The Quantum Theory that Connects the Entire Universe

  • Am Vor Monat

    SciShowSciShow

    Dauer: 10:18

    SciShow is supported by Brilliant.org. Go to Brilliant.org/SciShow to get 20% off of an annual Premium subscription.
    Quantum mechanics is weird and seems a bit...complicated. But understanding it can help us to understand the universe.
    Hosted by: Hank Green
    SciShow has a spinoff podcast! It's called SciShow Tangents. Check it out at www.scishowtangents.org
    ----------
    Support SciShow by becoming a patron on Patreon: www.patreon.com/scishow
    ----------
    Huge thanks go to the following Patreon supporters for helping us keep SciShow free for everyone forever:
    Bill & Katie Scholl, Adam Brainard, Greg, Alex Hackman, Andrew Finley Brenan, Sam Lutfi, D.A. Noe, الخليفي سلطان, Piya Shedden, KatieMarie Magnone, Scott Satovsky Jr, Charles Southerland, Patrick D. Ashmore, charles george, Kevin Bealer, Chris Peters
    ----------
    Looking for SciShow elsewhere on the internet?
    Facebook: facebook.com/scishow
    Twitter: twitter.com/scishow
    Tumblr: scishow.tumblr.com
    Instagram: instagram.com/thescishow
    ----------
    Sources:
    upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6e/Solvay_conference_1927.jpg
    journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.85.166
    journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.85.180
    www.cambridge.org/core/books/speakable-and-unspeakable-in-quantum-mechanics/E0D032E7E7EDEF4E4AD09F458F2D9DB7
    archive.org/stream/TheBornEinsteinLetters/Born-TheBornEinsteinLetters_djvu.txt
    www.forbes.com/sites/chadorzel/2016/05/04/the-real-reasons-quantum-entanglement-doesnt-allow-faster-than-light-communication/#6bf749a23a1e

    Image Sources:
    www.istockphoto.com/photo/red-laser-light-on-black-background-gm953164092-260212973
    www.istockphoto.com/photo/technology-cyber-electronic-concept-cpu-ram-computer-on-blue-light-background-gm921844850-253123587
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_Schr%C3%B6dinger#/media/File:Erwin_Schr%C3%B6dinger_(1933).jpg
    www.istockphoto.com/vector/cartoon-cat-skeleton-gm1030025036-275994539
    www.istockphoto.com/vector/blank-paper-or-cardboard-box-gm908742286-250321776
    www.istockphoto.com/vector/beaker-icon-illustration-gm945713856-258294240
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_de_Broglie#/media/File:Broglie_Big.jpg
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bohm
    www.istockphoto.com/vector/art-deco-pattern-gm942799514-257646630
    commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=pilot+theory&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go#/media/File:3_trajectories_guided_by_the_wave_function.png
    www.istockphoto.com/photo/coin-flip-gm156210661-10540379
    www.istockphoto.com/vector/print-gm1068776582-285890535
    www.istockphoto.com/photo/thunderstruck-gm895010376-247361646
    www.istockphoto.com/vector/atom-gm473563236-64846583

SciShow
SciShow

SciShow is supported by Brilliant.org. Go to https://Brilliant.org/SciShow to get 20% off of an annual Premium subscription.

Vor Monat
Josh Lasky
Josh Lasky

Scishow...paid for by Deepak Chopra lol

Vor 18 Tage
Dadson worldwide
Dadson worldwide

The fact we the observer are at the center of the universes is the samething mans known forever .

Vor 24 Tage
gdpr
gdpr

wtf, if you are stupid but you dont know it yet it does not mean you are not stupid !, how does the pilot theory has anything to do with locality ?!, or your missinterpretation of it ? wtf is wrong with you , haa ? if you spin 2 electrons in opposide directions YOU ALREADY KNOW THEY ARE SPINNING IN OPPOSIDE DIECTIONS, you just dont know which one is spinning in which direction, so as soon as you find the spin of one electron you combine that WITH THE INFORMATION YOU ALREADY HAVE and determine the spin of the second one, this has nothing to do with locality, it does not matter where you Move the second one, you already have the information. htf can smart people be this dumb ? are you so desperate to fin an explanation that you simply ignore parts of the ecuation to fit the result you already expected ?!

