The Uncertainty Principle is NOT about "Uncertainty"
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 09. 2014
- The uncertainty principle was suggested by Werner Heisenberg in 1927. His version was only about position and momentum, but it's much broader than that. In fact, it happens anytime you model waves.
________________________________
VIDEO ANNOTATIONS
Crazy Quantum Things: • 4 Crazy Things About Q...
Why is Time Relative? • Why is Time Relative?
________________________________
COOL LINKS & SOURCES
MinutePhysics on Uncertainty Principle:
• What is the Uncertaint...
Veritasium on Uncertainty Principle:
• Heisenberg's Uncertain...
SciShow on Uncertainty Principle:
• IDTIMWYTIM: Heisenberg...
Wikipedia:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertai...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_c...
________________________________
SCIENCE ASYLUM STUFF
More videos at: / thescienceasylum
Vlog: / thenicklucid
Facebook: / scienceasylum
Twitter: @nicklucid / nicklucid
Google+: www.google.com/+Scienceasylum
Main Site: www.scienceasylum.com/
T-Shirts: scienceasylum.spreadshirt.com/
________________________________
IMAGE CREDITS
Logo designed by: Ben Sharef
Stock Photos and Clipart
- Wikimedia Commons commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mai...
- Openclipart openclipart.org/
- or I made them myself...
I laughed really hard when he asked "where am i in the screen now?" 😂
This channel is informative but yet so underrated. You are amazing, man. Keep up the good work 👍❤
Seconded. My seventh grade stepson is on the autistic spectrum and people are always dumbing stuff down for him bc of how he acts, but he really loves watching the videos with me, and asks a lot of questions. We also both crack up at least once or twice per video. The content is very appreciated.
@@talkeetnatattoos That's wonderful to hear! Thanks for sharing.
@@ScienceAsylum I love that you responded to this comment so long after this video was even posted.
Anyways, you probably won’t see this… but I’m a college student studying electrical engineering and physics, and your videos really help me understand these things conceptually. Often we are just trained to do the math, which kinda sucks, so I’m glad to have a resource such as yourself to help understand, remember, or engrain some of these things to a higher degree than they were in the class room.
Happy holidays!
You're definitely "the best teacher I never had". For me you're our online Feynman. Keep it coming Prof. Your understanding of subject matter is impeccable.
3 min video explained it better than 13 years of school and intermediate college ... damn you nick you are a wizard
One of the hidden gems in CZcams. You sir deserve more likes and subscribers!
Thanks!
1:41 But where am I on the screen now? Everywhere!
Brilliant!
Your videos are awesome. I'm so glad I found your channel. Keep up the good work!
I'm bringing a "hi" from Looking Glass Universe. I also want tell you that you have gained a subscriber. You guys are great. Please continue making videos like that. They are being very useful for me as a highschool student who wants to be a physicist since I was a child. You (and other CZcams Education creators) helped me learn and improve my English as well. I'm very grateful to you for inspiring me in science. Making these kind of videos in my language (because there are none or too few) is one of my dreams and you are my idols. I hope you see the value you deserve as soon as possible from community. If this world won't going to an end soon, it's because of you. You are playing a huge role in saving the planet Earth. Just be aware of your importance in the lives of future's scientists. INFINITELY MANY THANKS!
Thank you! If there aren't enough educational videos in your language, then you should definitely make them when you are able. The more people we can reach, the better.
+The Science Asylum May I have more information about you? I'm going to apply to a university at the end of this academic year and studying abroad is an option for me if necessary scholarships will be available. Or I will (must) leave my country at least for masters degree and PhD. Maybe you can give me some advice and show me a better path to lead me to my goals. I would appreciate it if you help me when I have questions. Thanks in advance.
This is great stuff! I'm getting my 10 year old hooked on physics, and these passionate accounts of the weird whacky world of Lilliputia are super clear and easy to follow. Despite the ultra0complex subject matter, the video does a great job at helping to kick-starting my son's intellectual curiosity!
