The Many Worlds of the Quantum Multiverse

Sdílet
Vložit
  • čas přidán 20. 06. 2024
  • Is our universe a definitive single reality or is it merely one within an infinitely branching multiverse? Be sure to check out Physics Girl’s Dianna Cowern for more awesome science / physicsgirl
    Get your own Space Time t­shirt at bit.ly/1QlzoBi
    Tweet at us! @pbsspacetime
    Facebook: pbsspacetime
    Email us! pbsspacetime [at] gmail [dot] com
    Comment on Reddit: / pbsspacetime
    Support us on Patreon! / pbsspacetime
    Help translate our videos! czcams.com/users/timedtext_cs_p...
    The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics tells us that observation collapses a probability wave into a single definitive outcome, but this isn’t the only interpretation of quantum mechanics. The many worlds theory proposes that the wavefunction never actually collapses. The observer simply follows one of those many possible paths into their present reality while all the other paths continue on independent of the observer. Each of these paths branches off into an entirely different reality. In this episode Matt discusses the details of the many worlds theory and why it’s not so far-fetched to think that our reality is simply one of an infinite number of realities existing within space time.
    Links to sources:
    The Quantum Experiment that Broke Reality
    • The Quantum Experiment...
    Hugh Everett's Ph.D. Dissertation
    www-tc.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/manyw...
    Crazy Pool Vortex
    • Crazy pool vortex
    Previous Episode
    • The First Humans on Mars
    Written and hosted by Matt O’Dowd
    Produced by Rusty Ward
    Made by Kornhaber Brown (www.kornhaberbrown.com)

Komentáře • 4,7K

  • @Agent.Logic_
    @Agent.Logic_ Před 7 lety +3496

    Good to know that there's another me out there in another multiverse who fully understands this video.

    • @dhimmiwit
      @dhimmiwit Před 7 lety +85

      ....and another you married to another me :)

    • @xxGLhrMxx
      @xxGLhrMxx Před 7 lety +127

      +dhimmiwit Only the things that are conceivably possible will happen/have happened under the many worlds interpretation. Weird realities, like one with real-life pokemons or one where you'll marry someone, probably will never happen

    • @Brakvash
      @Brakvash Před 7 lety +51

      Sometimes the Internet entertains in the weirdest of ways...

    • @mykonpt8890
      @mykonpt8890 Před 7 lety +27

      "....and another you married to another me :)" hold on does that mean we are all mearied to eatch other?? and have all meet eatch other?

    • @coopercowley4883
      @coopercowley4883 Před 7 lety +4

      Guilherme C. burn

  • @PunkMonster
    @PunkMonster Před 5 lety +668

    One highly confused physicist out there in the multiverse who did the double-split experiment and got a smiley face on the wall.

    • @nirvanalove5356
      @nirvanalove5356 Před 4 lety +3

      A Nirvana Smiley Face would be Cool Too!

    • @maschwab63
      @maschwab63 Před 4 lety +3

      Just requires the right mask. Two slits won't do it.

    • @Mononoken
      @Mononoken Před 4 lety +39

      Just because there are infinite possibilities between 1 and 2 doesn’t mean 3 is possible.

    • @achyuththouta6957
      @achyuththouta6957 Před 4 lety +3

      @A Frustrated Gamer How does this explain the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment? The whole interference pattern changes just because we observed the photon. When the eraser is used the interference pattern appears again just because we would have no idea which photon went where. How does many world theory explain that? Copenhagen interpretation agrees straight with the experiments according to me

    • @jasminkaushal257
      @jasminkaushal257 Před 4 lety +2

      And the physicists There don't have the same structural distribution of eyes and mouth for a face and wonder what the pattern really means, conquering and bouncing off ideas off each other.

  • @MrPINKFL0YD
    @MrPINKFL0YD Před 4 lety +137

    GOD I LOVE THIS SUBJECT. I'VE SPENT 40 YEARS, LOOKING INTO IT AND IT NEVER GETS BORING AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR REALITY IS THAT I'M FASCINATED BY

    • @andofb
      @andofb Před 4 lety +33

      Why are you yelling at us?

    • @shezarr1668
      @shezarr1668 Před 4 lety +23

      He mentioned that he is older. Maybe bad eyesight.

    • @specialkay4329
      @specialkay4329 Před 4 lety +2

      There was a doc some 30 years ago. It was either PBS, or Nova. There was a group of people, somewhere in Europe, who described looking out back and there sitting at a table, where a group of people sitting. Perhaps sitting down to dinner. The odd thing was, they were of the Pilgrim era. I cannot find it. You heard of the it?

    • @Chillibe
      @Chillibe Před rokem +3

      Every time I happen to remind myself of the doubble split experiment, I'll go weeks or days in a complete manic flow state where every data of information consumed feels better than any stimulant I have ever experienced. I consider dedicating my life to this every time.

  • @MoisesZTech
    @MoisesZTech Před 4 lety +244

    I hope my dad is happy and living out there in a different timeline-in fact I hope that everyone who has and will ever have lived is out there in eternal happiness. RIP to everyone.

    • @Flyingtaco82
      @Flyingtaco82 Před 3 lety +11

      Vader had no father. His father was The Force. Thus presenting another realm of quantum possibilities. 😉

    • @jymfysher7704
      @jymfysher7704 Před 2 lety +5

      Don't have no more worry,everything is fine with your Dad and others and your hope is part of what makes that possible.Amen !

    • @stonewall1485
      @stonewall1485 Před 2 lety +4

      What if in the future we can reverse back energy we have in a point of time to a prefered form it was or will be in another point of time so in that way we can bring back any dead people???? Idk

    • @myomax5848
      @myomax5848 Před 2 lety +8

      And if that were the case, there would be other timelines where everyone you love is existing in an eternal state of agonisingly painful suffering

    • @stevenhardy5928
      @stevenhardy5928 Před 2 lety +2

      @@myomax5848 Look around lol it is in your face all of that suffering.

  • @sam08g16
    @sam08g16 Před 7 lety +382

    You explain rather complex stuff in a brilliant way. Well done.

    • @inco9943
      @inco9943 Před 7 lety +11

      exactly - it's actually a skill that not everyone has so well done for him

    • @mastertheillusion
      @mastertheillusion Před 7 lety +4

      It can be developed. Nobody is exclusive on this.
      You just have to have a bright mind in the first place to wrap it around some of this topic! lol

    • @ouderwetsss
      @ouderwetsss Před 7 lety +1

      +mastertheillusion exactly ;-)

    • @DonSolaris
      @DonSolaris Před 7 lety +3

      I would never trade 1 Matt for 10 Diannas. Her ultraviolet catastrophe episode was so bad that i unsubscribed. And i really HATE saying that toward one intelligent female human being. But i just did and feel totally uncomfortable.

    • @MrMartin1538
      @MrMartin1538 Před 7 lety +1

      Indeed.Our Universe offers so much complexity and I'd love to once be a person exploring this.
      The Beauty in Science and Mathematics is mesmerizing :)

  • @daggerdan12
    @daggerdan12 Před 7 lety +324

    Does that mean there is a timeline where every single particle in the double slit experiment happens to land in the spot predicted by scientists, stopping them from ever discovering the wave function?

    • @alquinn8576
      @alquinn8576 Před 7 lety +133

      Yes, those poor bastards

    • @HireDeLune
      @HireDeLune Před 7 lety +189

      House of Mouse And there's a universe where the particles land in a "Fuck you" shape each time. Among other things.

    • @alexkennedy4990
      @alexkennedy4990 Před 7 lety +5

      I was going to comment about this exact thing.

