Honestly, I don't see how anyone can respond to Devs in any meaningful way by only talking about the first episode. You need to watch all of it and respond to it overall. You need to approach it as an 8 hour movie because that's essentially what it is.
her video is great and useful, and the show put enough of its physical/philosophical cards on the table to discuss most of the relevant elements. i really liked the show, but there isn't really any deeper philosophy or technical elements that didnt get covered here. free will vs determinism and some quantum woo about the many worlds interpretation with a murder mystery on top.
this is a bad take. i hope you ended up doing a comprehensive review. it is art //my god, you are a scientist. by now it should be clear what sci-fi is……it is often the speculative daydreams of other scientists. or people who are trying to explore what a possible world looks like if theory is true. it is like reading Accelerando by Charles Stross and nitpicking on why the “lobsters” were uploaded and why not this creature or why they aren’t really lobsters…. it is like reading Permutation City and dismantling the Dust Theory as impossible disregarding that Egan simply used this as a plot device to really explore the nature of the uploading concept….what it would feel like to be the person who chose to copy their mindstate but wake up as the Copy even though-to the Copy-they were the Original. worst of all….the series can be viewed as a companion piece to Ex Machina and Devs might be the path many people walk down to explore concepts in quantum mechanics.
The point of this show is to make you think about the philosophical questions like free will, the simulation hypothesis and whether big tech companies can have too much money and power. Not many shows are this thought provoking so I think it should be commended even if it gets some science wrong. It’s also beautifully shot, it’s really a work of art.
Haven't you thought about the possibility that the universe is probabilistic, but we don't have free will? I mean how can true randomness, as quantum theory is suggesting, allow for free will? If neither determinism, nor randomness allow for a free will, how can there be a free will? I also think, that not having a free will isn't negative, but rather a positive thing. As Einstein puts it: "Schopenhauer's words: 'Man can do what he wants, but he cannot will what he wills,' accompany me in all situations throughout my life and reconcile me with the actions of others, even if they are rather painful to me. This awareness of the lack of free will keeps me from taking myself and my fellow men too seriously as acting and deciding individuals, and from losing my temper.”
Sinthoras 2107 Everyone seems to just accept that determinism is a thing. There must have been a seamless handover from Fate to Determinism without anyone noticing. It could be a weakness in the human brain that compels it grab onto such a strange concept as an indisputable fact, especially in the face of common experience and the twisting of meaning that is required to make it seem coherent. It's almost like people don't have a choice whether to believe in it.
yes exactly my thought as well. As she stated we have proven (mostly) that qm has no hidden variables influencing states. If free will was a quantum effect we would have such a hidden variable therefore it can't be quantum. Our minds might compute things faster using qm but inevitably they are classical in nature.
The overall story is about how Forest is biased in his adherence to the deterministic view. There are reasons for this that come to light later than in the fiest episode. In the story, he is wrong.
I hope you went back and watched the rest of the series! Even if you don't react to it, I hope you watched it :) It made me so interested in quantum physics that I ended up reading so much about it.
I'm going to use that multiverse excuse next time I flunk a test. I'll tell the professor, "We are just not in the universe where I put the correct answers." Hopefully I'm in the universe where that excuse works!
Nice reaction and discussion. I have watched the whole thing and from a cinematic POV, I think the show is fantastic. I understand your channel is more about quantum computing and your experience in the area, but it would be very interesting to know your opinion on the whole miniseries from your POV. Of course, being a sci-fi show, it is not expected to be scientifically accurate, but (as a fellow physicist) I enjoyed the exposition on interpretations of QM, superdeterminism, and such.
@@Anastasia-Marchenkova Cool! That would be great. I consider Alex Garland (Ex-Machina, Annihilation, and now Devs), one of the best when it comes to sci-fi. Regardless of the non-plausible nature of what happens at the end of the show, I believe the way it is based on actual physical and philosophical concepts, makes it worthwhile.
RSA vs ECC: I think the point here is to sub-textually show how their relationship isn't as real as Lily thinks it is. She mentions both being equally vulnerable to quantum computers. He says they're both brute force-able. Maybe he's not thinking about quantum computing, but about normal computers. Just because Lily brought up quantum doesn't mean Sergei will respond within the same frame of reference. He's doesn't bother to tell Lily "well, if we switch gears and consider only regular computing, RSA is weaker." He just threw her established frame of reference out without telling her, which means he's talking past her - which means he's not 100% there with her, and that' supposed to be a clue for what comes next...
It's already been said, but you can't really comment on the show without watching the whole thing. This is cool though. I also love that you brought up "losing the nobel prize". i'm a behavioral biologist and I always thought that friends I know in the world of high level physics hewed hilariously (dangerously) close to faith rather than rationality, which I, again, as a behavioral bio guy found funny cos.... humans... when they run out of road on ideas, they defer to faith to the detriment of actual discourse. Even the smartest humans find themselves just going "this is my god (unassailable notion)" And that's why we get non-scientists going "you believe in science".... no I believe in refuting hypotheses and getting ever closer to the truth. There shouldn't be "belief" in science.
