Parallel Worlds Probably Exist. Here’s Why

  • Am Vor 2 years

    VeritasiumVeritasium

    The most elegant interpretation of quantum mechanics is the universe is constantly splitting
    A portion of this video was sponsored by Norton. Get up to 60% off the first year (annually billed) here: bit.ly/32SM0yd or use promo code VERITASIUM

    Special thanks to:
    Prof. Sean Carroll www.preposterousuniverse.com
    His book, a major source for this video is 'Something Deeply Hidden: Quantum Worlds and The Emergence of Spacetime'

    Code for solving the Schrödinger equation by Jonny Hyman available here: github.com/jonnyhyman/Quantum...

    I learned quantum mechanics the traditional 'Copenhagen Interpretation' way. We can use the Schrödinger equation to solve for and evolve wave functions. Then we invoke wave-particle duality, in essence things we detect as particles can behave as waves when they aren't interacting with anything. But when there is a measurement, the wave function collapses leaving us with a definite particle detection. If we repeat the experiment many times, we find the statistics of these results mirror the amplitude of the wave function squared. Hence the Born rule came into being, saying the wave function should be interpreted statistically, that our universe at the most fundamental scale is probabilistic rather than deterministic. This did not sit well with scientists like Einstein and Schrödinger who believed there must be more going on, perhaps 'hidden variables'.

    In the 1950's Hugh Everett proposed the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. It is so logical in hindsight but with a bias towards the classical world, experiments and measurements to guide their thinking, it's understandable why the founders of quantum theory didn't come up with it. Rather than proposing different dynamics for measurement, Everett suggests that measurement is something that happens naturally in the course of quantum particles interacting with each other. The conclusion is inescapable. There is nothing special about measurement, it is just the observer becoming entangled with a wave function in a superposition. Since one observer can experience only their own branch, it appears as if the other possibilities have disappeared but in reality there is no reason why they could not still exist and just fail to interact with the other branches. This is caused by environmental decoherence.

    Schrodinger's cat animation by Iván Tello
    Wave functions, double slit and entanglement animation by Jonny Hyman
    Filming of opening sequence by Casey Rentz

    Special thanks to Mithuna Y, Raquel Nuno and Dianna Cowern for feedback on the script

    Music from epidemicsound.com "Experimental 1" "Serene Story 2" "Seaweed" "Colorful Animation 4"

Lacking at life
Lacking at life

My curious brain at 3am like “Hell yeah this looks interesting” not understanding any of it

Vor 8 Monate
SpiltMilk
SpiltMilk

Watch The Slit Experiment It’ll give a better perspective of how to identify what he means by quantum physics.

Vor 9 Tage
King Diabeto
King Diabeto

Why is this what most of us apes do?....

Vor 14 Tage
sparkyrohit
sparkyrohit

Same with me

Vor 17 Tage
Mohammed El Massri
Mohammed El Massri

@QT Ackers lucky sod ! Wish I did ! I am proof that one can be interested in things that one finds almost incomprehensible. There is not satisfaction like the satisfaction of understanding . that was Socrates I think who said that. I wonder what the Ancient Greek Philosophers would make of Quantum Theory?

Vor 19 Tage
Luan Alves
Luan Alves

BRO THATS LITERALLY ME

Vor 20 Tage
Ворон Маусы
Ворон Маусы

Things like these actually make our world more magical than any science fiction

Vor Monat
Jagannth KN
Jagannth KN

@Ворон Маусы ok

Vor 6 Tage
Ворон Маусы
Ворон Маусы

@Jagannth KN yes

Vor 6 Tage
Jagannth KN
Jagannth KN

@Ворон Маусы do you even understand what im talking abt?

Vor 7 Tage
Ворон Маусы
Ворон Маусы

@Jagannth KN what is? 😂

Vor 7 Tage
Jagannth KN
Jagannth KN

@Ворон Маусы this is stupid

Vor 7 Tage
Mateusz B.
Mateusz B.

I am ingnorant in physics, but could this phenomen of entanglement be used to mesure the speed of light in one direction? Like the beam of light provokes the mesure of one of the photons and we mesure the state of the other from far away ? Thank you for the video! :D I suppose brighter minds have already thought about it but I wonder why this is not an option :) I am really curious about this phenoemen

Vor Monat
Sheetal Agarwalla
Sheetal Agarwalla

Also its interesting to note why light goes at spees of light and other particles doesn't. Photons are massless so they can go at infinity speeds. But tiny particles even electrons cannot go at speed of light as they have some mass. But interestingly neutrinos which are almost massless goes at 99.99 percent speed of light and some lighter neutrinos may even go faster than speed of light. Some experiments have shown this but their findings have somewhat being taken as an error during measurement. So finding lighter neutrinos going at faster than speed of light might be the beginning of an entirely new era especially for special and general relativity.

Vor 24 Tage
Sheetal Agarwalla
Sheetal Agarwalla

@Udit Ghelani we haven't accepted it yet. We are trying to communicate faster than speed of light. To be able to use quantum entanglement somehow to transmit useful data at trillions of meters per second

Vor 24 Tage
Udit Ghelani
Udit Ghelani

​​@Sheetal Agarwalla But then does that mean that we accept the fact that nothing in this universe (including quantum particles) will be faster than the speed of light in one direction and then make no progress to calculate or surpass it?

Vor 24 Tage
Sheetal Agarwalla
Sheetal Agarwalla

@austin kutz see physics works the same as long as going two way gives us the speed of light to be c. It doesn't matter what one way speed is

Vor 24 Tage
Sheetal Agarwalla
Sheetal Agarwalla

Yes this is what I first thought when the idea that we can go faster than speed of light poped up. Actually in quantum entanglement the data which is transmitted is just random with probability of 50:50 so nothing useful is transmitted but scientist are hoping that somehow if we can use entanglement smartly enough we may transmit useful data faster than speed of light . If that happens special relativity will break down at that moment and a new theory will be required to study those velocities of trillions of meter per second and quantum will win over Einstein. And the first thing that we can do with this is to find one way speed of light. Hopefully. But honestly speaking that won't be an important problem any more as now everyone will focus on developing proper theories which can help us understand these high speeds.

Vor 24 Tage
thegorillaguide
thegorillaguide

I am delighted to have just come across this video as it resolves an issue that has been annoying me for years: If a human observer can cause the superpositioned state of the cat to collapse, as described by Schrödinger, then that requires the existence of humans - or, at least - an observing entity, for the universe to work as we understand it, thus raising us humans to the status of gods. By allowing for the observer to become part of the entangled system our not-so-much-gods-more-like-idiots status is preserved rather elegantly. Now, how to collapse away all those pesky multiverses...

Vor 2 Monate
Andy Bambrick
Andy Bambrick

@Calum O'Connell I think your on the right path, consciousness is another topic that we don't have tools to measure...but it exists. (Like air, can't see it but it's there, or time. Or (space time) it's there, we know it is, but we just can't control it yet...it's a human flaw, if you cant control or minupulate it is ot there?

Vor 15 Tage
Andy Bambrick
Andy Bambrick

So I've been looking at the "constants" of (entropy, time, and information) if their all related then schrodingers cat is in superstition state, then the cat lives in the future until it's observed, at which point "cat" passes the hyperspace between future and past. Never in the present and the cats life is solely defined by observation and can never be un-done. So my question is does a mere simple thing (observation) determine the future or are we trapped in the hyperspace present (which technically doesn't exist because you can't measure the present)

Vor 15 Tage
Vitulus
Vitulus

@Lady Moonweb How does a detector collapse a quantum state? At which specific particle interaction does this occur? In the quantum world, any particle interaction entangles with the superposed particle, so at some point these entanglements becomes a collapse? Do you see the issue with that. Sure detection changes the wave function, but doesn't mean it _collapses_ .