    • @edit4310
      @edit4310 Před 7 lety +9

      That's actually a really good question, I think we assume infinite scenarios allowing for every case to happen, due to the definition of infinite. But then due to the nature of sub atomic particles - I'm sure it'd just be a matter of repeating the experiment? all universes would definitely get the same results we did
      Begs the question then do we have infinite universes were not every outcome is realised?
      That's my take anyway. Awesome question

    • @alexkennedy4990
      @alexkennedy4990 Před 7 lety +34

      Tony Mangaka No matter how many times they repeat the experiment, at least some of the universes will still get anomalous results.

  • @ericpowell96
    @ericpowell96 Před 4 lety +192

    "Choose your own adventure, and steer this version of you towards one of the more awesome many world branches of space time"

    • @Kleaz80
      @Kleaz80 Před 4 lety +2

      Yeah this so caught my attention also!!

    • @UltimateTobi
      @UltimateTobi Před 4 lety +2

      An excellent outro by Matt.

    • @smokey04200420
      @smokey04200420 Před 3 lety +5

      Isn’t that what we’re doing anyway?

    • @ericpowell96
      @ericpowell96 Před 3 lety

      ​@@TonyStark-rw7en Well isn't that the same pitfall that most explanations of the collapse of the wavefunction succumb to? Most of them usually devolve into something like "it's impossible to prove or disprove" which just pushes the issue beyond the realm of physics. Your response also implies free will by suggesting that there is another me who could make that decision. So in a world where I am screwing myself over infinitely many times by taking the more desirable route, and also being screwed over infinitely many times, I am simultaneously demonstrating my free will while also having my future determined due to my other-self's free will which leads to a paradox. Does free will work like a lottery where in any given situation only one of my infinite selves gets the honor?

    • @minafawzy5086
      @minafawzy5086 Před 3 lety

      @@ericpowell96 That means that free will and pure deterministic universe can't co-exist because if I am free to swap to any other branch then the universe isn't deterministic because it can't predict which one I'll go to. If the universe can predict which branch I'll swap too, then free will doesn't exist. Here comes the paradox.

  • @matthewlightwood5412
    @matthewlightwood5412 Před rokem +31

    I love this. The only problem I have with it is that although I know there's a massive multiverse out there with infinite versions of reality, I CAN'T PROVE IT

    • @matthewlightwood5412
      @matthewlightwood5412 Před rokem +1

      @@TrueMinky I don't understand what this means but thanks?

    • @jeffsolo4696
      @jeffsolo4696 Před 9 měsíci +1

      I don't want to know anything about what the other time lines are like. I'm pretty sure that I'm probably dead in most of them.

    • @JacobZigenis
      @JacobZigenis Před 9 měsíci +5

      You don't know something you can't prove, that's a guess.

    • @matthewlightwood5412
      @matthewlightwood5412 Před 9 měsíci

      @@JacobZigenis Hm. That's one guess, sure

    • @scottslotterbeck3796
      @scottslotterbeck3796 Před 8 měsíci

      It does not seem right to me.

  • @theCodyReeder
    @theCodyReeder Před 7 lety +696

    Insane way to win the lottery: buy a ticket, plug the number into a computer that compares the winning number when it comes out, hook that up so it sets off a very powerful bomb if the numbers do not match, and then stand next to it during the drawing. From your point of view the bomb would never go off and you would win the lottery! or the bomb malfunctions somehow... but from our point of view you almost certainly die spectacularly. I'd prove it (to myself) by trying myself, but unfortunately I live in the universe where me not doing it was a far more likely way of continuing to observe the universe. :(

    • @MagneBugten
      @MagneBugten Před 7 lety +14

      You should beat him to the punch and do a video on an experiment to prove the earth is round. I bet other science channels are gonna pick up on that meme pretty quickly, but i think you're pretty much the only one who can do something like that in a matter of days.

    • @Dhirallin
      @Dhirallin Před 7 lety +14

      Man this almost makes me feel like watching The Prestige _again_

    • @garethdean6382
      @garethdean6382 Před 7 lety +7

      I'm not sure a 'point of view' is a solid, material thing.

    • @pi314159265358978
      @pi314159265358978 Před 7 lety +31

      +Cody'sLab A rather chilling idea. You could actually prove it to all of us by using a bomb strong enough to wipe out all life.
      I wonder if the Cold War already tested it.

    • @MrCooldude4172
      @MrCooldude4172 Před 7 lety +2

      Well, we would still have to survive the explosion after it has gone off, so no.

  • @rajdeeppatel9151
    @rajdeeppatel9151 Před 7 lety +1281

    you might not realized that this channel will be one of those few reasons which led any future Einstein to continue studying physics..

    • @shirleymason7697
      @shirleymason7697 Před 7 lety +12

      rajdeep patel .....Do I have to ask.....who wouldn't realize that?

    • @fractalnomics
      @fractalnomics Před 7 lety +50

      times have changes since his time; instead of 'sanding on the shoulders of giants', today - if you have an idea - you are crushed by people who think they are the giants

    • @MarekNR
      @MarekNR Před 7 lety +42

      @Blair This was always the case. And there was a reason why those people were giants in the first place. In reality scientific success is more like standing on corpse of the giants rather than their shoulders or maybe both.

    • @dart200
      @dart200 Před 7 lety +16

      no other way i could learn all this theoretical physics.
      all my life i'd been wanting to so do, but before these videos there was just nothing of the quality i needed.

    • @Sphynra
      @Sphynra Před 7 lety +41

      In all fairness, given the sheer ammount of timelines, cat videos could have led any future Einstein to continue studying physics too.

  • @peterb9481
    @peterb9481 Před rokem +14

    Good to see Physics Girl and PBS Spacetime broadcasting together 😊
    Good episode.

  • @thiesenf
    @thiesenf Před 5 lety +141

    Sir Isaac Newtron: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
    Quantum Mechanics: For every action there is an infinite number of reactions.
    It's kind of terrifying to know that there is an entire universe filled with nothing but my dopplegangers...

    • @JuanCarlosHazanow
      @JuanCarlosHazanow Před 4 lety +5

      Actions cannot escape from multiplicity, these as well as reactions are equally proportional and infinite.

    • @stevenbuck07
      @stevenbuck07 Před 4 lety +4

      It's much more likely that we don't exist, than even one other of ourselves existing somewhere else or in any other time. Other universes having exact duplicates of us is a fantasy. All it would take is a few ppl dying a few generations ago, in that other universe or timeline, and there'd be practically a whole different population living there, than what we have here now. All the talk about unlimited versions of ourselves would be impossible in reality, Reality is not magic. But believing is magic, so if you believe it, it can be real to you and that is almost as good as true. True enough for us. Since it is of the highest unlikelihood that we would ever know for sure, then you're safe, and believing what you want is good for you. So live it up but stay safe, the doppelganger you save may be yourself!

    • @xavierwaterkeyn
      @xavierwaterkeyn Před 4 lety

      I’m sure that all of them are variably terrified of you along a bell curve of probabilities.

    • @gsphere2527
      @gsphere2527 Před 4 lety +12

      @@stevenbuck07 Actually the concept of infinity implies that if something is possible, then not only is it bound to happen but it is bound to happen an infinite number of times. It doesn't matter how incredibly small its probabilities are - if you give it an infinite number of occasions to happen, it will keep happening.
      Imagine the probability of your own existence, all things considered. It is astronomically small sure, but it's obviously not zero.
      When we cease to exist and our consciousness switches off, how long will it take for every single atom to be at the same exact place as they are right now? Probably googleplexes of years. But since it's possible, it's bound to happen again... an infinite number of times.
      Add infinite universes to that and nothing is impossible.