Devs is INCREDIBLE. It's such a shame that it aired while west world was airing and had a similar premise but they didn't execute it very well at all. But because west world was a more popular show it totally over shadowed Devs.
After getting a D grade in Quantum Computation and Information course. Here I am trying to learn it again. Our prof made it too damn abstract and there was no discussion on any application whatsoever. I have started learning on Qiskit and this stuff is actually interesting! Your Qiskit Camp video motivated me to relearn it and I hope I can be on that camp one day. Thanks Anastasia.
He wasn't talking about ECC being brute forcible with quantum computers. He was just talking about standard computing. Vulnerability to quantum computers was her point. I'm pretty sure.
Doing the "right" things is a utility-function and not free will (although it feels like it). So determinism and "free" will is compatible, because the "free" will is an emergent phenomenon on another level and may only be one of the ingredients of a coherent World-Model with an acting entity, the "I", in it.
as a condensed matter PhD student who works on spintronics, I really am interested in quantum computers. I must study more about it and your videos are really useful for me. Thanks
Ultimately, aside from the more-fictional parts of this great sci-fi show, "Devs" poses a singular question: Is the universe (or multiverse) deterministic...and we only have the illusion of making choices? It's a great question, both in terms of physics and philosophy, and remains unresolved/unproven. An early-found spy in the series finds out what's going on at Devs and blurts out "This changes everything!" And the very fun and true rejoinder is: "This changes nothing." "Devs" trolls its viewers a bit at first by more or less asserting that determinism is a fact, and their walk-back/walk-forward quantum computing machine proves that...but -- while avoiding spoilers -- it later puts the appropriate amount of game back in the question. A lot of fun in any case, and -- IMHO -- far better than most sci-fi.
@@Anastasia-Marchenkova you absolutely should watch through. the show itself very strongly leans into a lot of the points you brought up. nick offerman's character is kind of favorite-playing with einstein's interpretation, foreshadowed by the "i don't like the multiverse theory" line, and he's actually attempting to impose his worldview onto the operations of that quantum computer. it makes for a pretty interesting story!
When you have the time, perhaps you can make a video on Optical quantum computing. and maybe another one on how current semiconductor technologies are used to make "Qubits" (fabrication wise). It will benefit the viewers greatly. Excellent content on this channel.
I really enjoyed this video! I wasn't sure how it was going to go at first, but it was really fun getting your perspective! Also, your dog is adorable! :)
Finally... been waiting for so long for someone to do it.🙂 You did it at last. 😀😀 How did you like it? Did u finished it? Personally I think there are some loopholes in the build up of the concepts. And BTW I think Alex Garland's Ex Machina was far more Elegant.
To me not only determinism would mean there is no free will, a randomness of events would also suggest that free will doesn't exist. Free will is more of a religous claim that we have some kind of power or soul to controll our decisions but free will doesnt make sense if you believe in materialism.
I will just pretend that I understand what she is discussing but I will come back here after I watch some quantum mechanics videos. This is a great way to learn.
Not a academic here, but isn’t determinism and quantum randomness still compatible? If quantum states collapse from random to solid, that would only mean that it’s a probability function that is scalable. So at a quantum level it is random, but slightly larger scales becomes deterministic and the larger a set of particles/events get, the more deterministic it becomes exponentially. So at the scale of human beings and human decision making, it is impossible to have free will. And even if there’s some quantum randomness affecting our decision making, it drowns in the causes that creates the effect on our decisions. I also don’t understand why science becomes false due to determinism? No physical laws are broken by it? It’s just a symptom of the physical laws. Is there any example of quantum randomness affecting the macro scale?
So everything is waves, particles are waves vibrating in a particular field, E, M, and they can be describe using wave equations, their frequencies determine their energy as Plank found, but when you do the FT of this finite frequencies you can see that in time they should have come from way in the past, like they always existed, like every wave had to always exist and keep going.
Where Devs really gets it wrong is when it suggests that the Many Worlds interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is indeterministic. That's flat out wrong. It's a deterministic theory as opposed to the incoherent, indeterministic Copenhagen interpretation.
Hi Anastasia! Love your videos from Vietnam! I’m not sure if this is the right place to ask, but can you make a video about preparing for quantum computing as a physics major in universities that don’t place emphasis on their quantum programs? I intend to look for scholarships abroad for my further education, but I don’t want to go empty-handed. So I guess maybe you could give some advice on how to prepare for it as early as possible (I’m in my first year). Here at my school I’m not even sure if there is anyone working on this field. However from what I learned from your previous videos, we have other approaches, like beginning with condensed matter physics or computational physics. We do have active labs in those fields, but sadly I don’t have any experience with solder or coding (like you did). So I’m not really sure about the right path for me.