Vor 21 Tag
thegorillaguide
thegorillaguide

@Andy Bambrick A cat has a half-life of one year on the basis that cats live for around 18 years and have nine lives. After a year, lift the lid and let us know the state of the cat.

Vor Monat
Andy Bambrick
Andy Bambrick

If no one ever opens the lid to determine the state of the cat does that make the cat immortal?

Vor Monat
Thomas Kist
Thomas Kist

Can you be more precise about: why a single electron interacts with itself, why two entangled particles light-years apart feel effects together, but why parallel worlds DON’T

Vor 2 Monate
RedDoorYoga
RedDoorYoga

The keyword to research here is decoherence. But basically? The entanglement gets spread out and has less and less of an effect as it moves from a few particles to the countless particles in the environment. Think about the correlation between the motion of a cueball and the ball it strikes and compare that to the correlation you see after many different balls have participated in the interaction.

Vor 18 Tage
Alex Goglin
Alex Goglin

they have affected each other in the past and by measuring one we have determined what the other one is experiencing (the opposite)

Vor Monat
Benjamin Smith
Benjamin Smith

If there are, in fact, parallel worlds, then a "single electron interacts with itself" is really the "single electron interacting with all the other-world versions of itself" in what's known as the "wave function" of quantum mechanics. And the two entangled particles that "feel effects together", are two particles that have interacted in THEIR world but haven't interacted yet with ours, and so the "effect" of the apparent interaction is simply those particles becoming part of the world that you inhabit. They don't actually "feel" any effect at all; as they are simply existing in the universe that they are part of which includes a non-entangled version of you. And when the wave function collapses as you observe either particle, they then become part of the entangled whole which now includes you but didn't previously. Mind bending stuff

Vor Monat
Jason Chang
Jason Chang

Suppose all you know about two particles (call them A and B) is that they started from point X, and are traveling in opposite directions at the same speed. Then, you find out where particle A is. You immediately learn where particle B is as well. The particles don't "feel the effects together," the effects already happened but we haven't learned it (and until we do, to us it's just a probability obeying Schrodinger's equation.) When we learn about particle A, particle B's whereabouts stop being a probability as well.

Vor Monat
Saint's Productions
Saint's Productions

Single electron does not interact with itself. Before passing through the slits it is a wave and is at every “point” on this wave until the instant it is recorded on the screen. Once recorded it is a single point particle again and all the other possible “wave positions” are gone. Two entangled particles feel effects at same time for similar reasons. Because the effects of one particle are directly determined by the effects of the other, when one particles effects are known, the other particles effects can be instantly known as well. Parallel worlds don’t feel the effects of eachother because they are not tangled. Parallel worlds form AFTER detanglement and therefore do not depend on eachother.

Vor Monat
BlueTowel - Reko
BlueTowel - Reko

Its good to know that im having a great life in a parallel universe.

Vor 8 Monate
Capt. Animosiac
Capt. Animosiac

So I'm assuming that say Taylor Swift from an alternate universe is struggling performing off the streets for money.

Vor 12 Tage
Car Phone
Car Phone

@Gunny White That nonsense unfortunately gave rise to the nonsense like the "Schrodinger's Cat" Thought Experiment and it 'exists' only in your mind.

Vor 13 Tage
Hannah Willis
Hannah Willis

@Arun kumar those versions of us are still us. You don’t have to trust me but just think on it, it’s clear.

Vor 21 Tag
MerlinW
MerlinW

@Arun kumar You are watching YT at your home. You are probably luckier than the 60% of the population.

Vor Monat
Unavoidable Fate
Unavoidable Fate

This was a really amazing video and it helped me understand the Shrodinger equation a lot more succinctly and understand the universal wave equation a lot better. Thank you.

Vor 3 Monate
Donovan Piko
Donovan Piko

Man, I remember going into this as a teenager and wondering why there was a debate in the first place. It may seem absurd, but we're just monkeys on a spinning rock - things aren't going to make sense most of the time.

Vor 4 Monate
Anay Joshi
Anay Joshi

Donovan Piko talks truth

Vor 28 Tage
mirin
mirin

@Computer Science he means that we are very basic living entities and have no solid, very sparring knowledge about the entirety of the universe which spans infinity and that things will never always be comprehensible to us(monkeys).

Vor Monat
djsonicc
djsonicc

We're also capable of learning...so just because we don't know something now, doesn't mean that future humans won't know.

Vor Monat
Prims and Whims
Prims and Whims

A spinning rock🤣🤣🤣

Vor Monat
Akshay Kumar
Akshay Kumar

Sometimes, I'd like to think that the dreams we see, are about the things that we experience from a different version of ourselves in these parallel universes. Like there are particles not invented that can travel through parallel universes...faster than photons....

Vor 25 Tage
Rahul Khatwani
Rahul Khatwani

Glad to hear in one of the universe elon musk and spongebob are playing table tennis together

Vor 18 Tage
Sun Flower
Sun Flower

This is such a cool video. I really love how you explain the many worlds theory and your breakdown of how the theory came about

Vor 4 Monate
Good Stuff
Good Stuff

Meanwhile, in a parallel universe: “Wow, 2020 has been a great year!”

Vor year
Warner G TV
Warner G TV

lmao 🤣

Vor Monat
Hank Moody
Hank Moody

@Fu Kelvin lol nope.

Vor Monat
Fu Kelvin
Fu Kelvin

there is a parallel universe that world ended in 2012

Vor Monat
Hank Moody
Hank Moody

nah, I checked, 2020 sucks in every universe.

Vor 2 Monate
shiroi
shiroi

💀

Vor 7 Monate
Julia Slane
Julia Slane

I really liked the guests simplification and pragmatic approach to understanding quantum mechanics. It’s a lot easier to see it as a tool for understanding how our world works as well as how energy/particles interact(s) in various states to more or less create a constant flow of probability and perceived outcomes.

Vor 2 Monate
Completely Random Review
Completely Random Review

The problem here is energy, every time the universe splits the energy output for the "new universe" is now doubled. I know that what they're trying to say is that every time a quantum entanglement happens the universe creates a copy, but still we can't have an infinite amount of energy spontaneously appearing out of no-where and self amplifying itself. Observe the universe, all things consume energy, then they too die and are consumed. From stars, to planets to people, its all the same, there is a finite amount of energy in our universe. To simply state that this multiplies itself infinitely seems... odd

Vor 2 Monate
Connor Syrewicz
Connor Syrewicz

If i understand the idea correctly, “branching” isn’t the universe, like, doubling or multiplying. Rather, I *think* the way to think about it is this: the universe, with all of its energy, *is* all of the quantum events that can possibly happen happening simultaneously. So it’s not, like, multiplication. Rather, we, on the probabilistic “branch” that we happen to be on, have access to our little probability slice of the total energy of the universe, and the rest of the energy in in the universe is spread across of all of the other probability slices. Someone please correct me if I’m butchering this—haha. But that’s what i *think* the many worlds interpretation is getting at

Vor 9 Tage
Hyperanthropos
Hyperanthropos

Exactly. Not enough attention is given to pilot wave theories and other interpretations. Many worlds might be parsimonious in one way, but it multiplies ontologies nigh infinitely and that does actually seem absurd in other important ways.

Vor 29 Tage
Evi Hofkens
Evi Hofkens

Just a thought about the weakness of gravity: it looks like the older the universe gets, the weaker gravity gets. Maybe gravity leaks to more and more universes as the universe 'splits' and thus to us, gravity appears weak. This can also explain 'dark energy' pushing the universe apart faster and faster: it doesn't because 'dark energy' doesn't exist, it's just gravity getting weaker over time.

Vor 2 Monate
Ishaan Makkar
Ishaan Makkar

If every possibility ends up being a reality, what probabilities does the wave function actually define? Since every possible outcome, however unlikely, happens in its own universe. Is the wave function defining the probability of which universe you experience? But what does this even mean if different versions of you experience every possible outcome? What am I missing??

