Brian Cox explains quantum mechanics in 60 seconds - BBC News
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 09. 2014
- Subscribe to BBC News / bbcnews
British physicist Brian Cox is challenged by the presenter of Radio 4's 'Life Scientific', Jim Al-Khalili, to explain the rules of quantum mechanics in just a minute. Brian succeeds; while conceding that the idea that everything is inherently probabilistic, is challenging. Even Einstein found it difficult.
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04hvx9z
Subscribe to BBC News HERE bit.ly/1rbfUog
Check out our website: www.bbc.com/news
Facebook: / bbcworldnews
Twitter: / bbcworld
Instagram: / bbcnews - Věda a technologie
I now understand all of quantum mechanics. I’ll be available to collect my phd whenever it’s ready.
Be sure to show the math!
@@mikesmovingimages 😄
Same
There is X probability that all the particles in your phd certificate will appear in your house in Y units of time.
You won't get anything with qm! Wth you thinking?
One of Eistein's best quotes....."If you can't explain something simply, you don't know it well enough"
Also one of Eistein's better quotes: "I can put any name infront of a sentence and people will believe it online"
@@MartinSlow Whomever said it. it's true. and a great quote... he is credited with making that quote over 70 years ago
@@MartinSlow oh yeah ??!!
"It's not a lie if you believe it."
- The great George Costanza.
@@edog5707 70 years ago ?!
"Quoting famous people quote makes me look smart."
- also Albert Einstein.
d'oh
- Homer Simpson
Watch this in 2x and now you know quantum mechanics in under 30 seconds
Clever!
Watch this in 0.5 and they sound drunk lmaooo
@@mrollo two types of people are there this comment and reply depicted both of that
Harvard wants to know your location
and than the lecture is over😭
I love how people with extreme knowledge are always so calm 💀
Only in physical appearance
ive never really thought of that but, its so true. i want to be calm! lol
And cheerful.
It's not that extreme knowledge makes someone calm (have emotional control and stability), it's that someone who is calm is more likely to listen, research, absorb and ponder (therefor gaining extreme knowledge).
We see the opposite of this all the time, mostly in political discussions - so many loud or uncalm people. They generally are the ones who don't know much of what they're talking about.
Cause they keep their thought in control or focused on what they want or they think is necessary , when you do that , your thoughts dosent control how to fake calmness or become anxious , hence they are taken care by subconscious or the devine or what some people call god.
This is perfect. It usually takes much longer to prove that I'm stupid.
Lol 😂
Funny
Love it. I share your limitations
You clocked in around 10 seconds. Well done!
Good one 🤣
I’ve never been able to even remotely comprehend quantum mechanics, so I really have no idea why I thought a 60-second explanation would be of any help.
Ikr..im lost😂
I was thinking the exact same thing. No idea why I even bothered watching this
I think it was Feynnman himself who said "If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics."
essentially it boils down to how everything on a smaller scale acts completely differently to anything on the macro ... and that it looks weird and spooky.
Like most of the readers, which means you think he knows what he is talking about. Well partially yes, partially not at all. The guy is more like a pop icon, with Michiu Kaku, Brian Greene etc.
Brian's gift is that he never tries to make himself sound smarter than you in his explanations. No hubris or ego at play.
That was great. Quantum Physics is really weird. It takes a lot of math. I went from knowing no physics and very little math, all the way through my bachelor's and master's, just so I could understand Quantum. Part of my study focused just on the giants of physics, in general, and quantum specifically. Brian Cox mentioned Richard Feynman. There are lots of great quotes by the big names in Quantum, but this one from Feynman is one of my favorites:
"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics.”
Here's another good one. I could go on and on, but this is the last one:
"If quantum mechanics hasn't profoundly shocked you, you haven't understood it yet." Niels Bohr.
Okay one more, because I have so many in my head. This one is from Erwin Schrodinger (of the infamous cat thought experiment):
"I don't like it, and I'm sorry I ever had anything to do with it."
That one always cracks me up. He did the cat thought experiment because he wanted to show how absurd Quantum Physics is. But Heisenberg and all of them applauded him, and went wild for it, saying, That's it exactly! Poor Schrodinger. hehe!
Haha brilliant. Thnx for that
You know what? What you said is profoundly interesting, I was quite disappointed when you finished your word. I just started learning quantum(in high school) and it was so confusing and was even more confusing towards the end. That was hilarious and made me relate to Feynman's quote. But I like seeing quantum enthusiasts here and there on the internet, always having fun chatting over the Higgs boson or the probabilistic behavior of energy quanta with a random someone on the internet. What can I say? It makes sense, and it does not!
@@gachalusaxxx.770 "It makes sense, and it does not!"
Then you DO understand it! Congratulations. I think the main hurdle in Quantum is coming to grips with a completely different universe. We're talking about particles inside protons and neutrons.
These quarks and so on can basically slip through the "fabric" of space/time like water through a sieve. So they can be any place at any time. Time is hard enough to understand in Newtonian physics (with it not having any inherent + or - direction), and with Einsteinian Relativity (where it's "created" and governed by the gravity wells of massive objects).
But in quantum, everything is so near massless that gravity can't mess with it. And so the three dimensions of space don't know what to do with it either! These sub-sub-nuclear particles pop in and out of our existence, and so they can only be calculated by probability. And their size makes them do really weird things.