Not sure if universe is deterministic but you are right not getting attached to the theory is must ,I think understanding consciousness might reveal some light in knowing which interpretation of Quantum mechanics is right or maybe we will need a new theory which will explain some deeper rules which governs this universe ,we only know 5% and in this 5 % we still haven't unified General relativity and QM . This quote of yours is so true "wishful thinking is no substitute for data, experiments or observables "
Very interesting content! I really like this. A unique way of learning! It's true that wishful thinking is not a substitute for data experiments and if we consciously look into the outcome without being dogmatic about personal opinion, we may come up with some accidental discovery even. However, I am curious about your approach to run any experiment and how you deal with the outcome.
Well…you really know your shit. Thanks for your reaction! I’ve watched this show a couple of times and you taught me something (many things) today. Cheers!
What Impact do you think the new Room temperature Super conductors (carbonaceous sulfur hydride) will have on the Quantum Computing space? (Cost, Accessibility, Qubit counts...)
Probably non, because super conducting quantum chips don't only need super conduction to work, but also need to be in such a low temperature, because you only use the lowest two excitation states. This means you need to cool the chip significantly lower, than the level where it becomes super conducting. Also at room temperature there is a lot of radiation around it, which can create problems in your Qubit and destroy your coherence.
@@NtotheGMC Ah I see, If they come up with a strategy for keeping the heat and noise from decohering the qubits, It still might reduce the price. Intels chip will be one step closer to being feasible 🤔 Still haven't solved the low excitation state problem tho Thanks for the reply!
Thanks for this! I've been a physics enthusiast for years, and have only just discovered this show. I enjoyed the questions the show raises, and highly recommend watching. The concepts of the multiverse are perhaps misinterpreted? I don't see them as physically existing, but existing in a state of probability, other than that, i'm happy with the show and how they tackle the problem!
"Quantum mechnics more likely actually supports free will due to this randomness argument" even if the laws that govern the universe are non-deterministic, this still doesn’t support free will because either way you are still governed by laws that are out of your control.
The only way to make a choice is realizing you have none. That's what it's saying. Until then; slaves to determinism. Many worlds interpretation is just an idea, more philosophy than science. It states that wave functions cannot collapse; however, wave functions do collapse...inside the mind. All the world's a stage. If you really want to get complex and make an even more confusing series, do the same show but add the aspect/notion of retro causality. The mind sees time as travelling forwards through time from birth to death; the mind also takes images upside down and flips them upright for our mind. Remember in "2001 A Space Odyssey" the old man becomes young man becomes the embryo. In a deterministic retro causal model, not only are you not making choices, but what is happening to you today is because of what "did" (NOT DO) tomorrow. Okay. Put another crazy thought experiment in it called quantum suicide. In this, the many worlds interpretation is used stating that one can never kill themselves; they cannot die until the model, fate, determinism says so; with this in place one would try to kill themselves and succeed in the initial world but in the many worlds interpretation they would not die rather something would go 'wrong' and they'd mess up and continue living having died in one world and continued in another. This world wouldn't be your original world. There would be something 'off' and it may only be a difference of up to 0.00001 percent, or more, or less... virtually identical. Also a possible explanation for the mandala effect. If this theory is true, then truly there is an actual plan for our life predetermined before conception. If it were true then also this would say something has a plan for everyone, everything....seems chaotic to us but a supreme being sees only perfect order. Notice the theme of the show goes towards religion, especially Christianity. The original sin was made without choice if you look at the variable it was all set up so there was no choice if you apply determinism and factor in variable for the story of the garden of Eden when the Eve of the Atom/Adam was conceived. Okay, I'm going to take a nap now and forget this show. It was pretty damn good. At least some of the writer's aren't on strike and this is the second FX series I've seen written intelligently; the other ironically was based on a Marvel Comics Character but wasn't a cgi bim bam boom mindless typical marvel movie/series. Fx Marvel's Legion. Three seasons of that and your brain is...
There is no freedom to choose. Every choice I make can be traced to a cause. Even if the cause was quantum particle popping straight out of the vacuum.
What is your best guess at a timeline for when we achieve the singularity, human integrated with AI incorporating quantum computing algorithm in the human brain? My guess is sometime before 2030.
Wait ok so hear me out but, if the universe is deterministic, then believing it's probabilistic could be explained by not having the free will to believe the universe is deterministic. It could be pre-determined that someone doesn't believe in pre-destination. 😂😂😂
Not sure if the statement "simulations are based on probabilty is correct". In CFD or FEA, simulations are based on initial conditons and boundary conditions. You put the same conditons in, you will get the same result. There is zero probability involved.
