Edward Teller - Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle (27/147)

To listen to more of Edward Teller’s stories, go to the playlist: • Edward Teller (Scientist)
Hungarian-American physicist, Edward Teller (1908-2003), helped to develop the atomic bomb and provided the theoretical framework for the hydrogen bomb. He remained a staunch advocate of nuclear power, calling for the development of advanced thermonuclear weapons. [Listener: John H. Nuckolls]
TRANSCRIPT: Well, that was not the only thing I learned from Heisenberg. The main thing that there was to learn was something about which I want to talk and to talk and to talk at the risk that maybe nobody will understand because the number of people who don't understand it right greatly exceeds the number of people that do, and that is Heisenberg's main work, his wonderful work on the Uncertainty Principle. The Theory of Waves and Particles is so constructed that if you know that the hydrogen atom is in its lower state, then you can calculate, without any doubt, the energy. But if you ask another question: the hydrogen atom is in its lower state, where is the electron? Is it at such a distance from the nucleus or at such a distance or at such a distance. The only answer that is furnished by the standard theory is: maybe this, maybe this, maybe this distance, with probabilities that we can predict. Some very important people, like Einstein, did not like this. His remark was- I can believe that God governs the world by any set of laws, but I cannot believe that he's playing a dice. Now, this is an important question. And it is perhaps the most interesting thing I learned in my life. And I want to talk about it. They are abstract ideas, but not complicated ideas. Einstein's statement, his remark, was really something to the effect- I can not imagine any science without causality. What the rules of the causality is, that we can develop, that we can learn. We don't know all of them. But without cause and effect there can be no science. To that question, in the theory not only of Heisenberg, but of his teacher, Niels Bohr, there are two answers. The first answer is this: if you look at a situation and ask all possible questions about it's past, you will find that these questions, without any exception, are consistent with the principles of causality. Ask the same question, not about the past but about the future and the answer about it is- the answer to it is: the future is uncertain. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. There are many situations, not all but many, where it is impossible to know the present sufficiently accurately to predict the future in a complete manner. The discussion of this uncertainty principle by Heisenberg involves ideas of this kind.

[@frunomaol5069]

I listened carefully three times and understood what he said. Thanks Edward Teller

[@drval]

The most basic ways of understanding Heisenberg's work is through the mathematics. Fundamentally it is an Inequality, the "Uncertainty" is an effect of the inequality viz position x momentum are greater than or equal to Plank Constant/divided by 4pi. More simply: you can derive the exact same outcome no matter how often you repeat the measurements; rather, the outcome is always similar but not exactly the same. In contrast 2 x 3 = 6 always and everywhere and the inverse is also invariant: 6/3 = 2, 6/2 = 3 no matter how often you repeat the calculation. Another formulation is that theoretically you could exactly specify the initial conditions of a system but can never predict the future.

[@ekorusoy]

Wow that’s a really subtle and profound point. The uncertainty comes from our inability to establish complete boundary conditions in the present. If god knows exactly how the universe began then god knows everything, but this knowledge is only attainable at the start.

[@frun]

How do you know knowing boundary conditions is enough?

[@charlesbromberick4247]

Excellent+

[@MichaelKingsfordGray]

Exactly! We do not have sufficient decimal places, at the moment.

[@niggabear]

Jesse we have to cook

[@robhavock9434]

It would be better to state their are no particular rules for particals or are their ?, Obviously atoms have to conform to strickt rules so any difference is just a abbreviation of the law.

[@robotenthusiast7572]

I always thought that the uncertainty principle was a consequence of the maximum resolution with which it is physically possible to measure a given physical quantity ( ie. why electron microscopes are used for microscopic objects below a certain length scale where it is not possible to measure with conventional optical microscopes due to the wavelength of electromagnetic radiation being on comparable scale to the object being measured).

[@NoahSpurrier]

The uncertainty principle actually arose out of the math first. The physical interpretation came after.

[@mabalicksbyyuo-sr7xk]

calling anyone a racist is foolish when there is not one human on earth that is not in some form or individual ,this is all spectrum of life

[@aolaol5716]

A true Hungarian

[@gnumani]

He is Jewish and proud of it. Anti-semitic Hungary was an accident of birth for this member of the talented race

[@yabannamba7678]

@@gnumani talented race lol talented since 1870 approximately.

[@gnumani]

@@truthmonster3290 In the first half of the 20th century, despite pervasive and continuing social discrimination against Jews throughout the Western world, despite the retraction of legal rights, and despite the Holocaust, Jews won 14 percent of Nobel Prizes in literature, chemistry, physics, and medicine/physiology. In the second half of the 20th century, when Nobel Prizes began to be awarded to people from all over the world, that figure rose to 29 percent. So far, in the 21st century, it has been 32 percent.”1 Jews constitute about 0.2 percent of the world’s population.

[@kurtgodel5236]

The majority of Hungarians beg to differ. Anti-Semites, the lot of them.

[@radhakrishna1845]

We know not what is cause
Know not what is is effect
Cause first effect later
Time is cyclic it is not linear
Inner cosmology exploring oneself is most essential
The pathways of ancient sages

[@parasharchatterjee3223]

Learn some physics please.

[@keithwald5349]

I can't think of any instance in which people remember the future.

[@missbond7345]

@@parasharchatterjee3223 don’t think it should be dismissed. Am sure Heisenberg or Bohr would agree or Atleast provide a pause to think about what the comment is.

[@missbond7345]

@@keithwald5349 They can’t remember, but you have surely heard of ppl who can try to talk about things happening before they happened? There is even a term for it called clairvoyance. The thing is , it doesn’t happen for all & not with certainity but that’s the point. We remember things linearly , but that doesn’t mean time is not cyclic. There was smething before Big Bang and there will be sometime after the Great expansion which could lead back to the Big Bang. We may not remember it

[@martinstent5339]

I'm completely against causality. It's an illusion caused by the strong tendency of our brains to find patterns. On a macroscopic level we can see causality because of the arrow of time and the aggregate behaviour of matter etc, but look at the quantum domain in detail and it works both ways, with the time arrow pointing forwards of backwards. How can you then speak of causality? Also all this fetish about "non-local". That's only an issue if you want to cling on to the causality illusion. Don't ask yourselves why things happen, just ask what happens.

[@truthmonster3290]

I'm a Why kind of Guy.

[@nagilum]

Dave's not here man.