Above all else, I see Quantum Physics as an exercise in humility. I'm also really impressed you studied it in high school.
Do you have any advice for someone approaching learning physics with the desire to understand quantum mechanics?
I just turned 20 years old and have wasted my life and potential up until this point by smoking and partying. I need some guidance to catch up with my education.
I have a profound urge to understand the world
What sort of math should I focus on? I’m learning calculus 1 at the moment.
@@jacka602 Hello, I don't know if I should even comment, because I'm younger and inexperienced than you. But I did want to comment to admire your need to change for the better. Not a lot of people have that kind of confidence and willpower. If you do want to start on quantum mechanics, I would definitely recommend going through 'quantum mechanics for Dummies', it will give you a broad beginning, and this channel Code Geek has a 11-hour course on quantum mechanics, it was pretty interesting, I would suggest you want to take a look at that. Calculus one is good, also take a dip at differential calculus, partial differential equations, and linear algebra.
Good luck on your journey!
Damn, imagine if they’d given him two minutes.
What good would it do to give two basic explanations when you can just restart it?
I still wouldn’t get it
🤣
That's not a dude. Transgender "cox"
@@spunkymunky9286 lmao that’d be great
This guy is always smiling when he’s explaining things, it’s really nice. Wish my teachers would’ve tried it.
Mine threw chalk and eraser brushes
its called botox.
Lol And mine! But then again, mine had good reason not to be able to laugh. I once saw a female teacher get slapped across the face by a male student, one of the many bullies.
@@user-op9mv5lq1u Mine were simply not even there. In all fairness to them tho my school was way too problematic for any teacher to survive it, even less smile while at it. Public lower secondary schools in Portugal are hell holes, just as bad as they are in England, because of all the monster kids coming from troubled homes. Basically if you can’t afford a private school at least until your kids reach higher secondary level (which in Portugal is year 9) you’re better off home schooling them. To this very day I have no idea how I myself survived it. It literally felt like I had served time by the time I got to year 9 and could kiss the hell goodbye. So again, one can’t really ask of teachers who work under these conditions that they’re able to smile; they are after all human beings, not super humans. I have seen female teachers be insulted with everything under the sun before getting slapped across the face by students. One can’t really expect a person like that, who is really just surviving day after day, lesson after lesson, to be able to teach much. So less judgement on the teachers, and more basic understanding please. The public educational system is a failure, and teachers are the escape goats, cause the ones who show their face in the field every day are obviously the easiest targets to blame; when facts are that they too are suffering. Most of my teachers in lower secondary were on the verge of mental breakdowns. So much for the physics! I made the decision not to have children because I can’t afford a private school or to home school, and I will never, EVER, produce a child so I can then leave it in the hands of any public school system of this fucked up society. I was still having nightmare’ish dreams about that school until very recently. As a teacher I’ve been lucky enough to only teach in private schools (well I made sure I qualified for that) and the difference is just abysmal! The kids are so mature, well adjusted, sane, healthy and well behaved it’s incredible. It makes me feel for the teachers, and kids, that have to endure the lower secondary public school insanity even further.
@@user-op9mv5lq1u omg my latin teacher in 6th grade always did that
if i had a teacher who could explain in simple terms the meaning and functions of certain principles of physics and math just the way brian cox did for quantum mechanics, I would have been an enthusiasts of deep learning a long time since childhood days. brian is a very good example of a very good teacher.
Brian Cox is not teaching, he’s divulging that is very different. The problem about quantum physics, or even Newton physics is one should study maths to real understand concepts without lack of information.
The art of divulgation is to explain something which arises from the mathematical formulation and give some common day life experience to have some intuition.
But one always loose something when doing so, there’s no magic ways to explain quantum physics or general relativity: if you want to understand them you have to study, otherwise you’ll never get the real thing and lack security when applying what you learn beyond the example in the video.
You can try perhaps Leonard Susskind courses or MIT open courses on quantum mechanics to have the basis of the theory: then you have good teachers, not divulgation
The ability to explain complex ideas in simple terms is a skill we should all strive for.
On that level he just gave birth to a turd, though. ;-)
It’s also sign of high level intelligence
@@mc1877 definitely
I can make a fart noise with my hand and my armpit.
@@CornPopWazABadDude me too
Tomorrow in physics class:
I'm somewhat of a physicist myself
Absolutely love this meme
Had a personal lesson from Brian cox. Nbd
Can you explain quantum mechanics to me?
Why yes I can, do you have a minute?
😆
That made no sense
He explained it in 60 seconds. I will understand it in ten years.
Or 20
if you think you understand quantum mechanics, you’re wrong
Unlikely, physicists don’t completely understand it. That’s why the door is left open
At least you are optimistic.
Ever consider the either??(
This is crazy. I've only taken one physics class, grasping only a basic level of understanding relating to the terminology. Yet, this was incredibly simple to follow and even made me excited to follow along while recognizing the logical consistency of the concepts he was introducing. Very nice.
Well, he's taken a particularly selective slice through the entire thing. By treating these quantum fields as if they were particles, he can describe them in terms of point locations in spacetime, and then, almost as a footnote, mention that the point locations have a probability of finding the particle there.
