I wouldn't say it's weird but rather we just don't understand it yet. Fairly convinced even after we nail down quantum physics there will still be another layer, and then another layer and so on. It has been like this in all our short history and there's no reason to believe it will be any different this time around.

Great question. What oscillates, mathematically speaking, is the phase of the wavefunction (i.e. imaginary part of the wavefunction). And what it represents in reality? Well, we don’t know, because wavefunction is something you cannot see / measure. But the point is, its not a property of (just) electron, any particle or quantum object could oscillate in phase. It cant be simply explained what these oscillation represent - there is no physical movement behind it. But when for example two electron interact, the phase of the oscillation does influence how will they interact. In general, trying to understand quantum physics by relating to classical world as we know it, is futile. It is a different world :)

If electron oscillate, another particle will create and that is plasmon. Just like EM oscillation, particle is photon. I guess

I know this is a year old comment, but maybe you would be interested in reading more about quantum field theory. I'm not an expert at all, but basically it answers your question such that the electron is an oscillation in an electron "field" that is everywhere in space (spacetime). There aren't really any physical particles like we classically think of them, all particles are just a disturbance that oscillate in the corresponding field.

Then how come electrons create interference pattern in double slit experiment?

Yes quantum world cannot be understand by classic mind, it's quite -quite different

a wave function is just visualising the ranges of where an electron may be located using probability statistics on a graph

Its great question, however science does not have a good answer, yet. Wavefunction does not really relate to anything in macro reality. If we look at bigger and bigger objects, they start to behave more in a “classical way” rather than “quantum way”. Scientists are trying to figure out where is the boundary - could a virus still behave quantum mechanically? (probably no). I might do a video about this, interesting topic

Thanks, I have a break now but will come back to this hobby later for sure :) (when I have more time)

What's your job

Thanks guys, about atomic roof wave lol

Awesome, thanks!

If exploratorio is reading this reply then please answer this comment

no we are literally shooting electrons out of this cannon as same concept as photoelectric effect and they are not converting into photons in their free flowing state because they both electron and photon has same nature because of nigligable mass

Sorry for (pretty late as well) response. We are literally shooting electrons. In the past, we could only shoot a lot of electron at the same time, but now we can even shoot electrons literally 1 by 1 (it's pretty difficult to do of course but these days it's not a problem - for top notch science labs). So in the double-slit experiment with electrons, you can think of purely electrons only (i.e. no photons involved at all).

@@ExploratorioYT- thanks for the video - excellent. In answer to the question I say that we are firing the non-observable probability of an electron (1 at a time) rather than an actual observable electron itself( 1 at a time). It’s a subtle shift of emphasis into firing a probability rather than a particle and it’s that probability that allows it to pass through both slits. It is not an electron until we collapse it into one somewhere, at which point we lose it’s fuzziness and the chance for it to act like a wave. . I think you captured what I’ve been trying to say in one of the graphics in this video. I then repeat the explanation for a single photon in an experiment- we are firing the probability of light doing something (1 event at a time) rather than an actual particle of light per se. Same concept. Whenever I think of diffraction or interference effects with atoms though my mind is blown because for this to occur it infers the whole atom and all it’s constituents particles must also be transitioned into a probability fuzz in order to act like a wave.- very much like the transporter on Star Trek. When the probability is in motion to allow for eg interference then the atom as an element must be temporarily ‘lost’ or non-local, like a box of jigsaw puzzle pieces thrown in the air (only to land reassembled again.). This then makes me think that ultimately everything in the universe is a collapsed wave of some kind - so it’s all waves. Particle physics is ultimately the study of collapsed waves (or fields). I’d be interested to know if I’ve pushed my interpretation of this excellent video too far?

Yep... absolutely none of that matters. ;-)

I agree. and because of this I've always considered light to be a "wavicle".

Has anybody found a massless electron? Behaving as wave. So, though electron is having mass It behaves in both way. But time taken between this transition is extremely fast to detect. The size of electron compare to Planck length is Galaxy to us. May be one day we will......

To be an electron is because it has already interact with higgs field, to be an electron is because it has mass, so it has not sense what you say

Same question here

hello im 16 and would like to ask if that means an electron is a wave but its existance is controlled by the 4d harmonic wave which interferes with the electron and creates a particle effect?

sorry i came here trying to figure out what exactly is an electron

I also want to know this very curiously. But l have not received any satisfaction.