Vor 2 Monate
Aditya Bhokarkar
Aditya Bhokarkar

It tells us that out of how many universies an event can happen

Vor Monat
gior nikitop
gior nikitop

everything but one...

Vor Monat
Fayaz P. A.
Fayaz P. A.

There's a version of me out there that understood the whole video.

Vor 2 years
Santo Pino
Santo Pino

Wholy or Holy crap, never seen 107633 likes to a comment.

Vor 4 Monate
lw216316
lw216316

Brilliant !

Vor 4 Monate
Nicholas Ackerman
Nicholas Ackerman

That was one of the coolest comments!

Vor 7 Monate
Boom Stick
Boom Stick

Yes I did… Sorry, other me.

Vor 8 Monate
NextGenX
NextGenX

That made me chuckle

Vor 9 Monate
Olefiend
Olefiend

The problem with the Everett interpretation happens when you send a photon through an interferometer that is tuned to have a detector (D1) click 75% of the time and a second decector (D2) click 25% of the time. If you count up the frequency of a large, potentially infinite number of observations in each branch of splitting universe, the frequencies do not add up to the ideal 0.75 and 0.25 probability encountered. Everett argued that these worlds should 'just be disregarded'. While interesting, there are still holes in this theory.

Vor 3 Monate
Schmetter Ling
Schmetter Ling

@Lunifer Everett's sentence starts with "one" and ends with "many". There is a Sesame Street video in which Ernie explains the difference to Cookie Monster using one large vs. many small cookies. It's well worth watching. ;-)

Vor 13 Stunden
Lunifer
Lunifer

@Schmetter Ling Thank you for this very clear and detailed answer! I get the dice analogy, though it assumes hidden variables (mass, position, etc.) that would characterize the system better than a probability function; this does not apply to quantum mechanics (Bell inequality). Given that, I still do not see the problem with Everett's sentence. I'm definitely not an expert of quantum physics though, I might mix these notions up.

Vor 17 Stunden
Schmetter Ling
Schmetter Ling

@Lunifer The wave function does not describe the physical system. It describes an ensemble of physical systems, i.e. an infinite number of repetitions of the same experiment. That is ontologically no different from the probability distribution for dice. A dice is a physical object that has mass, position (of its center of mass), velocity, angular momentum. It is being given an initial energy which then dissipates to the environment until is rests on one side. The probability distribution for dice does not describe any of that. It simply says that it's equally likely for the physical object to come to rest on all of its six sides. The way it does that is by assuming perfect symmetry. There is no dice probability formula for dice with unequal sides or non-symmetric mass distribution. It would be very hard to evaluate the Newtonian dynamics for all possible dice throws (which are not even a well defined set). The wave function does almost the same, except that we also have to multiply the initial conditions and the measurement operator with it to get to probabilities. You can see the inconsistency in Everett's sentence itself, which starts with a single physical system and ends in a probability. The single system does not have a probability. It has exactly one outcome, then it seizes to exist (because we have taken the energy out of it, just like we take the energy out of dice). Everett didn't even understand that. It's a trivial rookie mistake... the man couldn't see the forest for the trees.

Vor Tag
Lunifer
Lunifer

@Schmetter Ling I went to check this 2nd sentence because I'm bored, it reads "A physical system is described completely by a state function psi, which is an element of a Hilbert space, and which furthermore gives information only concerning the probabilities of the results of various observations which can be made on the system." I don't see anything flawed with it, though I don't especially like the many-worlds interpretation. It sounds as valid as any other to me -it's an interpretation-, but I didn't read the books and I haven't heard of the top comment experiment, so I'm not that sure of this opinion either.

Vor Tag
Schmetter Ling
Schmetter Ling

@caspar valentine At least you are trying your hand on humor in this one. In another one you might actually be funny. ;-)

Vor Monat
Matthias Kaufman
Matthias Kaufman

How can things continue to become entangled with their environment if at the origin of space and time, *everything* was in causal contact with everything else and thus already entangled?

Vor Monat
Dinesh Thamby Ambookkan
Dinesh Thamby Ambookkan

It took me a really long time to understand while studying, kids who really understood this stuff were good learners... But those who tried to understand and got everything but still felt themselves dumb as they did not feel like they understood it, were brilliant to realize that there is more unknowns in this without which they cannot get the complete understanding... :)

Vor Monat
Tiny .Cloud
Tiny .Cloud

i think the not understanding point helps a lot, because you start asking questions. Like i feel like i dont understand and understand it at the same time, feel like schroedingers cat rn xD

Vor 8 Tage
Gippo73
Gippo73

Weirdly this is the first time I feel that I understood the video in its' entirety. I feel quite bad for all the other universes where I didn't.

Vor 4 Monate
Mark Miller
Mark Miller

I have nothing but respect for people that understand this stuff fully………. In this universe.

Vor 10 Monate
dave201290
dave201290

..but no respect for people that do... in different universes?

Vor Monat
Nicolas Ramirez
Nicolas Ramirez

@jtrib the “universes” from these branches branched off of a current universe, so why would a basic math concept change when a particular atom behaves differently?

Vor 7 Monate
Jazzy Snazzy
Jazzy Snazzy

@Tolen Tarpay LMAO! Well played, well played..

Vor 9 Monate
Pushkar Lokhande
Pushkar Lokhande

It's easy

Vor 9 Monate
Alderak1
Alderak1

邪禰津真遮瑠 The theory doesn’t rely infinity to begin with, in fact he specifically denies infinity as a proven concept in this video. Also, if you think that this interpretation of Schrodinger’s equation is about “copy paste” or the “complexity of physical reality” has any bearing with this discussion then you’re not really qualified to speak on the veracity of this theory to begin with, it shows you fundamentally do not understand it on a level that even this short youtube video discusses.

Vor 9 Monate
D.
D.

The reason the measurement part of that is one point in the wave and it's irreversible is because we can only perceive matter from a three dimensional perspective and before particles are observed they exist outside of three-dimensional space that's why they're in the super position but once we have observed them they have to exist in our three-dimensional plane and can't be reversed if we had never observed they would exist in all positions also what if from the birth of the universe and time all parallel universes exist simultaneously like a giant bracket system or all universes exist in the supper position merging on one another when that parallel universe dies for whatever reason instead of making a new universe when quantum entanglement with outside forces happens do you think that is possible or maybe both happen

Vor 5 Monate
Vaspar
Vaspar

Just finished this video and realised (again) how perfect the show DARK is. I feel they showed quantum entanglement and superposition in a much simple and entertaining way. Like the 3 worlds represent multiple branches from a single wave universe. Martha (from Eva's world) contacting and not contacting Jonas describes superposition. Jonas and Martha saving Tannhaus's family from accident may explain quantum entanglement and closing of a single wave function.

Vor 4 Monate
sachin keniya
sachin keniya

Yup i truly get it. Hat's off to the directors because these types of things aren't by any way easy to explain, let alone convert it into a magnificent show! 👏👏👏

Vor 2 Monate
SrEe Hari
SrEe Hari

What I am interested in knowing is, whether it is possible to choose the superposition (considering that I all the possibilities) that I want to get entangled with. That is essentially me choosing whether to be in the world where the cat alive or not.

Vor 2 Monate
Neo Picard
Neo Picard

O M G . . . I now finally understand how Schrödinger's cat works. I’ve known about the double-slit experiment for a long time, but nobody’s ever explained the two concepts together like you just did. T H A N K Y O U ! ! !

Vor Monat
eric olson
eric olson

It's nice to know that in all those worlds, the earth is still round.