That's so wonderful!
Your videos are so fun and i learn more about quantum things that i love!
Just discovered your videos yesterday and I can't stop watching. You are very funny and I am learning a lot despite not understanding all of the content. Brilliant.
Love your videos, man. High quality gems on the internet! Thank you for all your time and effort; it's certainly noticed!
Finally a good explanation. People are giving wild interpretations out there, keep up the good job!
Thank you! You just removed a splinter that has been spiking my mind for half a century. Purr
For anyone wondering, here's an intuitive explanation of what a standard deviation is: Let's say we have the data set (1,5,8,6,10). The average of those numbers is 30/5=6. Now imagine we plot each of those data values on a number line along with the average value. Each data value will be some distance from the mean. Basically, the standard deviation is the average of those distances. However, to be technical, we actually _square_ each of those distances, average the squared distances, and then take the square root. So the standard deviation is the square root of the average _squared_ distance from the mean. I assume that's why Nick said it's complicated. The reason for this squaring and square rooting is that some distances will be positive and some negative (since some data values will be the left of the average and some to the right) and we need to eliminate this, otherwise the positive and negatives will cancel and we won't get an accurate picture.
So why not just take the absolute value of the distances and average them? Mainly for historical reasons. The "mean deviation" is the average of the absolute value of the distances and it's actually a better measure, but we've been using the standard deviation for so long now that we're kind of stuck with it, similar to how we're stuck with current being the flow of _positive_ charge while electrons have _negative_ charge. 🤷
What does this actually have to do with the uncertainty principle though? Well contrary to popular belief, uncertainty principle doesn't say that we can't measure the position to an arbitrary number of decimal places. You can measure it however accurately your equipment allows. _However,_ if you measure it again, you'll likely get a slightly _different_ value (you _could_ get the same value twice in a row, but if you did, it would simply be due to chance). If you do it several times, you get a data set that will have some standard deviation. Same thing for the momentum. You can measure it arbitrarily precisely any individual time (or as precisely as your equipment allows anyway), but if you do the same measurement several times, you'll have some variation in the data set which can be quantitied by computing the standard deviation. The uncertainty principle says that the product of these two standard deviations will always be greater than or equal to half of Planck's reduced constant.
What Nick meant about randomness, if I understand correctly, (Edit: Nick said he meant something slightly different than what follows, but that the description is accurate to how QM works. See his response below.) is that the variation between any two measurements is entirely random, but we see a low limit to this variation as we repeat the measurements over and over. Similar to how a coin flip is random, and hence we don't know ahead of time what the result will be, but we do know that, if we flip that coin an arbitrarily large number of times the proportion of heads to tails will get arbitrarily close to 1 (that is, there will be an equal number of heads and tails). It's theoretically possible, e.g. to get 1000 heads in a row, but it's _rediculously_ unlikely. Similarly, I think (though I may be wrong) that it's also theoretically possible to have a particular data set of positions and momentums that violate uncertainty principle, purely by chance, especially if the data sets are very small (i.e. only a few measurements have been taken). Is that correct Nick? Similar to how it's theoretically possible for the entropy of the universe to decrease, but it's just incredibly improbable?
*"You can measure it however accurately your equipment allows."*
True.
*"However, if you measure it again, you'll likely get a slightly different value."*
Actually, that depends on how soon you measure it. If you measure it again _right away,_ then you'll almost certainly get the same value you got the first time. When you measured the first time, it collapsed the wave function into a single eigenstate. It'll take some time to settle back into the super position. You have to wait between your measurements.
*"What Nick meant about randomness..."*
What you say after this is an accurate statement about quantum mechanics, but it's not what I meant when I said "randomness principle." I meant that, when someone hear "uncertainty," they immediately think of the uncertainty in measuring _devices_ that we have to factor into experiments. This is not what the uncertainty principle means. It's not about measurement uncertainty. It's about _probabilistic_ uncertainty... uncertainty in pure randomness.