    • @stevenbuck07
      @stevenbuck07 Před 4 lety +1

      @@gsphere2527 But eventually the universe will end, spreading thin, atoms breaking apart, black holes evaporating. Nothing lasts forever, so an event or person that happens twice in a few trillion years may not get to happen again, we run out of time. Also, how could every single part of a thing be just right in every way, how could anything ever really happen again, if you think about it, nothing is exactly like anything else. That would be perfection. It's true that things have a randomness, but also it all has a cause and result. Sure, you can win twice at a casino, but that deals with a limited # of possibilities. There is so much variables that go into a person, well you get what i'm saying. A billion yrs from now there may be people very much like us somewhere, and in other ways, very different in every way.

  • @Valdagast
    @Valdagast Před 6 lety +826

    This is why I don't let physicists near my cats.

    • @ApertureLabs
      @ApertureLabs Před 6 lety +8

      Haha, don't worry, it's just a point. Most people aren't running around stuffing cats in boxes and poisoning them.

    • @manowartank8784
      @manowartank8784 Před 5 lety +6

      I think it was quite unfortunate explanation, since everybody just jokes about dead and alive cat, completelly missing the connection to quantum physics. I know lot of people who know this cat paradox and still think that photons and electrons are small solid balls flying around.

    • @Life-Row-Toll
      @Life-Row-Toll Před 5 lety +1

      @@ApertureLabs What are you talking about? They ran experiments!

    • @Life-Row-Toll
      @Life-Row-Toll Před 5 lety

      @@manowartank8784 Well said

    • @tomdelay5543
      @tomdelay5543 Před 5 lety +6

      You mean they're not? I thought electrons were those yellow balls that orbited the blue and red ones?

  • @edit4310
    @edit4310 Před 7 lety +233

    building an entirely new house to escape washing the dishes LOL.

    • @bantaar
      @bantaar Před 7 lety +62

      I live in a reality where dishes wash themselves. Unfortunately, the dishes haven't realized that, so my flat looks messy.

    • @RomitHeerani
      @RomitHeerani Před 7 lety

      Maybe the dishes are just being lazy like you :P

    • @woopsiburntstarIV
      @woopsiburntstarIV Před 7 lety +3

      there is a timeline where he does this

    • @afsharalithegreatiranian9777
      @afsharalithegreatiranian9777 Před 7 lety

      Bradley n Emilee forever
      From where does his country come into the picture?

    • @nirmalpadwal2055
      @nirmalpadwal2055 Před 7 lety +4

      Afshar ali: The Great Iranian
      Chill dude i myself am an Indian. Dogs love barking. Let him bark

  • @aaronmagalong2940
    @aaronmagalong2940 Před 5 lety +14

    the quality of the videos from this channel amazes me

  • @thoughtsfromahead
    @thoughtsfromahead Před 4 lety +5

    Matt O'Dowd you are an absolute gem! "Choose your own adventure"--what a wonderful way to sum up how I feel about the possible implications of MWI!

  • @agustinvenegas5238
    @agustinvenegas5238 Před 7 lety +201

    "building a new house to avoid doing the dishes"
    Yeah, that sounds like something I would do

    • @georgeb.wolffsohn30
      @georgeb.wolffsohn30 Před 6 lety

      agustin venegas I'm doing that right now, I hate dishes !

    • @YourIdeologyIsDelusional
      @YourIdeologyIsDelusional Před 5 lety +5

      The thing to remember here is that the universe doesn't have intention or purpose. At least as far as we know. It just "is," it simply exists. The reason why this is an important point is that the universe may have formed with an unimaginably immense multiverse simply because the physical properties of it cause such a thing to emerge.

    • @ryanfranks9441
      @ryanfranks9441 Před 5 lety

      Violates energy conservation, aka my lazyness

    • @rykson161
      @rykson161 Před 5 lety

      Building infinite universes to deny the existence of God The Creator

    • @zloth54
      @zloth54 Před 5 lety +1

      @xjohnny1000
      but we also don't have evidence that the universe has a purpose it is "foolish" to assume that it does in this way as well.
      for all we know that the universe doesn't give a fuck WHATEVER we think , it just is.

  • @Idtelos
    @Idtelos Před 5 lety +17

    Sean Carroll is one of the major proponents of the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. He has some pretty good lectures/discussions here on youtube about it.

  • @stevoofd
    @stevoofd Před 3 lety +11

    “That’s like building an entirely new house to avoid the dishes”
    Lmao I love some of his analogies

  • @TimothyBrake
    @TimothyBrake Před 4 lety +78

    It comforts me to realize that when I buy a lottery ticket, one of me actually wins it and can do what he wants like study this in more detail 😀

    • @ruboyhsv7436
      @ruboyhsv7436 Před 4 lety +3

      yes but you can move into that version of you winning it by visualization and affirmations etc, its ancient knowledge nothing new.. humans have this power that they dont no about we are rediscovering it.. beautiful

    • @indorc1319
      @indorc1319 Před 3 lety +9

      @@ruboyhsv7436 yeah mate sure

    • @Cazanu417
      @Cazanu417 Před 3 lety +10

      Yeah but there is also a version of you that gets runed over by a truck on the way to buy the ticked so be glad with what reality you experience

    • @TimothyBrake
      @TimothyBrake Před 3 lety

      JaCk MeOff 😁

    • @Anecdotal1
      @Anecdotal1 Před 3 lety +1

      Or can you imagine where you win EVERY LOTTERY you enter... there should be ONE world existing... true among kadzillion billion.. but there should be One! :) :) :)

  • @mattscatterty
    @mattscatterty Před 7 lety +424

    Regarding the issue of the lack of free will in the many worlds interpretation, I would argue that even in a purely random universe, one could argue that there is still no free will. Look at it this way: pure determinism offers us no choice/freedom. We are enslaved to the pre-determined physics of our particular timeline/world. But with pure randomness, we are still without free will as we are enslaved to the pure randomness of the physics of our universe. We would never argue that a game of Russian Roulette offers us the free will to choose the outcome, so why would physics be any different. If it's just the randomness of quantum mechanics that determines my "choices", how is that different from my choices being determined by the rolling of dice? Does anyone have an idea of a third option that could involve free will?

    • @mattscatterty
      @mattscatterty Před 7 lety +26

      I would love to hear some arguments against this! I am legitimately interested in hearing other people's perspectives here, especially if they disagree with mine.

    • @InMaTeofDeath
      @InMaTeofDeath Před 7 lety +39

      Not really sure if this will help but this is the way I always thought of free will. My perspective is it really doesn't matter if we have it or not for a couple reasons. First is I think you will agree no matter what we believe about free will as humans we *feel* like we do have it. So that being the case we can assume that even if we don't have true free will we at the very least have the illusion of free will. Now here is the most important question for this line of thinking, can you think of what if any differences would be between what the experience of true free will vs the illusion would be? Idk about you but if when i really take a close look at it I can't tell much difference at all between what we assume is true free will and the potential fake version I know we all have.

    • @pbsspacetime
      @pbsspacetime  Před 7 lety +137

      This is extremely well put. Some system produces our experience of mind (it's mostly the brain, but the following holds even if it's magicy spirity stuff). The most elementary components of that system are either deterministic or random. Are either of those consistent with free will? I would argue that both can be, but only for the right definition of "free will". The problem with the whole free will debate is that the concept of free will is hopelessly poorly defined.

    • @TheClashOfCultures
      @TheClashOfCultures Před 7 lety +4

      to answer this we probably have to get a precise definition of free will, or even life, maybe. In this series and science we talk a lot about 'observers' which is as close as we scientifically come to defining what you look for, perhaps. observer to choice is already a leap of faith and has to be defined properly, but i don't know just an opinion.