Vor year
son
son

@Bill Palmer does that make it a sphere? no it’s still an ellipsoid, doesn’t matter how little squashed it is it’s still not a sphere

Vor 12 Tage
Bill Palmer
Bill Palmer

@son yeah, but only by about 1%. Really hard to see that

Vor 12 Tage
Armin Islam
Armin Islam

Falt earthers be like: im not even here babe- I'm a hallucination

Vor Monat
roger cox
roger cox

but in reality,...the earth would be flat in some of the many worlds,..imagine scientific thought in the pre-spherical era,...the world was flat for everyone....until a spherical model was implied by more complex math. (is it flat? or is it round?.....see Schrodinger) not a flat earther,...but a JAFO I am.

Vor 2 Monate
XxBeamerr
XxBeamerr

In a alternate reality the earth is flat and the humans are stick figures

Vor 2 Monate
Al R
Al R

The way I've been thinking about the wave-particle duality is in purely statistical terms. I can't explain why we observe a single particle when we take a measurement, but I spend a lot of time thinking about individual atoms vs atoms within a large system of atoms (e.g. in our body). I'm sure I am not completely correct, but my thinking is that we observe wave-particle duality in individual particles BECAUSE they are isolated and individual. When "entangled" or whatever happens within a large group of particles, there's a sort of physical "averaging" that holds particles in a way that reduces or eliminates the typical wave-particle duality. I don't mean that it's gone, but that it's sort of "buffered" in a large system of particles that make up the macroscopic world. I have no idea if any of his makes any sense. Thinking in this way. . . I'm becoming less convinced that there is a splitting of ME the same as there is with a particle.

Vor 5 Monate
mason hogan
mason hogan

I freaking love these videos. 🤯 I have always believed in both fate and that we can determine our own fate but have never been able to put into words why. This perfectly sums it up. Your fate in this universe is everything that hasn't happened in every other parallel universe what's left is your fate. However by your actions and decisions you choose what universe you consciously inhabit. When you make a decision or take an action the outcome of that is your fate but you choose it. Therefore we all have a fate but we mostly determine our own fate at the same time. Every decision we are faced with creates an alternate universe and whichever decision we choose determines which one of those universes we consciously inhabit. Our fate is set for each of those but it's our choice which one we reside in.

Vor 4 Monate
Chris Kokolios
Chris Kokolios

I want to ask ''Is it possible that we live the same life in parallel Universes?'' .Something like the eternal return concept.

Vor 5 Monate
Dennis de Jong
Dennis de Jong

So what if all the "branching" makes our visible universe smaller, because there is a limit to how many "branches" are possible to contain in a certain amount of space? Would that explain dark energy a bit? Just a thought, dont kill me 😅

Vor 4 Monate
chocoburger senpai
chocoburger senpai

No one can truly know for sure humans just like to think its infinite cause we are greedy and want to quench our never ending thirst for searching for the unknown.

Vor Monat
CinemaClips
CinemaClips

The universe could be infinitely big and thus has infinite energy thus there could be an infinite number of branches.

Vor 3 Monate
kaimana km
kaimana km

He broke it down and explained everything in detail and I’m still lost lol

Vor 8 Monate
DingDong Silver
DingDong Silver

@george costantin lmao I'm right there with you dude. They do these mathematic gymnastics to be able to be known for it in the scientific community. Very little is experimentally verifiable, but they still getting that grant money.

Vor 5 Monate
I’m not ur mom
I’m not ur mom

@Killuminati Dra eh I think it’s entertaining. It’s great to see different views and different beliefs and none are wrong. I don’t believe in this but someone might and I’ll just watch it, and learn more about it and why it’s a theory.

Vor 8 Monate
I’m not ur mom
I’m not ur mom

@Killuminati Dra hm? I’m not wrong Yk, nothing has been proven true yet. I’m guessing your gonna spam me with rolling eyes emoji and the gospel.

Vor 8 Monate
I’m not ur mom
I’m not ur mom

@Daniel Berube link plz?

Vor 8 Monate
Michieal Tester
Michieal Tester

Thank you for this video. This video shows that my intuitive understanding of the Many Worlds concept is, indeed, correct. It also settles an argument between me and my best friend, as I have always stated that it wouldn't require the energy of an entire universe to make the "split" as I always saw it as a localized split of the local space time. That line of thought eventually grew into this: that it's compressed down even further into a just making a copy of the universe's wave function, with the modifications that account for the differences of the new universe as compared to the universe before the split. This, then, would move the entirety from forging a new universe (and all of the energy required) to the copy of information (specifically, the wave function itself), allowing for an infinite or near infinite number of universal copies to exist. Putting this out there (mostly baked, lol) so that it can be thought about, and to see if others have similar, or opposing, conclusions. And, maybe, find a way to see if it would be possible to conclude, even if only in theory. Again, thank you very much for this video as it is awesomsauce!

Vor 3 Tage
Schmetter Ling
Schmetter Ling

Why are you telling us that you don't understand physics? ;-)

Vor Tag
avuaronar
avuaronar

I remember seeing an article that explained this with a clock - one going counterwise, another anti counterwise. These two are the only probabilities for the clock, therefore creating two different universes, where the counter goes two different ways. Now imagine you're doing a test question with 3 options that's worth 1 point. To get a full point (A+; 100% etc) you need exactly that one point. The outcome could go 2 ways - full score or a 99/100 - with 3 probabilities where 2/3 are lead u to the 99/100 "universe", and the other one - to the "full mark". This concept will get SO much more complicated with more options and if we put it into reality and realize that, everything in our life indeed has countless possibilities that differ probabilities of the outcome, it all gets mindblowing - just imagine how many universes could be out there, even if they're only different from each other by something sooo unimportant, like your answer to a SINGLE test question + what grade/score it could have determined..

Vor 3 Monate
avuaronar
avuaronar

@cashKD yeah. Either completely different from one another, or that only difference could be determined by your single test answer, lol

Vor Monat
cashKD
cashKD

Tho a lot of them could get different, like really different

Vor Monat
IsThatAShortJoke
IsThatAShortJoke

I grew up learning about electron clouds and how the valence theory was incorrect, so I always found quantum theory fairly easy to understand given the lack of consistency on a subatomic level.

Vor 5 Monate
ParallaxAstro
ParallaxAstro

Whaddya mean, you GREW UP learning about this? What kind of school system did you have? Almost everything I know about physics is self-taught.

Vor 3 Monate
Josh Kelly
Josh Kelly

I love how you brought Sean Carroll onto this video I watch his videos constantly

Vor Monat
Daniel Schaeffer
Daniel Schaeffer

No matter how boring my life is, I’m glad to know that there’s a universe where I really AM James Bond.

Vor year
Armin Islam
Armin Islam

And in that parallel universe..james bond has become u-

Vor Monat
Dawid
Dawid

@Mark Valkrin It's just that some things don't happen thats all. Just like there is infinite number of prime numbers but none of them is dividable by 8. Even infinity can have it's limits.

Vor 2 Monate
Mark Valkrin
Mark Valkrin

@Dawid if that can't happen then how are fictional world's possible at all. They should not be able to be accessed at all if they truly don't exist.

Vor 2 Monate
Kelp Dock
Kelp Dock

@Dawid Yes it does

Vor 2 Monate
Hex17
Hex17

@Runagate what if that’s your universe and you just haven’t reached the age where it all begins

Vor 7 Monate
Nichols Pikos
Nichols Pikos

Even though I don't believe this to be the case it seems that this interpretation would make it easier to reconcile quantum mechanics with relativity

Vor 5 Monate
Mark Oh
Mark Oh

Quantum mechanics always is so tough to understand, almost like trying to understand an image in 4D

Vor 3 Monate
Subtle Flare
Subtle Flare

This was interesting. Kinda blew my mind at one point when I realized that ‘waves’ at the beach behave like the ‘wave’ function. In the context of this video, makes me wonder: you know how waves crest? Do those crests signify the state of superposition and therefore a potential split? and what happens to the spillage? Does it just fall back in sync with the original wave?

