Is The Wave Function The Building Block of Reality?

The human condition?

Hahaha. I think of it as for every person that exists is another possibility for as much wonder or horror as one can imagine, and potentially everything in-between XD hahaha

The answer to your questions is also a superposition of "education" and "lack of education".

Skepticism

@@toni8675 education /= intelligence though. Informed and smart are different things. And common sense is considered intelligence to some, but abstract thought is to others.

What I like most about it is that we can actually test it. Theories like string or m theory are interesting, but there are no real test we can do to confirm it as far as I know. If a graviton does exists then we will probably not find out in our lifetime.

@@NLwino Gravity might be the residue of time moving through matter - If a graviton does exist it's probably entwined with a chroniton and in our current technology we have yet to come up with a method of studying a planck length of time or how to experiment with it so for now it can't be quantified.

Yeah, gravity is probably not a force. Its curvature is an emergent property of travelling through spacetime.

Yes but, we collapse wave functions by detecting them. By only being detected, the wave is collapsed. We dont give mass to it, and they are already inside a gravitational field before while uncollapsed…

@@Denis-ue2nz Quantum forces too, just not of spacetime, but a given quantum field.

He only collapses the wavefunctions 😂

If you haven't checked out Dr. Becky from Oxford, she's really good at explaining too.

i never heard of objective collapse theory before but now im STOKED, if it proves true it could be a pretty big step towards a theory of everything right? since it would explain why general relativity and the standard model are either accurate or not depending on the scale?

Of course, they could all be ruled out within a few years, and then we'll be back to square one.

@@EnglishMike that's just as important to science as proving something correct.

But i believe there's something missing in Quantum mechanics ☹️ may be a good interpretation will give new insights

@@kendrickmcelfish2805 The closer we get to the truth the more care we have to take to ensure we're not fooling ourselves based on background noise.

@@ChildOfTheLie96 Irony is a theist complaining about something from nothing.

@@ChildOfTheLie96 you're just spouting words you've heard. Please stop

I used to be involved in a university for some time where I'd attend a lot of graduation ceremonies. One of my favourite group of memories is of the women in their 70's or older who were finishing their first degree. For most of them their husband died, and after raising children and grandchildren finally did something for themselves. If Science inspires you, go for it if that's within your reach!

Dr. Matt is pretty awesome, agreed. Not everybody can get in front of an audience and do this stuff, although professors admittedly do it more than most. I've been a fan of this channel since day one. By the way Dr. Matt I'm sorry I called you skinny Thor in my first comment all those years ago. you just looked like Thor with your accent flying around out in space like a Thor do

@@ChildOfTheLie96 (1) Please explain to me what a communist is, in your own words. (2) Why would you seek out a Astrophysics channel if you denounce it so strongly?

An update or follow-up video would be awesome¡ Been a year since these experiments and initial results were discussed in the video 😊

Vial.

And Sean Carroll always switches out the poison gas with sleeping gas! Much preferred.

because of course a real cat is a conscious observer just like the experimentator

Not to mention that a ceramic cat is a lot easier to place inside a box it doesn't want to be in.

Let's not forget the third possible Schrodinger outcome: the cat desperately claws a hole in the box and releases the poison gas into the room. Everyone dies, nothing is learned, other than yet another confirmation of the human condition being one of foolishness.

*Highest-quality

Eh. The physics is good but they also produce a lot of garbage propaganda.

Shut up

@@benjaminhawkins6386 source?

@@francaisdeuxbaguetteiii7316 mr. Friedland!

Matt ties our Internet shoes, I absolutely agree. He's like our aglet, the little hard tube at the end of the lace that prevents it from becoming all frazzled, and keeps each lace away from ending up being more effort than it's worth, because you're just gonna want to replace your laces in that case, or even your shoes altogether.
So I think you totally nailed it, the Internet would indeed be a _much worse lace_ without our Matt O'Dowd on it 🤍 lol

We don't know if gravity can be quantized or not.

@@blinded6502 you guys might not but I do

@@megajor232 ikr it's so simple

So how does gravity come to being in case of quantum field theory

But then isnt it quantized in the form of the particles?