    • @mattscatterty
      @mattscatterty Před 7 lety +7

      +InMaTeofDeath Oh of course, I'm very much with you. Either way, it does FEEL like we have free will in some form. Though, I will say that if we really look at it, in psychological terms, the existence of free will is still a messy concept due to the fact that our unconscious/subconscious minds are the unseen driving factor behind everything we think and do. And we don't exactly have conscious control over our unconscious minds. In this way, this could be said to be a psychological representation of how the laws of physics allow us the illusion of free will without he actual reality of free will.

  • @cclifford1003
    @cclifford1003 Před 7 lety +288

    I know this was a physics video, but I saw a lot of good chemistry at the end.

  • @thestever
    @thestever Před 2 lety +8

    Is anyone else a bit concerned that the guy who came up with the Many Worlds Interpretation "disappeared into military research at the Pentagon"?

  • @lovmovement8477
    @lovmovement8477 Před 2 lety +1

    These videos explain the concepts so well ! Thanks for the great work

  • @ayudan24688
    @ayudan24688 Před 5 lety +77

    This is how Scarlet Witch’s power works, by manipulating quantum probability around her (sometimes at a universal scale) and selecting the timeline that she wants

  • @Nik-vc7ox
    @Nik-vc7ox Před 5 lety +17

    I'm happy believing the many worlds interpretation. it's not a crisis for me. it makes the most sense. and I don't feel it's predeterministic if you're aware of your ability to choose your reality. I like many worlds too because it helps me not fret over regrets. sometimes I think "what if I had done this differently?" and then I think "surely one of me did. I'll make a better choice next time. :)" I guess it keeps me aware that I always have the power to chose... maybe a funny way to look at it, but hey, I have the power the chose the thoughts that work best for me... :) many worlds just takes the pressure off while still holding me accountable for my actions and empowering me to do good and grow as a being. :) it's cool.

  • @marcvongeldern847
    @marcvongeldern847 Před 5 lety +117

    “It’s like moving to a new house to avoid doing the dishes.”
    Actually it’s more like terraforming a whole solar system and filling each terraformed planet with residential super-skyscrapers... to avoid doing the dishes.

    • @andyshreene6308
      @andyshreene6308 Před 4 lety +1

      Building* a new house

    • @Jason89537
      @Jason89537 Před 4 lety

      But they are all the same skyscraper once observed???? HALP MEEEEE

    • @josephhanrahan1615
      @josephhanrahan1615 Před 4 lety +1

      Actually it’s like generating infinite unique universes each and every planc-second that in themselves generate infinite unique universes etc...to avoid doing the dishes

    • @EliteTeamKiller2.0
      @EliteTeamKiller2.0 Před 3 lety +1

      I've done more to avoid doing less.

    • @GY6SCOOTERCHAT
      @GY6SCOOTERCHAT Před 3 lety

      always one “actually” guy...

  • @Rationalific
    @Rationalific Před 3 lety +2

    This video puts things so amazingly well! Thank you for what you do!

  • @deepampurkayastha3040
    @deepampurkayastha3040 Před 6 lety +349

    DR. Strange must have watched this video before calculating the 14 million outcomes

    • @PS1604
      @PS1604 Před 5 lety +10

      maybe his video is still buffering in 1

    • @r.russellreed7762
      @r.russellreed7762 Před 5 lety +2

      In a roundabout way...maybe.
      Though, it’s more than a little likely that the brains behind this video studied some of the work of, or has researched the same works as, the brain behind Dr. Strange.
      That is, Dr. Michalakis :)
      marvelcinematicuniverse.wikia.com/wiki/Spyridon_Michalakis

    • @pinkishi1648
      @pinkishi1648 Před 5 lety

      Yeah..

    • @ciyoduhkriter
      @ciyoduhkriter Před 5 lety +3

      And decides to choose the outcome where Tony and Natasha die.

    • @therealswinery5416
      @therealswinery5416 Před 4 lety +5

      To be honest, there would be so many more than 14 million outcomes in reality. More like 1e14000000.

  • @MaxArceus
    @MaxArceus Před 7 lety +84

    I build houses all the time to avoid doing the dishes :o

    • @qaedtgh2091
      @qaedtgh2091 Před 7 lety +3

      I get divorced and remarried anytime my wife sneezes.

    • @MagneBugten
      @MagneBugten Před 7 lety +5

      This guy gets it, he probably builds houses for a living.

    • @Pfhorrest
      @Pfhorrest Před 7 lety +9

      You build houses for money, then use that money to pay someone else to do your dishes?

    • @adaptone9777
      @adaptone9777 Před 7 lety +2

      me too

    • @GraveUypo
      @GraveUypo Před 7 lety +7

      oh. so that's why i find so many great abandoned houses with like 3 dishes on the sink. Thanks for making me rich. i've been selling those dishes and now i have like three hundred dollars.

  • @danielodors
    @danielodors Před 5 lety +24

    I love how concise the "schrodinger's cat" was. I do prefer not having someone shown me some silly implausible mechanism that stresses my suspense of belief as opposed to just being told there is one there. 😁

  • @ericulric223
    @ericulric223 Před 4 lety +2

    That was the best and shortest explanation of the double=slit experiment I have ever heard. Great Job!

  • @JonathanDaniel1986
    @JonathanDaniel1986 Před 7 lety +13

    Why doesn't this channel have 1M+ subs? It's pure awesome!

    • @squidslurpee
      @squidslurpee Před 6 lety +4

      Jonathan Daniel because most people today care more about celebrity gossip than the nature of reality.

  • @ravenlord4
    @ravenlord4 Před 7 lety +202

    It is fun to see philosophy making its way back into the hard sciences again.

    • @TheRedRuin
      @TheRedRuin Před 6 lety +14

      If you mean imagination and creativity, they are essential to advancing science. But what do these matter to a pseud such as yourself.

    • @EmptyKingdoms
      @EmptyKingdoms Před 6 lety +22

      Its always been there, tho. Only stupid logical positivists thought they didn't have to deal with it, though they werw using it.

    • @Freeroler
      @Freeroler Před 6 lety +37

      It never actually left. Einstein himself admitted he relied on some purely metaphysical papers that led him to develop the General Relativity.

    • @360.Tapestry
      @360.Tapestry Před 6 lety +27

      no. he's talking about _actual_ philosophy (such as probabilistic determinism), not your common, everyday, urban-dictionary meaning of "philosophy" - you "pseud" LMAO what a perfect example of an *utterly pretentious fool*

    • @ubu6949
      @ubu6949 Před 6 lety +7

      raven lord Heck even our modern economic system was invented by philosophers. Adam Smith, von Mises, John Keynes, Hayek, Friedman... These were all philosophers, and that's all i have to say on that.

  • @chironpictures
    @chironpictures Před 2 lety +3

    Love the Star Trek: The Next Generation sound effects here too! The door chime and the tricorder sounds!

  • @pedroalmodovar6087
    @pedroalmodovar6087 Před 2 lety +1

    Loooooove this! So many new realisations through watching it, thank you!

  • @1stPCFerret
    @1stPCFerret Před 6 lety +73

    "Not only is the universe stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine."
    -- Sir Arthur Eddington

    • @carlbrowitt6221
      @carlbrowitt6221 Před 4 lety +1

      Youd better believe it

    • @mohammadtausifrafi8277
      @mohammadtausifrafi8277 Před 4 lety +3

      Yeah, why not? Where can we find a guarantee that we have the ability to understand the fundamental nature of reality? Ants do not understand calculus despite being intelligent to an extent. Just because we are far more intelligent than ants, we cannot assume that the complexity of reality is not beyond the capacity of our intellect.

  • @douglasmcneil8413
    @douglasmcneil8413 Před 7 lety +311

    So, he wrote the paper and then "disappeared into military research". Hmmmm.

    • @VaderDarth512
      @VaderDarth512 Před 7 lety +89

      i'm not saying it's aliens....
      ...but it's aliens.