Vor 27 Tage
SFaPiL2
SFaPiL2

I dont know the underlying math in pilot wave theory but, by the way that it's being explained, it reminds me of modal analysis and other studies I've done in signal analysis during my engineering degree. Rather than thinking of the two particles being interlocked independently from space (indicating information travelling at extremely high velocities in order to guarantee their states are interlinked) couldn't it be that they normally match a "wave" which is independent from space itself? A "natural frequency", if you will accept my analogy with modal analysis, where these particles fit in the nodes of such waves; hence retaining a similar behavior as long as they stay fixed to the nodes of this wave independent from time and space. In order for this to be valid, though, an infinite number of particles all fitting in separate nodes of this hypothetical "wave" would all retain the same properties of the particle under test. Does anyone more knowledgeable know whether this analogy I brought up is a load of garbage or not? ;P

Vor 6 Tage
Existenceisillusion
Existenceisillusion

2 things. 1) QM properties of individual particles contribute to the QM properties of larger ensembles, and above some threshold ensemble size, the QM properties "smear out" (else we would have to choose which contribute and which don't), resulting in the classical properties we know and love. 2) I think it's Bell's theorem that showed that entanglement is more than just deduction. I.e., if we know there are a total of two states and two particles, and after separating them, we observe one, we subtract the observed state from the list of possibilities, leaving only one state possible, thus not requiring FTL info. Bell's theorem showed this is not true...if I remember right.

Vor 6 Tage
Patrick Mcguire
Patrick Mcguire

Our simulation overlords dictate the rules that guide their universe..we are just along for the ride 😂

Vor 8 Tage
kiss my dirty ass
kiss my dirty ass

Send me computer free😂😂😂honestly

Vor 8 Tage
MJ Music
MJ Music

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. It

Vor 10 Tage
blubastud
blubastud

Why does this sound like quantum entanglement?

Vor 10 Tage
Hyacinthus
Hyacinthus

Copenhagen throws out both determinism and locality, Pilot Wave throws out locality. In no way does the Copenhagen interpretation make more sense than Pilot Wave theory.

Vor 10 Tage
TheAwesomeG
TheAwesomeG

So... Ockham’s razor?

Vor 10 Tage
Joseph Crispino
Joseph Crispino

The copenhagen interpretation just seems like a place-holder until the fuller picture can be hashed out.

Vor 11 Tage
John Walker
John Walker

Your gender is in Superposition.

Vor 11 Tage
Owen Eastwood
Owen Eastwood

But what defines an observer/observation? It can’t be that something requires a living thing to observe it in order to change, so what’s actually happening here?

Vor 11 Tage
Jons LG
Jons LG

The shroedingers cat experiment is a horrible example imo, unless you're trying to prove that the particle is indeed in one state or another.. Because you don't actually change the cats state by measuring it. The cat is indeed either alive or dead, and the only thing that changes is your knowledge, as the measurement has no effect on the cat.

Vor 12 Tage
zainab alshammari
zainab alshammari

Very good job on explaining such a weird yet correct theory .. it's the brain food I'm looking for!

Vor 12 Tage
EmptySora_
EmptySora_

I love all the videos on SciShow but the quantum mechanics ones are always among my favorites.

Vor 12 Tage
Daniel 777
Daniel 777

My question is has anyone studied Seashells, with Quantum. I remember listening to the echoes of the Ocean younger.

Vor 12 Tage
Eric McGuinness
Eric McGuinness

Super position.....but when ever in the universe is something not being observed by or interacting with all the other particles, energies and forces around it? When is something ever completely isolated? Doesn't make sense to me but what do I know.