@@ScienceAsylum Isn't probabilistic randomness what I described though? Also, I realized I really should have said, "What I think Nick meant...", rather than wording it as if I was speaking for you, when I'm not. Sorry. 😔
@@Lucky10279 Don't worry. I didn't take any offense. You said "What Nick meant about randomness, _if I understand correctly_ ..." This video is super short, so that forces people to be a bit presumptuous. Yes, what you described was accurate for probabilistic randomness. I was just trying to clarify my statement in the video wasn't about the details. It was a broad statement contrasting what people _think_ the word "uncertainty" means from what it _actually_ means in the uncertainty principle.
@@ScienceAsylum Ah, gotcha. Thanks. :)
Q. Where is the electron?
A. It's in there.
Q. Where is the electron?
A. Yes
Probably
Yes, probabilities and likelihood. Probability is the energy available, and likelihood is the point of peak potential. The electron could be anywhere in this region.
Somewhere... over the rainbow...
Not really, it WAS if you measured it. It's "in there" if you want, but I see it as a weird undefined state (and it is everything it could be and isn't at the same time) when not directly observed.
Certainly got rid of lot of misconceptions. Thank You!
Nadim :You're really very dedicated for your passion.I appreciate with you to go on.
As always, awesome! And all that in just about 3 minutes!
Nick when you finally do build a time machine just remind me 20 years ago to focus on science and be a nicer person
I'll try to remember that 👍
That's why scientists in Germany prefer to call it "indeterminacy principle" (Unbestimmtheitsprinzip) rather than "uncertainty principle". The more colloquial term is "Unschärferelation" which would be "bluring relation".
Oh, that's good. I like it 👍
Just wanted to give you a shout out. I'm always looking for better ways to explain what I do, to people who don't do it. You've been supplying me with lots of good examples all weekend so far, so thanks for that too. And, don't worry, I never take credit for other people's intellectual work. I'll let 'em know where I got it. Try and spread the "good news" so to speak.
Once again, thanks. You've got a fan in me.
xxxooo
dc
wow a very great video it cleared my misconceptions about heisenberg uncertainty principal thanks alot
Great 3 min video! Changed my perspective
Another great video thank you for this wonderful beautiful information with knowledge I'm learning so much about things I Can't Describe or spell I give this video a thumbs up
I love how certain you are about the uncertainty principle! I hereby rename this video to the Nick Lucid Certainly not Uncertain principle.
I truly love your videos!! Each one makes me a little bit crazier!!
I'm still not sure I get at all Spin. I think I have some idea after reading a lot about it and watching many videos, but it is a really weird property. It is one of those things you think you kind of get, and then you lose it again.
I made a whole video on spin :-) czcams.com/video/sB1EPGmpzyg/video.html
I love that video, especially Spinning clone, he is my favorite one! I really like the way you graph and explain how spin looks with those arrows. Measuring it in one direction does not give information of how is it in the others, actually it will be in a superposition in them. That was something tough to understand but you made it very clear. Awesome!!!
" The electron doesn't have position " epic dialogue lucid
These are videos are so great!
The best 'ending' music. Gives me hopes for better understanding of the universe
Nick you are awesome thanks
Excellent explanation. Thank you
One of the best explanations! The uncertainty principle stems from the wave-particle duality. When the behaviour is like a particle, the location is more certain, and when the behaviour is like a wave, the velocity is more certain. This is because motion is in the form of waves. The wave prevents arbitrary positions around the nucleus.
Your channel is awesome!
Thanks!
Excellent video!!
Bingo. TRUE. Great succinct presentation.
Fantastic video!
Thanks!
The thing is that, no matter how many 5minute youtube videos you watch, you will never understand what uncertainty principle is, unless you go step by step from how uncertainty principle came to be.
And yeah, you just cant understand it without some descent high level maths understanding.
I disagree with you. There is a difference between spending years practicing every strategy in chess and learning all the rules of chess in just 5 minutes.