    • @lstein8670
      @lstein8670 Před 7 lety +26

      Douglas McNeil x file music plays in the background

    • @samrodrigue522
      @samrodrigue522 Před 7 lety +26

      George bush is probably at his desk at home reading this comment section, looking at this comment, immediately calls obama...
      "we got a code red this is defcon 10... send the seals for shut it down"
      *mysterious raid of youtube servers casually deletes this video*

    • @sshawarma
      @sshawarma Před 7 lety +3

      He is trying to tell us something :O

    • @1ucasvb
      @1ucasvb Před 7 lety +3

      Arrowhead Project confirmed.

  • @nertoni
    @nertoni Před 4 lety

    I am deeply thankful for your clear interpretation of this complicated topics.

  • @therealswinery5416
    @therealswinery5416 Před 4 lety +12

    "In a purely deterministic Universe, what happens to free will?"
    Free will exists neither in a deterministic nor probabilistic Universe. If that's what you're looking for, you're going to need to come up with a third option.

  • @raveenadandona1413
    @raveenadandona1413 Před 7 lety +5

    well I live in India, and every Thursday the first thing I do after waking up is watch you video!
    Amazing stuff!!
    Now you've given my mind a lot to think about for the entire week..!

  • @Aweshniap
    @Aweshniap Před 6 lety +324

    Shout out to the version of me that's a millionaire

    • @StAnger561to770
      @StAnger561to770 Před 6 lety

      Awesh I am a doctor, in an alternate reality. In this one I just seem to hang out...

    • @Exist64
      @Exist64 Před 5 lety +10

      You should shout out to the version that found more value in other things than...money.

    • @lordmalal
      @lordmalal Před 5 lety

      You’re lucky he can’t see how disappointing he is in this timeline

    • @jessicafisk9924
      @jessicafisk9924 Před 5 lety

      You mean Caitlyn Jenner?

    • @arthurheuer
      @arthurheuer Před 5 lety

      Which one? There are infinite.

  • @scentlessapprentice88
    @scentlessapprentice88 Před 3 lety +1

    This man is brilliant. Love this channel and all the information it provides us.

  • @NomaddictAlchemist
    @NomaddictAlchemist Před 4 lety

    you guys made me smile at the end so u both gained my sub and ofc my interest following up for knowledge!cheers🎈❤

  • @theotormon
    @theotormon Před 5 lety +56

    The idea that every possibility happens in another branch of reality is intuitive. Pretty sure I had this idea as a little kid before I ever heard anything about it.

  • @TamashiiRyu
    @TamashiiRyu Před 4 lety +15

    Curious, hasthere ever been a double slit experiment with two target screens, one on front of the other such that a particle can pass through both and register its location? I wonder if the pattern would be consistent between the two, if new patterns will emerge behind the impactpoints of the first screen, or something else entirely....

    • @rosalyschijf2157
      @rosalyschijf2157 Před rokem

      If you put the slits between the two screens both screens wouldn’t have the interference pattern.

  • @guillaumemaurice3503
    @guillaumemaurice3503 Před 3 lety

    Thank you for sharing this that was very interesting. A lot of great information.

  • @justlookin5048
    @justlookin5048 Před 2 lety

    Great vid guys. That was well put👍

  • @sylak2112
    @sylak2112 Před 7 lety +6

    Our cat Timi, is Quantum. When we open the door, he want to be in superposition, inside and outside: he stay in the middle of the patio door lol :-)

  • @splacl6102
    @splacl6102 Před 7 lety +19

    will i ever stop being mind-blown

  • @starlingalmyra
    @starlingalmyra Před 4 lety +5

    I'm going to open a bagel shop to compete with my local "Einstein's Bagels" location, and I'm going to call it "Schroedinger's Bagels". You get a bag and your bagels are in the bag... Or theyre not. It depends on whether or not you looked.

  • @DaellusKnights
    @DaellusKnights Před 3 lety +3

    Were the challenges at the end ever produced? I want to find both...

  • @lokynokey4822
    @lokynokey4822 Před 7 lety +70

    There is a version of me who hasn't watched PBS Space Time? Blasphemy!

    • @roysmith5711
      @roysmith5711 Před 7 lety +1

      A lot of versions of you in fact in a lot of worlds there isn't such a show

    • @lokynokey4822
      @lokynokey4822 Před 7 lety +13

      Rubjerg
      At least there is a version of me that is Batman. That should compensate for everything.

    • @bantaar
      @bantaar Před 7 lety +3

      LokyNoKey Even if I'm Robin there?

    • @thrustvectoring8120
      @thrustvectoring8120 Před 7 lety

      no, there isn't.

    • @DeathBringer769
      @DeathBringer769 Před 6 lety

      If Many-Worlds is true then there's a version of each of us that has... done a lot of terrible things, lol. Unfortunately for some people that's THIS universe for them... :(

  • @dankmheems290
    @dankmheems290 Před 4 lety +7

    There are 1 million universes out there of my deciding what to order for take out last night. Somewhere out there is a version of me that made the call BEFORE they closed.

  • @Speak_Out_and_Remove_All_Doubt

    I believe after graduation Everett went to work for the U.S. Navy Research Division, posted predominately at the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard in Pennsylvania. Records show he was a VIP guest on the USS Eldridge in the early 1940's.

  • @out_on_bail
    @out_on_bail Před 5 lety +163

    It’s getting clearer to me we are in a simulation.

    • @MrPINKFL0YD
      @MrPINKFL0YD Před 4 lety +26

      The proof is everywhere. Matter has no mass. Computer code is in nature. God knows what is going on here out of our sensory compression..

    • @scienceexplains302
      @scienceexplains302 Před 4 lety +52

      A simulation of what? If someone can create a simulation where the parts become conscious and feeling , then it is no longer a simulation, it is a reality

    • @scienceexplains302
      @scienceexplains302 Před 4 lety +10

      @Hahhah0 Distinction? Yes, the distinction is that one is conscious and the other is not. I am extremely confident that some things are conscious and others are not (and that my confidence is irrelevant).
      Or are you referring to gradients? That seems highly likely, since almost everything in biology has gradients. There are things that are on the border of being alive (viruses), so there are probably beings that are semi-conscious. Even people are not always conscious and are semi-conscious frequently (e.g. falling asleep and waking up).

    • @scienceexplains302
      @scienceexplains302 Před 4 lety +9

      All good questions.
      Can a computer be conscious? Not the current ones. It would probably have to be made out of biological material to have a chance of becoming conscious.
      It find it interesting that some people say we are most likely in a simulation without saying what we are a simulation of and without demonstrating that a simulation can produce consciousness (and how you determine whether another entity is conscious doesn't seem relevant to my point, since each of us knows we are conscious.)

    • @cptnawzum5663
      @cptnawzum5663 Před 4 lety +6

      @Hahhah0 Everything is made up of particles. When we define our bundle of particles as conscious, we also define everything else as potentially conscious, given that the structure of bundled particles that are necessary to define consciousness are recreated.

  • @abstractrussian5562
    @abstractrussian5562 Před 4 lety +15

    5:20. "Why stop at the cat?" A mindset of a serial killer or a quantum physicist.

  • @IlicSorrentino
    @IlicSorrentino Před 7 lety +30

    I adore Spacetime and Physics Girl. They are two of my most preferred channels because they treat about interesting things in different ways. With Veritasium, Vsauce, It's ok to be smart, Crash Course and so on... we can start to speak about The Order of the EduTubers.
    And also if they are not so famous there are very interesting channels about scientific divulgation here in Italy too...! bye!

    • @LKAChannel
      @LKAChannel Před 7 lety +4

      You forgot SciShow, MinutePhysics, Numberphile, CGP Grey and AsapScience

    • @sonetlumiere13
      @sonetlumiere13 Před 7 lety +2

      And Cody's lab is great for chemistry stuff!

