Understanding Quantum Mechanics #8: The Tunnel Effect

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 29 сен 2024

Комментарии • 982

  • @alexChook
    @alexChook 3 года назад +284

    This is a fantastic presentation Sabine! I studied quantum mechanics as part of my physics undergraduate degree and I love how you are helping to de-mistify some of these concepts which are labelled as 'weird' by most people. Thanks for your contributions to scientific knowledge.

    • @georgesiantis8485
      @georgesiantis8485 3 года назад +1

      Bin ein Fan, aber die Verharmlosung dieses großen Rätsels, das unsere Realität in Frage stellt, in diesem Video finde ich suboptimal. Die ach, so coolen Referenzen von Sabine, wie kallulierbar die Hauptprobleme der Quantenmechanik doch noch seien, wenn man nur das und dies wegdenke und abstrahiere, sind respektabel aber machen auch verlegen.

    • @crystalgiddens7276
      @crystalgiddens7276 3 года назад

      total gibberish. I cannot understand because it is total gibberish.

    • @crystalgiddens7276
      @crystalgiddens7276 3 года назад

      @@georgesiantis8485 even more gibberish? I'm a fan, but the trivialization of this great mystery that questions our reality in this video is suboptimal. The oh, so cool references from Sabine, how calculable the main problems of quantum mechanics are, if one only thinks away and abstracts this and this, are respectable but also make you embarrassed.

    • @frankdimeglio8216
      @frankdimeglio8216 3 года назад +2

      The page Nexus of Physics has now given the following two writings the thumbs up on their page. ALSO consider this: E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS time DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
      THE UNIVERSAL AND MATHEMATICAL PROOF THAT ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY:
      Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. SO, gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. THE SUN AND THE EARTH are described and represented by BOTH F=ma AND E=mc2. F=ma AND E=mc2 PROVE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS ALL of SPACE is NECESSARILY electromagnetic/gravitational (IN BALANCE). Objects fall at the same rate (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS the SPEED OF LIGHT is RELATIVELY CONSTANT AS WELL. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. In fact, the rotation of THE MOON MATCHES it's revolution; AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. So, THE PLANETS (INCLUDING WHAT IS THE EARTH) are not "falling" in what is "curved SPACE" in RELATION to what is THE SUN. This is nonsense. E=mc2 is DIRECTLY AND FUNDAMENTALLY DERIVED FROM F=ma. This truly explains PERPETUAL MOTION. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. A PHOTON may be placed the center of THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), as the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the SPEED OF LIGHT; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
      By Frank DiMeglio
      EINSTEIN NEVER UNDERSTOOD PHILOSOPHY, MATHEMATICS, AND PHYSICS, AS HE HAS BEEN TOTALLY OUTSMARTED BY SIR FRANK MARTIN DIMEGLIO:
      The balance of being AND EXPERIENCE is ESSENTIAL. BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand.
      THE SELF represents, FORMS, and experiences a COMPREHENSIVE approximation of experience in general by combining conscious and unconscious experience. MOREOVER, the ability of THOUGHT to DESCRIBE OR RECONFIGURE sensory experience is ULTIMATELY dependent upon the extent to which THOUGHT IS SIMILAR TO sensory experience. THOUGHTS ARE INVISIBLE.
      Dream experience is/involves true/real QUANTUM GRAVITY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. MOST IMPORTANTLY, in dreams, BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE is invisible AND VISIBLE IN BALANCE. IMPORTANTLY, dream experience is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. THE EYE is ALSO the body. Dreams improve upon memory AND UNDERSTANDING. Indeed, there is no outsmarting the GENIUS of dreams.
      OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/with what is THE EARTH. NOW, get a good LOOK at what is the translucent, SEMI-SPHERICAL, QUANTUM GRAVITATIONAL, AND BLUE sky. Excellent. The DOME of a person's EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. THE EARTH IS also BLUE (as water).
      F=ma AND E=mc2 PROVE that, why, and how ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, and describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. SO, it is NECESSARILY a matter of precisely how these equations are understood in a BALANCED, EXTENSIVE, AND INTEGRATED fashion in RELATION to/with WHAT IS THOUGHT. The INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of THOUGHT (AND description) is improved in the truly superior mind. E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma.
      Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.
      The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. A PHOTON may be placed at the center of THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), as the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the SPEED OF LIGHT; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Get a good LOOK at what is THE EYE. POINTS are points. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. F=ma AND E=mc2 PROVE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS ALL of SPACE is NECESSARILY electromagnetic/gravitational IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT.
      The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. OPEN your EYES. NOW, LOOK at what is the FLAT, SETTING, AND ORANGE SUN (with the SPACE around it THEN going invisible AND VISIBLE IN BALANCE). This ORANGE SUN manifests or forms at what is EYE LEVEL/BODY HEIGHT as well. This ORANGE SUN is manifest ON BALANCE as what is NECESSARILY the BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE of THE EARTH/LAVA. The viscosity of LAVA IS BETWEEN what is manifest as WATER AND THE EARTH/GROUND. ALL of SPACE is NECESSARILY electromagnetic/gravitational IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. F=ma AND E=mc2 do provide absolute, BALANCED, THEORETICAL, and CLEAR proof that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
      Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. THEREFORE, the rotation of THE MOON MATCHES it's revolution. MOREOVER, a given PLANET (INCLUDING WHAT IS THE EARTH) sweeps out equal areas in equal times; AND this is THEN consistent with/as what is F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is PERPETUAL MOTION; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It ALL makes perfect sense. BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand.
      THE PLANETS (INCLUDING WHAT IS THE EARTH) are NOT "falling" in what is "curved SPACE". In fact, this is nonsense. It is PROVEN.
      By Frank DiMeglio