I always clearly understand your videos
Sir your explanation and expression is mind blowing
Yay! I finally got mentioned on a video!!!
hey arent you the person that got mentioned in a video? :)
Alekssandr Kät you're so famous, can I get an autograph? 😀✌🏼
14 minutes and 59 seconds left...
Why does anyone thumbs-down these videos??
There are always haters.
You should teach!!!!!! Be a professor or something!!!! :P
Arindam Banerjee Who says I don't teach? ;-)
@@ScienceAsylum ☺
I'd say that's exactly what he's doing :D
@@ScienceAsylum hahaahahah
He is! Great one at that. Respectus maximus!
Nice explanation.
Hi! I recently have been binging on your videos, and they explain beyond what I could find through schooling or on my own very well! When you listed off all the different properties of particles that can have this spread of values, they seem very similar to the properties that are affected by general relativity (through time dilation, length contraction, etc). Is it the case that these lists are identical? Are general relativity and the uncertainty principle related in that way? Maybe we cannot measure particles accurately because every device we use to measure them has these relativistic effects on such a small scale.
Great explanation
The last thing i wasn't sure about was "probability" what day it was.........
Another marvelous vid guys, love and appreciate your work.
Ohhh and i was one of those asking for a vid on this. And kind of was in this episode *fist pumps* Thanks so much. :)
Hi i was doing some reading on black holes and learned about hawkings radiation, Can i ask you what happens to a black hole once it has evaporated through the Hawkings radiation effect, I mean once its mass isn't big enough to be a black hole anymore in an unimaginably long time frame what would happen?
Dean Butler Well, once something is a black, it stays a black hole until it *completely* evaporates. It just shrinks gradually over time until it's completely gone.
Thanks man
*****
Hang on what happens to the stuff(information) that goes in to the black whole. How can you end up with nothing or everything being the same(radiation) This conflicts with certain principles like conservation of energy, does it not?
Who is here because of Looking Glass Universe? 😂😂
I am.
Me.
Did she recommend The Science Asylum or something?
Nehmo Sergheyev She recommended this video in the comments of one of her videos on the same subject. She and I are (internet) friends.
+The Science Asylum JUST (internet) friends?!?! Hahaha. ;p On a real note though: I need some some intelligent internet friends! My FaceBook wall usually consists of people "ballin'," or "bitchin'." My curious brain is oh-so-lonesome! Won't you be my internet friend?!?! =))))
Bravo.good one
ya good video you have to make a video on thermal holes for time travelling
i love your videos...
The momentum is the fourier transformation of the position. So when we collect more data for the position in the time domain, we can accurately predict of the momentum in the spatial frequency domain.
The original term is "Unschärferelation" which could be translated literally as "unsharpness relation". I think that captures much better what's going on.
I agree, that translation would be far more accurate.
to be honest, at first i wasn't interest in your video, i was watching it for like 30 seconds and then move away but my conscience tell me to move back and give the video a chance, and I have to say i wasn't wrong. Your video is very interesting. I hope you make more video so I can learn more. Thank you.
If you have two audio waves, say a guitar and a violin, most people can tell them apart easily even if they are the same note. But if we shorten the notes until they are really fast, until each lasts less than a wavelength of the sound, it is no longer possible to tell the notes apart. This is not because our ears can't hear it. It is because the information is no longer in the note. The note is just too short to contain the information. This is how the uncertainty principle works. There is so little information in the quantum wave that the universe forgets the wave's origin.
Thus it's important to understand the uncertainty principle applies as a universal rule, not just for observations, but for mechanics as well. Once we lose sight of a particle, it can have wildly varying energy levels (for "wildly varying" levels near h-bar). For example, the breaking radiation from a particle accelerator doesn't come out as a single frequency, but as a spread of frequencies. So it is not just a measuring problem, but a fundamental law of nature.
I want to hear your take on the double slit experiment, and why the results are different between observing, and not observing the experiment.
Thanks for this, a very nice video. But I only see this true for wave , honestly.
It still don't make sense to me how a particle can be every where. However, you mentioned 'probability wave', pls make a video concerning this so I and some others out there can understand.