2:04 Wait, quantum computers don't work the way I was told they worked? 4:55 Wait, classical computers can do what I was told only quantum computers can do? I've avoided delving deeply into quantum computing, even though I'm an old coder who dabbles in crypto and physics. The field is interesting, but I figured I could wait until it matures a little more and settles down. Even so, I want to at least know the basics, so that I can utilize quantum computers when they are ready. If she's right about the above two points, then clearly I don't know the basics after all. I look forward to learning more.
well technically she is right. You can simulate a quantum computer on a classical computer, the thing is it is very slow. Ya the no cloning theorem is quite interesting if you don't mind maths I would recommend to try to prove it. It's quite fun.
This is a very difficult question, because we don't even know what intelligence itself is. therefore we cant say if we can "code" intelligence or if we need something else to create it. We might not even know enough physics to understand what intelligence is, or it could be that it is simple classical interactions (similar to machine learning).
Well one can do time series forecast in classical computers even now. Like that facebook prophet library. And generally when tv show people talk about anything quantum, that gives me goosebumps in a cringe way. You sure are brave.
@@Anastasia-Marchenkova Haha but yeah I actually enjoyed so much about bioshock infinite which was one of gaming version of quantum culture. I guess quantum mechanic finally after the one century of discovery becomes culture.
Great video Anastasia. We have seen mathematics that propose a range of Shor's algorithm to break RSA from the high end 4n+2 to the moderate 2n+3 to the highly controversial 1/2n where n is the key size. Still a lot of work to do to prove any of these using actual circuits, but we'll see how it goes.
when they the boyfriend talks about brute forceable couldn't he be just simply describing trying every combination one after the other, but at a quantum rate? I dont think parallel and brute force are intrinsically synonymous processes, are they?
@@Anastasia-Marchenkova ah I thought i had some grasp of this. Its apparent i dont. LOL I am fascinated by the subject though. I will keep reading/listening.
randomness is not the same thing as freewill. It is the antithesis of freedom! if every decision you made was based on the result from a random number generator or a dice roll we could not describe that as free. read freewill by harris
Short answer: Probably not, but it can defiantly improve it Long answer: New technologies especially in computing/software have led to a huge increase in human industriousness leading to a higher demand for high skilled workers. These high skilled workers are able to produce much more than low skill workers making there work be more valuable, enabling them to pay more taxes. These tases can then be used for social programs/charity/education which can reduce the poverty of other people especially younger generations leading to a world with less poverty.
Honestly, I don't see how anyone can respond to Devs in any meaningful way by only talking about the first episode. You need to watch all of it and respond to it overall. You need to approach it as an 8 hour movie because that's essentially what it is.
Absolutely. It's an interesting video but it's a really low-effort way of talking about this series (which I think is fantastic btw).
her video is great and useful, and the show put enough of its physical/philosophical cards on the table to discuss most of the relevant elements. i really liked the show, but there isn't really any deeper philosophy or technical elements that didnt get covered here. free will vs determinism and some quantum woo about the many worlds interpretation with a murder mystery on top.
smd shes below me and my methods.
this is a bad take. i hope you ended up doing a comprehensive review.
it is art
//my god, you are a scientist. by now it should be clear what sci-fi is……it is often the speculative daydreams of other scientists. or people who are trying to explore what a possible world looks like if theory is true.
it is like reading Accelerando by Charles Stross and nitpicking on why the “lobsters” were uploaded and why not this creature or why they aren’t really lobsters….
it is like reading Permutation City and dismantling the Dust Theory as impossible disregarding that Egan simply used this as a plot device to really explore the nature of the uploading concept….what it would feel like to be the person who chose to copy their mindstate but wake up as the Copy even though-to the Copy-they were the Original.
worst of all….the series can be viewed as a companion piece to Ex Machina and Devs might be the path many people walk down to explore concepts in quantum mechanics.
The point of this show is to make you think about the philosophical questions like free will, the simulation hypothesis and whether big tech companies can have too much money and power. Not many shows are this thought provoking so I think it should be commended even if it gets some science wrong. It’s also beautifully shot, it’s really a work of art.
Haven't you thought about the possibility that the universe is probabilistic, but we don't have free will? I mean how can true randomness, as quantum theory is suggesting, allow for free will?
If neither determinism, nor randomness allow for a free will, how can there be a free will?
I also think, that not having a free will isn't negative, but rather a positive thing. As Einstein puts it: "Schopenhauer's words: 'Man can do what he wants, but he cannot will what he wills,' accompany me in all situations throughout my life and reconcile me with the actions of others, even if they are rather painful to me. This awareness of the lack of free will keeps me from taking myself and my fellow men too seriously as acting and deciding individuals, and from losing my temper.”