It's not an interpretation.

@@ThePowerLover this is not a reply.

@@helloyes2288 this Statement is false!

3 pedants in a row...

Might have a link to the Heisenberg uncertainty relation:
With less space uncertainty, i.e. less gravity as per equivalency principle, you have more and more randomness and decoherence of trajectories of particles.

Mostly, mass all but guaranties collapse. Once is trillions of year matter can become more quantum i hear

Most mass doesn't come from the Higgs field. Most mass of our familiar "baryonic matter" (protons, neutrons, and electrons) arises from binding energy inside nucleons being equivalent to mass because of special relativity. This is about 99% of the mass of everyday objects.
Besides that, if an OCM is true then yeah what you said is right.

​@@Latronibus do you have a recommendation on somewhere that I could read about the difference of mass from baryonic matter? I'm not seeing any differentiation on pages like: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_generation however I do see on the Higgs mechanism that they mention "essential to explain the generation mechanism of the property 'mass' for gauge bosons".

Bravo

Woah. Excellent argument. I'm commenting here because I want to see how MW opponents respond to you.

MW is the simplest theory? Sorry, not a theory (no evidence) and not simple at all. It makes the outlandish claim that whole universes are instantly created. How?? Where does all the energy come from? There is no evidence to think that what we see in this universe points to there being other universes, none. It's NOT simply a continuation or simply believing in the Schrodinger equation as commonly proposed. It makes the HUGE, outlandish, preposterous leap of religious faith to interpret what we see during a measurement as a branching of universes. NO EVIDENCE. You can't pretend like that is not an assumption (even tho I know you will) It's just an idea that magic could happen (cloak it as a theory instead of magic) to make every possibility happen in unlimited universes and explain away any difficulty I can't explain in this world..
Even the very word "universes" is itself a one-word oxymoron, so you have to say "worlds" instead, otherwise it becomes more obvious how silly this is. Claiming you have knowledge of a universe outside our universe is also oxymoronic, in a sense, if not obviously farcical.
We'll forgive you for the Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser proposition since it has been debunked, and yours is an older post.

This is about other theories, not interpretations.

@@ThePowerLover With the right interpretation, we would unlock deeper level technology.

@@wulphstein Yep.

Look up [[ earth core superionic ]] Because of the extremes of pressure on the core, also matter takes on interesting effect's. Scientist discovered recently, that the core of Earth, is a liquid and solid at the same time. There are also earth core superionic videos on playlist on my channel as well, its on top of the page.

kudos for removing the woo-woo about quantum mechanics and the classical limit

Look up [[ earth core superionic ]] Because of the extremes of pressure on the core, also matter takes on interesting effect's. Scientist discovered recently, that the core of Earth, is a liquid and solid at the same time. There are also earth core superionic videos on playlist on my channel as well, its on top of the page.

Well, if a collection of “theories” are equivalent, and are just different interpretations, or different but equivalent descriptions of the same thing, they could all be true... or at least,
in some sense? Uh, I guess it depends on the details of how the interpretations differ.
I suppose conceivably there could be different interpretations which have the same content as far as what they predict about what can possibly be observed, but which also include incompatible metaphysical claims, and in this case they couldn’t both be true ?
But if you ignore the parts of interpretations which aren’t even in theory testable, then they could be both true? I guess?

No, physics is absolute

@@flix7280 what do you mean by this?

Any quantum theory, by definition, can be both true and not true...haha

The problem is that solipsism is not a falsifiable hypothesis, there does not seem to be an imaginable disproof.

@@ThePowerLover That is until we figure out how and why consciousness arises, if there is some kind of physicality to it beyond the obvious "Brain=complex processing system=consciousness" we may be able to falsify it. (That is unless you're talking about solipsism purely from a philosophical pov)

The problem is the problematic definition of 'observation'. The most likely one is 'any interaction with anything', but people keep defaulting to the more ubiquitous definition, especially those out of the know.