Thanks commenter for being remarkable

Yeah that is not easy to understand. I will put this into my list (altough I do have a break currently from video creation)

Waiting

Yes, it does make an acoustic wave. Do you want me to do the chicken and egg for you, too? ;-)

Adobe After Effects for basically everything :)

@@ExploratorioYT tysm

Bro do u know what presh talkwakar mind your decision is using?can u please check one video and tell..please

Nope. ;-)

Good to know, thanks!

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/gM2Fi5Ol3bGVkYE.html Wait You should try this one

An atom is not 99.9% empty. They just told you bullshit about the Rutherford experiment. ;-)

Electrons are quanta of energy. Energy doesn't have a position. So, yes, you are absolutely and completely off on all of this. ;-)

Haha glad it worked! Yes exactly. You could do this experiment with any electrically charged particle and you would observe the same properties. Even non-fundamental particles, but charged atoms (ions) would behave the same.

​@@ExploratorioYT thank you!

Sorry for (pretty late) response. Yeah that's a good point. However, the issue is not as much technological anymore. It is more about the fact that we cannot know anything about a particle without influencing in one way or other. In our world we can just look at a thing and it doesn't change anything. But for these tiny bastards, you can't measure where they are without influencing them. So to measure where an electron is we need an electro-magnetic field to "sense it", but at the same time this field we bring to the party will influence the electron itself.

Yes, you do sound silly. ;-)

@@schmetterling4477 I guessed same, so do you know the answer?

@@so-nali Yes, I know the answer. ;-)

@@schmetterling4477 okay, then explain please

@@so-nali The answer is that it depends. At low energy the number of electrons will stay the same. At high energy we can create all kinds of stuff, including new electrons. That's just one of the reasons why the double slit is a silly experiment that doesn't tell us anything about quantum mechanics.

mass and energy are interchangeable. don't think of mass and energy as seperate they are different form of the same thing. it's called mass-energy imagine a non newtonian liquid like starchy custard. it's a liquid but then when u impact it its hard like a solid... solid and liquid are just different forms of the same custard. when we observe an electron we interact with the system and so it behaves like a particle when we don't it does like a wave. we're seeing the same energy in different forms

@@vkdeen7570 despite the wave electron has mass energy, it's orbital in an atom doesn't have to do with mass energy, it has to do with potential and kinetic energy right?

@user-tn2mp9qr6q yes kinetic energy for the orbital. but it's important to remember it's not orbiting like a planet orbits a star. It's more like a standing wave in a probability cloud. it's the electron magnetic force which governs the "orbit"

@@vkdeen7570 thank you for your time

In that case somebody is bullshitting on the internet. ;-)

That is a pretty good analogy

@@ExploratorioYT Exactly. Why can’t it be both. Electrons have mass, this can easily be shown and apparently they have spin. Does spin generate a wave of sorts. It’s hard to picture all this happening with subatomic forces. I still can’t get my head around firing individual Photons/electrons in these slit experiments.And what is flowing through wires in electrical circuits. Is it Photons or Electrons. Is a Photon actually a wave generated by the Electron??

Its not actual wave, there is no way you can directly observe the wave (unlike a water wave). Its a wave in purely mathematical, abstract sense

It's a Particle but travel in Wave.

Why we are studying it?

Nope. ;-)

No, the particle is always in one position at all times, its like a spec of dust in a wave of water, the measuring of electrons requires us to shoot a photon at the electron which directly changes the properties of the electron changing its state and position, theres factors that determine where the position of the electron will be we just cant identify all of them.

It is not as complex as people say it is, think that particle that spreads out its mass and energy like a wave, it automatically localizes when interacting with another particle, in free space its a wave, when interacting with another particle it localizes.

An electron is a quantum of energy. No need to write an essay. Seven words are enough.

@@schmetterling4477 Thank you for your helpful comment.

@@christophergame7977 Also important to remember: if somebody wants to help you with your mental confusion it's important to learn to be grateful rather than snapped in. That's part of the human maturation process. ;-)

😂

Few electrons must be going in that way too but probability will be less significantly.

Your first sentence is correct. Electrons are quanta of energy. We teach in high school what a quantum is. Nobody seems to listen.