Vor 13 Tage
Seán O'Nilbud
Seán O'Nilbud

Ex-spearmint?

Vor 13 Tage
Igi Vup
Igi Vup

Sperm cells are particles and waves at the same time... Just sayin.

Vor 14 Tage
jeffwads
jeffwads

Nothing is random. If you have all the variables, you will be able to calculate the event completely. The cat experiment is ridiculous. The cat would be either alive or dead. The observation aspect is moot because you are outside the box.

Vor 14 Tage
Zes
Zes

no such thing as connecx or not

Vor 15 Tage
Matlab Tutor
Matlab Tutor

i am still not getting it --- The dead and alive Cat *** I mean we can use the argument in many classical experiments like The example of Dice ???? i dont know why the Cat's example is a big deal for quantum mechanical particles????

Vor 16 Tage
xxDrain
xxDrain

By now all those cats have knocked the vial over themselves and they're all dead.

Vor 17 Tage
Ken O
Ken O

"Reality, what a concept! "-Mork from Ork (Robin Williams). But when it comes to quantum mechanics, the question is, Which reality?

Vor 17 Tage
Krazy Maniak
Krazy Maniak

What if you put the cat into a glass box

Vor 18 Tage
merlopick
merlopick

Schrodinjer?? @3:48 "every expiriment"??? How the hell does this guy talk???

Vor 19 Tage
Russell Alson
Russell Alson

Could anyone explain why most scientists decided Copenhagen? Its seems to me both have just as crazy cons (cat dead and alive analogy or all particles effect each other in the universe)

Vor 19 Tage
H Missy
H Missy

What if nothing is ever fixed, and your perception is the only thing that makes it SEEM like it's fixed?

Vor 19 Tage
TROUBLE CAINE
TROUBLE CAINE

YOU WERE very wise to SHOW your words in the graphics to aid understanding. This channel is always getting better...!!

Vor 20 Tage
Gristle Von Raben
Gristle Von Raben

Actually the rudimentary roots of laser light research comes from crystallography, sapphires and rubies create a strange star effect simetimes. We typically use rubies to make lasers by pumping light into a reflective cylinder and aligning the crystal so that it bounces light to the front and back of the cylinder until it comes out of that tiny area of the ruby that only allows a thin plane of light to exit. Quantum theory helped explain it, not to create it, correct?

Vor 21 Tag
tonz lang
tonz lang

"theory" why do scientists do not get that?

Vor 21 Tag
CHEVASIT HOMPA
CHEVASIT HOMPA

Good!

Vor 21 Tag
Critico
Critico

Peter fills a bottle with a pitcher and put it in the trunk of a car. Mike, who doesn't know whether the all or half of the water is poured, drives the car for 10 miles. Before he stops and checks the bottle, the pitcher back a the starting point can be either empty or half full. That, however, is only the case in his knowledge space. In Peter's knowledge space, the amount of water still in the pitcher is already known. The information doesn't teleport 2 miles instantly when Mike opens his bottle, it's just that he doesn't know it yet. Should there be any information that travels, it should be inside Mike's brain, not over 10 miles, and It takes time to deduce that half a bottle means half a pitcher. Say if the universe is run on an engine inside a computer, and it can be paused to examine the exact speed and position of any particle. Then the information is there all the time, we just have no way to get it. It's beyond our knowledge space, which is limited by our methods, not necessary beyond every intelligent being's knowledge space, nor beyond the universal/absolute knowledge space, should there be one. Photons that interact with the pitcher carry information for a suitable observer. The bottle that got carried away can be said to contain extractable information. These carriers of information don't travel instantly. The knowledge inside the brain can arguably be considered information, but this conscious information(knowledge) should not be confused with physics information. If a bird knocks over and empties the pitcher after Mike leaves, it will be possible that Mike sees a half full bottle and thinks that the pitcher is half full. How then, can he get a wrong information, which teleports back to the pitcher?