I agree that it is a bit of an annoying explanation from a scientific perspective. However part of me really wants this to be true because it's a far more fascinating answer in my opinion.

i like to think that consciousness simply is born out of the underlying quantum physical processes. i.e. consciousness is quantum in nature
you could even go further to suggest how our consciousness is entangled to our environment, and thats why we all consciously observe the same events, however, i predict that as we approach the ability to measure near the planck scale, we will actually have different conscious experiences of a minute detection in an experiment, as we arrive at a degree of precision not agreed upon by our individual conscious compositions.

Scientist discovered yesterday, thatthe core of Earth, is a liquid and solid at the same time. Because of all the pressure on core, matter takes on interesting effect's, look up [[ earth core superionic ]] There are also earth core superionic videos on playlist on my channel as well, its on top of the page.

@@a.ielimba78 this has nothing to do with the comment of Rutvik.

Einstein said that gravity is acceleration so they are the same. Likewise a gravity wave is a ripple of deformation of space time travelling at the speed of light, so that ripple is a bending of space as it passes which is the same as mass does to space so it acts as mass passing at the speed of light. So the concentrated gravity wave Matt is talking about, must be in phase like a laser to make the ripples add constructively to an intensity that forms an event horizon. so it would require a form of lens, like concentric rings of large masses or even black holes of various sizes to form and focus a coherent gravity wave. Following the naming convention: A Laser works with light, a Maser works with microwaves, so a gravity laser would be called a "Graser". This should be enough for an entire Netflix series about a type III civilization!

@Rutvik the point related to acceleration might be a very important piece to the puzzling whether or not objective collapse theory pans out since in Wolfram's physics model it appears that in the large scale limit it can be shown that for any Turing complete system this limit when computational irreducibility is applied always reduces exactly to the generalized Einstein field equations with the catch that if super positions are used to resolve all possible orders for updating the system then addition to the normal causal space you also automatically get quantum field theory in the form of a universal Feynman path integral within an additional type of space that represents all possible states or outcomes for which a system can evolve which wolfram refers to as branchial space.
This name comes from how it is effectively analogous to the configuration space of Quantum field theory under a softer variation of a many worlds interpretation where said worlds are not independent but rather branches of a single wavefunction which gravitate warping the local geometry of branchial space.
Importantly the wave guide equation for pilot wave theory becomes a limiting case for the local metric tensor components within branchial space.
In this case the probability of a quantum outcome becomes represented by the degree of local curvature of branchial space around said state in branchial spacetime.
Likewise it means that a quantum measurement rather than changing the physical system merely represents the acceleration of an observer's frame of reference within branchial space.
The higher the probability of an outcome the more paths are bent by the curvature towards that outcome so by extension a definite wavefunction collapse becomes equivalent to falling into a state where all possible trajectories lead to the same outcome, an event horizon within branchial spacetime.
It is a lot to take in yet alone understand but it effectively means that all of quantum field theory can be described within the full geometric framework of general relativity with an observation of a quantum system becoming equivalent to accelerating your frame of reference within the configuration space of quantum field theory which is just as real as "normal" spacetime except that the units of this space are energy eigenstates of the Hamiltonian.
A.k.a., rather than measuring distance in "meters" like normal spacetime the units of distance in this separate type of space are measured in joules. And hence the branchial components of velocity are measured in units of power which is interesting as we can now equate the Heisenberg uncertainty principal with a relativistic Lorentz transformation of the observers frame of reference.
Also those infinities you get when you try and mix regular GR and QFT conventionally make perfect sense here as you are effectively trying to crunch a hyperbolic number of spatial dimensions down to 3. You are going to get infinities just like if you try and contract the Schwarzschild metric down to a radius of zero.

As long as equivalence is correct it should be correct

Hard to tell. My mind is constantly blown while watching this series.

Why are we always killing cats.

@@miker252 😂🤣😵😉

Nope, me too.
It reminded me of science itself: we know only as far as we measure. There could be another explanation that fits the facts and fits inside our measurements that is actually the truth

@@miker252
Better we kill them before the kill us. It's is a scientific fact that we are already aware of what they are plotting.

My brain almost split into two realities. This is mind-blowing.

