The Uncertainty Principle and Waves - Sixty Symbols 

Id like to hear Phil talk about how the uncertainty principal relates to wireless data transfer. The faster the data rate, such as in video transmission, the more spread out the bandwidth is. Therefore you have a high loss transfer. In low data rates, you can have a tight spectrum and have lossless transfer.

Top marks for explaining physics soundwaves with metal chugs and top marks for playing an epiphone elite with the international headstock, it's a rare guitar and it's a great one as well.

Try this, professor: four -- eee --:eh (eh sounds like the long A sound, as in space)

Nice to see another djentleman...

Thall.

What a djentlemanly thing to say

haha

You made this so easy

But doesn't your ball actually still have definite positions and momentum regardless of the methods to measure them? An oscillation doesn't. Maybe if you got the ball bouncing to some rhythm and tried to locate the rhythm, then you'll see that the position of the ball is not the 'reduced' position of the oscillation. Also, the real trick is showing why quantum mechanics is relevant to the real world, not the other way around.

It's an analogy, it's not "This is literally how it works". It's just a way to visualize the relationship if you have a hard time thinking directly in terms of sine waves. And no, it goes both ways equally.

Well, really It only goes both ways if you're not scientific and 'believe' in QM theory.

The position is absolute. You can not say that this is somewhere over there. It's like record a video of a race car, you can only find the position (absolute) with one frame, if you use all frames you can determine the velocity but can not find the absolute position. Edit: I was explaining the analogy itself and not the uncertainty of the particles.

Lol yeah. This fourier is a very boncus guy indeed

Brady's bad - mea culpa!

hawk eye

But really, how certain can we be?

LOL

S T R Y P E R

T O M B R U H

S P Ë H S

VAFS

Ok

Jim Griffiths

How does a wave ‘know’ it has an end? When I have a sine wave that lasts for only 10 sec, then during those 10 sec the wave must be pure/true. If it was not and the uncertainty of the wave would be present before the cutoff, then we would have communicated information from the future. So only after the 10 sec have passed can the stop be detected. Else I could detect the stop before it happened, but then decide not to stop, thereby creating a paradox.

@@Laurenss23 The sine wave, when measured as it's playing, is perfect. But it has to be measured in its entirely, otherwise it's like measuring just part of something but not the ends. There is a wide bandwidth on the start of a sine wave that quickly narrows but it never reaches a true single frequency. It always has sidebands because we aren't measuring it lasting for infinity seconds. It's the same for Dirac spikes. We can never produce an infinitely short-lived impulse because it's a mathematical concept, not a reality. The impulse would last less than a Planck length of time, just as a "perfect" sine wave has to last for infinity time to produce one individual frequency with no sidebands. Both perfect sine waves and Dirac spikes are physically impossible and we have to deal with that reality. I don't know how mathematicians deal with it, though. I'm just a sound engineer, car mechanic and RU-vid commenter.

@@BlazeOrangeDeer Nope. It's a perfectly flat line covering the whole frequency spectrum from zero to infinity Hz, rising and falling instantaneously.

@@JimGriffOne you mentioned you were a sound engineer and just made me think of spike testing of acoustic environments to get data for convolving reverbs. So, yeah, the spike contains energy across the whole audio spectrum in one brief click, as you said.

Accents are tribal are disgusting because they're performative and you should speak clear and concise rather than pretending you can't

Similar restrictions exist with modulation of any kind. You can only send information at less than half of the carrier wave frequency (The Nyquist frequency).

Exactly. Thanks to the net it's fairly common knowledge now but back in the 1970's it was easier to experience it in practice. Hearing some fool CBer wipe out three channels to either side while splattering across the entire band because he thought overdriving the finals of an illegal linear amplifier would give him more power will drive home the concept much better than a RU-vid video.

Yeah that must have been easier to understand in practice... because I have no idea what you're talking about.

@what else is on think about the fourier transform from the video and how the short guitar note made a wider fourier transform than the longerone. The radio "bands" are supposed to transmit the information on a specific frequency, so whoever is listening can filter out other frequencies. Shorter / faster input would make the fourier transform wider, hence if it got too wide, other bands could get polluted. Not sure what "illegal linear amplifier" is but I guess the concept is that the extra noise it would cause outside of the target frequency when interpreted from the fourier transform would be annoying to other people trying to receive different information through nearby frequencies.

Only it's not true. Science has proven that humans can hear up to 10 times faster than Fourier time-frequency Uncertainty. This demonstrates quantum coherence as noncommutative phase and study Penrose and Hameroff for details.

Nice Ok computer image

Emanuel de Matos He’s a feminist AND a Rush fan, ugh could he be more wrong?

@@Mortiis558 Hey! Rush is great! You watch it, buddy! >.

Kristopher Poulsen I’m not your buddy, guy!

Mortiss558 - you may not be a fan of their music, but it's hard to deny that they're masters of their instruments.

justyo96 They know how to play their instruments decently. But I’ve never been blown away by anything I’ve heard.

It's the same for any oscillation tho, not unique to 'quantum phenomena'.

Not disagreeing, and not really my point. I do think it is important to explain though - it's pretty fundamental to the uncertainty principle put forward by Heisenberg and shows it is not an infinitely sliding scale. You can never truly know the absolute exact value of any complementary variable.

Hi, Joe. I remembered your comment under this video from a few months back and thought you might be interested in the material for "The Quantum World" module that I'm about to start teaching. Best wishes, Philip (Moriarty)