    • @frankdimeglio8216
      @frankdimeglio8216 3 года назад +1

      THE THEORETICAL, SIMPLE, ULTIMATE, CLEAR, LINKED, BALANCED, AND EXTENSIVE MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION OF PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE IS PROVEN, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA:
      Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.
      Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. The perpetual motion of THE PLANETS in RELATION to WHAT IS THE SUN is the result of the fact that gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, as this IS proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. GREAT !!!! ACCORDINGLY, a given PLANET sweeps out equal areas in equal times; AS GRAVITY IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. THEREFORE, this NECESSARILY represents, involves, and describes what is MOTION AND NO MOTION IN BALANCE. SO, THE SPEED OF LIGHT (c) IS THEN understood as a POINT; AS the SPACE that envelopes THE EARTH IN BALANCE IS the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE. E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand.) Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Indeed, gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Again, E=mc2 IS F=ma. OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/with WHAT IS THE EARTH. NOW, LOOK at what is the translucent, semi-spherical, AND BLUE SKY. THE EARTH is ALSO blue. SO, objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Great. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy.
      ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This is proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. Indeed, a PHOTON may be placed at the center of THE SUN (as a POINT, of course); as the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the SPEED OF LIGHT (c). GREAT.
      ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy IS gravity. This is proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. "Mass"/energy involves balanced inertia/inertial resistance consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/energy, as electromagnetism/energy is gravity. Gravity AND electromagnetism/energy are linked AND balanced, as electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ACCORDINGLY, gravity/acceleration involves balanced inertia/inertial resistance; as gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Carefully consider what is THE EYE along with the falling man. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
      ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This is proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. (E=mc2 is directly and FUNDAMENTALLY DERIVED FROM F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. That is where Einstein got it from.) This NECESSARILY represents, involves, AND describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. THOUGHTS are invisible. Very importantly, the ability of THOUGHT to DESCRIBE OR RECONFIGURE sensory experience is ULTIMATELY dependent upon the extent to which thought is SIMILAR to sensory experience. SO, BOTH equations apply to, represent, AND perfectly describe the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE as invisible AND VISIBLE ELECTROMAGNETIC/GRAVITATIONAL SPACE in FUNDAMENTAL equilibrium AND BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The BALANCE of being AND EXPERIENCE is essential.
      "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Consider THE MAN who is standing on WHAT IS the EARTH/GROUND. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Take careful notice of WHAT IS THE ORANGE SUN. Beautiful. Now, carefully consider the role and RELATIONAL significance of what is the eyelid. Consider what is lava. The viscosity of lava is BETWEEN that of what is water AND what is the Earth/ground. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity.
      Time DILATION ALSO ULTIMATELY proves that GRAVITY IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Indeed, this not only explains the term c4; but it ALSO explains the significance of the fourth spatial dimension. GREAT !!! Notice that THE DOME of a person's EYE may also be visible. THINK. IT IS CLEARLY PROVEN. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper understanding of physics/physical experience, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
      E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Moreover, objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy.
      INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper understanding of physics/physical experience, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Ultimately and truly, time is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (E=mc2 IS F=ma.) This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
      The INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of thought (AND description) is improved in the truly superior mind. THINK.
      Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. The full distance in/of SPACE is thus LINKED and BALANCED with what is the middle distance in/of SPACE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. GREAT !!!! The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky.
      SO, stellar clustering ALSO proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Carefully consider what is A GALAXY. (BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand.)
      By Frank DiMeglio