So far, it sounds just like classical physics, which is exactly what makes it intuitive to understand. That's because he doesn't mention what it looks like before measurement collapses the wave function to produce the specific particle. In other words, he doesn't mention what makes quantum physics unlike classical physics. And so he's glossed over the account of what is taking place in the general case, when there is no measurement to simplify things.
Everything that we think of as a classical particle is properly described as a field. A field in mathematics is a description of what values exist at every point in some kind of space. For example, if you take the ocean's surface as a 2D space, the wave height at every point on that surface could be called a field. So could the temperature, the salinity, and so on. This is still intuitive classical physics.
But in quantum physics the value of, say, the electron field at some point is the probability of finding an electron at that point. The field is spread out over all of spacetime, and there's just one field for all the electrons. It's like waves on the ocean surface. But there are no electrons anywhere in this field until some interaction occurs. It's all just field potentials. Those potentials are as real as the particles, but we don't know that directly, because we can't measure them without interacting with them and thus turning them into particles. That's a bit spooky.
@@starfishsystems I appreciate the time and effort you took to elaborate on the key details missing from this video. The format is inherently stress-inducing, which I now imagine lent credence to oversimplification (in regards to the speaker having 60 seconds to answer the prompt). The explanation you provided was concise, constructive, and accessible to a passive enjoyer of quantum mechanics like me. While I don't understand 100% of the information you explained. My concluding thought was still "damn, a lot of this seems like discerning and predicting the pretense of particles." Not sure if that thought means I'm on the right track to understanding this though 😅.
Great! Now explain quantum entanglement.
Sign of genius. Taking the very complex and making it at least understandable to the masses.
He quoted Feynman who was a great teacher and a theoritical physicist who would break down complex knowledge in a simple way
...did not explained anything at all
@@TheReverb1 Bro are you slow
@@herohunter5961 and you're a phoney who probably flips burgers for a living but likes to pretend to know shit on youtube and other social media sites.
@@herohunter5961 No; so do you really think that he explained for dummies?
That’s how you know if a person knows his/her stuff. They can distill and communicate what’s important to understand. And generate more interest about it too. Well done!!!
just say they
@@erenyeager6668 if only there was a word that can be used for some ambiguous person with no revealed gender
If you can't explain it simply, you simply didn't understand it- Albert Einstein
As I learned in undergrad, the less you say, the more you know.. well done 👍
I would agree, especially if the individual has been within the field for a very long time.
He explained something but I didn't learn anything. But I have a probability that I may understand what he said at a later point.
do u get it yet?
Nice
Comprehension mechanics - the probability that you will understand something at a later date! 😜💫
I can calculate the probability that I will be at another point in the room at some time later in the day.
This
It was so hard to understand quantum mechanics before, but I understood quantum mechanics a little bit!
This is amazing. He is so laid back in his explanation.🤯
I love how I thought in the beginning, he would need more than 60 seconds to explain it, but by the end, it was me who needed more than 60 seconds for him to explain it.
I love how I lol at this.
baahahahahah me too
😂
What do you not get
@@joeg5265 everything if you know pls help
I understand all that. But why couldn't they put Humpty back together again?
A question old as time itself.
Entropy.
He was rich in protein
@@Lunarfacia tenet
Because all the Kings horses and all the Kings men didn't have Richard Feynman. And Mr Dumpty was too fat.
Cool..you can understand the level of understanding that Brian has in the way he can explain quickly and simply..Thank you
"Less is more". A good teacher keeps things simple for students to go the next level.
I guess I'm a quantum mechanic now.
Quantum physicist not mechanic
whoosh
Ha Ha Ha
I have a socket set and a spanner so i'm in.
no vitchh try again
Brian Cox has done something that most people can never do. He has managed to hold onto that child enthusiasm we all had. Look at him. He's explained what's beyond most people's imagination or ability to comprehend and he did with the same look an excited child explains things to a parent or sibling.
If a child explained things this well, they were clearly the smarter adult
Hmm, It has been proven that only a small percentage of people don't understand quantum mechanics, and even less that don't get it when it's explained to them like they were 10. So I don't know where you get this "most people don't understand it". Must be from TV shows because they make it seem so. I mean, if you actually bothered to read something about quantum mechanics you would realize it's not complicated at all. The complicated and hard part is actually discovering something new about it. Understanding it is very easy.
Science has nothing to do with people's abilities and everything to do with their opportunities and their environment. Peer pressure, poor teaching, lack of resources, all play a part.
I heard his full name is Brian Cox-Ucker. He sure comes across that way.
@@HelloImCrimson Source?
Great Explanation
Thank you Brian for you efforts in science education. You should be Knighted.
I bet he smiles in his sleep.
he's a happy man
The Sun
happy git
He smiles in a beautiful way.
Can you imagine being his wife, though? Waking up next to him, turning over and he's sleeping with this eyes open, like :D... I would be like, 8|
:-) He is very nice with his appearance and how he explains. He has taught me physics.
As the skipper often said to the professor
“easy for you, difficult for me.“
why he looks like gay? is he gay?
@@makara2711 listen gabe, thats a random ass question and kinda goofy
@@ryan0150 C'mon Ryanny !! Gabe was -speaking- (asking) about Skipper. Do you know who's Skipper ? Exactly. You Goofy ass.
