Yooo the King of Physics education has returned!

i'm honestly thanking you from the bottom of my heart elliot. just got an excellence scholarship for my first choice uni studying physics, wouldn't have had the guts to choose physics over engineering without your videos specifically. science communication is amazing and you are one of the best people that do it. so thanks. :)

Elliot you deserve a billion subscribers ! Truly .. the ultimate teacher and the ultimate pure Physics content creator. No BS ! Such a fan of yours . Keep up the good work

Beautiful. Finally Physics got its 3B1B . Fantabulous. Kudos From A Theoretical Physicist. By the by, I've downloaded your dissertation "Stringy ER == EPR" [Note the Double Equal Sign, I'm a born coder], hope I shall find time to read it one day. It turns out to be one of the problems I'm working on and I've my own strange theories.

Best channel with proper explanation. I was sick of seeing other channels hyping every concept to philosophical level without providing basic math or explaining realistically. Thank you.

Elliot, you're simply the best physicis teacher I ever had !

I’m studying physics at university and still struggle with the maths for quantum, so I am very excited for this series and this was a fantastic start! Thank you!

Also, when I was an undergrad we worked with the Schrodinger equation, and solved it for the hydrogen atom, which I found fascinating. But we never discussed the Fenyman approach, so I'm very anxious for your next video on that method.

Once you realize you need a mechanism for "how can the sum of two things be smaller than either of them individually" the idea of using complex numbers is utterly reasonable. Can't wait for the next videos in this series!

Great video. Looking forward to the those coming next. Would like to add for those that are interested in the equations that h-bar isn't technically just Planck's constant but the reduced Planck's constant, i.e., Planck's constant, h, divided by 2pi.

he’s back with another banger!

I can see Elliot being the true Physics 2 professor for a grneration of students that grew up on YT.

Great visuals, and great explanation! Looking forward to the Path integral :)

No way this came out 4 days ago. It’s like perfect and I need it right now. But what a coincidence. If I needed it a week ago I wouldn’t have found this video. Thank you

i dont usually comment but this is probably the best channel to learn about physics!!! I hope we get more videos frequently

I can only imagine the effort it takes to create such intuitive animations.

I have just found this channel, weeks before QM exams. Your videos really helps to patch the fragments. Thank you the video!

hello doctor ngl i think you're one of if not the best at explaining physics in youtube without shying away from the complicated spots lool but i would like to ask ( i'm sure lots of us do ) which software you use for your animation ..... it would be great if you make a series of lessons about it loool 😁😆🔥🔥🔥

Babe wake up… Dr elliot just dropped a QM vid 😮

Awesome video! 😊🎉

One of the better vids on this topic. In particular I'm glad that you emphasised two points: 1. A quantum particle is quite a different 'thing' to a classical particle and 2. It makes no sense to think that quantum scale events / structures should be analogous to macro ensemble events / structure (i.e. the Greek atomists were wrong - but we had to start somewhere so kudos to them anyway). If educators (also on YT) went into those points more often and in more detail then all this lay confusion and quantum mysticism would fade away and people could concentrate on the more important unknowns. One thing would would make this video even better IMO - not showing quantum particles moving through space. I think that perpetuates another common misunderstanding about QM and perpetuates the outmoded notion of 'wave-particle duality' which we really need to put to bed now - it had its time.

Another fabulous video that clearly and succinctly examines another concept in physics. I make use of your videos often to help my studies. Congratulations!

Excellent video. Very interesting, informative and worthwhile video.

I always like to think of wave-particle duality as simply that it's a wave when it's in motion, but when it hits something it becomes a particle. Almost like an explosion running backwards and forwards in time, depending on whether it's "free" or "captured".

Amount of work goes into these videos are mind boggling

Its the clearest explanation I have ever come across even as a physicist. Congratulations and thank you so much!!! Christian

I enjoy every second of this video. Absolutely brilliant!

I've been waiting 7 months for this video. Time to get my pen and paper and study w/ glee. Thanks for the upload!

I had my first lecture in quantum physics today, seems they introduced the same topics that were discussed in this video. Really looking forward to your upcoming videos in the "series"!

Wonderful Elliot, thank you so much for your awesome work.

This is the best explanation of wave-particle duality I've ever come across!

Excellent!