Thanks a lot sir, you are really doing a great job.🎉🎉
2:14 It's not we don't know the position,it is that it doesn't have a position.Remember
I am just talking to myself,please don't reply anyone.
Can you explain how the uncertainty principle works in atoms (orbitals to be exact),please?
In orbitals, there are some measurements that can be definite at the same time (like energy, angular momentum, and spin). By definite, I mean that an electron has only one value of each. We might take a measurement and find an electron in the 1st energy level with an angular momentum of zero, which means it's "definitely" in the ground state. When some measurements are definite, others are not. That means, for other measurements (like linear momentum or position), an election has multiple values at the same time with some probability for each. The uncertainty principle tells us which measurements are mutually exclusive and how they're related.
The Science Asylum Thank you very much!
" an election has multiple values at the same time with some probability for each..." Does that mean Bernie really did win?
UnderdoneElm77 lol. People on youtube 😀
@@underdoneelm7721
To err is human; to really foul things up requires a computer (with autocomplete) 🙂
U r an amazing scientist and teacher, what a better world we would live in if society shared your views and knowledge! If I could ask you a question I guess it would be why do we age and is it possible to reverse the deterioration of our mitochondria?
We don't really have a good answer for the aging question. If we did, we likely would have solved the problem by now.
@ 2:06 you have a picture of a wave function, and it got me thinking about world lines, is there such a thing as a particle with no momentum? (maybe momentum isn't the best word here, I'm not sure)
If you were to plot a particle on an x,y axis with time(x) and space(y) would it be safe to say because of the wave function all particles move through space and time?
Everything moves through time. As for space, that's tricky. If you're talking about a quantum particle, it can't ever have a precise amount of momentum. That means it can't ever have exactly zero motion through space with 100% precision. There's always some probability of it moving at least a little bit through space.
@@ScienceAsylum You're awesome, thanks for the fast reply. And for once I understood the reply :) Cheers!
@@ScienceAsylum I'm not sure the terminology but I know I heard that quantum particles vibrate ever so slightly, I take it this is why they can't ever have exactly zero motion through space with 100% precision? And does that also explain the absolute zero kelvin issue where nothing can ever be at zero kelvin because of motion through space?
That's _part_ of the reason for the absolute zero limit on temperature, but not the entire reason.
So many people try to make videos about these things when they haven't seen the math in too long. I think you've seen the math, and you eminate understanding more than any other channel on the platform.
0:24 - 0:41 Yeah that's Great Explanations
It would be very nice to make a video on the mass of neutrino.Why does it matter?
+Debabrata Dey
Why does it MATTER? Ha! Nice! (intentional or not)
I didn't know that a neutrino ever mattered? I thought it just energied... 🤔
Great video
Thanks! 🤓
Chandler you are awesome you have helped me understand physics😁😁
You're welcome! Glad I could help :-)
To use the word random is not correct, it is only interpreted as inherent randomness according to the Copenhagen Interpretation, according to the de Broglie - Bohm Pilot-wave Interpretation it is not random but due to non-local hidden variables. It is important to keep in mind that the mathematical formulism of the de Broglie Bohm interpretation can make as accurate predictions as the Copenhagen. In light of this, it cannot be considered as a fact that the position and momentum are random, so it would have been more accurate on your part if you would have said "according to the Copenhagen Interpretation".
You are amazing sir
Thanks 🤓
Excellent
Aha! The more you know where it is the less you kniw what it's doing. That is the way I learned it. Thanks!
Here's a good one for you. Does the inverse square law also applies to Gravity as it applies to Light? thanks.
excellent video. question: how is momentum conserved for single or double slit diffraction? in other words:I have a photon gun that I can dial the intensity down to fire one photon at a time. I fire my photon gun, the gun recoils in the -X direction, the photon flies off in the +X direction. The photon then passes thru two closely spaced slits (double slit experiment)instead of appearing on the screen directly behind the slits, the photon ends up to the side (after many, many photons the interference pattern appears) however, for the single event of a single photon, how is momentum conserved? dos the single event photon exchange momentum with the walls of the slit? Since the photon ended up to the side, it was no longer travelling in the purely X direction, therefore shouldn't the photon have exchanged momentum with the slit somehow?