@@makara2711 dude is talking about quantum mechanics and the only thing that pops into your head is if he’s gay or not? Lol cool
@@makara2711 you can come out of the closet no one will judge you
I like them both, Brian Cox and Jim Al-Khalili. Physics is so interesting, and these two guys really do their best to present it to the world in a way that most people can understand it.
Here's my slightly longer explanation: Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle states that we cannot simultaneously measure both the position AND the velocity of a particle. All we can measure are ranges of probabilities. The probability of measuring a particle at a particular position at a later point in time is governed by the Schrödinger Equation, which calculates the time-evolution of the "probability wave", aka, the distribution of probabilities at all possible locations at later points in time. Another way of calculating the probability of finding a particle at a certain position at a later point in time is using Path Integrals (this formalism was created by Richard Feynman), and adding up the quantum "Action" for every possible path the particle could have taken to get to that specific position. The Path Integral formalism is also used in Classical Mechanics, but is updated in Quantum Mechanics to use an Imaginary term in the Action quantity. Lastly, I will clarify that the uncertainty in the particles position is not due to a measurement limitation or a lack of knowledge, it is *true* indeterminism.
When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change.
nice
No shit
What ur saying is along the lines of "every 60 seconds, a minute passes" lmao
when you stop looking down, you'll start to realise youre looking up #woke
Brilliant!
There is a nonzero probability that you can walk through a wall. The particles that constitute the atoms that make up the wall, would have to move in just the right way and you could try from now until the end of the universe and never succeed. But the probability is not zero. That’s quantum mechanics.
Noted🤓
Thanks for this thought process
What's the probability you make it halfway and they move back so you and the wall become one?🤔
@@Juan-dc6yf i think it would be even more likely to be stuck in the wall than to go through it😅
But why?
Anything to do with quanta is highly fascinating to me... this was a great way to explain to tbh...
Path integral formulation uses Lagrangian to describe quantum mechanics (you can notice that when he said 'action'). The easier version of quantum mechanics is to use Hamiltonian, involved when you describe quantum mechanics with the Schrodinger Equation. Path integral formulation is more difficult since you have to know field theory, whereas solving the Schrodinger Equation is equivalent of solving a linear algebra problem.
Well, knowing field theory should be a given I think considering quantum physics is literally the quantization of classical field theory. And I do sense that you're correct because I have run into Hamiltonian mathematics numerous times but never this path integral thing. But I don't see at all how these specific domains (which seem mostly to just be disparate components of quantum theory rather than the core elements that define it) actually serve as any kind of synoptic explanation for the quantization of particle physics and field theory generally.
First rule of quantum mechanics: "Everything is possible... In theory."
IT`s ALL happend Before...... .....To Move Mountains......
Second rule of quantum mechanics: if it’s starting to make sense in your head, you’re on the wrong track
No cloning theorem does not like your first rule
First rule of quantum mechanics - you do not talk about quantum mechanics
Yet these theories can’t be disproven
Can you explain quantum mechanics? Us neither. But physicist Brian Cox can - and he's done it in 60 seconds: bbc.in/1uVy00c
Simple as that eh?
what he said.
Great, not sure I understood but great all the same.
Mmmmm..... Ok. I suppose so.
Christian Amador
Very rare that fast is in a straight line. Trying to follow an Esprit in an Elise though curves and straights is the most fun i have ever had.
a fun thing to do with quantum computing is related to spin, and angular
momentum, I’ve read its kind of math metaphorical to compare newtonian
spinning bike wheels to quantum spin, I saw a video where a guy had two
bike wheels on an axle, on a rope, where he could spin them same
direction or opposite directions, spinning same direction they turned
horizontal and had precession, they had a particular spin, when the two
were spinning same direction they omitted going horizontal and just went
vertical, now with quantum entanglement or linkage of 18 photons to one
other photon, or one electron, you can have all of them spin up, and
the main one actualizes nonfractional spin up, then if you you have 9
spin up, and 9 opposite spin up they balance bigly, and perhaps the
quantum actualized state of the photon is durably undecided or
indeterminate (longer compute interval! Less unwanted environmental
disruptability/stabler quantum computers!) along with perhaps causing
increased compute time or computation resolution, “cylesishness” this
could be a new third quantum bit besides up and opposite of up spin, so
you get 3 factorial states, making quantum computing more effective per
module. also, if fractional ratios like like 4:14 are resolvable or 7:9
then you can get like 2^18 bits, or something, per quantum superposition
compute element, really heightening quantum computer capability.
tell me what you think of this quantum computing idea/note, if you think it
has merit pass it along to engineers and scientists. The idea is public
domain. I'm Treon Verdery.
Feynman also said in an identical situation: «Listen, buddy, if I could tell you in a minute what I did, it wouldn't be worth the Nobel Prize.»
Literally everything that was said in this video can further be shortened to very short and also very useless sentence:
Particle is described by it's physical properties such as it's location, moment of time, mass, momentum, etc
Chance of particle hoping from one place to another is calculated by adding up chances of all it's different possible paths.
Not particularly enlightening
Anything can be stated simply and briefly.
Then why give him a prize? For explaining absolutely nothing. What a load of shite.
@@supertramp6011 huh? He formulated a simple method to calculate these intergrals. It helped explain and advance the entire field of particle physics.
@@supertramp6011 It's spelled SHIT!
like you have 'Shit' for brains!
my life goal is to be as happy as Brian is
Your goal should be to be as intelligent as him. Duh!