Sinthoras 2107 Everyone seems to just accept that determinism is a thing. There must have been a seamless handover from Fate to Determinism without anyone noticing. It could be a weakness in the human brain that compels it grab onto such a strange concept as an indisputable fact, especially in the face of common experience and the twisting of meaning that is required to make it seem coherent. It's almost like people don't have a choice whether to believe in it.
yes exactly my thought as well. As she stated we have proven (mostly) that qm has no hidden variables influencing states. If free will was a quantum effect we would have such a hidden variable therefore it can't be quantum. Our minds might compute things faster using qm but inevitably they are classical in nature.
The overall story is about how Forest is biased in his adherence to the deterministic view. There are reasons for this that come to light later than in the fiest episode. In the story, he is wrong.
I hope you went back and watched the rest of the series! Even if you don't react to it, I hope you watched it :) It made me so interested in quantum physics that I ended up reading so much about it.
I'm going to use that multiverse excuse next time I flunk a test. I'll tell the professor, "We are just not in the universe where I put the correct answers." Hopefully I'm in the universe where that excuse works!
Nice reaction and discussion. I have watched the whole thing and from a cinematic POV, I think the show is fantastic. I understand your channel is more about quantum computing and your experience in the area, but it would be very interesting to know your opinion on the whole miniseries from your POV. Of course, being a sci-fi show, it is not expected to be scientifically accurate, but (as a fellow physicist) I enjoyed the exposition on interpretations of QM, superdeterminism, and such.
@@Anastasia-Marchenkova Cool! That would be great. I consider Alex Garland (Ex-Machina, Annihilation, and now Devs), one of the best when it comes to sci-fi. Regardless of the non-plausible nature of what happens at the end of the show, I believe the way it is based on actual physical and philosophical concepts, makes it worthwhile.
RSA vs ECC: I think the point here is to sub-textually show how their relationship isn't as real as Lily thinks it is. She mentions both being equally vulnerable to quantum computers. He says they're both brute force-able. Maybe he's not thinking about quantum computing, but about normal computers. Just because Lily brought up quantum doesn't mean Sergei will respond within the same frame of reference. He's doesn't bother to tell Lily "well, if we switch gears and consider only regular computing, RSA is weaker." He just threw her established frame of reference out without telling her, which means he's talking past her - which means he's not 100% there with her, and that' supposed to be a clue for what comes next...
It's already been said, but you can't really comment on the show without watching the whole thing. This is cool though. I also love that you brought up "losing the nobel prize". i'm a behavioral biologist and I always thought that friends I know in the world of high level physics hewed hilariously (dangerously) close to faith rather than rationality, which I, again, as a behavioral bio guy found funny cos.... humans... when they run out of road on ideas, they defer to faith to the detriment of actual discourse. Even the smartest humans find themselves just going "this is my god (unassailable notion)" And that's why we get non-scientists going "you believe in science".... no I believe in refuting hypotheses and getting ever closer to the truth. There shouldn't be "belief" in science.
Devs is INCREDIBLE. It's such a shame that it aired while west world was airing and had a similar premise but they didn't execute it very well at all. But because west world was a more popular show it totally over shadowed Devs.
anyway…what I loved about the show is it explores the fact that MW is as deterministic as Pilot Wave.
I really should finish it!!
After getting a D grade in Quantum Computation and Information course. Here I am trying to learn it again. Our prof made it too damn abstract and there was no discussion on any application whatsoever. I have started learning on Qiskit and this stuff is actually interesting! Your Qiskit Camp video motivated me to relearn it and I hope I can be on that camp one day. Thanks Anastasia.
@@Anastasia-Marchenkova Hey! Thanks for replying! You post great videos! Keep it up!
How do you know?
EDIT: First episode - not gonna' do the whole show?
He wasn't talking about ECC being brute forcible with quantum computers. He was just talking about standard computing. Vulnerability to quantum computers was her point. I'm pretty sure.
Doing the "right" things is a utility-function and not free will (although it feels like it). So determinism and "free" will is compatible, because the "free" will is an emergent phenomenon on another level and may only be one of the ingredients of a coherent World-Model with an acting entity, the "I", in it.
as a condensed matter PhD student who works on spintronics, I really am interested in quantum computers. I must study more about it and your videos are really useful for me. Thanks
Ultimately, aside from the more-fictional parts of this great sci-fi show, "Devs" poses a singular question: Is the universe (or multiverse) deterministic...and we only have the illusion of making choices? It's a great question, both in terms of physics and philosophy, and remains unresolved/unproven.
An early-found spy in the series finds out what's going on at Devs and blurts out "This changes everything!" And the very fun and true rejoinder is: "This changes nothing."
"Devs" trolls its viewers a bit at first by more or less asserting that determinism is a fact, and their walk-back/walk-forward quantum computing machine proves that...but -- while avoiding spoilers -- it later puts the appropriate amount of game back in the question. A lot of fun in any case, and -- IMHO -- far better than most sci-fi.