Apparently Heisenberg didn't even _call_ it "The uncertainty principle." He called it "The indeterminacy principle." That's what the introduction to the concept on my homework problems said anyway.
I like that name a lot better because it references the idea of indeterminant forms such as 0/0. The way I always explain the idea of indeterminacy, especially in the context of why 0/0 is indeterminant is that they're ambiguous -- we can't assign them specific values in isolation. They only make sense in specific contexts where we have additional information about what they're supposed to represent. Similarly, at least in terms of the math (leaving aside the different interpretations of what it all means physically), it doesn't even make sense to ask about the position of a single wave. We have to add many waves together in order to assign the phrase "position of particle x" any meaningful value, but each new wave we add has a different value for value for momentum, so at that point, it doesn't really make sense to ask what the momentum is, because there are many different momentums. (Ted Ed did a really helpful video visualizing this process for anyone who's confused about what I mean). That's what it means when we say, e.g. that a particle is an a superposition of several different momentums -- it literally doesn't _have_ a single momentum because we've (for lack of a better term) "constructed" it out of several different waves with different momentum values. And "superposition" just means the whole is the sum of its parts. It's actually _not_ specific to Quantum Mechanics at all, but applies to many different things, both in and out of physics. E.g. The total force on an object is the sum of the individual forces. Similarly, the "total" momentum of a particle is equal to the sum of the different momentums of each wave. Don't take that analogy too literally though. With classical forces, we can just add them up and get a single answer. But the properties of quantum particles are usually given by wave _functions,_ so the superposition will (I think, but I'm not an expert) end up being something like, e.g. f2+f2+f3, where you can't further simplify the expression. Note that the above isn't the standard notation used.
That's the gist of the math, which is necessary to fully understand this principle, because it's fundamentally a _mathematical_ principle -- a result of the model we're using. That's not to say it doesn't correspond to physical reality; it's been experimentally verified numerous times for position and momentum and plenty of other similarly related variables. However, the principle itself is a broader mathematical principle that has to do with the math of wave functions. It's applies in many other circumstances besides QM.
Love the format of your videos!!!!! Would love to see it better produced! From a fellow physicist, really great job!
The newer videos are definitely better.
SURELY! But I meant these older videos with better production!
You rock nick
Please make a video about Bohr's explanation of spectral lines of Hydrogen.
looking glass universe
Glass ceiling. Work for any employer... even a university
When you have a point please be gentle....
You voice and the way you present repels even those who want to listen to you..
Please take it a fruitful way...
Sound is spherical --- everything vibrates
Let's start with "Where's the electron? " Probably I'd place it on the table. Uncertainty: It was in my hand but the electron vanished when my hand landed on the table. It's likely that there's no electron, but again uncertainty: I drew my hand away and at once an electron appeared on the table.
Ultimate intro!
Thank you,
You're welcome! 🤓
Good Vids
wicked video. Hilarious and informative.
Thanks!
I want that shirt!
I bought it from Philip DeFranco's store many years ago. He doesn't make it anymore, unfortunately.
Here's a thought experiment. Let's assume that we have the most cutting edge technology at our disposal.
We need an electron detection sphere, as small as possible, it must detect a single electron when it hits the surface, let diameter of it be d.
Now assume that we introduce an electron in the centre, and apply a strong repulsive force on the electron from all the sides so as to stun it and after some time remove the force.
Now the electron is in the centre of the sphere in resting position. But it's velocity cannot be zero due to uncertainty. So assuming that it has some velocity, it will eventually go and hit one of the walls of the sphere.
NOW here comes the catch
The more and more we wait without the sphere detecting the electron, the more and more certain its velocity becomes. The uncertainty in the position is ∆x = d
And the uncertainty in velocity is ∆v = d/2t where t is the wait time, and m, mass of electron is a known constant so the total uncertainty is md^2/2t.