LOL.
Why do you think he's happy?
I assume he's not sad really but happy as Brian?
Your goal should be not to lecture other individuals what their goals should be ..."Duh"
Christy Neaverson My life's goal is you
When you're fully into a certain subject and you can look at it from a wide angle, you're able to explain it in simple terms.
Dr.Brian cox explains complicated things like a enthusiastic happy kid and that make it more interesting to hear and simple to understand.. Nail and brian cox r two gems❤
Well that's that fucking sorted then,
Love the way the Brits use sorted
The most British comment of the day
i'm dying XD
Haha
Very good!
You just know that somewhere in his house, there's a portrait of Brian Cox that is ageing horribly, while the man himself is eternally young.
UNDERRATED COMMENT ALERT 🚨 🚨
Plastic gonna make you young till it gives you cancer
Yeah and that portrait has an acting career
Brill 👍🏻
I have a paint sample card in my wallet, the color is called "Dorian Gray" and I kept it because it looks like Dorian Gray's business card.
Probably the algorithm for determining 'the action' is quite complicated, but it would be interesting to hear it!!
Got too meet him today, it was awsome
"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics" - Richard Feynman
carpy1970 "If Quantum Mechanics hasn't profoundly shocked you, you didn't understand it." -Neils Bohr
I don't think quantum mechanics understands me either. Perhaps we're not suited.
maybe because quantum mechanics cannot be understood mentally. Through intuition and looking at the big picture, it seems accessible tho.
IMO Intuition says _charm , up, down, spin_ etc... is all BS Emperors new clothes only.
If you want intuition's version look up Walter Russell or Tesla, Bill Gaede even.
Saying "Bill Gaede" has stripped you of all credibility. He is just a bitter old man who failed high school mathematics, who is on a crusade to remove mathematics from physics because he just can't understand it.
He can explain this relatively easily but can't explain why a fallen shampoo bottle in the shower is louder than an atomic bomb.
Poseidon Missiles will be even louder!
Or why a small amount of liquid left in a glass becomes an ocean when it's knocked over.
@@andysedgley Are you dumb? It's a combination of gravity, viscosity, and surface tension that makes liquids spread out.. literally 5 year olds can work this stuff out.
I don't think he was trying to explain why your liquid filled bottle causes a loud sound when it impacts a thin acrylic bath. but it is certainly quieter than an atomic bomb, so get you ears checked.
Or when you drop your toast it always falls butter side down.
I've watched hours of videos to explain this but couldn't in the end. This guy nailed it in less than a minute!
More please
The probability of a simple explanation was low, but he did it perfectly. On a quantum level, it totally makes sense. 😂
hahahaha I had a good laugh, thank u for that😂😂
At a quantum level it took minus 19 seconds.
😂😂😂
❤agreed
@@baldrick1485 At a quantum level, he wasn't even there when I wasn't looking.
In quantum mechanics the physical system is described through a wave function whose evolution over time is determined by the Schrodinger equation. The wave function represents infinite different possible results for the physical quantities related to the system, but when we take a measurement, only one of these infinite possibilities becomes real; after the measurement, we must therefore modify the wave function “by hand” to eliminate all other possible results, and this modification is called the “collapse” of the wave function.
The fundamental problem with quantum mechanics is that interactions among particles are already included in the Schrodinger equation and such equation does not predict any collapse. The collapse of the wave function is a violation of the Schrodinger equation, i.e. a violation of the most fundamental laws of physics and therefore the cause of the collapse cannot be determined by the same laws of physics, in particular, it cannot be determined by the interactions already included in the Schrodinger equation. The Schrodinger equation is what allows us to make quantitative predictions about the outcomes of future measurements; everytime we make a measurement, we receive new information about the system, and we need to "update" our wave function, i.e. to collapse it, otherwise the Schrodinger equation would provides wrong predictions relative to successive measurements. After one century of debates, the problem of measurement in quantum mechanics is still open and still represents the crucial problem for all interpretations of quantum mechanics. In fact, on the one hand it represents a violation of the Schrodinger equation, that is, a violation of the fundamental laws of physics. On the other hand, it is necessary for the laws of quantum physics to make sense, and to be applied in the interpretation and prediction of the phenomena we observe. This is the inescapable contradiction against which, all attempts to reconcile quantum physics with realism, break.
Quantum mechanics is incompatible with realism (that's why Einstein never accepted quantum mechanics); all alleged attempts to reconcile quantum mechanics with realism are flawed. Quantum mechanics implies that physical reality (the universe) consists of the collection of all observed phenomena and such phenomena do not exist independently of consciousness. In fact, the properties of a physical system are determined only after the collapse of the wave function; when the properties of the system are not yet determined, the system is not real, but only an idea, a hypothesis. Only when collapse occurs do properties become real because they take on a definite value. It makes no sense to assume that the system exists but its properties are indeterminate, because properties are an intrinsic aspect of the system itself. The collapse represents the transition from a hypothetical system to an actual system.
