange if this is somehow considered a cause of acceleration of the Universe, because no such mechanism is established on how the energy "thinning" at each branching point is somehow contributing to acceleration of the Universe (and there are many such Universes, each is thinning, and depending on which stage of branching they are in, they will have varying degree of thinning/"acceleration"). The energy issue should be perhaps more crucial than any other. There is something missing in how QM (or QFT) is applied to the whole Universe (ie lack of gravity, not just at a quantum level, but a proper formulation that "emerges" at the classical level).
@@maxborn7400 He mistook the wave function for a description of the individual physics system. That is not what a wave function is. In actuality it is a description of the unmeasured quantum mechanical ensemble, i.e. of an abstract notion that is based on an infinite repetition of the same quantum mechanical experiment. That mistake will naturally blow up the number of physical states by infinity, which is exactly what MWI claims. In other words... Everett and his followers can't even count to one. ;-)
@@schmetterling4477 I guess it boils down to what one considers a wave function to be: an abstraction or a "real" entity describing interactions/systems. There is no more information to be obtained than what is 'inside" the wave function, so some people say it is a description of a given system - maybe too idealised because there's always some correlation with surroundings, and wave/particle nature are just two extremes of that correlation. I also find it a bit of a leap, when people start talking about the wave function/wave packet like it's an actual thing "evolving" just without a measurement process. A more accurate way to saying, "a wave function evolves" would be "if we measured an ensemble of this given system at this point in time, it will have a probability amplitude like so" - which is admittedly a mouthful. I have had this debate with some people once and you would be surprised how acerbic and visceral reaction people have to understanding this simple fact. Incidentally, *Max Born*, was the one who told us how exactly to think of a wave function. But the issue of measurement remains in a more complicated way, and I think it's a deeper problem of having a consistent picture of quantised gravity (or even just including classical GR properly in the Standard Model framework). We can be very precise and still end up at a problem: quantum mechanics tells us that states of particles can entangle with surroundings (i.e., when we make measurements, the probability distributions would agree with an entangled state description). At some point, as Carroll had shown, there will be a massive wave function containing all these entangled possibilities, spanning all of the Universe, in principle - again, if we made measurements on larger and larger number of particles/systems, probability distributions would agree with the entangled/correlated description. The issue is to assume that we can do this process *ad infinitum* to every last particle in the Universe. Gravity has not been consistently included in this formulation, and that is at least one source of the "paradox"/multiworld problem. Penrose is one of the few people who is now seriously considering the issue of what happens if a superposition state of a particle is introduced in a gravity field behaving as per GR. His idea seems to be that the wave function would still "collapse" at some point, because now the whole of the gravity metric is acting like the cat in Schrodinger's cat experiment.
@@maxborn7400 The wave function was always an abstract and it will always be an abstract. One can't even measure it. And that ends the discussion about MWI. It's simply intellectual nonsense. ;-)
Unfortunately, it is never explained in such lectures how all this is determined experimentally. For example, how can you observe a single photon? But what makes this lecture so special is above all the impressive and sonorous voice of the lecturer...
@@ivocanevo I would doubt that. The accepted literature value is closer to half a dozen to a dozen. Otherwise you would be seeing cosmic rays all the time. Every photomultiplier tube picks that stuff up constantly.
U Model Thanks for your well produced video If you add all the possible wave functions together will in make a “U” shape wave or square wave function? I have been trying to describe the “U” shape wave that is produced in my model. The “U” shape wave is produced as the loading increases/ just before the wave function shifts to the next higher energy level. Your viewers might be interested in watching the test video the model. See the load verse deflection graph in white paper. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-wrBsqiE0vG4.htmlsi=waT8lY2iX-wJdjO3
The moment a particle is a wave; it has to be a conscious wave! Nicola Tesla states, “If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency, and vibration” Gravity is the conscious attraction among waves to create the illusion of particles, and creates our experience-able Universe. Max Planck states: "Consciousness is fundamental and matter is derived from Consciousness". Life is the Infinite Consciousness, experiencing the Infinite Possibilities, Infinitely. We are "It", experiencing our infinite possibilities in our finite moment. Our job is to make it interesting!
When you dont looking at stuff is vave function because you see whole distribution, aka all possible states at the same time smeared out creating an appearance form (atom, molecules, stuff). But when you measure you take a slice at a specific time, so of course when you look you see only a certain state which looks like particle not wave. So that's that I agine a propeller of an old airplane. When it rotates it seemed like a disk, but when it stops you see it's only two blades. On micro level of this subatomic particles the time frames we talk are so small or if you will do short that you see the element in all possible.positions. but when you measure it's location of course you take away time completely and you can see the stuff at only a specific position. That's all. So not sure what's the big confusion. In those small subatomic levels time frames are so small that then can even reverse in time, hence stuff seems to pop in from nothing and pop out into nothing. That's when it actually goes back in time
Being the physics nitwit I am, my problem with the "many worlds" notion is: when opening the box to find the cat (with all its electrons) asleep, why/how would that cause that entire scene (including all of its electrons) to duplicate itself into existence with a cat that's awake at the moment of opening that box, and does this include the lab the box was placed in; the building; the street or the entire town, country; planet? Or, in short: no matter the electron's form or state, where do the extra electrons come from that make up the other cat, its box and researcher who opened it etc. etc. ? If anyone reading this, could and would try to point out the flaw in this question of mine, I'd very much appreciate it!