Yes!! You're back!

I watch these videos to relax. Awesome scholarship and presentation. Thanks.

sehr gut video freund, waiting for next video

Love from india.. your way of teaching is fantastic. Please upload more lecture.

Awesome. I guess the notes are still not posted on the page (or I couldn't find them)

One more weird phenomenon he did not mention is that a detector placed at either hole, so we know which hole the electron passed through results in a pattern that looks just like the pellets. In other words, the interference pattern is gone, and the electrons act like classical particles. If we turn off the detector the interference pattern re-appears.

You came at a time when I needed it the most !!

What can I say... Suscribed!! .you need more followers. Great job man.

Love you! I took Modern Physics last semester and didn’t understand well. Hopefully I’ll make it up and be ready for Quantum Mechanics next year!

Woah, already hyped about the other videos

Хорошо что есть автоперевод. Очень понравилась подача

Very lucid. Great animation

A great explanatory video! Thanks a lot.

I was waiting for your video from long time plz make videos more frequently these are very helpful

Excellent 👌

This is good, but I think it's important to stress that the wavefunction is - must be - more than just a probability distribution. It's irresistible, especially for beginners, to think the wavefunction could just be a probabilistic representation of our knowledge of the particle, where the particle goes on 1 path but follows some complicated rule we don't know about. This _cannot_ be the case, because of statistical impossibilities in certain experiments. I know you know this; I just think it should be stressed more.

Amazing work.

Thanks for your interesting video. Area under a curve is often equivalent to energy. Buckling of an otherwise flat field shows a very rapid growth of this area to a point. If my model applies, it may show how the universe’s energy naturally developed from the inherent behavior of fields. Your subscribers might want to see this 1:29 minutes video showing under the right conditions, the quantization of a field is easily produced. The ground state energy is induced via Euler’s contain column analysis. Containing the column must come in to play before over buckling, or the effect will not work. The sheet of elastic material “system”response in a quantized manor when force is applied in the perpendicular direction. Bonding at the points of highest probabilities and maximum duration( ie peeks and troughs) of the fields “sheet” produced a stable structure when the undulations are bonded to a flat sheet that is placed above and below the core material. Some say this model is no different than plucking guitar strings. You can not make structures with vibrating guitar strings or harmonic oscillators. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/rdhyptSaqpbad2g.htmlsi=waT8lY2iX-wJdjO3 At this time in my research, I have been trying to describe the “U” shape formed that is produced before phase change. In the model, “U” shape waves are produced as the loading increases and just before the wave-like function shifts to the next higher energy level. Over-lapping all frequencies together using Fournier Transforms, can produce a “U” shape or square wave form. Wondering if Feynman Path Integrals for all possible wave functions could be applicable here too? If this model has merit, seeing the sawtooth load verse deflection graph produced could give some real insight in what happened during the quantum jumps between energy levels. The mechanical description and white paper that goes with the video can be found on my LinkedIn and KZfaq pages. You can reproduce my results using a sheet of Mylar* ( the clear plastic found in some school essay folders. Seeing it first hand is worth the effort!

14:00 _... with a big bump in the region behind the hole._ However, there are already smaller bumps at the sides.

Good explanation.

Excellent sir

Your videos are great. This fuels interest even to those who avoid physics. Could you please explain on Lagrangian concepts. When deriving conservation laws, why we we can't use Noether’s theorem for some differential equations where Lagrangian does not exist.

One of the best explanations

Bro , I just comes to know about you bro ,And you are just insane bro ,Unbelievable bro ,Aswsome bro 🙏🏼 You teaches things so good bro , Another level bro 💯 🙏🏼 Thank you so much for giving notes for free so that A middle class student like would able to get to know about Quantum Physics Don't leave it bro. PLEASE continue this bro until you can possible do bro Thanks from an Indian ❤❤❤❤❤

For next videos, please talk about non-linear slits, shaped ones, like the integrated circuit designers use, to produce diffraction-limited masking correction. This is already a well known technology. Now being used for attempts at Moire pattern Qbits.

Every time you explain, I actually understand 😂

A tiny request to discuss mathematics behind physics like videos . Like the important part of maths with details that are required in physics. Btw this is a fantastic video ❤️❤️❤️

Very well done! (from an ancient physics major)

Bravo 👏👏👏👌👌👌👌 great work!