@@Anastasia-Marchenkova you absolutely should watch through. the show itself very strongly leans into a lot of the points you brought up. nick offerman's character is kind of favorite-playing with einstein's interpretation, foreshadowed by the "i don't like the multiverse theory" line, and he's actually attempting to impose his worldview onto the operations of that quantum computer. it makes for a pretty interesting story!
Great video, I subscribed to learn more. You explain the science in a way I can understand.
When you have the time, perhaps you can make a video on Optical quantum computing. and maybe another one on how current semiconductor technologies are used to make "Qubits" (fabrication wise). It will benefit the viewers greatly.
Excellent content on this channel.
@@Anastasia-Marchenkova behind the scenes coverage will be huge. I look forward to it.
Did you get a chance to watch the whole show? Some of these earlier threads are red herrings.
Thank you very much Anastasia! Continue the good work!
Next a conversation with Sabine Hossenfelder on super determinism :)
don't have a smart comment, just a wanted to say i find your vids interesting and inspiring!
15:46 Whoa, disco rave trees. I'm gonna have to make some of those for my back yard.
I really enjoyed this video! I wasn't sure how it was going to go at first, but it was really fun getting your perspective! Also, your dog is adorable! :)
Finally... been waiting for so long for someone to do it.🙂
You did it at last. 😀😀
How did you like it? Did u finished it? Personally I think there are some loopholes in the build up of the concepts. And BTW I think Alex Garland's Ex Machina was far more Elegant.
To me not only determinism would mean there is no free will, a randomness of events would also suggest that free will doesn't exist. Free will is more of a religous claim that we have some kind of power or soul to controll our decisions but free will doesnt make sense if you believe in materialism.
slight concern; no quantum interpretations are falsifiable, or they would be theories. not just the everett one
I will just pretend that I understand what she is discussing but I will come back here after I watch some quantum mechanics videos. This is a great way to learn.
Awesome reaction and think we all loved Quarky’s cameo :)
Not a academic here, but isn’t determinism and quantum randomness still compatible? If quantum states collapse from random to solid, that would only mean that it’s a probability function that is scalable. So at a quantum level it is random, but slightly larger scales becomes deterministic and the larger a set of particles/events get, the more deterministic it becomes exponentially. So at the scale of human beings and human decision making, it is impossible to have free will. And even if there’s some quantum randomness affecting our decision making, it drowns in the causes that creates the effect on our decisions.
I also don’t understand why science becomes false due to determinism? No physical laws are broken by it? It’s just a symptom of the physical laws. Is there any example of quantum randomness affecting the macro scale?
So everything is waves, particles are waves vibrating in a particular field, E, M, and they can be describe using wave equations, their frequencies determine their energy as Plank found, but when you do the FT of this finite frequencies you can see that in time they should have come from way in the past, like they always existed, like every wave had to always exist and keep going.
Where Devs really gets it wrong is when it suggests that the Many Worlds interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is indeterministic. That's flat out wrong. It's a deterministic theory as opposed to the incoherent, indeterministic Copenhagen interpretation.
Hi Anastasia! Love your videos from Vietnam!
I’m not sure if this is the right place to ask, but can you make a video about preparing for quantum computing as a physics major in universities that don’t place emphasis on their quantum programs?
I intend to look for scholarships abroad for my further education, but I don’t want to go empty-handed. So I guess maybe you could give some advice on how to prepare for it as early as possible (I’m in my first year).
Here at my school I’m not even sure if there is anyone working on this field. However from what I learned from your previous videos, we have other approaches, like beginning with condensed matter physics or computational physics. We do have active labs in those fields, but sadly I don’t have any experience with solder or coding (like you did). So I’m not really sure about the right path for me.
Not sure if universe is deterministic but you are right not getting attached to the theory is must ,I think understanding consciousness might reveal some light in knowing which interpretation of Quantum mechanics is right or maybe we will need a new theory which will explain some deeper rules which governs this universe ,we only know 5% and in this 5 % we still haven't unified General relativity and QM .
This quote of yours is so true "wishful thinking is no substitute for data, experiments or observables "
Very interesting content! I really like this. A unique way of learning! It's true that wishful thinking is not a substitute for data experiments and if we consciously look into the outcome without being dogmatic about personal opinion, we may come up with some accidental discovery even. However, I am curious about your approach to run any experiment and how you deal with the outcome.
Well…you really know your shit. Thanks for your reaction! I’ve watched this show a couple of times and you taught me something (many things) today. Cheers!
What Impact do you think the new Room temperature Super conductors (carbonaceous sulfur hydride) will have on the Quantum Computing space? (Cost, Accessibility, Qubit counts...)
Probably non, because super conducting quantum chips don't only need super conduction to work, but also need to be in such a low temperature, because you only use the lowest two excitation states. This means you need to cool the chip significantly lower, than the level where it becomes super conducting. Also at room temperature there is a lot of radiation around it, which can create problems in your Qubit and destroy your coherence.