Look up [[ earth core superionic ]] Because of the extremes of pressure on the core, also matter takes on interesting effect's. Scientist discovered recently, that the core of Earth, is a liquid and solid at the same time. There are also earth core superionic videos on playlist on my channel as well, its on top of the page.

Simple because by bell's theorem objective models (realism) and relativistic limits (locality) can't both be true in Quantum Mechanics.
We have a lot of evidence behind locality and not much for realism.

Yea. Haha. Just for long enough for somebody to ask ...but why?

That's what the greeks said too, back when.

@@onbored9627 And, more germane to a discussion of quantum mechanics, what scientists thought in the mid-late 1800s.

And this is where u are wrong. I'm mean sure its exciting, but there is so much more to know.

Or how about the line where quantum mechanics and philosophy start blending

Hmm good question. I must be misunderstanding slightly

Not strength of overall gravity of some localized spacetime, but the specific gravity of sufficient wave function interactions to cause collapse due to gravity within interactions. Finding that “Penrose Constant” (to coin a phrase-and which already may need more theoretic distinction following the experiment described in the video) for the nonlinear term for Schrödinger is a micro-, not macro-paradigm task.

Gravity field continuity between micro and macro through… worth exploring. The QC measures may give insights into the scales. Interesting.

@@csmarkham Forgive me for still being kind of bull-headed about my ignorance, but _why_ does such an effect restrict it's self to the micro scale, when it does not do so in any other circumstances? I think many-worlds and the "no collapse" idea makes more sense than trying to differentiate between micro-scale gravitational effects and large-scale gravity wells. It would, otherwise, imply that the gravity well of a black hole is less likely to be quantum than that of Earth, unless I'm misunderstanding even more than I think I am (fully possible).
Furthermore, doesn't the Sun discredit this idea? It's constantly undergoing quantum tunneling at a fairly well known rate, yet the matter in there is *much* more densely packed than in a quantum chip, or any lab for that matter. Such proximity should make quantum effects impossible, if short range gravitation effects cause chain-collapse.

in the absence of electromagnetic waves everything is in superpoistion. Obviously the collapse is due to influence from em waves. Its probably why dark matter exists and doesnt exist because it doesnt interact with em. Dark matter is matter in perpetual superpostion state with no way of collapse but it still has a gravititional effect because it is still matter. Wording is a bit loose there but you get my point. Mysteries of the universe and potentially quntumn gravity solved. Case closed.

I've watched for 6 years and still have not reached 100% lol

It would be 50/50 so you cannot expect reasonable resolution

😂

I don't see why it can't be argued that everything is occurring in a single dimension and the mind extrapolates extra dimensions. There's still a human component when it comes to science, mainly the observation and classification of phenomenon in order to derive laws. Who's to say that in the process of classifying things, we've accidentally assumed there were extra dimensions in order to simplify the process of understanding reality?
For example, suppose we take the natural numbers. Trying to encapsulate each and every member as a single entity is simply not mentally feasible. It's more practical to view the elements through the lens of base 10 (or whatever base, I'm using 10 as an example) since we can establish a finite number of groups (each group being a digit with a number being a combination of these groups). While this enables us to represent the natural numbers in a finite manner, we can't forget that natural numbers are not fundamentally defined to be in base 10; this was a human construct, with each group being a "dimension" to represent a number in 10 "dimensions". To then assume that some numbers are shadows of higher dimensions (if we can only view numbers that do not contain the digit 3) is completely missing the point.
Who's to say we're not doing something very similar with our reality? What if length, width, height, time, whatever, are merely "groups" we extrapolated in order to understand our sense of experience? Memories, sensations, what if they are just extrapolations of something more fundamental? If anything is to be labeled as a shadow, it makes more sense to me that this notion of there being multiple dimensions is merely a shadow projected by rationality of something that's more intricate.

Yyoouu hhiitt tthhee nnaaiill oonn tthhee hheeaadd ii tthhiinnkk yyoouurr oonn ttoo ssoommeetthhiinngg Pplleeaassee ccoonnttiinnuuee wwiitthh tthhiiss lliinnee ooff rreeaassoonniinngg
Tteesssseerraacctt

Look up [[ earth core superionic ]] Because of the extremes of pressure on the core, also matter takes on interesting effect's. Scientist discovered recently, that the core of Earth, is a liquid and solid at the same time. There are also earth core superionic videos on playlist on my channel as well, its on top of the page.

