Amazing !

First you need to find it though. If you haven't figured out the value of science and scientific institutions yet you might end up "learning" "quantum mechanics" from "what the bleep" or Deepak Chopra, instead of learning it from MIT. The truth seems to be, that for many people it's hard to get on the right track without some type of guidance. They'll get sidetracked by conspiracy theories, fraudulent claims and various pseudo-sciences. And that may be understandable, since we haven't evolved to perceive or understand reality accurately. Furthermore our success (as a species) seems to be largely based on an accumulation of knowledge i.e. learning from other people and building upon that. So it's understandable that people can not see the value of the scientific method or scientific institutions. Scientific thinking isn't something, that has come naturally to us. It's not something that people just come up with themselves. So for most people it requires a person, who introduces them to science, leads them into the right direction, makes them ask the right questions etc. If you lack that you might not be very likely to end up here.

You obviously missed this: 53:13. Think about it.

@@stauffap 4 years after my comment I'm not really any further with this lecture series. But started multiple other lectures on different topics like Human Behavioural Biology from Stanford. I'm also thinking of finally trythe problem sets, but I guess I maybe would be hit by a wall then. So I probably gonna try it anyways.

@@AlexTrusk91 You should definately try problem sets. You never fully understand physics if you can't do the math (you might just have the illusion that you understand it). I meet people all the time, who think that they understand a certain topic in physics, because they have developped a more or less accurate intuition, but they fail when confronted with having to calculate something and often fail as well with their intution. The ultimate test to whether or not you understand a certain topic in physics is always doing problem sets that involve math (and preferably understanding the derivations).

@@stauffap And can you help me abt problem sets like from where and how i should start to solve them like pre requisites and everything , i would really appreciate it

Would have been nice to see his laptop screen as direct instead of through the projector... still, a wonderful job as you said.

@@scowell wow wow, we're not talking about THAT much advanced technology here.

An absolutely perfect lecturer

;Touch and hold a clip to pin it. Unpinned clips will be deleted after 1 hour.😢hh O❤ ❤❤❤

MIT is a very prestigious university. Very low acceptance rate because they take the cream of the crop in student's. If they do that for their students you can only imagine how they select their professors.

@@Ne012 yeah but : I went to Cambridge.. very selective on students.. terrible lecturing and teaching in general in the subject I studied which was economics.

They put him in camera for a reason. I imagine they have good and bad professors also

So do I.

Yeah, you can learn now.

I've seen a few other lectures from the other teachers and I didn't like them as much as these ones. I think this is a gem, and we should appreciate we can watch the best of the best for free. It's not limited to the 100 of the smartest hardworking kids anymore and it's awesome!

This is better though. All the learning with none of the crippling loans, egotistical teachers, or crushing deadlines! Einstein figured out SR while working as a patent clerk (though he did have a decent undergrad education)

You can always work harder now.

People get excited when I stop speaking too, probably for a different reason

i did bachelors in electrical engineering now i am going to switch to masters in physics!

How is it all going ?

I was the kid at school who said I wanted to be a Physicist when I grow up... (... grow up.... something I might get round to one day ;-) and got told, "there's no point we already know everything" by the _teacher_ I went on to do mechanical and computer engineering with Physics /QM as the stuff I do for fun. but its more just a love of learning stuff do what you enjoy

You’ll make it there! I wish you all the best! You deserve to be there.

I don't think that matters here. What he's saying doesn't apply to MIT.

LMAO!!! xD

Dang. I missed it by 3 years...

The pizza is an imaginary component probably

@@NovaWarrior77 - I missed it by 4.

Wait it said free pizza at 5, not at 120…?

Truth be told, your IIT professors must learn pedagogy from these professors.

@itchy armpits I majored in physics.

Engineering Physics?

I'm never going to directly use any of this but that hasn't kept me from trying to just understand it for my own curiosity. Never know when something will appear at the edges of something else and come in handy. This dude has come the closest so far to getting me there 🤣

Physicists always try to use the same math, it was the kind of math especially designed for them.

The concepts are easier to understand when you know the language, like psi and B*B

Here, kid, have a cookie. :-)

Let me sound smart and say that is empirical knowledge 😌

High school senior here, I'm actually fascinated with that EXACT field!

In which video did he refer to allan?

same. its completely irrelevant to my school work but its just so damn interesting

Watching before 1 day of exams

SOMMAN EDU did you pass? Are you now a quantum theorist

@@financewithsom485 how did they go

@@roku6194i am a software engineer now studied mechanical engineering that time this comment is 4 years back 😂

but how can you be sure?

I study at a Fachhochschule and yet I'm here watching these videos instead

This is awesome!

Nachiketa Ramesh Here is one not directly related to quantum physics, but reasonably funny none the less: "Entropy---It may not be the first bad law to keep a good man down but it is definitely the Second!"

CHistrue I didn't get this one. Second law of thermodynamics right? What man? How did it keep him down X(

Nachiketa Ramesh Well, you know, it ruins the perfect closed system. No perpetual motion machines. I guess if I have to explain it, the humor misses. Should I try again?

CHistrue Yes please!!

Ken, that's an odd statement. Obviously, in context, he is stating that a level of comprehension has personally been reached by him with enough confidence to state he is 'understanding' the current level of knowledge we hold. Obviously he isn't stating he's reached a mastery level of understanding that entirely exceeds that of all humankind to date... that would be a large assertion indeed.

Quantum chemistry sounds awesome!

Lies again? WTF WOF

If ψ1(χ) and ψ2(x) both satisfy the Schrodinger equation. Which means that they are a solution to Schrodinger equation then their linear superposition is also a solution to Schrodinger equation. It is a property of differential equations.

Did you graduate?

To some extent it does replace classical quantum theory for example the wave particle duality is thought as well, a duality, in terms of a classical quantum theory while a quantum field theory treats it as local excitations in the respective fields, it extends quantum theory by providing a relationship between quantum theory and special relativity such that some quantum systems can be described completely in the sense that they can also be described in terms of special relativity.

The spatial wave function in the Schrodinger picture, psi, is not the same as a ket vector, | psi >. psi is the projection of |psi> onto the position basis: psi = < x | psi > | psi > holds all the information of the general quantum state and can be projected onto different basis's. That's why it's so useful. For example the momentum wave function can be arrived at by projecting | psi > onto the momentum basis: psi = < p | psi > But if you had just psi, the 'wave function', you still have a full picture of the quantum state because you can go to the ket | psi > from it.

@@paulryan94 Thank you for your answer, but the question I asked above was answered on physics stack exchange right after I made my comment. So it's no longer something that confuses me :). Here's the link to the question and answer on the site, if you're interested: physics.stackexchange.com/questions/560132/wave-function-as-a-ket-vector-in-a-hilbert-space

I think he says is the average between the two, which this is what the expectation vale is.

I think he has add or ADHD cause I am the same when I look and notice what's Ian saying " I'am like dude whaooooo are your even realizing what you're saying"

Chalk is nontoxic when consumed in moderation.

@@grandpaobvious Yes, may be Calcium in it is even beneficial for the bones!

if youre paying attention...the chalk is already in the coffee bottle, and also not in the coffee bottle

There is.probably a function to assess that

@Dirk Knight Thank you - I think I got it. Since we can use the idea of the unit circle (and so sin and cos) for almost all oscillations in nature, it's useful to get rid of 2π in many of the formula...

I take this step as a try: calculate with it, make predictions, and if they can be confirmed by observation or experiment, use it. As said in the Copenhagen Interpretation of QM, we can't avoid classical terms.