So there is a threshold time, when the uncertainty melts down. All we have to do is repeat the experiment a trillion times and wait for a long long time
Conclusion: Either there is something wrong in the whole logic (likely) or that uncertainty is fundamental but not elemental and absolute.
Hi, you did an assertion that the electron has no position inside the atom. Although I understand this concept of the probability cloud inside an orbital, when I think of an electric current, for example,
where only the electrons are moving it becomes more difficulty to visualize how it really happens.
What is moving there, a particle, a wave? I used to think that were little particles in transit,
and that they could have their positions easily determined. Another aspect that is difficult to me is to accept that the electron has mass but is all over the place. What is the meaning of the electron mass? Is it the sum of many
small amounts here and there?
Thx
You need to completely let go of what you think "position" means... at least anything you think that physically implies about a particle. Those judgements don't work anymore when you're talking about things like electrons. You need to think of "position" as something more abstract. It's a measurement you might make about a particle and the wave function tells you all the numbers you might measure. Before the measurement happens, the word "position" doesn't really have any meaning.
Tell some books which is helpful to have to study for my brother and he is doing my course for scientist
Soo awesome
I have a question about quantum physics:
With electrons, is it really that it has no position, or is it just not possible for us to make a machine that could tell us an exact position?
Pls tell how we arrive at the Schrodinger's time dependant wave equation
Sounds like a good topic for a video 😁
But the standard deviation of a given measurements describes how uncertain that measurement is ... In this context 'uncertainty' does make sense, and implies some randomness within the deviation.
But yes, using sigmas instead of deltas in the inequality clarifies where the uncertainty lies: not in some contrary stubbornness intrinsic to particles, but in the limits of our ability to measure without influencing the system being measured.
I like the name 'Uncertainty Principle' more now that you made it clearer what is uncertain.
I was about to argue with you, then you said "It's not that we don't know it's position (presuming there is one to know), it's that it doesn't have one." I believe I understand what you're saying. So the "position" of the particle is inclusive of it's entire wavelength?
Yeah. In quantum mechanics, a particle only has "position" if it's _position wave function_ is narrow with a single peak (what we'd call "localized"). If not, it's difficult to even assign such a property to the particle.
Are particles, besides being distributed over space (heisenberg), also being distributed over time? Because spacetime is one single thing?
Yes, absolutely... except, when you include spacetime in quantum, you start to realize that particles aren't actually there. What exist are quantum fields: czcams.com/video/Y7Ac8zKTD-E/video.html
Mahalo I sorta get it now. Heisenberg is pictured with a formula with standard deviation symbol sigma.
So in the double slit experiment how do we know that the slits it self is not interacting with the electron and changing its path?
The idea is we're setting up the experiment so that doesn't happen (much).
tell us about the books in the background south west cornor
I’m certainly uncertain about the uncertainty principle… and the randomness principle
When is this principle applied. Like when we here that they teleported a single photon, get must be having a great precision of its position and momentum. Also does this principle means that hypothetically I cannot hold an electron in my hand?
Keep in mind that these "uncertainties" (standard deviations) are _almost always_ quantum sized. Your hand is not quantum sized. Even if an electron had a large uncertainty in position, you could still hold it in your hand. "Large" is a very relative term. "Large" for an electron is the size of an atom.
@@ScienceAsylum but if we see the working of electron microscope it literally comes in contact with electron and other quantum particles to form a image also I have heard that it's tip is made of a single electron. If we consider this then how is uncertainty principle applied here if we have captured the electron on tip
_"I have heard that it's tip is made of a single electron."_
This is not true. I might be able to believe that it's a single atom, but not a single electron. That's not how matter works.
Trust moa.
This is the best youtube channel for science,
It's fun to think about particles like they are just a slippery soap. The harder you try to hold soap in place, the bigger chance is it will fly out of your hands in proportionally big velocity.