2:50 Congratulations, FINALLY a video on youtube that explains that the 'observer' in the experiment is not a 'soul' or a 'consciousness', etc...

Schrodinger overlooked that the fact that there must be NINE decays--He should have used a dog!

Man, I've been familiar with the Schrodinger's cat for a a long time now (like 2-4 years since I saw it being mentioned in a show I watched) but this is the first time I actually understood the proper context for that thought experiment. I did not expect it to be a means of discrediting an interpretation lol. The more you know.

Pitch perfect! Great transition and extrapolation from the Maths to the interpretations! Too often I see these topics treated separately, when, just like you showed, they are all under the same continuum of calculus => experiments => interpretations => peer-review.

I've never taken a physics class (yet), and the fact i almost understood what he was talking about goes to show how good of a teacher Dave is Also i thought heisenberg was a chemist

I have just watched Schrodinger's equation (no mention of time dependent or time independent) however, it was simply wonderful, as was this Heisenberg's paradox, as a consequence, I have subbed you Thank you, Professor Dave !!! Love from bloody Australia

U r the best youtuber of science I've ever seen..

I like your simple and casual way of explanation professor!

Well after a year of keeping this stuff in my mind i think i'm finally making sense of it. I love these aha moments! :D

Heisenberg: You're goddamn right!

Does the cat not act as an observer?...

Heisenberg is pulled over on a highway. The cop gets out of the car and asks Heisenberg "do you know how fast you were going?!" and Heisenberg replies "no, but i know exactly where I am."

Hey Dave! Doing an episode on the uncertainty principle in Turkish and man - got a little confused. Watched a decent amount on it, and read some articles. Wanted to know your input. Here's what I got out of it - since everything is both wave and particle (de Broglie), this imposes the superposition principle - they can be in multiple places at once (or a probability) and their location is the sum of all the possibilities - until we measure or observe it; then the state collapses (like you mentioned and from what I understand). So the uncertainty principle is when you limit the superposition of location lets say (or decrease the possibility of the particle being in more places), then you increase the superposition of the momentum (when you get close to the heisenberg uncertainty limit). When it is said that the uncertainty principle is when you measure one, the other goes crazy is wrong I feel like - since the principle does not depend on an observer being there. But it is caused by you decreasing the possibility of superpositions? I saw the episode that Veritasium did, and he had a light passing through a slit, and as he made the slit smaller - at one point the light that was projected on the wall started expanding - where you are limiting position, so the uncertainty in momentum has to increase. So the act of knowing where the particle is doesn't cause the uncertainty, but limiting the places it can be (so the position is more certain) does? Does that sound right? Quantum dude.. Would appreciate your thoughts!

Is the cat dead or alive? Schrodinger: YES

I have a doubt. The photons will be interacting with the system whether or not we are looking right? Our eyes just happens to be in the way of some of the photons, so the system must have already collapsed into a reality whether we look at it or not.

Say my name!

Truly, it is all about the wave.

That is the first time i understand what Schrödingers Cat acctually trys to convey! thanks Dave!

Bro said let’s finish up with Heisenberg and proceeded to not

In the Schrödinger’s cat idea, wouldn’t the radiation detector be able to act as an observer? Since the information of the atom decaying is causing something to happen, would that collapse the superposition? In that vein, wouldn’t the superposition immediately collapse whenever the emitted particle interacts with anything?

What a roundabout way to explain the Heisenberg uncertainty principle! It follows from Planck's constant of action. Any two values that form this constant cannot fall below this constant between them, that's all. No need for particles, waves, probabilities etc. etc.

If the mechanism can detect whether or not, the atom is decaying. Doesn't it make it an "observer"?

I don't see a real paradox here. The Geiger detector is actually an observer, that will either detect the emission of a particle inside the box or not. We simply do not know whether the atom has decayed (i.e. whether the cat is dead) until we open the box, but the cat will stay alive, until (unless) the atom has emitted a particle that has been measured by the detector. Saying that the cat is in a dead/alive superposition is like saying that an observer is in a superposition state before he actually observes a quantum phenomenon.

Thanks!

you're making me want to become a physicist

I know that the video is old, but there are two common misconceptions here: First of all the accepted solution for the Schrodinger paradox (in the Copenaghen interpretation) Is that the cat Is a macroscopic system so It causes the wave function collapse. The second Is on the Heisenberg physical interpretation: It seems to be that the effect of the noise caused by the photon could be far beyond the limit of hbar\2, but the articles Is really technic and i only have a Bachelor in physics so i can't understand it

Absolutely fascinating content!! Does this imply that everything is inherently a wave and particle until observed? How does quantum understanding apply to the observation of the self? Does this imply that we are superimposed in a physical/wave state simultaneously? If so, is death a release of this observational constriction of our selves as ‘particles’?

1:56 When it's gotcha, it's gotcha!

dave sir u gonna be a star

6:05: They do have precise position and momentum ,but they both can not be measured at the same time.

Can you please do a video on the mathematics of Fourier Transforms with respect to wave function collapse?