@@NtotheGMC Ah I see, If they come up with a strategy for keeping the heat and noise from decohering the qubits, It still might reduce the price. Intels chip will be one step closer to being feasible 🤔 Still haven't solved the low excitation state problem tho Thanks for the reply!
Thanks for this! I've been a physics enthusiast for years, and have only just discovered this show. I enjoyed the questions the show raises, and highly recommend watching. The concepts of the multiverse are perhaps misinterpreted? I don't see them as physically existing, but existing in a state of probability, other than that, i'm happy with the show and how they tackle the problem!
It's wild that we've learned so much about our universe, yet we still don't have a grasp on fundamental questions.
which laptop should I buy for A.I. M.L. as well as deep learning and more higher level programming?
"Quantum mechnics more likely actually supports free will due to this randomness argument" even if the laws that govern the universe are non-deterministic, this still doesn’t support free will because either way you are still governed by laws that are out of your control.
The only way to make a choice is realizing you have none. That's what it's saying. Until then; slaves to determinism. Many worlds interpretation is just an idea, more philosophy than science. It states that wave functions cannot collapse; however, wave functions do collapse...inside the mind. All the world's a stage. If you really want to get complex and make an even more confusing series, do the same show but add the aspect/notion of retro causality. The mind sees time as travelling forwards through time from birth to death; the mind also takes images upside down and flips them upright for our mind. Remember in "2001 A Space Odyssey" the old man becomes young man becomes the embryo. In a deterministic retro causal model, not only are you not making choices, but what is happening to you today is because of what "did" (NOT DO) tomorrow. Okay. Put another crazy thought experiment in it called quantum suicide. In this, the many worlds interpretation is used stating that one can never kill themselves; they cannot die until the model, fate, determinism says so; with this in place one would try to kill themselves and succeed in the initial world but in the many worlds interpretation they would not die rather something would go 'wrong' and they'd mess up and continue living having died in one world and continued in another. This world wouldn't be your original world. There would be something 'off' and it may only be a difference of up to 0.00001 percent, or more, or less... virtually identical. Also a possible explanation for the mandala effect. If this theory is true, then truly there is an actual plan for our life predetermined before conception. If it were true then also this would say something has a plan for everyone, everything....seems chaotic to us but a supreme being sees only perfect order. Notice the theme of the show goes towards religion, especially Christianity. The original sin was made without choice if you look at the variable it was all set up so there was no choice if you apply determinism and factor in variable for the story of the garden of Eden when the Eve of the Atom/Adam was conceived. Okay, I'm going to take a nap now and forget this show. It was pretty damn good. At least some of the writer's aren't on strike and this is the second FX series I've seen written intelligently; the other ironically was based on a Marvel Comics Character but wasn't a cgi bim bam boom mindless typical marvel movie/series. Fx Marvel's Legion. Three seasons of that and your brain is...
This was soooooooo interesting, and I understood 1.9% of it, with a +/- 1.0 error rate.
I did like Chinese and Russian.... RUDE, hahaha. Along with liking Sudoku. (I just finished all 8 episodes).
Great video. Love the Quarky clips! )
More of that and more bloopers please )
Hi, how do you see the field of quantum computing evolve and how would it impact the life of a common man?
Please make video on your books collection 📚
@@Anastasia-Marchenkova will be waiting for 🙂👍🏼 books📚
There is no freedom to choose. Every choice I make can be traced to a cause. Even if the cause was quantum particle popping straight out of the vacuum.
Hi Anastasia, In what what way Quantum computing can help/contribute to computational neuroscience? Thanks for your elaboration.
19:31 - Not necessarily. Everything can be real but totally Simulated... It will be undetected by anyone within it.
Just watched Devs, looking to see if Anastasia could clarify. Tech reality aside, I enjoyed the Deus storyline.
Super cool video, it's really interesting to see someone in conversation with this show!
I watched Silicon Valley for nostalgia. I used to work in the Bay Area and I miss it. Sometimes you don't realize what you have until it's gone
@@Anastasia-Marchenkova awww :( but based on what I hear is going on now, I can't blame you
Oh man that stuff about the RSA/ECC at the beginning makes me sad too
You did so much in this video. Thank you for this!
When ep2?
You record the video in Auto-focus?
All that and did that undergrad. Man I'm so fucked up
is their a discord of this channel
That would be cool, but in case there isn't there is a quantum computation subreddit with a discord
What is your best guess at a timeline for when we achieve the singularity, human integrated with AI incorporating quantum computing algorithm in the human brain? My guess is sometime before 2030.
Wait ok so hear me out but, if the universe is deterministic, then believing it's probabilistic could be explained by not having the free will to believe the universe is deterministic. It could be pre-determined that someone doesn't believe in pre-destination. 😂😂😂
Intriguing. 🧐 Philosophy mixed with science. I only took Intro to Computer Science and a programming class, but your videos are quite interesting. 🤔
Have you invested in any quantum computing stocks?