The probability (wave determining) the pattern the photons will create does not require time as a variable. So, of course you expect the patterns shown in all cases based on wave mechanics. Time is not a QM variable. I don't understand why people have such a hard time with QM.

Schrödinger and friends, should be a sitcom prequel to big bang theory.

Light behavior in double slit experiment is in line with reflection / refraction situation when the resulting wave is the sum of original wave plus waves produces by electrons in the medium the light is passing through. Maybe the electrons also produce some kind of waves which "excite" the matter around them. And the observed behaviour is the sum of the original wave plus the waves from the excited matter?

Excellent channel! Thanks!

There can be some more to add to this issue. Let's say that we have two slits but we make one infinitely large and then pass photons through them. Phi (r1, t) would not be symetrical to the phi (r2,t) of the vertical coordinate y as a f(t). Also, it is hard to understand this phenomena even in classical manner where x is f(t) but if you consider inverse function such as as t(x) then symetry gets lost again because we don't have the definition of time. Also, this implies that all this stuff was not discovered but invented something like Richadr Feynman did.

Outstanding work

There's a thing about maths. It's easy when you understand and know what you are doing, but a never ending hell if you don't know it. it's like so by common standards

extremely good job. wonderful

Excellent

Great video, will you be explaining the collapse of the wave function, and the measurement problem in subsequent videos?

Love your videos

19:55 : so interesting that in the classical wave sense you need to square the sum of functions only because we are using a math trick ( taking only the real part of complex numbers) , but in the quantum sense, nature is telling us that nature itself is using something similar to a "math trick" by squaring the sum of the quantum wave functions in order to produce "the real part" , ie, what we see. What is the interpretation of my statement? Does it have any significance, is it a coincidence, or is there some deeper meaning?

Hi Elliot! Very cool!

So great… can’t thank you enough.

In the case of the BBs, the highest hit-rate is dead center? Between the two slits? Whatever happened to 2 clumps? The two single-slit curves wouldn't combine in the way shown in the animation, having one high point.....there would be two high points

Thanks

The wavefunction is the action itself. There is no separate wavefunction. \psi = S. The trajectory in spacetime is a cardioid. The trajectory in space is a spiral. Solve the Euler-Lagrange equations for the 2 electrons and you will get the interference pattern.

some thougths would actually now flood my mind on what is the cradle of all being and any given entity since I have just listen to Tarjas < bless the child > and there the line < think of me long enough to make a memory > got me this way, as the AP's in the cerebrum to create a memory are pure electromagnetic energy, but due to sombre asymmetrics I cannot but want nonetheless place the fragments here, so as to being able to pick 'em up later, when I am done with what needs to be pulled off first... ...might it be that the quantum field of the photons is somewhat very fundamental to all other field regulations? and here is why this crossed my mind... ...in the beta-decay you end up with an electron ( and a neutrino of course... ) where you wouldn't expect an electron to emerge since the neutron that surpasses a metamorphosis to a proton is totally hadronic with two down quarks and one up quark and therefore nonleptonic and nonetheless there must be interactions with the field of the photons to have these electrons emerge in that photons are emitted by the electrons and need to be as for me their fundamental base rather than some additional feature and furthermore is gamma ray able to let electrons emerge ( gamma ray is actually photonic... ) on collision with molecules with positrons that emerge also and that bears the question which way the field theory must be entangled in the theory of anti-matter, where it is clear - as it would contradict the uncertainty principle after Heisenberg - that fields must exist without the possibility thus of absolut empty space ( I think of it as the mark of God... ) in that this would require the field strength to be zero as the differentiation in function of the time would need to be likewise zero... ...and that isn't possible according to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle that not only refers to the momentum and the locality of a particle... ...so the field of the photons may be very fundamental to all other fields and the fields themself the way they get excited may provide some answers to what ends up being antimatter and what ends up being normal fermionc matter... ...and isn't it interesting speaking of a fundamentality of the photons to keep in mind that positrons likewise electrons do emit photons thus photonicity may very well constiute a base of all that is? Le p'tit Daniel

Is the wave function the attempt to locate a particle in the future (Quantum Mechanics) and a particle when it can be observed in the present/ past (Classical Physics)?