Agree, I'm so glad he got the Nobel Prize

@@EA-tc6kb Action, reaction, ‘time’ and observation, are all wave-motions of space/energy..because that is what exists..

@@EA-tc6kb Keep it. You only repeated what I said..

@@EA-tc6kb At least you didn’t say that Stephen Hawking’s quote is wrong!

Scientist discovered yesterday, thatthe core of Earth, is a liquid and solid at the same time. Because of all the pressure on core, matter takes on interesting effect's, look up [[ earth core superionic ]] There are also earth core superionic videos on playlist on my channel as well, its on top of the page.

There is no "multiple realities" interpretation, there is multiple universes interpretation, all of them making up reality. And is only grandiose if you believe beforehand, that reality doesn't exceeds our universe "so much".
That's religion, not science.

No he ain't. I am.

Just kidding. This is where I learned a lot of things. But I wouldn't say he is good at that because he can't seem to make up his mind.

Every collapse is an instance of particles becoming entangled. It is really shocking that this isn't the language used. Terms like "observed," and even "measured," in this case only serve to add to the mysticism around quantum mechanics that confuses people.

Actually, not every interaction with matter/energy causes the wavefunction to collapse (assuming it's a real thing); some interactions just result in a larger quantum entangled system. The term "measured" is used to delineate between interactions that cause the wavefunction to collapse and ones that do not. The exact mechanism behind why certain interactions are measurements while others aren't is still a fervent topic at the forefront of physics (it's known as "The Measurement Problem").
While I agree the terms "measured" and "observed" can yield confusion when compared to their colloquial counterparts, they do have a certain utility in the context of quantum mechanics. In an ideal world an entirely new word would have been used to define the aforementioned distinction; one that didn't invoke a sense of agency. But alas, it's probably too late for that now.

The problem is that solipsism is not a falsifiable hypothesis, there does not seem to be an imaginable disproof...

@@ThePaulsen1992 Wavefunction "collapse" or "reduction" resembles matter-antimatter annihilation, which process also eliminates previously existing wavefunctions, reducing them to zero.
Perhaps every time a wavefunction bifurcates, into "half going left" (L/2) and "half going right" (R/2)...
that bifurcation is associated with the co-creation of virtual matter-antimatter pairs "another half going left + anti-half going right" (L/2 - R/2) and "another half going right + anti-half going left" (-L/2 + R/2)...
such that emerging from the "split" would not merely be "half going left + half going right" (L/2 + R/2)...
but rather otherwise instead "half going left (real) + another half going left (virtual) + anti-half going left (virtual)" (L/2 + L/2 - L/2) and symmetrically (R/2 + R/2 - R/2).
If the particle "collapses" going "left", then the left's virtual particles are "promoted" to reality, L/2 + L/2 = L on the left, along with R/2 - R/2 = 0 on the right. The real R/2 right half wave is annihilated, along with its virtual states also, which are never "promoted" to real but "fade away".
This annihilation-like process could possibly produce "virtual radiation" of the sort that Casimir plates could detect. Wavefunction collapses could perhaps "jostle Casmir plates back & forth" or something vaguely like that

Well said!

Look up [[ earth core superionic ]] Because of the extremes of pressure on the core, also matter takes on interesting effect's. Scientist discovered recently, that the core of Earth, is a liquid and solid at the same time. There are also earth core superionic videos on playlist on my channel as well, its on top of the page.

It also removes the "magic" of the quantum.

Good questions i think

Ever heard of the fun-fact that theres MANY MORE
Science-KRplusr?
Professor Dave, Sci Man Dan, Joe Scott, Tom Scott, Sci Show, Seeker, Tier Zoo,
theres so many more to check out. Waiting for you.