This seems to me to be a good way to explain why when we look around, we can see a little bit of quantum weirdness, but not a lot of it. The Universe is splitting into more branches very frequently, but each branch rapidly loses its ability to influence the other branches. All the famous "interference effect" quantum weirdness is just traces of the rapidly fading connections between different branches. All this is just metaphor though unless and until somebody can turn it into math. Likewise, entanglement being somehow the way that the connection between geometry and energy arises is a very appealing idea.
There are neither particles nor waves. There are only people who weren't paying any attention in school when we taught them that "quanta are small amounts of energy". :-)
I'm totally obsessed with this subject,,,couldn't you say that ,,the wave becomes a particle on its first impact with the closest object,, ? P.s. & it is Saturday 😊
You run into the problem that "object" is not well defined. By "object", do you simply mean another particle? Because 2 particles can interact to become entangled without collapsing. This is the whole measurement problem in a nutshell. Measurement is not well defined, same as object is not well defined. With the many worlds interpretation, "measurement" just means entanglement with the environment, so that anyone within that environment also becomes entangled with the measured particle, thus "collapsing" the state into one of the possibilities.
@spaceinyourface There are never particles. There are fields, and they change in a wave-like way. "Particle" is our macroscopic, limited observer interpretation of fields interacting with each other.
@@JerseyLynne Out where? There is a lot of nothing everywhere, but there are also quantum fields that have energy. Fields interacting with each other can be described in simple human-perspective terms as particle motion.
Be-cause-effect the exponential, exponentiation-ness designated "e" unity-connection or ONE-INFINITY reciprocation at Pi-bifurcation emitter-receiver log-antilog recirculation is the constant self-defining explanation->existence of 2-ness as one mono-dualistic POV "Truth in Labelling", all potential positioning possibilities are point-line-circle axial-tangential orthogonal-normal reciprocation-recirculation representations of the Universal Wave-packaging Fusion-Fission Function.
People have been familiar with the many worlds, for ages now. Personally, I have not visited a 3rd world country as of yet, but I have visited a 2nd world country, and I am currently living in a 1st world country.
About the cat. Need explanation. When i look at him, it may be either asleep or awake. But with electron, when i observe it, he is always a particle, that is an awaken cat. How so!??😮
Our body take in fractions of reality through the senses. We detect patterns through these and see things that are thought of as intangible but somehow still existing. A fraction of reality is a memory since a memory is grown into us. That fraction connected to a pattern leads us to connection other things with that pattern and evolving it. The unreal is a fraction of reality existing as us partially in our mind like a pattern connected to that other reality but it’s not another reality, that is potential. The unreal has potential to be real but guide reality to create it. That guiding insight is us though and not an invisible guy in the sky. People have just misunderstood. Like how you look through a kaleidoscope and see how the smaller scale is connected to the larger scale like sacred geometry.
The data points to the realization that there's a good chance we live in a simulation. The code is not written until you look behind a certain door and then the room is rendered but not until.
Э э э ребяты, да какие волны могут быть при потоке частиц? Что то напутано при представлении движении частиц потоком по траектории волной. Попробуем проанализировать опыт с двумя щелями, коли поток частиц движется по прямой, то, при прохождении щели возникнет кавитация или завихрение. Что то тут слабо проработано с точки зрения механики ( каких то не хватает знаний о процессах движения потока или всё же потоков), относительно анализа движения частиц волной. Выходит " О сколько нам открытий чудных готовит просвещенья дух" А.С. Пушкин.
Wrong(?), I do agree with Professor Carroll, except when I dont, which is one of those "Nearly is as good as a mile" when missing the Mark.., ie things like that Measurement Problem everyone knows about, ..complicated and messy Quantum Computational Mechanics. For myself, the measuring operation is a navigational question of how to arrive at a projected logical destination, which on the surface of planet Earth is the Observable time-timing sync-duration Longitude Problem of determining a distance by precise relative-timing ratio-rates in 3D-T Perspective Principle so as to be able to position the intersection of orthogonal-normal axial-tangential alignment of, for example, an on-ship survey sighting of Astronomical Positioning relative to the surface of the Ocean.., it is messy to do it the old way now we have GPS relative-timing, accurate timing modulation clocks in simplified precision measurement techniques. Thanks to Professor Susskind's ER=EPR shell-horizon envelope-shaping holography of navigational dimensionality, a more comprehensive thought experiment of probabilistic correlations in temporal positioning is possible, in conjunction with Euler's Unit Circle derivivation, instantaneous e-Pi-i 1-0-infinity sync-duration here-now-forever flat-space ground-state vanishing-into-no-thing Perspective.
Dear Professor, Whenever not looking it seems like a wave function or energy but whenever looking, it looks like a particle. Does it mean visible things are matter while twin invisible things are energy? So, matter (particle) -energy (light) entangling; both the gravitational field (mass associated) and EM field (charged particle, electron) as conservative energies hold the whole transformation and conservation of energy in the universe. (Because the light and electron similarity in the double slit experiment and the quantum phenomena (particle and wave nature) make them alike and accepting! )