Like Sean Carol , I think people CAN understand Quantum Mechanics. Although I think I heard Sean say there are only 100 people who truly understand it now. He is hoping for a new generation to take on the task.

20:42 h-bar is the reduced Planck constant? 🤔🤔🤔 it is equal to h/2*pi

If screen is displaced consider all cases in obsevation for n sources

In this speculative scenario, let's consider Leibniz's Monad, from the philosophical work "The Monadology", as an abstract representation of the zero-dimensional space that binds quarks together with the Strong Nuclear Force: 1) Indivisibility and Unity: Monads, as indivisible entities, mirror the nature of quarks, which are deemed elementary and indivisible particles in our theoretical context. Just as monads possess unity and indivisibility, quarks are unified in their interactions through the Strong Nuclear Force. 2) Interconnectedness: In the Monadology, monads are interconnected in a vast network. In a parallel manner, the interconnectedness of quarks through the strong force could be metaphorically represented by the interplay of monads, forming a web that holds particles together. 3) Inherent Properties: Just as monads possess inherent perceptions and appetitions, quarks could be thought of as having intrinsic properties like color charge, reflecting the inherent qualities of monads and influencing their interactions. 4) Harmony: The concept of monads contributing to universal harmony resonates with the idea that the Strong Nuclear Force maintains harmony within atomic nuclei by counteracting the electromagnetic repulsion between protons, allowing for the stability of matter. 5) Pre-established Harmony: Monads' pre-established harmony aligns with the idea that the strong force was pre-designed to ensure stable interactions among quarks, orchestrating their behavior in a way that parallels the harmony envisaged by Leibniz. 6) Non-Mechanical Interaction: Monads interact non-mechanically, mirroring the non-mechanical interactions of quarks through gluon exchange. This connection might be seen as a metaphorical reflection of the intricacies of quark-gluon dynamics. 7) Holism: The holistic perspective of monads could symbolize how quarks, like the monads' interconnections, contribute holistically to the structure and behavior of particles through the strong force interactions.

Great videos. You have a very clear way of explaining things,and the graphics get better all the time. I'm having problems with the NOTES though. If I print them onto paper, the font comes out so small that I can't read it. (Although I am very old!) I tried copy and paste into WORD, but the formulae just come out as "?" symbols.

5:40 Single slit also generates interference pattern

Thanks for the great video. I have a follow up question. I didn't catch why are the profiles at 8:47 already in a waveform? At 7:46 it seems to me like the each should be in form of a normal distribution curve.

Nice video! Where does the square for the intensity come from?

When will we get the other parts ?

I think that it is better to think of electrons as fluctuations in the electron field. The distribution along the detector is determined by probability from the wavefunction. The electron's mass is only confined energy that is manifested on the detector. We should not think that an electron is both a wave and a particle exhibiting both interference and superposition at the same time. Rather we should think that the energy fields are interacting an the "impact" is just the conversion of energy.

your the reason i can do most things in physics

Thank you very much, this video is brilliant and explains it very well especially for a non physicist like me. However I do have some questions, lets say an electron behave as a particle wave, and the base ball behaves as a particles but at which scale does this transition in the behavior happen, does a simple hydrogen atom with one proton and electron behave the same, what about a bromine atom with 35 electrons, what if it is a macromolecule? 🤔

I am more interested in how do you make such smooth animation 😊

What's the number of spots per electron - single or multiple!! When you send a stream of electrons - 1 electron at a time - through the double slit, you see discrete interference pattern on the backstop. Discrete spot means electron is particle like and interference pattern make it wave like !! But what happens when you send just exactly 1 electron (not a stream) through the double slit ?? does backstop record 1 spot or multiple spots??

Awesome.

A+ on the vid. content

Elliot: your diagram shows a point source of electrions. What if there was a true "plane source"? What would happen? 19:37 why do you show a plane wave source? What I am not understanding?

When they describe the wave function, isn’t it more of a wave pulse, and not a periodic wave? When you fire one electron at a time at the two open slits, the electron appears in some location on the back wall in a “building wave interference pattern”……how is momentum conserved in the one electron case?

Hey elliot had a problem, I am a young guy interested in teaching physics further in my life but don't wanna do it the traditional way, is the KZfaq way practical? BTW love the work you do

Why is it important to know the position of the electron?