Yes, that is a bullshit explanation that also won't go away. ;-)

that literally doesn't make sense

OrchOR was falsified in 2016 by Penrose's experimentalist. The "bing" turned out to be a gestalt counting space (start/stop) for a biological language then named GML (geometric music language).

@@eenkjet Hameroff have answered all of supposed "refutations". Nothing was debunked.

@@tehdreamer I debated him a while back. He's a complete hack at this time.

@@eenkjet What do you mean? You have a recorded debate with Stuart Hameroff, the main man along with Penrose who propose OrchOR?

Yeah it collapses upon interaction. But every interaction IS a collapse, not just likely.
But mind that “collapse” is not literal, it doesn’t stay collapsed. After the interaction, it is a wave function again, but that function carries the information of the interaction.

Same. My amateur-theory is also that these wave function collapses are what _cause_ gravity. They warp time, which in turn causes diverging geodesics which then causes "torque" which manifests as gravity (as has been explained before here on PBS).
c (speed of light) could simply be interpreted as an interaction/wave function collapse budget. The more interactions happen within a physical space, the more time is warped because the interactions take a way from time budget. More mass means more interactions, hence more mass causes more time warping which manifests as stronger gravity.

@@juzoli The problem is that solipsism is not a falsifiable hypothesis, there does not seem to be an imaginable disproof.

@@ThePowerLover I think you commented this on the wrong thread, because your answer is not even remotely related to the topic here.
What I said is easy to prove, and considered trivial in science, but lot of non-scientists misunderstands it.

@@juzoli Is very related, as we can't test is a tree falling make sound when there is no one to "observe", interactions are like trees falling.

IIRC superpositions of valid solutions to the Einstein Field equations are not always themselves valid solutions to the field equations. That's the mathematical justification for Penrose denying this possibility.

Really??

@@kevin42 yup

@@YossiSirote you've peaked my interest. elaborate.

That's simple: collapse is irreversible giving us an arrow of time. And it is independent from the fact that in the past entropy was smaller.
This causes some problems: it violates rule of conservation of energy and momentum according to Noether's theorem.
However any form of collapse is such a violation. It is unavoidable as any measurement requires collapse.
So if any measurement causes conservation energy violation then I don't think that this is argument against objective collapse.
Because objective collapse is so rare then this violiation was not observed yet.
Also: any arrow of time have problem with energy conservation.

Yes, that's a random number linked to a non-existing concept. :-)

I think waves are always a higher level abstraction. like ocean waves, there is water moving in a particular way to create wavy behavior. sound waves has moving air, springs oscillate in a wavy way because of deforming and interchanging of potential and kinetic energy in the material periodically. wherever there are waves, something underlying is moving creating the pattern

@@ecicce6749 Yeah. If you wobble an electron then it creates waves in the EM field like ripples on a pond.
What was wobbled to create the probability wave described by Schrodinger's equation?

The 'mysticism' is advanced science, we just aren't there yet. Electricity was once thought of as only 'mysticism' and fictional.
Arrogance leads to ignorance.

@@tailong9548 This.

@@ThePowerLover
You might like.
krplus.net/bidio/p5Syppx7c5C4dIY

@@tailong9548 When was electricity ever thought of as fictional?

@@simonO712 When people thought that electricity was only the stuff wizards could produce.
It was science but people believed it was myth or 'fiction'.

Yeah, I had the impression that something along those lines is what Susskind is saying. But I probably misunderstood Susskind.

Seems it would be more efficient to seed a function and generate it at interaction rather than rolling and "recording" every value from that virtual interaction to a real interaction. Why calculate something that may never be used?

That is what makes sense intuitively. The double-slit experiment made me think otherwise.