    • @jamiedorsey4167
      @jamiedorsey4167 Před 7 lety +2

      Kurzegesagt

    • @IlicSorrentino
      @IlicSorrentino Před 7 lety +1

      I am sorry of course all the above are really great! I follow many of them!
      Can I quote some of the italian ones if it is not annoying? ( tech level is not like the top but they have passion, I promise)
      Link4universe, La fisica che non ti aspetti, science4fun, la chimica per tutti, zoosparkle, to science and beyond and sooo many others. Thank you bye

    • @IlicSorrentino
      @IlicSorrentino Před 7 lety +1

      Jamie Dorsey I didn't know it... it seems really interesting!, dankeschöen (...schon? schen?) ...err... thank you very much! eh eh!...

  • @christianvulpescu1398
    @christianvulpescu1398 Před 4 lety +15

    Schrödinger`s daughter, once asked, why her father used a cat to potentially be killed, she answered: "My father just doesn't like cats!"

  • @tylerv0558
    @tylerv0558 Před 5 lety +11

    Look at Matt getting flustered and crushing on physics girl 🤣

  • @inertsoul_
    @inertsoul_ Před 5 lety +2

    The only Channel to give complete knowledge of a small topic
    Hey man u look good in beard

  • @Qexilber
    @Qexilber Před 7 lety +4

    There are two problems here which I would reeeeeally like to hear you answers:
    1) uncountable infinities: There's always the talk about "a large number" of worlds that emerge from each quantum action in the whole universe. But for the double slit experiment, it is not only in which stripe the particle lands but also the exact coordinates on the screen so that large numder is not even infinity but an uncountable infinity. Correct? The "number"-thing wouldn't make sense anymore. And, if so, does the many-worlds-interpretation really still make sense?
    2) Increasing mass: In the many-worlds-interpretation, where does the mass and energy come from, to copy the whole universe once for each possible outcome of what an electron does?
    Additionally: Am I the only one who sees the parallel between the many-worlds-interpretation and the infinite improbability drive in "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy"?

  • @gerritroorda9795
    @gerritroorda9795 Před 5 lety +3

    Compliments for your channel! Could you teach us something about alternative explanations/theories for the results of the double slit experiment? And are there more experiments that show the presumed wave-property of a single photon?

  • @ASLUHLUHCE
    @ASLUHLUHCE Před 3 lety +7

    7:45 In the Copenhagen interpretation, the Schrodinger equation is not considered to be ontological outside of measurement (unlike in Many Worlds). For all the Copenhagen interpretation knows, the Schrodinger equation corresponds to the probabilities of outcomes upon measurement. Describing it as "alternate realities which merge into a single timeline with its wavefunction collapse" is misleading as it seems to imply ontology outside of measurement.

    • @ASLUHLUHCE
      @ASLUHLUHCE Před 3 lety +4

      6:40 Also, all timeline are obviously *not* equally likely

    • @pirrrateee5022
      @pirrrateee5022 Před 3 lety

      Good, but why are u reiterating the same thing that he said ? And what do u mean by all timelines aren't equally likely ?

    • @netscrooge
      @netscrooge Před 6 měsíci

      Multiverse is a form of religious belief, not science. Anyone who has studied the hard sciences, psychology and theology should be able to see that. Too bad we don't value a quality liberal arts education as much as we once did.

  • @heidileeshire5959
    @heidileeshire5959 Před 5 lety +7

    It renews my hopeful heart, in humanity as a whole, and in it's future survival, to see more than 1.3M subscribers to this channel. We're probably still screwed...but.......

  • @pocok5000
    @pocok5000 Před 7 lety +55

    I have an idea how to prove simply that the Earth is round. Set up a skype with someone who is at a significantly different longitude coordinate, and watch the sunset(s) together :) If the Earth was flat, the Sun would set at the same time at both places, because the tangent planes would be parallel at every point of the flat Earth's surface, so the Sun would cross them at the same time. However, the Sun will set at different times, so the tangent planes are not parallel, therefore the Earth is not flat by definition.

    • @adityakuttus
      @adityakuttus Před 6 lety +17

      You're only about 2500 years late congratulations

    • @michiro8470
      @michiro8470 Před 6 lety

      Dávid Kertész yes 🙂

    • @EGarrett01
      @EGarrett01 Před 6 lety +14

      +Aditya Nair
      No he isn't. There are a ton of idiots who believe the earth is flat even now.

    • @adityakuttus
      @adityakuttus Před 6 lety +8

      EGarrett01 shhhh....dont give them more exposure... Let natural selection do it's job

    • @MultiFreelilboosie
      @MultiFreelilboosie Před 6 lety

      Dávid Kertész the earth is flat with a dome

  • @X-Gen-001
    @X-Gen-001 Před 4 lety +8

    I hope people enjoyed my presentation of this video in a parallel universe.

  • @sujin.vsujin.v2756
    @sujin.vsujin.v2756 Před 5 lety

    Wow amazing to know about quantum theories

  • @burt591
    @burt591 Před 7 lety +42

    +PBS Space Time What do you think about Pilot Wave theories? Derek from Veritasium made an awesome video on that topic. I would like to know what's your take on that

    • @borzumehrtoloui2059
      @borzumehrtoloui2059 Před 7 lety +13

      From the MWI standpoint, the pilot wave is just the cumulative effect of all the other versions of particle interacting with it. The problem with the Pilot Wave view is that it singles out one of those versions as the only real one and demotes all the others to be constituents of the background pilot wave. In this, it is somewhat reminiscent to me of the Tyco Brahe's hybrid model of the solar system where all planets, except Earth, revolved around the sun while the Earth was somehow singled out and the sun and its orbiting planets revolving around it. Such hybrids are generally bad explanations their special singling out is ultimately a form of bias. This bias creates defects in their explanatory power. In the case of the pilot wave, it confines it to working on a specific basis all the time, has trouble incorporating spin, and is forced to accommodate for non-local effects. Even worse, the way the 'wave' interacts is very specific. It always interacts "as if" it was made by other versions of that particle subject to its particular setup. For example, if you put a barrier on one of the paths in the interference experiment, it effects the outcome only if the barrier is opaque to the passage of the particle. If it is transparent, it doesn't effect it at all. A general non-local spread out wave piloting shouldn't be so specific and idiosyncratic in how it acts.This shows that the addition of "as if" in the sentence above is superfluous. Doesn't add anything to the actual explanation. If you get rid of it, you get MWI back again with all its explanatory power. Anyways, that's my two cents.

    • @burt591
      @burt591 Před 7 lety

      Borzumehr Toloui
      Thanks, let me ask you another question: with the Pilot Wave theories Schrodinger's cat doesn't need to be dead and alive at the same time, right? it would be just a regular cat. So at least it would solve that problem, right?

    • @borzumehrtoloui2059
      @borzumehrtoloui2059 Před 7 lety +2

      True, but that is only a problem if you had assume before hand what regular must mean. In the MWI, a cat that is alive in one universe and dead in the other is as regular as any other cat. The particles constituting that cat, by themselves, can be in a superposition of two or more states. Why not the cat that is made out of them?
      Oh, and you are very welcome.
      (BTW, that individual particle can be in multiple states at once is really is really the only reasonable way to comprehend how quantum computing works, for example. In the pilot wave model, it's pretty much like magic. In intermediary phase between preparation and measurement cannot really be considered as a sequence of well defined computational steps.).