Vor 21 Tag
Adam G.
Adam G.

Regarding the speed of light being the universal speed limit for everything... we've already proven you can cheat that. By bending space/time you can cheat by moving between two points without the travel time between them. Makes sense that particles may be able to do that too... right?

Vor 21 Tag
Justin Nehls
Justin Nehls

David Bomb. Bombian mechanics

Vor 22 Tage
Sim 303
Sim 303

it almost come down to chaos/creation vs scripted/mainframe...quantum mechanics and philosophy,in the same room.

Vor 22 Tage
Aiden Watler
Aiden Watler

What a good episode! I realise this will likely be lost in the sea pf comments, but this was so good and not quite as intense as Space Time. More SciShow Physics videos please!

Vor 22 Tage
Jordan
Jordan

Yeah but things can effect things not in thier immediate surroundings without sending a "traveling" signal or message. You have seen this it's called gears. Gears all start turning see the same time with a little gap for the space between the teeth. The universe often functions like waves making particles because inertial energy gives a portion of existing fabric of the universe mass. Like a set of gears though an already excusing standing waves that have created a network of simultaneously moving parts can communicate information in the form of specific inertia to make it look like a partial was at one end and then just appears at the other end. This duplicate however simply interacted with something like this at one end and communicated it's inertial energy to the other end instantaneously. Similarly entangled particles are capable of staying entangled by creating a standard wave along it's path as the two entangled particles travel apart and when one is flipped on the other end the information initially is communicated via spooky action without the usual need for time for a traveling wave to communicate the effects of that traveling inertia on it's immediate surroundings.

Vor 22 Tage
V
V

Yay, non-orthodox interpretations of QM :) do er=epr next!!

Vor 23 Tage
Nehmo Sergheyev
Nehmo Sergheyev

I am soooo tired of educators, particularly ones on YouTube, using "weird" as a quantum mechanics adjective. Those guys are the truly weird.

Vor 23 Tage
iVardensphere
iVardensphere

The Copenhagen Interpretation doesn't violate locality.

Vor 23 Tage
WormholeJim
WormholeJim

Ugh, I like cats. In my ideal world I would end getting eaten by one, that's how much I like them. So I'm not too fond of that guy Schrödinger. Luckily there's another example (maybe devised by a cat-lover) that shows much the same, and actually at the same time gets to examplify entanglement. Instead of cats you have two friends, two identical boxes and two equally proportioned balls, one red and one white. Your one friend now goes to the opposite end of the world while your other friend grabs the boxes and the balls and takes them with him to a place equally far to both of you and your first friend. He now puts each ball in each identical box and brings them to the post-office with a note, please mail these boxes to these receipients. The clerc then, upon coming back from lunchbreak, writes your adress on one box and your friend's adress on the other and sends them off in the system. A couple of weeks later each box have arrived at their destinations, half a world a part. Right now, *both* balls are in a superposition due to the Copenhagen interpretation. The minute - the second, nay, the split-nano-femtosecond - you open your box and look inside it, the state of the ball will decay into being either red or white. Just like with the cat and it's highly elaborate scheme to ensure maximum randomness. But on top you at the same very instant have caused the state of the ball that is in your friend's box to decay as well - even without him neccessarily having looked yet! Entanglement, ta-daa.

Vor 23 Tage
The Void Alchemist
The Void Alchemist

The machine releasing the poison observes the atom causing a collapse of the superposition, thus no quantum cat required.

Vor 23 Tage
Mark Marcum
Mark Marcum

Could entangled particles be connected by tiny wormholes? That would explain the instantaneous transfer of information? Sorry if it's a dumb question

Vor 23 Tage
Mark Marcum
Mark Marcum

Still watching the video and it's amazing! How about a collaboration with PBS Spacetime?