Vor 9 Tage
Tiny .Cloud
Tiny .Cloud

at this point i think almost or everything that has energy behaves the same, my mind is blowing rn

Vor 8 Tage
Tiny .Cloud
Tiny .Cloud

isnt sound behaving the same?

Vor 8 Tage
Matthew Firestone
Matthew Firestone

Would it be fair to say that reality is just the interference pattern caused by the amalgamation of all the individual wave functions within it?

Vor Monat
Jacobi
Jacobi

This gives the term "be the best version of yourself" a totally new and deeper meaning.

Vor 8 Monate
That Dude
That Dude

@Hillmidget just wondering, are you an atheist?

Vor 8 Monate
Hillmidget
Hillmidget

@That Dude just no.

Vor 8 Monate
zoltanlukas
zoltanlukas

But who observing me? Observing things and such. Sometimes the multiverse reminds me a laser scanner twisting around

Vor 8 Monate
MeDiAAiDeM
MeDiAAiDeM

Fake views and fake streams?..... MeDiAAiDeM, on Spotify......... Hip Hop and RnB, psychedelic (Note: Not all headphones are compatible)....... Producer, writer.......

Vor 8 Monate
Colby Clipston
Colby Clipston

13:09 Wouldn't this mean that "our branch" is slowly loosing all its energy? I get that it'd be conserved across all branches, but wouldn't we be able to measure a loss in ours?

Vor Monat
Pig Man
Pig Man

is the radiation detector in schrodinger's cat box not making a measurement? wouldn't that be the determining measurement, not the act of opening the box and looking inside? doesn't the cat also observe if it is still alive?

Vor Monat
Shridhar Gavai
Shridhar Gavai

Well we are assuming cat being experimented is full alive but it can be 70 per alive before putting in box and 30 per in some different universe. What if same cat in a parallel universe is experimented same time. May be we can pull rest 30 per and can make the current cat more powerful and 2nd cat dies

Vor Monat
Lash LaRue
Lash LaRue

It is taking a measurement, but remember that it's entangled with the cat and the box. Because we don't know what's going on inside the box, it's in a state of superposition and both states are true.

Vor Monat
CinemaClips
CinemaClips

Yes, that's the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. The environment makes a measurement.

Vor Monat
Paolo De Angelis
Paolo De Angelis

This way of interpreting the quantum phenomenon easily manages to reveal the mystery of life: we are in the only "story" that has generated a life and a conscience to understand it!

Vor 4 Monate
Landon Looney
Landon Looney

@Veritasium So wouldn't there be an inverse of this? Meaning that there was a singular point that started the "many worlds", that point being the big bang. Would there not also be a counterpoint for every split thereafter in which the big bang did not occur in the first place?

Vor 2 Monate
Voices of Music
Voices of Music

There's another universe where a scientist has already found the proof that alternate universes cannot exist.

Vor 6 Monate
Ian Goiz
Ian Goiz

I mean in the past there were "proof" for the earth being flat

Vor 5 Tage
Lone Assassin29
Lone Assassin29

@Jacob Schiller could've come to the conclusion they don't exist but they were just wrong like how we thought smoking was good for you then we learned that's wrong

Vor 6 Tage
Lone Assassin29
Lone Assassin29

@Crisscross but who's to say if it was mathematical?

Vor 6 Tage
Lone Assassin29
Lone Assassin29

@Crisscross the "proof" would then be fake

Vor 6 Tage
Sebastian Zevallos
Sebastian Zevallos

this paradox makes me angry

Vor 16 Tage
Shane B
Shane B

To reconcile the "overlapping or separate universe in space" dilemma, think about it this way. All of existence is essentially One thing - a singularity that is nothing (has no spatial dimensions) and something (has dimensions that appear to be an illusion from an observers point of view). The experience of spacetime is an illusion of our human experience, but in essence, there is no spacetime. It's all just one thing. And so, the "branching" of many worlds many seem to us to be happening in different parts of "space", but in reality, it's overlapping, because everything is just One thing that essentially doesn't experience space.

Vor 4 Tage
Pup
Pup

I guess the device secured against direct interference from the cat would have to block his view of the device. If the cat could view the event it wouldn't be accurate, even though he has no understanding of what he is viewing. Similar to most people day to day, that don't think about possibilities on such a small scale. But I got the idea the shield was primarily suggested to ensure the cat didn't tamper with the device, by rubbing against it. The thought experiment would be more accurate if he used a piece of fruit or a plant. I don't know. Maybe I gave it too much thought. ,

Vor 4 Monate
avuaronar
avuaronar

I started thinking about this and making up countless theories about the concept since I was 12-13, I'm happy and also sad to see that you confirmed everything 🙃 but I just haven't discovered anything new so lol

Vor 3 Monate
John Carnal
John Carnal

It has always bothered me that in quantum mechanics theory once you measure a parameter you have changed the "state" of what you are measuring. In other words reality changes the more we know about it.

Vor 4 Monate
BENZONE - By Sarthak Rana
BENZONE - By Sarthak Rana

Imagine making content so cool that everyone watches, even if they understand nothing.

Vor 9 Monate
Miguel NewMexico
Miguel NewMexico

@Biff Masterson what? like, i figured you're an atheist and that's great, but you made *zero* sense.

Vor 8 Monate
Amy
Amy

🙋‍♀️ same

Vor 9 Monate
Biff Masterson
Biff Masterson

So there is a version of the world with a god, just not a chance in hell, it is real to us. So as a non believer the chances are 0% that I will go to hell. Cool. Party on Wayne, party on Garth.

Vor 9 Monate
Trevor Beatz
Trevor Beatz

@Ahir zaman şairi yes

Vor 9 Monate
Christopher Barbas
Christopher Barbas

"mind squeezing meaning", answer is "have you see this video"? I really enjoy your presentations, I have saw a similar video, not at the exactly point, at past which was also "brain damaging" but yours is far more. Really enjoy those "brain burning" explanations here. Keep up the good work and thank you.

Vor 2 Monate
Tom Lister
Tom Lister

If we were able to observe and measure the entire wave function of the universe would it immediately collapse?

Vor Monat
Christopher
Christopher

It seems to be a helluva lot simpler just to assert the wave function doesn't always obey the Schroedinger equation. At least that's what this version of myself believes in this universe.

Vor 5 Monate
Typical Poet
Typical Poet

Previously when I thought about Schrödinger’s cat, I didn’t think it made any sense since the cats measurement should be exactly like our measurement, but somehow give different results. This makes much more sense!

Vor Monat
DTStar
DTStar

Meanwhile, in a parallel universe: "Parallel universes probably don't exist and here's why"

Vor 2 years
shiroi
shiroi

woah

Vor 7 Monate
Nicholas Ackerman
Nicholas Ackerman

That makes since that with infinite universes there would be one that has no branch or several or all of them. Or non of them. I can’t remember or won’t.

Vor 7 Monate
John Pompey
John Pompey

Can you tell what happened when the world ends, since we have projected an asteroid to hit, both religiously and scientifically. While data exists, can we calculate, predict or more so can we alter, and who will be here to tell...👌

Vor 8 Monate
Chaynika Chitrak
Chaynika Chitrak

@Jbrownjetmech - 😇😇

Vor 8 Monate
Chaynika Chitrak
Chaynika Chitrak

@Jbrownjetmech - 😇😇

Vor 8 Monate
R vLn
R vLn

This is very good, very good indeed. If an event E1 in a thread T1 is very unlikely to occur, is the "unlikelyness" part defined by how many branches contain E1 compared to how many branches don't?