Hellooooo madam I had raised one question regarding quantum computing with machine learning or AI answer plzzzz
Hi, could you do a video at the level Dr. Andrea Morello recently gave?
you should have watched the whole thing first!!! this 1st episode was the appetizer.
Time Mechanics
Expand your definition of "quantum computer" to all computers that interact at a subatomic level
See professor Ronald Mallette from CT to start
Not sure if the statement "simulations are based on probabilty is correct". In CFD or FEA, simulations are based on initial conditons and boundary conditions. You put the same conditons in, you will get the same result. There is zero probability involved.
2:04 Wait, quantum computers don't work the way I was told they worked? 4:55 Wait, classical computers can do what I was told only quantum computers can do?
I've avoided delving deeply into quantum computing, even though I'm an old coder who dabbles in crypto and physics. The field is interesting, but I figured I could wait until it matures a little more and settles down.
Even so, I want to at least know the basics, so that I can utilize quantum computers when they are ready. If she's right about the above two points, then clearly I don't know the basics after all. I look forward to learning more.
well technically she is right. You can simulate a quantum computer on a classical computer, the thing is it is very slow.
Ya the no cloning theorem is quite interesting if you don't mind maths I would recommend to try to prove it. It's quite fun.
Is it possible to create a artificial super intelligence by creating a artificial quantum neural network
This is a very difficult question, because we don't even know what intelligence itself is. therefore we cant say if we can "code" intelligence or if we need something else to create it. We might not even know enough physics to understand what intelligence is, or it could be that it is simple classical interactions (similar to machine learning).
Quarky, nice. If you get a cat, you need to call it Meowon :)
Came here for the science, leaving with some deep moral thoughts.
А я слышал что квантам компьютеры Биткойна теперь могут урушать. Посмотрю ваши новые видео.
Well one can do time series forecast in classical computers even now. Like that facebook prophet library. And generally when tv show people talk about anything quantum, that gives me goosebumps in a cringe way. You sure are brave.
@@Anastasia-Marchenkova Haha but yeah I actually enjoyed so much about bioshock infinite which was one of gaming version of quantum culture. I guess quantum mechanic finally after the one century of discovery becomes culture.
Quarky should show up more often. 😊
According to Sabine there is no free will
Great video Anastasia. We have seen mathematics that propose a range of Shor's algorithm to break RSA from the high end 4n+2 to the moderate 2n+3 to the highly controversial 1/2n where n is the key size. Still a lot of work to do to prove any of these using actual circuits, but we'll see how it goes.
when they the boyfriend talks about brute forceable couldn't he be just simply describing trying every combination one after the other, but at a quantum rate? I dont think parallel and brute force are intrinsically synonymous processes, are they?
@@Anastasia-Marchenkova ah I thought i had some grasp of this. Its apparent i dont. LOL I am fascinated by the subject though. I will keep reading/listening.
randomness is not the same thing as freewill. It is the antithesis of freedom!
if every decision you made was based on the result from a random number generator or a dice roll we could not describe that as free.
read freewill by harris
I know there is no free will. Yet I live a very fun productive life. I am now typing this text into my iPhone 📱 without free will. Simple.
This is a metaphor and do not take it literal
What happened to the whole thing about blondes being dingy or dumb? Boy you sure prove that theory wrong. Beautifully
You should keep watching. It's flawed, but it's good.
Amazing . Keep it up. ✅🙋♂️
Great content!
It already happened.
So you reject the possibility of determinism because entertaining that possibility is dangerous? That is not very scientific.
God I wish I was even half as smart as this lol
You do know this is fiction, and not a documentary, yes? Cool cool.
Yes! But reaction videos are silly and fun. Obviously overly pedantic people are not fun!
Good exploration tho.
Can a quantum computer solve world poverty?
Short answer: Probably not, but it can defiantly improve it
Long answer: New technologies especially in computing/software have led to a huge increase in human industriousness leading to a higher demand for high skilled workers. These high skilled workers are able to produce much more than low skill workers making there work be more valuable, enabling them to pay more taxes. These tases can then be used for social programs/charity/education which can reduce the poverty of other people especially younger generations leading to a world with less poverty.
Is that a crack on the wall? If so you might have structural issues
So uh, you do realize the time lords are looking for the answer behind you, right?
I got 2/3rds into the pilot I watched something else 😆
1 minute in.... thumbs up 👍🏾
Gah! You never made another DEVS video. Sad face.
Nerd
Always wanted to use it on someone worthy 😂 lol
I have dm u something important asking for help... Pls check the_rohn_25
15:59 Islam taught something interesting about free will. Do you notice this Anastasia?
Puppy Dog!
@@Anastasia-Marchenkova the best kind!