Vor 23 Tage
the_armada
the_armada

I know pilot wave theory makes certain things nicer to think about while makes other things messier, but I’m a Copenhagen man:)

Vor 23 Tage
Pat Black
Pat Black

Our theories are also “guided by aesthetic and pragmatic choices” I love you, SciShow. This is such a simple yet effective demonstration of just how foggy the frontier of our exploration of reality really is. It’s a strange world with stranger questions arising every day.

Vor 24 Tage
Dadson worldwide
Dadson worldwide

You still have to send the entangled particles to were you wish to communicate.

Vor 24 Tage
Walter Archibald
Walter Archibald

SHROW-ding-erz OR watch: https://youglish.com/search/Schr%C3%B6dinger/us? O watch:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7w3uDcIh9M 9GOOD CHOICE! oder (auf deutsch, mit umlaut): https://www.rightpronunciation.com/languages/german/erwin-schr%25C3%25B6dinger-3779.asp?id1=9&page=142 This name is heard endlessly in American English (ex. The Big Bang Theory), using (basically) what I put first. It just "sounds right" to Americans. BUT, WHAT IS TRUTH? (Really wish Jesus had said that, rather than Pontius Pilate!) https://www.dictionary.com/e/video/how-do-you-pronounce-facade/

Vor 24 Tage
TheIntJuggler
TheIntJuggler

"Newtonian physics is weird" Quantum Mechanics

Vor 24 Tage
quest 77051
quest 77051

so does sub space exist or not.

Vor 24 Tage
Draws Gaming
Draws Gaming

What if the Pilot Wave interpretation is correct and locality must be sacrificed to solve the Bell Inequality?

Vor 24 Tage
John Galdino
John Galdino

Doesn't gravity according general relativity already break this locality rule? Is that why there is so much search for gravitons?

Vor 24 Tage
Saumitra Chakravarty
Saumitra Chakravarty

Correction needed at 1:37 - Something can be a particle and a wave both but NOT at the same time.

Vor 24 Tage
Jim Goltz
Jim Goltz

I thought the Copenhagen interpretation wasn't popular these days...?

Vor 24 Tage
El Triggered
El Triggered

Where’s Olivia

Vor 25 Tage
M ß Q
M ß Q

This video is definitely going to exceed 1M views in less than a month

Vor 25 Tage
Engin Haymana
Engin Haymana

Doesnt that just mean that we need better methods to "observe" particles, as doing so alters the results? We live in a deterministic world, so i find it very hard to wrap my head around that concept. Its like chaining the poison gas to the opening of the door. Sure, you have observed the status of the cat, but also changed the state of the poor cat. The original state has not been uncovered, but the information of that state is still there.

Vor 25 Tage
Keaton Smith
Keaton Smith

Pilot wave theory sounds like Dao.