Vor 5 Monate
Tyler Ezell
Tyler Ezell

Doesn't the fact that there are different sizes of infinity imply that not all possibilities are real? So although he could be president in another slice of the wave of the universe, that could also not be remotely included in the wave. You touched on the subject that they are not the same, but I think it's important to note that even if there are infinite possibilities, that does not mean that one of those infinities must include all options.

Vor 11 Stunden
Steve Sether
Steve Sether

The problem I've long had with the many worlds interpretation is, in what sense does something really "exist" if we can never ever possibly observe it, even with the best luck and most powerful scientific instruments? Isn't reality what's observable, not just what makes an elegant model, or a good sci-fi story? In other words, how is the many world interpretation not guilty of "that's not even wrong"?

Vor 2 Monate
Steve Sether
Steve Sether

@alcatel😊😊😊😀☺ I"m not sure how serious you are, but in case you're not joking I'd say that science isn't really about explanations, it's about predictions and models. MW seems to delve into a narrative rather than science. Narratives are important, but we shouldn't mistake them for science. MW does make good sci-fi, or maybe philosophy however.

Vor 2 Monate
alcatel😊😊😊😀☺
alcatel😊😊😊😀☺

It's an explanation. Being unobservable it may or may not be a or the true explanation. Perhaps it's merely the product of a dream by your (or should I say my) consciousness.

Vor 2 Monate
sangam mahawar
sangam mahawar

10:05 can someone explain why it is a split. The interaction caused the wave function to change to a new one at any point of unit interaction. How can an interaction between two wave functions result in multiple resulting wave functions at any given instance of unit interaction.

Vor 4 Monate
cheezeofages
cheezeofages

A friend of mine that was high at the time mused "If every possibility makes a new reality that means that in a couple of them you're a building because one of your parents became an architect instead of having you."

Vor 8 Monate
Nicholas Crowe
Nicholas Crowe

I’m high rn and I can’t wait to watch

Vor 6 Monate
Norman Gomez
Norman Gomez

I never laughed so hard in my life.

Vor 6 Monate
Why no
Why no

@Antonio Angeconeb lol i dont even need shrooms to be this high

Vor 6 Monate
lightning bones
lightning bones

@chino8646 No. But, are all stoners pilosophers!? Also no.

Vor 6 Monate
Johnny Zeppeli
Johnny Zeppeli

Your friend is amazing

Vor 7 Monate
Eeh
Eeh

The exparament seems to place an importants on being observed (similarly to the question if a tree fall and no one around to hear it dose it make a sound question) and when looked at like that regardless of being seen it still has an affect a solid effect now this is probably where parallel worlds comes in to make probably real, while there can only be (in my opinion) one or the other state every microsecond were the atom dose or doesn’t decay there is another world (one where it dose decay and one where it doesn’t) but paring this with all the other probability’s in the world the percent of worlds with decayed to not decayed is the probability... I should probably just finish watching (I watched this once before but that was a long time ago) these were just what I was thinking and I’m only at 4:40 so.................

Vor 4 Monate
Peter Nguyen
Peter Nguyen

Someone asked Shrodinger if he owned a cat, and he said, "Yes and no." lol

Vor 5 Monate
Jade Anfe
Jade Anfe

xd

Vor Monat
Indonesian Guy
Indonesian Guy

The problem that always boggles me is that, how did the universes know that I'm going to do this thing or just do this thing and automatically make or just already spawn a new universe, that part always boggles my mind because if you think again there's like no way an unconscious universe will know that I do or even write this comment right now

Vor Monat
chocoburger senpai
chocoburger senpai

The word " there is no way" is a statement from the limited minds. We are beings on a spining rock and along with black holes, burning huge ball of fire and stars. We have yet to truly understand what is possible and what is not.

Vor Monat
Professor Force
Professor Force

So, from what I understand, when something happens, atoms will split and there will be two branches in the universe, as well as seeing that parallel universe is the wrong term we use, it should be branch universe. Also I believe that parrallel universe are just universes that have no connection to this universe, what so ever, they may have formed symilerly, but they are completely 100% different.

Vor 4 Monate
Nick Johnson
Nick Johnson

Let me tell ya, screen writers have gotten more use out of this theory than any physicist

Vor 8 Monate
Simon Mikkelsen
Simon Mikkelsen

Let's put it simple: This theory is not supported by any observation. It is just pretty math.

Vor 7 Monate
Shivani Ravikumar
Shivani Ravikumar

True Flash series for example

Vor 8 Monate
Grand Rapids57
Grand Rapids57

@BlitzGames You're welcome. There is a parallel universe in which random Youtube commentators have a sense of humor.

Vor 8 Monate
Grand Rapids57
Grand Rapids57

@I’m fine, I’m fine It's funny on Youtube random commentators, such as yourself, who are so far outside some field that they have no idea when they are disparaging someone who actually is in the field. Let's put it this way: there is only a tiny, tiny space for any recognition in this field and its not particularly hard to find attention seekers who will paint various theoretical pictures meant to make sophomorically intellectual people believe they are experiencing something profound. My personal favorite are those who talk of "an infinite number of infinities." It is the Ph.D. equivalent of the used car salesman making the customer believe he is getting an irreplaceable bargain.

Vor 8 Monate
Comcap gang
Comcap gang

@Enoch Greensock yeah, it's funny how he does it. Talks about obvious and reasonable things and then makes the dumbest and weirdest conclusion possible with the same tone, like it's something mundane and obvious. Really makes me wonder if the other videos were wrong as well but I just didn't know enough about the subject to realize

Vor 8 Monate
Cossicrots 42
Cossicrots 42

Sometimes when I hear about quantum physics and stuff and that it’s random, I wonder…what if it’s not random and there’s something controlling it that we don’t know?

Vor Monat
Kamaboko Gonpachiro
Kamaboko Gonpachiro

Veritasium once said ' watching a video gives you the sensation of understanding, but you never actually learn anything '

Vor 7 Tage
Gurpreet
Gurpreet

I want my school teachers to explain as good as you.

Vor 2 Monate
Octopus Ears
Octopus Ears

When telling friends and family about this channel, I describe him as "what Bill Nye should be"

Vor 2 Monate
Tasdiq Jubaer
Tasdiq Jubaer

Meanwhile, in a parallel universe: "Oh wow 2020 has been the best year so far"

Vor 8 Monate
Tantris — Brawl Stars
Tantris — Brawl Stars

@dkavenge You have no idea how much worse that year was than 2020

Vor 6 Monate
Phil
Phil

2020 is the best year for certain people even with the pandemic and mass death, it’s exactly what they have envisioned. multiple-universes co-exist in the same place at the same time.

Vor 8 Monate
your local idiot
your local idiot

In a parallel universe covid would probably give you immortality or something

Vor 8 Monate
Ky’ree
Ky’ree

@MartyOof (DEDOZNOZ) Okay I see why 2019 is the worst but why is 2020 the best?

Vor 8 Monate
Fire Heart
Fire Heart

Yup while we got the shitty one 😐

Vor 8 Monate
Night Squatch
Night Squatch

Sounds like we are in a simulation and once at the quantum level, the simulation and thus our observations, break down. It's a resolution issue. Seems just as plausible as countless, near infinite threads/parallel universes.

Vor 13 Tage
Jack Callahan
Jack Callahan

If we know how long it takes something to decay, how can a particle ever be in superposition?

Vor Monat
Michael Gould
Michael Gould

My man. Your videos are exceptionally good. You are a brilliant communicator. Amazing work.

Vor 11 Tage
wooway invs
wooway invs

wow, that just made total sense to me. I had been introduced to this idea before but never this clear. THanks!