The collapse of the wave function represents a non-physical event, since it violates the fundamental laws of physics, and can be associated with the only non-physical event we know of, consciousness. Therefore, the only consistent rational explanation of the collapse is that it occurs because consciousness is involved in the process. However, the fact that properties are created when a conscious mind observes the system in no way implies that it is the observer or his mind that creates those properties and causes the collapse; I regard this hypothesis as totally unreasonable (by the way, the universe is supposed to have existed even before the existence of humans). The point is that there must be a correlation between the collapse of the wave function (=violation of the physical laws) and the interaction with a non-physical agent (the human mind); however, correlation does not mean causation because the concomitance of two events does not imply a causal link. The consciousness that causes the collapse of the wave function must be an eternal consciousness, that is, a conscious God. This is the idealistic perspective, which implies that physical reality exists as a concept in the mind of God who directly creates the phenomena we observe, according to the matematical models through which He conceived the universe (the laws of physics); the collapse of the wave function is a representation of the moment when God creates the observed phenomenon. This is essentially the view of the Irish philosopher George Berkeley, and in this view God is not only the Creator, but also the Sustainer of the universe. Idealism provides the only logically consistent interpretation of quantum mechanics, but most physicists do not accept idealism because it contradicts their personal beliefs, so they prefer an objectively wrong interpretation that gives them the illusion that quantum mechanics is compatible with realism.
Wow. . . That's amazing
@@schmetterling4477 Probably, but they made it sound amazing. I honestly have no idea with this stuff.
If I ever meet you in a bar or coffee shop...............the drinks are on me. However , be prepared for some big questions !!!!
Great and no loud music
Great. I'm going to put quantum mechanics in my resume and just memorize what he said here when tested on it. I'll definitely land that cashier job now.
The probability of you being somewhere else in the future is..... lemme check.... carry the one... divide by Pie... Ummm, yep.
a lot
Cashier on the space station
What's the probability of that money moving from cash register to my pocket?
legit lol
Underrated comment right here 😂
So, if my cat's asleep on the couch and I get up from my reclining chair to get another beer, there's a probability that my cat will sit where I was (because it's warm from my ass) before I get back. I'm no expert in quantum mechanics but I can tell you that, that probability is right around 98%...ain't that right mittens?
Just change that cat with quantum particles and hurray you are a physicst🤓
If you are getting your tenth beer, what is the probability, when you get back, you will sit on mittens?
@@m.dewylde5287 Cats, like particles operate on probabilities.
And they even often suddenly and seeming without reason need to be OVER THERE NOW.
Also, any measurement done to a cat effects the cat. They are too, immeasurable. Heisenberg Me-oooow.
You sir/madam are bid good day.
Good day I say. 😆
Unless the cat is in a box, then it belongs to Schrodinger, and he might not make it out alive, or he might already not be alive, or he might be both alive and not alive... you should just let the cat out of the box.
Now I get it!
Perfect!
So loved Carl Sagan Cosmos !
He has more shine on his face than my future!
Feel sorry for you than! :D
Lol
Do not study quantum mechanics. It makes you forget to wash your face.
lmfao someone please parody this interview
Your future must really suck, because I saw loser reflecting towards your direction.
*explains quantum mechanics in 60 seconds*
CZcams: Here’s a 30 second ad
Me: GOD DAMN IT!
Not gonna generalize but I take it you’re an impatient spouse.
I use Huawei phone, so no ads for me and i can even play youtube in the background 😎
@@navish1909 your all data for no ads
Fair deal you say?
Schrodinger's Cat Litter!
I love listening to him speak
Incredible
Quantum Mechanics were the only lectures I never missed in my Physics degree, found them absolutely fascinating, took as perfect notes as I ever took. Thought I understood it really well but could I ever get the calculations to work and give me the right answers? That would be a big fat "no".
There were the ones I hated. Never understood much of it (didn't need to either). And I understand even less when, say, BBC or quantum computer fantatics try to popularise it by their far fetched analogies.
I had the same problem with deep learning.
How's it going now?
I just saw a video with Einstein explaining E = MC2
Is this the same?
You just need some renormalization shenanigans 😂
Congrats we all are now PhD in quantum mechanics. Update your resume and apply in NASA
Foxy nope. Particles can be waves, or waves can be particles. Depends on observer.
Except for you. You still clean toilets.
@@joelklemann9841 how do you know?
Well NASA isn't going to hire a PhD in Quantum mechanics
Indians obsessed with certifications and phds ... No wonder pathetic country
Thank you for clearing it all up😄
this is the type of teacher we want in our high school... he's damm good
One thing I learned. Real scientists don't comment on YT vids.
Whistler4u Nonsence.
Rob Degrey You mean Nonsense? Thanks for proving my point.
Whistler4u aha Im a real physicst here, look how angry all my comments are XD Rob Degrey I've seen your other posts I dont believe u know phys for a second
Nick Sumner And your point? At what time did I say I was a physicist? btw You're actually a stalker too...
Whistler4u Late night? Yeah using the term stalking so damn loosely, I can't help it those messages were at the top of the comment page jeez...
And read into what I said, I don't think I was angry at you nor calling you a physicist. Everyone else here thinks they're one and you seem to point out some truth to how egocentric everyone's being, so grats I actually think ur alright.
Normally, before you shoot an interview, you would powder the subject's face so he doesn't look like he took a shower in Vaseline before you started filming.
Dr Shaym Yeah, normally done when the interview is on screen. This is radio. No one gives a fuck how you look.
u r the guy from red letter media
Does that offend you ?
Radio?! Then why did they shot it it HD and posted in CZcams?