Vor 25 Tage
Vitor in_Berlin
Vitor in_Berlin

I think it is important to keep in mind, that the different interpretations of quantum theory are models describing real quantum phenomena! Most likely, there is no definitive interpretation, because no physical (or - to my best knowledge - any other) model, was ever able to capture every part of the phenomenon it described in all detail on all scales. That's why science relies on various models of the same phenomenon, each with emphasis on different parts (or scales) of said phenomenon. The real question is, which models are able to coexist without fundamental contradictions to each other. I don't think that the different interpretations of quantum theory show these fundamental contradictions, even if that appears to be the case! The key flaws in humanitie's ability to solve those contradictions and create a more accurate approximation to real quantum phenoma lies in it's limited perception of the phenomena themselves and time as a phenomenon which is described by a model based mostly in human perception of it. My suggestion would be, that most of the different interpretations contradict each other, because the describe quantum phenomena with emphasis on their observed (or predicted) behaviour in different temporal dimensions. For example, lets take the many-worlds-interpretation and the wave-collapse-interpretation (or Copenhagen interpretation): The collapse of a wave function into a particle, or the termination of a state superposition in a particle and it's adaptation of a single state with an elimination of all other possible states, allows two (or more) interpretations based on how many temporal dimensions one can observe. Human beings experience time as one dimensional. Their frame of temporal perception is a single point on a line, where what lies behind is inaccessable and what lies in front is unpredictable but unavoidable. From this point of view the assumption, that every state of superposition we are not able to observe after the collapse of the wave function is eliminated from the equation, is fully understandable. But if we assume that time is/has a multidimensional 'structure' (which most evidence points to), and try to imagine what the collapse of a wave function looks like for beings with two dimensional perception of time: Instead of the 1D-perception of a moment in a timeline and the elimination of states in the collapse, a being experiencing two temporal dimensions, would perceive time as a (freely accessable) line in plane (with inaccessable parallel lines) and in this frame of temporal perception, the collapse of the wave function would most likely look like all possible states of the particle are spread among all the parallel lines, observable, but inaccessable. To summerize this: 0. Quantum phenomena (and every other processes) occur in a multidimensional temporal structure. 1. The wave-collapse-interpretation is a model, which describes these phenomena as observed in one temporal dimension. 2. The many-worlds-interpretation is a model, which describes these phenomena as (likely) observed in (at least) two temporal dimensions. 3. Each interpretation serves best, when applied in it's specific frame of perception and holds scientific plausiblility, when viewed in in said specific frame of perception, without contradicting each other fundamentally.

Vor 25 Tage
feekygucker
feekygucker

I always that Bohm rhymes with Ohm rather than Nom... but it could be me. Also... shout out to PBS SpaceTime that has a MUCH deeper treatment of this material over MANY videos.

Vor 25 Tage
Jacob Johnson
Jacob Johnson

I don't like copenhagen's. Its self-contradicting. That's logically wrong. Pilot wave theory doesn't break the law of non contradiction, its simply counterintuitive to how we are used to thinking of things.

Vor 25 Tage
Mick G.
Mick G.

"The physics of the super tiny" is the worst description of QP, I've ever heard.

Vor 25 Tage
Chillman
Chillman

It can't be predicted... yet.

Vor 25 Tage
Waylen Edge
Waylen Edge

This is by far the most dumbest video ever made!

Vor 26 Tage
Daniele Del Frate
Daniele Del Frate

First part of the video: well, this pilot wave theory seems legit Second part of the video: pilot wave theory is insane!

Vor 26 Tage
Shalkar
Shalkar

With String Theory there are multiple dimensions. Couldn't the signal be from one of those dimensions? Think of Night Crawler going through one dimension to go to another spot in ours. We just haven't figured out how to "see" the dimension... yet. Also, what if Dark Energy/Matter is playing some role in this?

Vor 26 Tage
SIIIOXIDE
SIIIOXIDE

Damm , here I was thinking I was the center of the universe this whole time :'(

Vor 26 Tage
TCOrigamist
TCOrigamist

But what if you were the cat?

Vor 26 Tage
Joshua Champagne
Joshua Champagne

I have a question on how to get around locality. If a wormhole can connect any to points in the universe, could two particles interact through a wormhole giving the illusion they are interacting across the universe faster than light? Can the particles on each side of the wormhole be considered local because they can interact? If so, any particles can interact with any other particles in space meaning any point in space would be local to any other point in space making all of space local.

Vor 26 Tage
Alexander Hugestrand
Alexander Hugestrand

Can someone please tell me why quantum mechanics and the wave particle stupidity isn't a shitload of crap, and why the following extremely intuitive explanation is? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJjO2J7HTF8&t=1s

Vor 26 Tage
Kurei0
Kurei0

I hope you're getting a ton of views for this video because I swear I watched this a bunch of times to understand it lol

Vor 26 Tage
leslie sylvan
leslie sylvan

You would have increased your learning curve out of the box. Meow!

Vor 25 Tage
Rollinestilo
Rollinestilo

Many Worlds?