Vor 4 Monate
fearless avocado
fearless avocado

It feels like the more you know, the more you realize how less you know

Vor year
Feingold
Feingold

@SlendyDie Сократ

Vor 4 Monate
Chay Kulkarni
Chay Kulkarni

Very very deep

Vor 5 Monate
Nasreen Zaman
Nasreen Zaman

Yup the universe is infinite

Vor 6 Monate
Josh Michaud
Josh Michaud

Dunning Krueger effect lol

Vor 7 Monate
Hugo Damestoy
Hugo Damestoy

Dunning-Kruger effect

Vor 7 Monate
MrBeastmania
MrBeastmania

I think I understand… so basically we have an equation that represents what happens if two scenarios occur. Like if the cat dies or if the cat is living. Then once we know what the outcome actually is we can plug in “0” for the situation that didn’t happen. Leaving us with only the part of the equation that actually happened. Is that right?

Vor 2 Monate
Nicholas Fitzsenry
Nicholas Fitzsenry

To me it seems the superposition is a theoretical position. Specifically what I’m trying to say is that parallel “worlds” are not probable realities but instead theoretical alternatives to our observed reality. So my conclusion is not that there are parallel realities co-existing but rather that our reality is theoretical in nature with infinite (or large enough to be incomprehensible) possibilities, until it happens or rather is observed to have happened. So nothing truly exists as it “is” until it is observed to exist as it “is”. 1 reality, many possibilities.

Vor 28 Tage
Greg The Flying Whale
Greg The Flying Whale

the amount of times the universe can split into different branches depends on the PC characteristics of the Inventor 😂

Vor Monat
Powers Freelancing
Powers Freelancing

Could it be that we're the sum of the people we've met, in a way? I wonder if these branches are related to the process of aging, I know the traditional thought of cells ability to operate decays over time, just wonder if it's related at all.

Vor Monat
Seldin Gardane
Seldin Gardane

USB plugs exist in one of three states: the up state, the down state, and the super positioned state. Only when you look at the USB plug does its state collapse into one or the other which is why it never goes in until you look at it.

Vor 2 years
Dweepayan Sharma
Dweepayan Sharma

You're amazing....lol

Vor year
Levi Swartz
Levi Swartz

Lmfao

Vor year
leatherxrose
leatherxrose

Best interpretation 😂😂

Vor year
Aris.A
Aris.A

Took some time to get lol.

Vor year
Sweney
Sweney

this

Vor year
Amy Kitchens
Amy Kitchens

I think this would explain away any paradox that might occur in the case of time travel. As soon as you travel to another point in time, you would be experiencing a different "branch". Even if you significantly change the past, it wouldn't change you (like Marty McFly wouldn't be disappearing because his parents didn't get married.) Therefore, there would be no paradox, but you probably could never "return" to your original timeline unless you had some sort of anchor.

Vor Monat
John Roberts
John Roberts

This incredibly easy to watch video manages to explain very complex theories in such a way that this layman feels much more educated on the Big Bang theory. I am stuck on one thing though. George Lemaitre (Father George), pondered on the then recent revelation by Hubble of an expanding universe. His thought exercise starts with a universe that contracts by reversing time ( a thought exercise). The force of gravity caused all matter to condense into one point. Described as reaching 1/2,1/4,1/8,1/16……size. Wouldn’t it by definition be contract forever? This contradicts the Big Crunch On Schrödinger’s cat now. According to the many worlds theory Fluffy is in the super position of being both dead and alive. The observer understands this. With the box closed the observer is duplicated, one with dead kitty, because the radioactive atom decayed, the other not. Since cat is an observer and inside the box, he could only observe no decay.

Vor 3 Monate
StockTraderClass Live
StockTraderClass Live

Check out my previous comments on other videos , the multiverse is directly related to the number of choices all living things can make… also I don’t believe it’s complicated as scientists describe because nature is simple it’s a “paradox” !

Vor 2 Monate
Daniel Betts
Daniel Betts

Fantastic explanation. Thank you.

Vor Monat
nearspaceresearch
nearspaceresearch

As a physics professor who has taught quantum mechanics for years, I have very mixed feelings about this video. Your description of the scientific THEORY of QM is excellent and your description of the HYPOTHETICAL interpretation of QM involving parallel worlds is excellent. However, like many youtube videos, the distinction between theory and hypothesis is quite muddled. Sean Carroll has been a cheerleader for the many worlds interpretation for years, but your viewers should know that MANY, MANYexperts in the field (a sizable majority by some counts) would vigorously argue that parallel worlds probably do NOT exist. Whoever is correct, it is definitely misleading to suggest to viewers that the theory of QM necessarily implies that parallel worlds are likely to exist.

Vor 2 years
Steve Sether
Steve Sether

@Lekhaka Ananta How are we to decide what the correct interpretation is when both interpretation produce the same prediction? That' what I mean by fashion. It seems a bit arbitrary which side you pick, since neither one really tells us anything. If the two are equivalent, a far a theory and prediction goes, are we really talking about science anymore, or have we delved into philosophy? That's not a pejorative BTW, but I'm skeptical of these "interpretations" where the only reason anyone were to choose one over the other is merely because one idea is old, and the other new. How can you prove the MW (or one world) wrong, for instance?

Vor 2 Monate
Lekhaka Ananta
Lekhaka Ananta

@Steve Sether That's over-simplifying things though. There's a continuous spectrum between the clearly-known and the completely-unknown. It's not like there's only either "science" or "fashion". There's some grey area between them where people are trying to figure out natural philosophy using meta-principles, such as Occam's Razor. This happens when conclusive evidence is hard to find or work with. These are not as ironclad as the standard we expect for "science" but it wouldn't be totally random guesses either.

Vor 2 Monate
Steve Sether
Steve Sether

@Lekhaka Ananta In the absence of evidence for either one (and my understanding is evidence of one or the other isn't even possible?) then which one forms consensus seems more a matter of fashion than a matter of science.

Vor 2 Monate
Heisenberg
Heisenberg

@Ricky Ricardo ok not that far dude it says intrpetation its a little misleading but I think h eimproved nowadays

Vor 3 Monate
Felis Super
Felis Super

@Lekhaka Ananta  Yes, but the typical versions of MWI are unfalsifiable as well (in the sense that there's no way to detect the existence of the other branches). Sure, you may make other versions that wouldn't be unfalsifiable (which is what I was alluding to in my last statement in my last comment), like for example a version that makes possible the Everett-Wheeler telephone, but that isn't really the version we've been talking about here. So in that respect, Copenhagen isn't much worse. You may also say that the unfalsifiable MWI version doesn't allow the possibility for any more physics, because if you modify it to include extra physics, then you have a slightly different interpretation from the one you started with. Nobody is saying you're not allowed to modify Copenhagen to make a slightly different interpretation that is more falsifiable. Saying there's no more physics only applies in the domain of the Copenhagen interpretation itself, like saying that there's no way to communicate between worlds only applies within the domain of specific MWI versions.

Vor 4 Monate
Patty Stephens
Patty Stephens

A collapsed wave function doesn’t create parallel universes, it makes our larger. It’s the reason the universe is expanding faster

Vor 9 Tage
InkBladeboy
InkBladeboy

If every universe could have one of you in a different format, then that could mean that we experience,(Maybe?) the one universe where we contribute the most, like in this universe it could be you performing your best and changing the world, but in another i could be contributing more to the world. But I have a major question, what decides the path you, the part of the brain that is you, go on? Is that possibly the universe you do the greatest work you could do to society? Now i am just confusing myself.Bruh

Vor 2 Monate
Belair Beats
Belair Beats

I understood it completly different. If you shoot 2 balls at each other. And 1 is slightly off, than the other ball can deflect in so many different ways depending on the slight error. That does not mean there are coexisting universes... The propability of the accuracy would be the wave function and the actual deflection would be the measssurment.

Vor 16 Tage
Aidan MT
Aidan MT

Those who first discovered quantum behaviours couldn't wrap their heads around it either. It took so much time and effort to think about this because they had to change the way they thought to really look at it, and looking at it changed the way they thought. You may look at a Monet for 30 seconds, but Monet looked at that Monet for much longer... so long that it changed what he saw. And since the change was happening while he was painting, you could argue he was painting change itself.