CZcams is radio now? Also the lighting and other elements in the room suggests a video "version" of this interview was intended.
Brilliant!
This is what is so compelling about physics in general. We start with fundamentally basic principles of things like mass, energy, inertia and build ever more complex relationships between them to explain the universe.
Quantum mechanics is still elusive to me, but I appreciate an expert starting with a singular concept of the Path Integral.
You tried so hard with the vocabulary lmfao
@@jpmcfrosty I'm an engineer. Newtonian mechanics are really straightforward. Quantum is not.
@@petrichor3647 Alright, mate. Me like simple motion. Newton friend. Quantum strange. Smart man make hard topic less hard. Thanks, smart man.
Upsetting people think you’re going over the top with vocab 💀 I’ve seen people throwing in long words they don’t even understand before.
It's elusive to me why the Path Integral would make much of an impact on your understanding of QM. He outlined just a calculations technique.
Brian lost me after “well, the most basic version is….”!
The good old days before everyone thought it was so cool and trendy to start sentences inappropriately with "So"
😂😂
@@richardmacpherson2
So, what?
🤣😆😂
Brian lost me and thousands of others when he started spouting his anti-Brexit garbage. Just another pathetic Liberal littering our education institutions that has never held a proper job. Never again will I listen to anything of his.
Brian explained the 'tip of a very big iceberg' of Quantum Mechanics. What he didn't mention was that electrons, photons, etc. can appear as waves or particles depending on how you observe or measure them and they have a probability of being most anywhere, like waves on an ocean. There is also the problem of the measurement changing the probability distribution of the particles/waves as described by Heisenberg. Then there is the 'spooky action at a distance' as described by Einstein, that seems to defy information moving faster than the speed of light, which would also break a few laws of physics. As Richard Feynman said: "If you think you understand Quantum Mechanics, then you really don't understand Quantum Mechanics".
Brian is an amazing man. Knowledgeable, well-spoken, and a great speaker on scientific issues.
and played keyboards for D:Ream.
terrific actor too
This guy makes more sense on a complicated topic in 60 seconds than my group do in our 15 minutes presentation :)
Yeah because you go to a state college and not private so it’s going to deaden your mind
That's because his IQ level is 183. The average human IQ is 100.
@Lizzie McGuire Had a crush on you as a kid
@@alexk3469 they really arent much different from each other depending on the major youre going for. also he never said he goes to a state college. but maybe you did.
I remember this analogy from an engineering professor of mechanics of material. A person leans on a wall through time (infinite time which is the key) they will eventually fall through the wall.
Wow, you got a really crappy explanation. :-)
Thx
Or for most of us, “How to impress your friends in 60 seconds by pretending you understand quantum mechanics.”
😂🤣😂
Literally this
I just add the word quatum to everything and make quatum sentences with quantum grammars
@@Shinji17 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
spotted Fake
Quite brilliant. I couldn’t get past how shiny his skin was.
it always is. Every interview he's in.
I was looking at the redness of his lips ...
@@remirec that's sensual bro
You can get there too, the probability from a to b, you have to calculate, multiple that by infinity, to the 4th power...now solve for x
No, it was one minute exactly: from second 14 till minute 1:14. That was a very elaborate and easy to understand explanation. Well done Brian. I wonder how Jim would've answered in under a minute. Much more succinctly I expect.
I think the 60 second explanation being provided in an 82 second video is all I needed to know.
I guess now that he has explained this simple concept, things, can only get better.
Winner
Haha...
Um no.
Only D-reams
I see what you D-ream there.
If everybody in the world smiled like him. So contagious.
Our great ambassadors and explicators of the wonders of modern Science.
One of the best particle physicist in the world.
Read the comments below for an explanation of Quantum Stupidity in under 60 seconds. 😀
Brian and Jim sharing the mic ... that's when I listen - with my mind open and humble. Thanks for sharing ✌️
Its not about understanding - its about just accepting that things are this way- without any reason. Thats why its DESCRIPTIVE physics
Now that I know that , I can go on with my life with the full understanding that I will need this information in case I critically need the location in the room of a specific electron .
It takes a very smart individual to explain something with deep complexity in simple terms. These types of people make the greatest memorable teachers in life. We all had a few of them as we pass through our educational path.
Yes! I saw a quote that said something like “if you can’t explain it in a way that makes sense to a child, then you don’t fully understand it yourself”. I think the quote was attributed to Einstein but who knows whether that’s true or not 😂
Hmm, never saw it once in my life path, UNTILL NOW! Quite a revelation, I must say 👍
Load of tosh , next he'll be saying we're descended from ape's 😂
His voice is so reassuring and demeanour always so calm and charming. I wish I had a maths or science teacher like him. Although looking back I might not have appreciated them.
He is like damon (ian somerhalder)
Don't dwell on the past, think about the future! Things Can Only Get Better!
@@imaweerascal that’s not true if a nuke drops then things will only get worse hour after hour
@@adamatch9624 It was a joke. Brian Cox was in a band called D Ream, they had a hit called 'Things can only get better'. Weird but true.
@@imaweerascal He played keyboards for the band Dare too.
These two guys are totally awesome! Them and Michio Kuku are by far my favorite physicists.
The wave or string that remembers pass spins
I mean this is so iconic. How amazing it is to see Keanu Reeves talking about quantum physics and science. Is there anything this guy can't do!!!