Vor 26 Tage
Phat As Phoebe
Phat As Phoebe

Both theories are flawed because they are dependent on the assumption of individuality between particles, energy, matter. There is no “signal” traveling faster than the speed of light, they are the same particle, experiencing different realities, within the same universe. *Both* realities are true, as they are when observed.

Vor 26 Tage
John Smith
John Smith

Pilot wave is my favorite. I'd pursue it if I was a physicist.

Vor 26 Tage
John Smith
John Smith

If there are waves in an ocean, I can send out two croc shoes in opposite directions. They will both be effected by the same waves. So even if I can't see the wave directly I could infer the waves by watching the flotsam.

Vor 26 Tage
zoperxplex
zoperxplex

"There are a number of different interpretations of quantum mechanics." Sorry Hank, "a number" is singular. LEARN GRAMMAR!

Vor 27 Tage
zoperxplex
zoperxplex

Chrome Cobra pay close attention pinhead. It is irrelevant if the subject is plural if the sentence is referring to that subject as being comprised of a singular group. For instance, if one says "a flock of geese" that flock is still singular notwithstanding the fact that it is consist of a multitude of geese.

Vor 8 Tage
Chrome Cobra
Chrome Cobra

And it's "Sorry, Hank, ..." so YOU need to learn proper grammar. You cannot even grasp it within your own comment. Stay stupid on stupid channels. Leave the smart stuff for the adults, kid.

Vor 18 Tage
Chrome Cobra
Chrome Cobra

But because "interpretations" is plural it makes it correct English. It says, in kindergarten talk so you comprehend it, that there are many individual ways. Ignorant.

Vor 18 Tage
Saarang Sahasrabudhe
Saarang Sahasrabudhe

https://youtu.be/LQxMEHUmnXQ Here's a version of Pilot Wave that does not break locality

Vor 27 Tage
KillAllBots 101
KillAllBots 101

8:51—9:00 Maybe we really are in a simulation.

Vor 27 Tage
gdpr
gdpr

wtf, if you are stupid but you dont know it yet it does not mean you are not stupid !, how does the pilot theory has anything to do with locality ?!, or your missinterpretation of it ? wtf is wrong with you , haa ? if you spin 2 electrons in opposide directions YOU ALREADY KNOW THEY ARE SPINNING IN OPPOSIDE DIECTIONS, you just dont know which one is spinning in which direction, so as soon as you find the spin of one electron you combine that WITH THE INFORMATION YOU ALREADY HAVE and determine the spin of the second one, this has nothing to do with locality, it does not matter where you Move the second one, you already have the information. htf can smart people be this dumb ? are you so desperate to fin an explanation that you simply ignore parts of the ecuation to fit the result you already expected ?!

Vor 27 Tage
Tim Harris
Tim Harris

So... your telling me we have a way to make undead cats?

Vor 27 Tage
Rev Lemmon
Rev Lemmon

Didn't Einstein call quantum entanglement spooky action at a distance?

Vor 27 Tage
Greg Neyman
Greg Neyman

Don't quantum computers depend on superposition to work?

Vor 27 Tage
MiserablerHurensohn
MiserablerHurensohn

If you don't check the cat box for a long time and you start to smell a decayed cat, is there both a dead cat and a smelly cat in there?

Vor 27 Tage
Skylar O'Connor
Skylar O'Connor

Is there an episode where everyone on the SciShow team or teams is introduced and their credentials, ocupations, etc. are introduced to the audience? If not, can we get one? I'm very curious about who everyone on screen and behind the scenes are and what they do. I'd also like to know what kind of education everyone has. I'm not trying to imply anything or upset anyone, I'm just curious.

Vor 27 Tage
Skylar O'Connor
Skylar O'Connor

Can anything other than light behave like both a particle and a wave at the same time? At least theoretically?

Vor 27 Tage
richard bidinger
richard bidinger

Well, wouldn't quantum entanglement solve that one little problem.

Vor 27 Tage
Sean Peacock
Sean Peacock

This is why Death doesn't like Shronenberg.