Is it possible to have a probabilistic view of Quantum Mechanics while also agreeing with Schrodinger that the cat being both dead and alive is absurd?

Please do not forget its Fourier transform Energy versus time

6:06 conjugate complementary variables

That's where. LHC emerged

Dear sir what is the preferred formula. Sometimes we write uncertainty product as 'h/2π' and sometimes only 'h'.

nice explanation

Wow! 👏You explained this so well and clearly. Once students get to know your videos, you will really become a popular channel. Probably, they look at your picture and they don’t know that you are really a great prof. Also some people don’t like the fact that you look like you are reading the script. May be you can think about it. I am only suggesting because I feel that not many students know that you have good information. I am sorry if I offended you. Good luck!

Is there not some confusion here between the Uncertainty Principle and the Observer effect?

you're a lifesaver man

It's like the ratio of position to momentum has to stay the same so if you have more possible positions then you need less possible momentums to be in equilibrium but if you have more possible momentum you need less possible positions to be in equilibrium kind of like position and momentum are parts of the same thing in a certain ratio to each other. When you measure one or the other you get the particle property of the system which determines which aspect of the system will express itself as a wave so if you measure the position it will express the momentum more as a wave or vice versa. Just my thoughts as I'm trying to learn about it.

I used to think this way when i was little. I was rather imaginative since i grew up alone pretty much. Before entering a different room. Before opening a door. Did it even exist until i seen it with my own eyes. Maybe not quite the same but my mind was always working. 😅

What if the two cats are in to different time frames one in present time and other in a past time? Every time you check the particles potion you just reconfirming you are in present time. When you stop looking the particle goes back to a position it held in the past so your looking at a kind of time echo

Good explanations thank u so much.

Why can't the decayed/not decayed atom stay in a state of superposition on it's own? I mean... as an end of the sequence? The cat may well be dead or alive with certainty, while the atom remains in superposition.

Thank you for the explanation

I suppose no one was thoughtful enough to consider that the cat is a relevant observer?

why the right side of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle contains h/4*pi as a constant. what is the explanation of the occurrence of this particular constant??

Thanks alot professor Dave

I find myself agreeing with those in the camp of the cat is dead or alive until you look in the box. If quantum mechanics is fr governed my probabilities then I feel like a resolution to the paradox could be made such that “that cat may or may not be dead, who knows till you look, but damn bro the longer you wait the more likely it’s gonna be”

I like your opening 😊

I love your "check comprehension" I wish more youtube teachers would do this but I feel that it is to short for example say you have a formula at the end after "check comprehension" have say 10 questions (so it will sink in)kind of like a work sheet

Greetings Dave this principle is heplful for quitting smoking, dropping cookie obessions...............as shared by Dr David Hawkins..............please explain this power thank you Kay La

Let's say every particle is not in a superposition, but a definite state, that we can't measure (because the experiment changes the state of the electron). If we knew precisely how does the photon (that we use to observe and it interacted with the particle before) alters the state of the system? If we knew it precisely, would that mean that we can calculate the exact state of the electron in at the exact time of the experiment? Seems a little bit misleading to think that just because we can't measure something, it's in a superposition. But I guess physicists know better.

Well done Dave

Schrödingers Cat 🐈 Tibby, or not Tibby, that is the question! Heisenbergs Cat 🐈 is probably somewhere around here.

to be honest I was in the same camp untill now... However, I am now with Scrodinger that such probabilistic nature shouldnt be natures way. Nature is concrete, it doesnt play dice. One such area where I wouldnt mind probabilistic operations are when we plan for the future, not predict the future.

Problem, isn't the cat an observer? Also, wouldn't this mean if you put a human in there? They'd be both alive and dead. Or since they're observing it, what would happen? What about the apparatus? It's able to observe if there's decay. This is all very confusing. I think I'm gonna stick to normal mechanics for now.

The odds of me understanding this tutorial is probabalistic even if I use the shroderinger equation the location of understanding it is zero

Omg, so every time I look at the night sky, I'm affecting the system?

yes but you measure fast enough, it's like a movie. you can't tell the motion of an actor from looking at a still frame, but if you play it fast enough it's motion is inferred.

In the Schrodinger's box you stated there was no observer with the box closed, this is untrue, the detector that sets off the poison vail is an observer and so the cat would be dead.

how does pie gett jntwo the equation ¿¿¿¿¿¿ Pie only is to do withé circlê ¿¿¿¿

Surely if a cat is able to observe the inside of the box then the interior is in its super position state and there for proceeds normally and kills the cat? Idek if I’m making sense - this stuff melts my brain

I don't think that Schrodinger's cat experiment debunks the Copenhagen interpretation in any way and it's just rather an interesting thought experiment on reality. The cat cannot be alive and dead at the same time in the physical world. It's either dead, or alive. What if a human was put in there instead and had a radio to talk to the scientist? If he stops receiving transmissions, the guy inside is dead.

Sir will you please elaborate schrodinger wave equation .....

Hisenberg has the name and face of a mad scientist super villain.