Whoa.
🤣
Except for the fact they MAYBE have similar hair and that's it, good observation...
cillian murphy mix with keanu
@@dogodogo5891 Or tom cruise mixed with cilian fusion resulting in keanu reeves.
Now I understand what my dog hears when I speak to him.
Hahaha so true
nice analogy
The association of the main numbers in the field of mathematics with each other, reflects numerical sequences that correspond to the dimensions of the Earth, the Moon, and the Sun in the unit of measurement in meters, which is: 1' (second) / 299792458 m/s (speed of light in a vacuum).
Ramanujan number: 1,729
Earth's equatorial radius: 6,378 km.
Golden number: 1.61803...
• (1,729 x 6,378 x (10^-3)) ^1.61803 x (10^-3) = 3,474.18
Moon's diameter: 3,474 km.
Ramanujan number: 1,729
Speed of light: 299,792,458 m/s
Earth's Equatorial Diameter: 12,756 km. Earth's Equatorial Radius: 6,378 km.
• (1,729 x 299,792,458) / 12,756 / 6,378) = 6,371
Earth's average radius: 6,371 km.
The Cubit
The cubit = Pi - phi^2 = 0.5236
Lunar distance: 384,400 km.
(0.5236 x (10^6) - 384,400) x 10 = 1,392,000
Sun´s diameter: 1,392,000 km.
Higgs Boson: 125.35 (GeV)
Phi: 1.61803...
(125.35 x (10^-1) - 1.61803) x (10^3) = 10,916.97
Circumference of the Moon: 10,916 km.
Golden number: 1.618
Golden Angle: 137.5
Earth's equatorial radius: 6,378
Universal Gravitation G = 6.67 x 10^-11 N.m^2/kg^2.
(((1.618 ^137.5) / 6,378) / 6.67) x (10^-20) = 12,756.62
Earth’s equatorial diameter: 12,756 km.
The Euler Number is approximately: 2.71828...
Newton’s law of gravitation: G = 6.67 x 10^-11 N.m^2/kg^2. Golden number: 1.618ɸ
(2.71828 ^ 6.67) x 1.618 x 10 = 12,756.23
Earth’s equatorial diameter: 12,756 km.
Planck’s constant: 6.63 × 10-34 m2 kg.
Circumference of the Moon: 10,916.
Gold equation: 1,618 ɸ
(((6.63 ^ (10,916 x 10^-4 )) x 1.618 x (10^3)= 12,756.82
Earth’s equatorial diameter: 12,756 km.
Planck's temperature: 1.41679 x 10^32 Kelvin.
Newton’s law of gravitation: G = 6.67 x 10^-11 N.m^2/kg^2.
Speed of Sound: 340.29 m/s
(1.41679 ^ 6.67) x 340.29 - 1 = 3,474.81
Moon's diameter:: 3,474 km.
Cosmic microwave background radiation
2.725 kelvins ,160.4 GHz,
Pi: 3.14
Earth's polar radius: 6,357 km.
((2,725 x 160.4) / 3.14 x (10^4) - (6,357 x 10^-3) = 1,392,000
The diameter of the Sun: 1,392,000 km.
Numbers 3, 6 & 9 - Nikola Tesla
One Parsec = 206265 AU = 3.26 light-years = 3.086 × 10^13 km.
The Numbers: 3, 6 and 9
((3^6) x 9) - (3.086 x (10^3)) -1 = 3,474
The Moon's diameter: 3,474 km.
Now we will use the diameter of the Moon.
Moon's diameter: 3,474 km.
(3.474 + 369 + 1) x (10^2) = 384,400
The term L.D (Lunar Distance) refers to the average distance between the Earth and the Moon, which is 384,400 km.
Moon's diameter: 3,474 km.
((3+6+9) x 3 x 6 x 9) - 9 - 3 + 3,474 = 6,378
Earth's equatorial radius: 6,378 km.
Orion: The Connection between Heaven and Earth eBook Kindle
I got a phd in quantum physics in just 60 seconds. Thanks man
I've watched all the videos about quantum mechanics on CZcams in my quest to understand the concept. But I would have saved myself countless hours if I only watched just this video. Brian Cox managed to confuse me like all the other quantum mechanics videos, but he did it in under 60 seconds.
see my notes above. His example was a poor and over complicated example.
The most important part is that particles can hop around without ever being anywhere in between, but we cannot state with absolute certainty where they will be at a later time point. All we can do is calculate the future probability that they are somewhere else with a very simple equation. It becomes complicated though as soon as the situation gets complicated. But then we can calculate it on a computer given enough time and processing power.
What he forgot to mention is that particle can also be in all the positions simultaneously.
THAT's the doozy@@rohandavies8889
I love him, I went to a lecture in Manchester was alot more in depth than this. But he really makes it interesting for people that just want it simplified. Just draws more people into the field, witch is a great thing. (Yes I put witch instead of which get over it)
I like witches too.
@@galadriel3134 😂
Says a lot when you can’t even spell ‘ which’ - witch. I’m done with this utter garbage.
@@supertramp6011 He made alot of mistakes witch bothered me to.
@@supertramp6011 No need to be like that, I'm typing on my phone it always changes things. Either that or I mistyped somthing, either way it isn't a big deal still makes sense and doesn't take anything away from the point I was making.
Wow, thank you