Vor 27 Tage
Domenick Palmieri
Domenick Palmieri

Hank's comedic timing is very underrated I think

Vor 27 Tage
SomeDudeOnline
SomeDudeOnline

How does Copenhagen make more sense? It's just saying that locality isn't a thing sometimes because we don't want it to be all the time... right?

Vor 27 Tage
H H
H H

How about the cat's observation? The cat observes the state in the box and thus the state becomes one deterministic state once observed. So the cat is either dead or alive in the box not both.

Vor 27 Tage
Lightning Larry
Lightning Larry

This theory is grounded in sound research

Vor 27 Tage
anthony newton
anthony newton

It really isnt rocket science. Weve been programmed to over complicate the basics that make our reality. Nature is the true laboratory

Vor 27 Tage
anthony newton
anthony newton

I have a strong hunch that everybody has missed the point. The quantum state exists in one place only. Each persons individual mind. The cats status is set,it is dead or it is alive. Each individual conciousness that is aware of the box and its contents,is where the superposition exists. Not a huge leap to understand the links to a multiverse theory that works. If you think hard enough.

Vor 27 Tage
Tim Davis
Tim Davis

Yes but why are these theories based on observation? Copenhagen theory violates locality based on the idea that a particle requires observation to establish superposition. No other interaction is required beyond observation... And the Quantum Gravity theory requires a conscious observer but points at the universe as a conscious observer...

Vor 28 Tage
Giordano Tanora
Giordano Tanora

many worlds > copenhagen

Vor 28 Tage
TheKing Olaf
TheKing Olaf

Schrö-ding-er (ding like the sound when the microwave is ready)

Vor 28 Tage
J Attitude
J Attitude

Time: 7:30 Does that suggest that all things affect all things consistently all the time? Is there a test that we have not mastered or cannot do now, and or can not think of to test? What things are we testing with bios too?

Vor 28 Tage
J Attitude
J Attitude

Maybe you like this: How do Spacecraft Photograph the Planets & get the Images Back to Earth? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrD1oe5_zvw

Vor 28 Tage
jjhack3r
jjhack3r

Why do you guys all talk the same?

Vor 28 Tage

Nächstes Video

Why Is It So Hard to Fix Traffic?

11:00

Why Is It So Hard to Fix Traffic?

SciShow

Aufrufe 651 000

Quantum Mechanics:  Animation explaining quantum physics

25:47

Quantum Mechanics: Animation explaining quantum physics

Physics Videos by Eugene Khutoryansky

Aufrufe 1 500 000

Brian Greene on The B-Theory of Time

32:43

Brian Greene on The B-Theory of Time

Zehadi Alam

Aufrufe 659 000

Trying Different Face Masks - Part 2 w/ iJustine!

12:52

The Logistics of the International Space Station

12:04

The Logistics of the International Space Station

Wendover Productions

Aufrufe 805 696

How To Make a Quantum Bit

07:51

How To Make a Quantum Bit

Veritasium

Aufrufe 992 000

5 of the World's Most Bizarre Seeds

09:54

How many ways can circles overlap? - Numberphile

09:46

That Time It Rained for Two Million Years

08:04

The Fog That Killed 12,000 People

05:18

The Fog That Killed 12,000 People

SciShow

Aufrufe 640 000

Goodbye Drogo...I SHAVED!

4:13

Goodbye Drogo...I SHAVED!

Jason Momoa

Aufrufe 5 515 975

Childhood Crushes

9:27

Childhood Crushes

Emirichu

Aufrufe 772 567

William Osman Visits Japan

9:08

William Osman Visits Japan

William Osman

Aufrufe 532 474

Mobster Bugsy Siegel  - Q+A

16:05

Mobster Bugsy Siegel - Q+A

BuzzFeed Unsolved Network

Aufrufe 393 362

Apple Gave Up!?

6:27

Apple Gave Up!?

TechLinked

Aufrufe 525 216