​ ​ A man was arguing for you to defend you and said something about the brain is firing on some cylinders.
I replied to him ​ @Randy Terry you are defending the other guy? I wrote him but look -this is part 2. I just answered you - and him - in "depth" but missed out [my apologies] on a critical word/phrase/sentence you used.
You said "brain is not firing on all cylinders".
My response: who the h*** cares - all cylinders, no cylinders, some cylinders [e.g. distributed cognition] - in the context [keyword : context] that
1. The mind [the one with free will] is NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT the brain
The mind is a separate, independent , non mystical "SPIRITUAL" quality but with potency [i.e. free will : the ability to amazingly "re-program" the brain within limits . N.B. The word "Reprogram" is a metaphor to represent the actuality: neuro-plasticity by deliberate choice].
Interesting fun fact. Jeffrey Schwarz, M.D. , UCLA worked with quantum physicist Henry Stapp (Berkeley) - the earlier showing how frameworks helped x% of O.C.D patients overcome their ailment and outright change the neuro-plasticity of their brain using "mind power" . The background theory they proposed is ORCH S.R. (as I call it to distinguish it from Sir Roger Penrose's ORCH O.R.) .
ORCH S.R. : subjective reduction of the quantum wave function at the ion channel (between neurons, in the gap) where man's brain, nature and the relational component work together.
ORCH O.R. : objective reduction is a Penrose Physicalist theory where microtubules self-collapse (resolving the tension between General relativity and Quantum mechanics in the universe) generating proto-consciousness 4 times per second.
NOTES: all notes on quantum theory above are hypothesis, fun and interesting - NOT truths. The ONLY TRUTH as in ABSOLUTE TRUTH is you have free will and therefore can use "reason AND logic" [two different words, elements] .
Computers have blazing speed precision logic that can do "so much" but are unable to reason; can not "induct" nor "abduction/abductive inference". Only man has these "qualities" of mind . HOW? The technicality is NOT known: what is known is it is ABSOLUTE TRUTH because consciousness can identify existence [no A.I. can; nor mental patients nor animals. Only man.
But what about you? AND then there are PEOPLE LIKE YOU THAT HAVE "RATIONALITY" use free will TO deny it .
You can Not deny one or more of the three:
Existence [then where are you?]. You can validate this by pointing to things or touching or smelling things: making a "decision amongst alternative options" if rational - about whether you are in and of existence.
If there is existence then you auto-validate consciousness for it identifies the above.
And if there is existence and consciousness : one identity identifying another identity then you autovalidate "truth: identity" [Aristotle' law of identity]. So the moon exists regardless of whether you do or whether you look at it or not
Therefore the three "axiomatic' concepts upon which the ENTIRETY OF SCIENCE AND MATH AND ALL OTHER SUBJECTS OF ACADEMIA AND BEYOND ARE DEPENDENT are existence, mind and identity [by mind it means full fledged free will - NO CONSTRAINTS - a separate spiritual identity altogether -it's own cause; and you are the cause of it as one unified entity over your life span].

That's what the many worlds interpretation claims.

That's pilot wave theory.

That's why Sir Penrose is a Nobel Prize laureate very well deserved

It shocks me how much creativity is involved in coming up with a scientific theory. It's almost like creating a piece of art.

Unbelievable human being. Probably my favourite physicist

If Landau and Lifshitz do that, then they make the same mistake as pretty much every other QM book of that time. Too bad. Their mechanics volume is better, I think. And, no, classical mechanics is certainly NOT the short de Broglie wavelength limit, either. That is just some of the folklore that has gone unquestioned for a century now that does not withstand even the slightest experimental physics test. It may be that for free single quantum systems without mass gap and assuming that we forget absolutely everything about high energy physics. It is certainly not that for systems with mass gap, like superconductors. While there are mean field theories for those systems, they are not "classical" by any means. Heisenberg was the first to point out around 1927 that the quantum-classical transition occurs for systems under weak measurement conditions (he used Rydberg atoms as an example, but didn't do the math). In 1929 Mott solved the weak measurement problem for alpha-ray tracks, which shows that the "solution" is not actually classical physics, but only something that can be mistaken for classical physics by folks with poor physics intuition.