    • @burt591
      @burt591 Před 7 lety +1

      Borzumehr Toloui
      I'm not sure if a quantum computer could work if the Many Worlds Interpretation is true, I mean for any given calculation all the different result would happen on different universes. So we need to be very lucky for the correct answer to happen on our universe (probably I'm understanding all this wrong, and quantum computers doesn't work the way I imagine)

    • @borzumehrtoloui2059
      @borzumehrtoloui2059 Před 7 lety +5

      No. It's the only one that truly explains it all. What happens is that the calculation is done in all the branches in parallel and then at the end, you make the branches with the 'wrong' answer cancel each other out through destructive interference and the ones with the answer you want to compute to constructively interfere. Then you measure, which means you entangle yourself with them, and depending on how well that scheme of constructive/destructive interference went, these versions of you that see the right answer end up in the branch with the large enough measure or 'thickness' within all the branches. That's what under certain circumstances is interpreted operationally as the probability of getting a successful run of the computation.

  • @MessyJoeHesse
    @MessyJoeHesse Před 5 lety +3

    I've often believed in the possibility of the multiverse and that each reality is born from me choosing to do or not do something. But those are just possibilities, it's all just theory. This makes it feel like realty more than possibility. Great video to watch though lol, regardless of the unsettling feeling of knowing there really might be an endless spiral of branching possibilities.

    • @evelyn9273
      @evelyn9273 Před 4 lety

      Many worlds theory does not at all indicate, that your decisions have an impact on other universes. There are other universes, in which, there may be a person(like you, but not you), that makes different decisions then what YOU would make. But that does not impact this universe or your actions don’t impact another.

  • @eagasi
    @eagasi Před rokem

    Love your shows! How about the conservation of energy in this many worlds interpretation, what can you say about that?

  • @diabolicnephilim2659
    @diabolicnephilim2659 Před 4 lety

    7:27
    Damn right.
    There are so many that my mind screen can't even fit them and my head hurts from not giving up on trying to imagining that.

  • @cosmotect
    @cosmotect Před 6 lety +84

    What if we are living in many worlds ourselves, and when we think about alternate history we are just accesing "us" in that timeline.
    And in order to not overload the brain, only one particular event chain is continiously registered while all others are heavily blurred and become imagination, fake memories, and background noise

    • @toillenesredla3751
      @toillenesredla3751 Před 6 lety +14

      now we have to add consciousness to this mess? why not

    • @dikshabagade5542
      @dikshabagade5542 Před 5 lety +3

      Damn, now that was a crazy one

    • @stevenbuck07
      @stevenbuck07 Před 5 lety

      This may be the background noise universe, as far as i can tell. Where's the fun and excitement everyone talks about?

    • @natemullikin
      @natemullikin Před 5 lety +1

      Or dreams?

    • @bacicinvatteneaca
      @bacicinvatteneaca Před 5 lety +1

      Quantum mechanics isn't a game of shoot higher

  • @damiion666
    @damiion666 Před 7 lety +21

    My head hurts

    • @Exist64
      @Exist64 Před 5 lety +3

      damiion666 like your muscles after working out. You're growing smarter

  • @fliesbyme
    @fliesbyme Před 4 lety

    This was my thoughts as a wee lad. Crazy.

  • @KellyLCall
    @KellyLCall Před 5 lety

    I just had a thought that would explain the particle wave experiment and why a particle is observed in a wave pattern. Conceivably when the particle passes thru the slit, it experiences a slight gravitational attraction with the barrier itself and depending on how close it is to the edge of the barrier the more strongly it's trajectory is pulled into phased trajectory. If all matter is a vibrating then there is a harmonic resonance between the particle and the barrier. This accounts for the stripes and the more or less empty spaces between the stripes. So it remains a particle but it's trajectory is altered by the harmonic resonance in gravity with the barrier. Are you with me? So we see it's disbursement pattern as a wave when in fact it's just the collective average of the particles predictable trajectory divergences. I think this explanation satisfies both conditions of particles and waves.

  • @manskiptruck
    @manskiptruck Před 7 lety +8

    I was thinking that when you start the experiment when them quantum particle things go through both splits and when it hits the board. That every particle would hit every spot at once and an create an infinite amount of alternate realities where I exist in harmony with the other ones without knowing.

    • @manskiptruck
      @manskiptruck Před 7 lety +2

      I thought that before you started explaining it lol

    • @googelplussucksys5889
      @googelplussucksys5889 Před 7 lety +1

      It's the essence of MWI. Other interpretations are designed to work around this problem of us only observing one possibility out of many theoretical ones, whereas MWI rather embraces it.

  • @Longshotsz
    @Longshotsz Před 7 lety +3

    THINK! A UNIVERSE WITH NO ADS ON CZcams!!!

  • @raullaforcada5877
    @raullaforcada5877 Před 3 lety

    Hey Matt & PBS Space Time staff! is there a video available in spanish? If not, I would love to translate (accurately) and capture all of the important essence that distinguishes this channel among the others. Love your work! Love your videos! Much love to the team!
    Saludos desde Mexico

  • @corlisscrabtree3647
    @corlisscrabtree3647 Před 3 lety

    Thank you

  • @DrShaym
    @DrShaym Před 6 lety +7

    I also by my shirts in packs of four from WalMart.

  • @Tomyb15
    @Tomyb15 Před 7 lety +14

    As as our knowledge of physics grows, testing hypothesis becomes more and more difficult.
    What if quantum mechanics is bound to hit an insuperable roadblock? Because maybe we won't be able to test everything we need in the future because we are just made of matter, and although we have found clever ways to make matter do what we want like forcing the Higgs field to produce a particle, it may not always be the case. Maybe we would need a deity-like perspective to test something like the many worlds interpretation, or questions about the Universe we haven't even began to question.
    I'll stop now before I have an existential crisis again.

    • @Jopie65
      @Jopie65 Před 7 lety +5

      Yess, lets ask Zeus why his friends needed all this quantum madness magic to create the universe

    • @davidwuhrer6704
      @davidwuhrer6704 Před 7 lety

      Ciroluiro I would say that as our knowledge of physics grows, it becomes _easier_ to test hypotheses.
      People had crazy ideas about the world since forever. Just look at Aristoteles and his elements. The more we know, the more tests and experiments we can devise for these ideas.
      The more we know, the more hypotheses can be tested.

    • @ABaumstumpf
      @ABaumstumpf Před 7 lety

      The crazy thing isn't what we already know, or that we might not be able to test such thing.
      But rather that we already have propositions for testing things that just seem impossible.
      Near lightspeed or faster than light travel, teleportation, or even interaction with possible other universes - yep, for all those things we already have some ideas and concepts of how that could be accomplished.
      just a boomer that many of those things would require us to destroy a few planets or stars for the materials and energy needed.

    • @Tomyb15
      @Tomyb15 Před 7 lety

      ABaumstumpf well, it's kind of that. We have ideas about the stuff but maybe some of them are so crazy you wouldn't be able to test them. I'm just speculating .

    • @davidwuhrer6704
      @davidwuhrer6704 Před 7 lety

      Ciroluiro There are tests to see if an idea can be tested.

  • @MrPangulo007
    @MrPangulo007 Před 5 lety +4

    That's why both possibilities of yes and no are both combined until last minute

  • @tortinwall
    @tortinwall Před 2 lety +1

    In my favourite cartoon, Erwin Schrodinger is in the waiting room at the vet. A nurse comes to him and says: “About your cat, Mr Schrodinger, there’s good news and bad news.”

  • @Ja-cs8ft
    @Ja-cs8ft Před 7 lety +4

    At the double slit experiment it is more likely, that the photon will land in the middle, not at for example the side. It could have landed on any other spot, just with a smaller propability. If there are universes, in which every single event occurs, doesn't that make the propability of each event happening equally propable?

  • @johnybazukata
    @johnybazukata Před 7 lety +25

    Aw you guys are so cute! Like two amazing nerds that could potentially fall in nerdy love.... *fanfic underway* Just joking - love both your channels!

