The Biggest Ideas in the Universe | 19. Probability and Randomness 

Keep these up they’re awesome! As a math student, these have helped me too appreciate the use of geometry, topology and algebra.

Sean what software are you using to film/create these videos? (I assume you're writing on an ipad with the apple pencil?)

@@obiwankenobi07 he discussed that in one of the q&a videos

David Taylor which one do you remember? Thank you

@@obiwankenobi07 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-m2qrXl0g0OE.html

At least Sean doesn’t have to write and talk at the same time for this lecture! (How many times has he said he shouldn’t try to do that.)

Any animator will tell you, it's easier to draw the lips to match the dialogue than to sync the acting to match the animation.

give or take some credence

Admirable effort, bear in mind that true mastery of a subject requires practice, though! So hope you have a place to make some exercises on subjects like these, to really get a feel for it.

How many times have I watched one of Sean’s lectures late at night and woken up to see the video has ended. His voice is soothing. Now I watch the videos in the daytime so I don’t miss anything.

It's the properties of the wave function (or particle) in question, iirc

I was also tempted to do a pun about the element Sodium but I though "Na".

Northern Hemisphere bias. There are clockwise plants and counter-clockwise plants. You might make the argument from amino acid handedness, but clocks pre-date our knowledge of that.

@Jeffrey Simmons I didn't think we were losing it per say. Nor a actual edge but spacetime bleeding into to something leading to the acceleration. Some other that pulls and adds to the acceleration of our universes expansion. The edge would be everywhere and nowhere at the same time since there isn't a true edge to the universe. The pulling increases but since spacetime increases too it never is fully "pulled or depleted" but the pulling still adds some acceleration. I just used the water analogy since it is easier to picture the effect I was thinking of. The water never depletes and the table is always expanding from whatever point you pick so the "edge" would constantly be in a different spot relative ro you as the observer but the "pulling" effect is still there. Like I said though lol. Layman but very interested in these subjects and question I had as to what might explain Dark Energy. If I am wrong I am wrong. Just pondering. I guess what I am thinking is what if our universe bleeding into another dimension and that adds energy to our own.

Ramon Atila - the word you are looking for is "please".

Wanna buy a box of ideal gas? It's Methane - from a spherical cow of course !

And thank you Sean. Such an amazing series. I'm loving this you are such a great teacher. Thank you. 😍

Interesting point. In practice even un-conditional probabilities are estimated subjectively, so it’s all the same soup.

Thank you Simon for your interesting and considered reply. I’m not clear as to the distinction between theory and practice in this context. Either the universe is deterministic or it is not. I might agree that Newton’s equations are deterministic in theory, but the universe is not. The concept of a unit circle is theoretical and there is no such thing in reality. Integer measurements are impossible as any scientist will confirm. The fact the cos pi is -1 is true if we define angles in terms of pi. Simplifying in this way is a common feature of physics. The speed of light is set to be 1 and so is Plank’s constant to make calculation easier. These are conveniences. Pi divided by pi is 1 and pi to the power of 0 is 1. The universe is not so convenient. Cos (pi/6.34567…..) is the kind of thing we find in nature. The problem is not simply difficulty with irrational numbers but also with real numbers. Determinism is about predicting the paths, motions, evolution and interaction of particles. For each particle we need three real (infinitely imprecise) spatial coordinates and an infinitely imprecise momentum in the context of all other particles at the same infinitely imprecise time coordinate. Forget for a moment the issues with simultaneity over spatial separations, at a single time we cannot know both direction and velocity/momentum of particle. It is not simply the difficulty of getting infinite numbers into my head. It is that I cannot specify infinite coordinates such that I avoid chaotic solutions to Newton’s deterministic equations. The greater the time interval between the prediction and the position, the greater will be the amplification of any imprecision in the initial conditions. I think QM also destroys the idea of determinism but that is another story.

Max has leh leh leh left the chat