@@schmetterling4477 To clarify, "short de Broglie wavelength limit" was my wording, not L&L's, and I am not particularly well-versed in high energy physics outside of the small subset important to understand for quantum chemistry, so forgive me if my 'poor physical intuition' isn't able to properly account for all of quantum field theory.
In L&L's defense, their exact wording was that classical mechanics is "A limiting case of quantum mechanics", which certainly sounds accurate to me, considering the amount of "weak" quantum phenomena which can be modelled using quasi-classical quantum theory. Furthermore the full title of the edition I'm reading includes the parenthesis (Non-Relativistic Theory), implying that it leaves some of the newer developments in quantum theory for the next volume, Relativistic Quantum Theory, originally published in 1968 and heavily expanded later by Lifshitz & Pitaevskii as the field kept advancing.
I must also add that it is unclear to me how anything you've just said disproves the notion of a "short de Broglie wavelength limit". There is nothing inherently classical about a mean field theory. They are rather approximations based on the assumption that non-linear multi-particle interactions don't matter. Please elaborate.

@@n00bowser Classical mechanics is not a limiting case of quantum mechanics. It is simply wrong to think of it that way. QM describes all of the structure of matter and radiation. CM describes none. You are correct, though, generation after generation has been told these fairytales in non-relativistic QM beginner's classes.
In the short de Broglie limit we are expecting the emergence of quantum gravity, not the recovery of classical mechanics. Even if you go to the equivalent of the 1TeV de Broglie length, what you are seeing are not classical particles. You are seeing the entire zoo of the standard model.
To be honest, the idea that a non-relativistic theory has a well defined high energy limit is entirely brain-dead.

Scientist discovered yesterday, thatthe core of Earth, is a liquid and solid at the same time. Because of all the pressure on core, matter takes on interesting effect's, look up [[ earth core superionic ]] There are also earth core superionic videos on playlist on my channel as well, its on top of the page.

There's a PBS Space Time about using Kugelblitz for spaceship propulsion, you can watch it here: krplus.net/bidio/dd6SeYB1q6nUhIY&ab_channel=PBSSpaceTime

Agreed. Although it feels incoherent and unnatural. Meaning humans don’t quiet have the full grasp on it…… I think (hoping?) there is significant refinement coming in the future…..

It very much could be that we have the math wrong with some correct answers. In theory, we should be able to have a single, simple and elegant solution that works with both Quantum and the real world.

There is no such thing as wave function collapse. There are only people who don't understand physics. :-)

I don't think it's correct to assume consciousness requires the ability to be rational. There's no obvious requirement for consciousness to also have the ability to discriminate/classify perception into individual components/systems. In fact this idea is not supported by meditators with extensive experience of quieting the discriminatory nature of the mind; are they no longer conscious when they enter samadhi, the state of not discriminating (aka unity)? The fact that they can enter and exit samadhi is a strong counterexample that logic (which is really an aspect of discrimination) is fundamentally tied to consciousness.

@@yerpderp6800
Well our consciousness never , up to date, experience a glass repair itself from broken to brand new and stuff like that ?
Maybe it’s possible , an unknown consciousness can exist in a quantum state , but not ours .

Science asylum did an episode on superposition two months ago saying that particles were in one state but spoke about vector spaces. The schrodinger equation told you which axis of the vector space the particle was in. I didn’t really understand it and how it relates to this episode.

He mentioned the theory says it should be instantaneous and non-local. So I guess the answers are no.

Experiments show it is at least a few orders of magnitude faster than C

@@JorgetePanete what experiments?

it doesn't really matter, it's mostly wrong. The issue is at a certain relative distance from any cloud of tiny particles (smaller is farther away), they appear to be a solid object, and there is no real way for us to differentiate them from each other. We can't make energy at a high enough frequency to separate the particles. So we have to kinda fake our way to what we believe is supposed to happen.
It's easier if you think of the quantum perspective as distant, rather than small. The Dimension of Observation is a physical objective barrier to the transfer of information, of C. Causality has a mirror. And in that reflection information, as if falling into a black hole, begins to take infinite amounts of time to progress. For all intents and purposes Causality itself hits 0 m/s^2, and in these boundaries both minimum and maximum, information can no longer be shared.
Every edge in a 3 dimensional universe is a boundary layer of causality that cannot be penetrated. This is what the Cosmic Horizon and Singularity represent. 0C

@@jb76489 Entanglement breaking experiments work over thousands of km and the delay has been measured to be zero. Damned Matt burned us all with his answer to the second to last comment!