IMHO the trouble with this explanation and all other popular explanations of Schrodinger's Cat is that it doesn't give a convincing reason for why the atom and the cat must be in a superposition of states. From a naive observer's POV there is no reason to suspect a superposition of states, even if the the decay is random - it is just like everyday life. It needs to be linked back to the double slit expt. which essentially shows that the photon never went through just slit one or just slit two, the wave had to go through both or there wouldn't be an interference pattern over many trials. Thus it is the double slit expt that forces us to infer a superposition of states until there is a measurement, because otherwise there would be no interference.

clearly cophenhegen interpretation states that the reality is much like a superposition of a numerous reality and we can only objerve or we can relate to it in any random way of relation only so reality is a stream of random variable and any interaction within any two physical reality is all exist out there we van see or realize any one of it.......................

Dave. Lovely videos and my first time here. Dave I can't work out if the "act of observation" is meant metaphorically or literally in the Cat experiment or both? You seem to be suggesting it's the human bundle of atoms (photon entering the eye etc) actually alters the result. I don't understand how we can know something is in both states, since we could never make a record, observation of this. Is it a mathematical, probabilistic assumption? Scratch my head.

Great video! I had a question if you don't mind: I'm having trouble visualising this principal. If I know the exact position of a stationary partical then according to the uncertainty principle, I can't know the momentum (mass*velocity). But if I know the exact stationary position, how can there be a momentum/velocity (Speed in given direction) since its stationary??? Is it more accurate to think along the lines of: As mass and velocity constitute momentum, that would mean I can know the exact position and velocity but not mass/(energy) or I can know the exact position and mass but not velocity of the partical? I'm quite sure there is some basic information I'm missing that's confusing me but explanation would be greatly appreciated! Thanks again for the videos!

About the Schrodinger paradox: couldn't the radiation detector also be considered as "observing" the system since as you said even detecting a single photon is considered observing?

So Prof, basically the person who should be given credit for the cat-box experiment is Copenhagen.

Well just put a live camera in the box :,)

I'm uncertain that I understand this.

Simply speaking, is it correct to say that "superposition" is a certain amount of space , let's say a box, within which there is a certain probability the atom is located at a certain time? This implies that it is impossible to know the exact position of the atom, until we observe it? Does the act of observing give us an exact position, or will it continue to be uncertain even once observed? The concept of the uncertainty of the position is quite understandable to me, which is why I'm trying to make out why it was necessary to make the cat example. I mean, we know that because of the superposition principle, we cannot know the position, so why not just stop there?

What about the cat observing itself and the contents of the box

The problem is, that people don't know, that when you are talking about "an observer" in quantum physics, we are not talking about humans, but any interactions between particles, and as soon the interact, the waves collapses. So yeah, the cat is never dead and alive, just dead or alive, as soon as the single atoms wave collapses, and emits an particle, the cat is dead, and stays dead.

Hi, Prof. Dave! I've a doubt: how does "h/4pi" come into the mathematical inequation of the Uncertainty Principle i.e. how does the inequation explain the uncertainty? Also, why does the product of the uncertainties in the position and momentum of the particle represent that when one of the 2 variables is known, the value of the other becomes more and more uncertain?

How do we compensate for it?

Not to be weird or anything but isn't the cat technically an observer? Just seems important since you can reasonably consider it to have two eyes capable of seeing natural phenomenon. I guess classifying this experiment and the state of physics study for their time as unnatural would be an argument that progresses from Schrodinger's cat, or the Heisenberg principle even?

The problem is that we are using the logic of classical physics for the rules of quantum mechanics. That doesn't work.

Came to check abt the cat comments 😂😂

hello guys ! does anyone know about best mcqs books for inorganic chemistry?

Does this mean that the radioactive atom and the cat are entangled?

can anyone solve my confusion! what's the relation between the heigenberg's principle and the schrodinger's cat experiment?

observation is not passive - thats deep

Awesome

Why isn't the device with the ability to detect radiation counted as the observer. If the device detects radiation then it has observed the state of the atom.

So what happened?? I love cats so killing a cat feaks me out. so what was the result of the exsperiment please??

why don't found tranzliation to Arabic

I am not saying that i would, but if you were to put someone in a box and no one ever saw them again they could be considered dead or alive right? Seems to be so Columbus like ideas. Just because you didn't discover it didn't mean it hasn't happened.

👍👍👍

*Observers effect.

😅a camera picture I answer

"Durrrr reality depends on my observation of it. If a tree falls and nobody sees, it didn't fall." -arrogant chodes

God is both wave & particle or as described in Saivite Agamic philosophy Siva is both Nada & Bindu respectively. As per, first Hermetic principle "The All is mind; The Universe is Mental(Consciousness)". Physicality and separation are mere illusions "created" by the Great Cosmic Prankster aka God. Ironically, one who is spiritually enlightened is described as attaining immortality, by being in state of "living dead" so to speak, somewhat comparable to Schrödinger's cat. 😁😁😁

Professor, If we replaced Cat with camera, what will we see?

I hate the schrodinger equation,,, such cruelty against beautiful cats...

poor cat