    • @daniel117100
      @daniel117100 Před 7 lety +10

      veritasium is already banging her

    • @mksjnd
      @mksjnd Před 7 lety +7

      johnybazukata Looks like Derek from Veritasium has some competition ;)

    • @Qermaq
      @Qermaq Před 7 lety +3

      I have long said, these two should make sexy babies.

    • @tonee899
      @tonee899 Před 7 lety +10

      They're bumping uglies in some universe... and have the smartest kid of all time

    • @Qermaq
      @Qermaq Před 7 lety

      I seriously almost said "bumping uglies".

  • @ioanbota9397
    @ioanbota9397 Před 25 dny

    Realy I like this video its so interestyng

  • @idrissahmat498
    @idrissahmat498 Před 4 lety

    So we never die, awesome!

  • @pi314159265358978
    @pi314159265358978 Před 7 lety +22

    Can I propose an experiment that could test the quantum multiverse theory for a person. (I'll be the person in this example so that people are not offended) If I replace the Schrodinger's cat with myself in the box and set the odds of killing to be extremely high I should still survive no matter what if the multiverse theory is correct. I mean after the experiment is over I'll be dead in most of those universes (and maybe even with a Darwin Award), but I'll be also alive in a few. So for me nothing happens in the box because thinking me always ends up in the universe where I survive. Not that I can share this result with anybody outside the box considering the statistics behind it.
    It just seems like you can't die if the multiverse theory is correct. Well, at least if you have some chance to survive. That's pretty neat :-D

    • @nsnick199
      @nsnick199 Před 7 lety +6

      Ah yes, quantum immortality: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_suicide_and_immortality

    • @Gothamlk
      @Gothamlk Před 7 lety +9

      Well, you'll just have proven nothing in a dozen universes (and given some nasty work to the janitor of the science lab on a multiverse scale, uncool) and, in far less universes, either that Many World is true... or that you just got really lucky.
      No dice!

    • @Kisama001
      @Kisama001 Před 7 lety +7

      The problem here is that each version of you, in each universe, is not the same you. Think of each version of you, as your twin.

    • @pi314159265358978
      @pi314159265358978 Před 7 lety

      NSNick Cool. I had no idea something this crazy was already known thought experiment.
      gothamsnetwork Indeed :-D
      Kisama001 I disagree. My stance on the problem of identity is that if there is the exact same you somewhere else it is still you. In fact I would even argue that if there is slightly different version of you it is still you.

    • @Seurabimn
      @Seurabimn Před 7 lety

      pi314159265358978 Would you say then that a completely different version of you (say, you as a baby) is not you?

  • @leetattitude6808
    @leetattitude6808 Před 7 lety +13

    What if the many worlds multiverse only exists in the future, and collapses into our universe when it transitions into the past? I think that makes sense.

    • @qaedtgh2091
      @qaedtgh2091 Před 7 lety +1

      I like your thinking . . .

    • @powerLien
      @powerLien Před 7 lety +19

      I think that's another way to state the Copenhagen interpretation.

    • @Zerepzerreitug
      @Zerepzerreitug Před 7 lety +7

      So instead of a single universe branching into many, many "new" universes during each quantum event, it would be an array of multiple universes collapsing into a single universe as the arrow of time moves forward. Kinda like a zipper joining two unconnected sets of teeth into one.
      I like it.

  • @ForumArcade
    @ForumArcade Před 5 měsíci +1

    But think about this: At every change, whether experiential, circumstantial, or genetic, "you" change. You're not fully "you"- at least not the you that you experience and identify with. But even a different you is still mostly you.
    I like to think of this the same way that we think of the observable universe. We each have our own distinct observable universe, because we each occupy slightly different positions in space time. Every time we move, or even by remaining stationary, the borders of our observable universe shift and change.
    So an alternative "you" is just as real, but they are their own being, with their own possibility horizon that is slightly different than your own. Your probability horizon extends out until so much has changed that their are no identifiable qualities of "you" left. That creates an outline of a complex, multidimensional shapes; perhaps the most comprehensive and accurate image of "you" that can exist in reality.
    Also reality isn't necessarily splitting at every juncture. More reasonably, all states in space/time/possibility simply exist, and have always existed, simultaneously in the grander universe. :)

  • @Alreadygone-qg5qw
    @Alreadygone-qg5qw Před 4 lety +1

    The battle must begin

  • @meusana3681
    @meusana3681 Před 7 lety +16

    Kerbals obviously simulated our universe

    • @watsisname
      @watsisname Před 7 lety +13

      In Jebediah Kerman we trust.

  • @vicentelitvak3999
    @vicentelitvak3999 Před 7 lety +84

    There is a world in which I didn't comment this

    • @MG53v8
      @MG53v8 Před 7 lety +11

      did you just unnecessarily create another world ? basically a copy of this one , but without that comment ?

    • @vicentelitvak3999
      @vicentelitvak3999 Před 7 lety +4

      I guess you just did the same

    • @RakeshSamaddar
      @RakeshSamaddar Před 7 lety +6

      It would have been created nonetheless. If he didn't comment here, he would have commented there.

    • @cyancoyote7366
      @cyancoyote7366 Před 7 lety

      Another world

    • @cyancoyote7366
      @cyancoyote7366 Před 7 lety +1

      And another

  • @pauldance7387
    @pauldance7387 Před 5 lety

    Best science channel by far

  • @MervinM123
    @MervinM123 Před 5 lety +1

    Great video, what would happen if the double slit experiment was done with slits so small that a photon or whatever particle is being used cannot fit thru the slit but a wave could? Would that classify as an observation and the wave would collapse and no particles make it thru the slits?

    • @sharkedforlife4075
      @sharkedforlife4075 Před 2 lety +1

      The wavelength of any light we can make is bigger than the "diameter" of a photon so I don't think that's possible. If you did manage it would be an uber-uber-gamma ray that would obliterate anything it touched

  • @XDemon87
    @XDemon87 Před 7 lety +5

    im curious how does the many worlds interpretation account for the conservation of mass and energy? the amount of energy and mass in the universe would have to multiply by the number of options.

  • @ShubhamKejriwal
    @ShubhamKejriwal Před 6 lety +58

    WHAT HAPPENED ABOUT THE CHALLENGE?! Only 1.5 Months left Matt!! Have I missed the video or what?!

    • @adankseasonads935
      @adankseasonads935 Před 6 lety +81

      Unfortunately, we find ourselves living in universe where he forgot.. All those other lucky bastards who live in the other universe's have that awesome video.

    • @JM-us3fr
      @JM-us3fr Před 6 lety +11

      We need to hold them accountable.

    • @svencoop6830
      @svencoop6830 Před 6 lety +13

      Here's an experiment you can do to prove the earth is round: Turn on your phone, open google maps, and look at your location. The fact that GPS works proves there are artificial satellites, and if the earth was flat, those would have fallen down and crashed a long time ago.

    • @aresgalamatis7022
      @aresgalamatis7022 Před 6 lety +6

      Still nothing almost two years later :(

    • @laurent4595
      @laurent4595 Před 5 lety +1

      :'( equally curious

  • @robertschlesinger1342
    @robertschlesinger1342 Před 5 lety +2

    During the early years of the Many-Worlds Interpretation, aka the Everett Interpretation, Wheeler and Dewitt were amongst Everett 's supporters. There is now a vast literature on the Interpretation, both in the physics community and in the philosophy of science community. Many such papers are freely available on arXiv.org . Like many theories in modern physics, the theory seems absurd at first, then with time and reflection, it seems not so absurd, and perhaps even possible.

  • @mars23air
    @mars23air Před 2 lety +1

    Can you include the links that follows up with the challenges please?