Vor 4 Monate
George Raev
George Raev

There is also another version of professor Carroll in a parallel branch where he strongly disagrees with this theory and even wrote a book about the insanity of such a possibility

Vor 2 years
Bill Craig
Bill Craig

Such a good point! And is either reality more 'true' than the other?

Vor year
Nicholas Simmons
Nicholas Simmons

I'm really wondering why that version of Carroll isn't in this dimension because usually scientists don't advocate pseudo-science.

Vor year
Ashylin K
Ashylin K

@Ryan Clark but will popsicle be able to withstand the conditions? I mean both paper and steel are collection of particles but that doesn't mean we can use paper for a vehicle that can be used in practically

Vor year
Zulu
Zulu

It’s plausible that in some universe we are spending our research dollars on things that have practical applicability, are useful and have the potential to actually help us

Vor 5 Monate
Zurl Hammerdoom
Zurl Hammerdoom

This is the kind of stuff the interests the heck out of me. I is what I love so much about physics and probability. Somewhere in another world there is a version of me who actually pursued this as a career. I would really like to meet that person someday. 😎🤓🧐🤠

Vor Monat
The Scarpion
The Scarpion

could the upper limit of the branching happen 10^80^10^80 times every planck time? instead of being infinite?

Vor 3 Monate
SpaceOwl
SpaceOwl

But why does my consciousness find it self in this specific branch of the universe and not another one? Isn't it arbitrary? Isn't this some "ugly extra rule" we have to tack on to the Many Worlds Interpretation just like the "ugly" wavefunction collapse for the Copenhagen Interpretation?  Would this imply some physical reality of consciousness?

Vor 4 Monate
Kami sama
Kami sama

"The cat is both alive and dead now" Cat: *Meow* Schrödinger: I don't hear anything

Vor year
Kritischer Geist
Kritischer Geist

@Lucas Moore No, thats wrong. Because the cat is still in the box. Observation means, to open the box and look inside. If your statement would be true (for the copenhagians), than a observer would not be needed. I am a bomian. So I have no problems with cats in boxes. Moreover I have only problems with cats outside.

Vor 8 Monate
StickGuy
StickGuy

This is true because you believe in reality you want to believe. It can't be dead and alive at the same time. It is either dead or alive but you just don't know. The things you don't know doesn't make them happen at the same time

Vor 8 Monate
Apple
Apple

meow meow

Vor 8 Monate
Lucas Moore
Lucas Moore

@Kritischer Geist smelling the cat would count as an observation.

Vor 8 Monate
Just a Bow Main
Just a Bow Main

When we observe we use photons to see and photons raise energy of the quantum system so it becomes unpredictable? I've read it but my question is how come it comes in contact with photon only when we observe, won't it be always under light or photons?

Vor 2 Monate
Gabriel Rivera
Gabriel Rivera

Im curious to know how this all adds up with the theory of relativity, when we come to look at it, it might be even more complex than what we already consider. For example, a person might have read this comment before I even finished writing it, because a different version of me already did, thus, you and I are living in a different timeline I have several theories that I would like to dive in to I like to think of time as a memory, its like the universes mind or “RAM”, and it creates a chronological order for you to experience, so there is a chance that we split into different timelines every once in a while This is where I believe deja vu’s root from, you get a feeling that you already lived something, and it’s because you did, but in this new timeline you didn’t, but your brain retained that memory from a previous timeline you were a part of Another thing is that sometimes we dream about things that actually end up happening, this can be due to our brains predicting a pattern in the wave function, or due to us already living that in another timeline and now we know that its gonna happen again Now, if we are actually constantly changing from timelines, then that could mean it is our brains choosing that chronological order for us, bases on what makes sense to us, as our brains delete certain information, it utilizes that to switch us in the timeline because we dont fully remember we already went through that This would suggest that if you for example, were sitting next to your biological mother, there is a chance that person isn’t the one that actually gave birth to you, that person has split into another reality and is experiencing different things from the ones you are This is really interesting and Id love to study it but Im stuck being an accountant

Vor Monat
Ali
Ali

Thanks for sharing. Quite fascinating. And also, let me remind you what was Einstein working as, while having one of his "thought experiments" that gave birth to theory of relativity. Life as it is and this reality on its own, in which I am writing this very comment, is already mysterious enough. We will never know. Perhaps you will have an original, novel idea lurking somewhere in your mind waiting to be discovered.

Vor Monat
Julie N
Julie N

Love your videos, but sometimes I feel it's more philosophy with science or mathematics words. To believe the Many worlds theory, you have to accept a lot of unproven and very subjective postulates beforehand. For example, the professor doesn't even know how many worlds there is, but says not as much as we would think (meaning not infinite). But why would it be finite, and why would reality have some kind of limit in the first place? According to his theory, we can easily assume that this duplication of worlds, when there is an entanglement, happens at every moment and for every atoms or particules at the same time. Meaning that at every moment, an infinite variations is happening to the subjective world of a conscious (or even not conscious?) being. At every moment, every particule happens to be enclosed in a subjective world, separate from the others, and all those different paths are themselves separate at every moment in different ''timelines'' to create infinite worlds infinitely duplicating themselves at every moment. Even if we remove the zero probability events (another postulate to accept, even if it makes more sense), there are still an infinite number of possible variations. One atom go to the right 1 mm or to the left with an angle of 90.001 degree, or to the right with 40.56 degree and 1.102 mm, etc. Even the world where he is president, there would be a world where he is president and on the 21th of may 2020 he drank a glass of water at 13h30, but another world where he drank Pepsi, and another where he drank it at 13h31, etc, etc, etc. It also means that there are ''places'' or ''spaces'' for these world to expand, but it makes no sense. You then have to accept the postulate of separate '''spaces'' or ''layers'' of reality which is not only unproven but a product of imagination or faith. One way to counter that would be to say that some ''timeline'' has more energy and this is the ''real'' one where everyone meets, but again, it's philosophy, not science. Furthermore, he even admits that he doesn't know if his postulates are true, but then starts with cognitive bias (he is psychologist now?) to explain why his theory seems farfetched for most people, but is in fact plausible. My point is that most things in your videos are presented like it's true or mostly probable, when it's actually not, or very incertain. Anyway, I might go too far or be confusing, great videos, love them.

Vor Monat
Kaleb Vazquez
Kaleb Vazquez

There is a version of him that is actually interviewing him right now in this very universe. Separation is ain illusion.

Vor 4 Tage

Nächster

This is why we can't have nice things

17:30

This is why we can't have nice things

Veritasium

Aufrufe 17 000 000

Was The Universe Born From Nothing?

41:50

Was The Universe Born From Nothing?

History of the Universe

Aufrufe 2 000 000

The Longest-Running Evolution Experiment

17:17

The Longest-Running Evolution Experiment

Veritasium

Aufrufe 5 200 000

Minecraft, but if I say "die" then I die

11:51

Santa Fe Klan - Luka (Video Oficial)

4:38

Santa Fe Klan - Luka (Video Oficial)

Santa Fe Klan Official

Aufrufe 1 816 593

Math's Fundamental Flaw

34:00

Math's Fundamental Flaw

Veritasium

Aufrufe 20 000 000

Why No One Has Measured The Speed Of Light

19:05

Why No One Has Measured The Speed Of Light

Veritasium

Aufrufe 15 000 000

3 Perplexing Physics Problems

14:00

3 Perplexing Physics Problems

Veritasium

Aufrufe 8 500 000

How to Slow Aging (and even reverse it)

21:10

How to Slow Aging (and even reverse it)

Veritasium

Aufrufe 5 200 000

Minecraft, but if I say "die" then I die

11:51