A Brief History of Quantum Mechanics – with Sean Carroll

38 thoughts on “A Brief History of Quantum Mechanics – with Sean Carroll”

1. I agree with Feynman… nobody understands quantum mechanics.
   If you think about it, no matter how deep you go, no matter what you discover, you can always ask why?

2. Could it be that quantum physics relates to things that haven't happened yet I. E. They are in space, but have no space-time. Kind of like a 'potential' or PE. When something happens, I. E. The decay of uranium atoms, this behaves as a solid (rather than a cloud) because it now has space and time. It possesses time. In the quantum state it does not, only space. This allows things to be real, but only once they've happened (and are hence observable). Things that haven't happened are not observable, but are modellable via the quantum theory.

3. The physicists have been trying to understand the universe, and yet until now they are still guessing. MAN IS NOT CAPABLE OF KNOWING WHAT GOD MADE. So, like the parable of the fox and the grape, when the physicists could not understand God, they simply say there is no God.

4. I once asked a professor of quantum mechanics. if a tree falls in the forest and there is no one there. Doe,s it make a sound. He said yes it makes a sound. But we can,t be exactly sure where the tree was

5. I will believe Manyworlds when you include gravity into it.

6. Those last six minutes tho… that was the TEDX portion of the talk.

7. Of course , Faraday did that. 😅. Or Tesla did that . Teacher . By the way, could you explain more about STEAM engines ?

8. a gem

9. Thanks for the talk. So with time, size gets thinner according to wave function square, and since we can't interact with other universes, "total" energy in our universe decreases. Can we measure this?

10. Clear and concise as concise can be under your control. Thank you for your time and effort.

11. In one second we have one second,one minutes,one hour,one day,one year,one decade,one millenium,one infinity in one second so we can do more task in one second.jun Jun CEA.gmrc.thanks.

12. Nice pictures of electrons, when they are emitted from a radioactive nucleus. It’s nice to se how they actually looks like. Not as a mathematical wave function, but how the looks like in real life.

13. 1:48 Is Sean now Entangled?

14. Heh! Sean said, "It Matters…" in relation to Quantum Mechanics.

15. Xyz=x=y=z=one quantity
    M=L=T=one quantity
    Don't forget the pie.
    {(Xyz)(MLT)(π=3.14)}-centroid of mathematician-very very easy-centroid of archimedes,Isaac Newton,gauss followed by every one is mathematician.i'm three years course only-nautical.gmrc.thanks.jun Jun ceA.

16. There is an existence 1 and 0 which is your reference.nothing or one.from Jun Jun CEA.gmrc.

17. QUESTIONS?-WHAT ARE DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE BLIND PHYSICIST AND THE SEEING PHYSICIST? HOW DO THE DATA COLLECTION METHODS OF THE BLIND PHYSICIST AND THE SEEING PHYSICIST DIFFER?
    AND ISN'T THE TRUTH ABOUT ALL SEEING PHYSICISTS IS THAT POTENTIALLY THEY ARE ALL INSANE AND DELUSIONAL AND THERE NEVER WAS A CAT OR DOESN'T THE STATE OF A CERTAIN THING HAVE INFINITE POSSIBILITIES DEPENDANT ON THE ENVIRONMENT WHICH INCLUDES BOTH THE INSANE/ DELUSIONAL SEEING PHYSICIST AND THE BLIND PHYSICIST 🤔???? OR CAN I CONCLUDE THAT A BLIND PHYSICIST IS IMPOSSIBLE? OUCH! MY BRAIN HURTS!

18. 32 min
    Maybe we are in a state of entanglement with objects around us but we aren't able to perceive this entanglement because we've been accustomed to it since we were born.

19. Measurement SE YE develop last relation..✌✌

20. Time is more important..einsteinian time..in entanglement

21. QM is not fundamental rule..✌✌gr is no rule…😂😂😂😂

22. Electrons are supposed to behave as waves but we only observe them behaving like particles. And apparently, it was sort of prejudiced to say that the observed is following quantum mechanics and the observer is following classical mechanics, but should be considered in the same system as also a wave function. Since the observer and the observed are both behaving as waves, which then become entangled, is there any validity at all to the simplification that the intersection of two waves is a point (particle) and we therefore only observe the resulting intersection/entanglement?

23. Scientist go ask a Buddhist.

24. jesus christ let me go back on how earth was born

25. Apparently, quantum mechanics is showing that both everything & nothing are not only possible simultaneously, but our reality?

26. LET ME THINK OF THE CORRECT WORD FOR THIS,,,,,,,JUVENILLE, CHILDISH, PRE-SCHOOL, PRE- EVERYTHING !

27. The classic double slit proof of quantum phenomena is viewed in a two dimensional format, a flat screen with slits, the observer placed on one side and the photon passing through the slit from the other side.

    In any two dimensional format, say a projector screen the photons generated by the light source form a two dimensional picture after being filtered through say a negative slide.

    What if the photons travel three dimensionally, in a spiral fashion, the track taken through space and time would mean on arrival at the flat double split screen, the photons that arrive could have had a 360 degree position dictated by the time and distance travelled, they could therefore pass the slits at any point allowed by the gap.

    The resultant observation would have left, right, up, or down positions recorded.

    What would be the outcome if there was an interrupter placed between the photon source and the double slit behaving like the interrupter gear used on propeller aircraft to avoid the propeller being smashed by bullets.

    Could the outcome be a stable position for the photons.

28. (Schrodinger) What did that man have against cats.

29. And here I thought superposition was something from the Kama Sutra

30. Perhaps . .. I suppose the guy I was 20 years ago who stayed with the gorgeous girl who went to [deletes fact] is happy with a couple of kids. Perhaps I'm OK with that 😉
    [The Irony is I have a Physics degree, I'm only now kidding myself :)]

31. I’m reasonably certain that his initial reaction was “I was young.”

32. Your ignorance of gravity is not just astounding,
    nor is your ignorance of gravity just profound.
    Your explanation of gravity by space/time is actually insulting.
    Space/Time only explains what gravity does.
    Space/Time does nothing to explain what gravity is.
    You should admit that you, with your PhD. have no more knowledge about gravity than I with my high school diploma.

33. I enjoy this talk very much despite not understand almost all of it.

34. Quantum mechanics is people agreeing to listen to something until the end and applauding to look like they were the one that understood it

35. WHEN YOU MEASURE THE TIME OS STAR'S DISTANCE, THE SPEED OF LIGHT IS INADEQUATE, SO BILLIONS OF YEARS ARE NOT ABSOLUTE

36. .
    ,

37. Just watched thus whole video high asf and didnt understand 1 thing that he talked about

38. We need quantum mechanics because our scale of observation is unable to cope with the scale of electrons themselves. It is nothing more than a way to extend observational deviation within a wider standard deviation such that observational theorems can be tested on extradimensional phenomenon that we can't observe directly as of yet. We will most likely find that electrons ARE a wave of energy that connects Atomic nuclei to dark energy/dark matter. meaning atomic nuclei are real in our dimension and electrons are real extra dimensionally…decay and stellar recombination are how the energy goes from our dimensional reality and dark dimensional reality. Or something like that…lol

Comments are closed.