  • @hylianknight3
    @hylianknight3 3 года назад +176

    "Quantum tunneling isnt that weird... except for this, whoops" i love it

    • @MrHotlipsholohan
      @MrHotlipsholohan Месяц назад +1

      Saw on documentaries people describing light objects that appeared in their houses going through walls , must be the same principle ,

  • @MCsCreations
    @MCsCreations 3 года назад +16

    Fantastic, Sabine! Thanks a lot! 😃
    Stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊

  • @baganatube
    @baganatube 3 года назад +3

    Every video of yours reminds me of how lucky I am to have come across your channel some time ago. I've seen a few great science popularization channels, but none has explained this concept so intuitively.

  • @Almeida19001
    @Almeida19001 3 года назад

    Thanks Sabine for covering this weird effect. It becomes even weirder when you learn about the Hartmann effect: ie tunneling time of the tunneled wavefuntion is independant from the width of the wall.

  • @masterwrench4252
    @masterwrench4252 3 года назад

    You make my brain work, thank you. Now mind you, I only understand & grasp .01% of what your saying but, it's fascinating in its possibilities. Then I remember, I'm a mechanic, a dang good one if I do say so, who was stumped by trigonometry...grab my beer, hit the like button and wonder "hmmm, quantum tunneling & and the cosmic web...is this our answer to ftl travel?
    Found your channel during the covid, thank you for the diversion & the info!

  • @leyasep5919
    @leyasep5919 3 года назад

    5:30 awesome work here, Sabine !
    I'm sending you a quantum cookie your way !

  • @richardgreen7225
    @richardgreen7225 3 года назад

    - Since space is largely "vacuum" the idea of a "barrier" is a mathematical fiction (V = step function). If electromagnetic forces are intermediated by photons (or virtual photons [eh?]), one should expect the barrier collision sieve to be "hit-or-miss" ... some particles will percolate through.
    - But allowing the classical analog: What does the P (momentum) operator produce?
    - How is quantum tunneling different from classical statistical mechanics for evaporation/sublimation? Surface molecules will contain some that are on the long tail and have sufficient energy to overcome the surface barrier.

  • @jonasschmitt3548
    @jonasschmitt3548 7 месяцев назад

    Great video! I have one question, though:
    If I were to prepare an energy eigenstate with energy < barrier energy and I would place a detector right inside the barrier and get a click there...would this violate energy conservation?

  • @Nathillien
    @Nathillien 3 года назад

    7:13 There should be some correlation between the peak position difference and some other parameters in the experiment ... maybe the ratio of barrier energy and wave energy or just the barrier energy or barrier length some uncertainties within the experiment or ... some more complex correlation. No?

  • @heybillpack
    @heybillpack 3 года назад

    I'm still only seeing waves of quanta interacting with other waves of quanta and I'm not understanding the decoherence or measurement problems for tunneling nor the double-slit experiments...
    A wave travels along the field.
    It passes through a field of additional waves, which in this case is an obstacle of relatively stationary/known location (a wall, perhaps).
    For any given wave there are infinitely-many, smooth positions along the path where the introduction of an additional wave at exactly the right frequency would perfectly nullify the wave. This is basic trigonometry.
    - When wave(s) of an obstacle and the initial wave perfectly nullify they "interact" which can/will only ever be observed in discrete quatum packets (even if the wave itself is smooth/continuous), which is equal to the number of values that perfectly nullify a wave (i.e.: 1) at that position in spacetime. So a wave is necessarily only ever observed as a single particle.
    - When the wave(s) of the obstacle(s) and the initial wave do not perfectly nullify the initial wave they do not interact _in a quantized way_ ; meaning they do not interfere with each other in a discrete/measurable nullification of the initial wave that could be described as "a particle"; so the wave continues until it is nullified by a later interaction, at which point it appears to be quantized.
    So for tunneling there is some chance that a single wave will have some possibility of passing through an obstacle in a way that ignores all perfectly-nullifying frequencies of all intersecting waves along the path, but this is vanishingly small with each additional wave. Like yelling at your friend at a concert, sometimes they can hear part of what you're saying.
    With the double-slit experiment, the beam splitter/slits in glass introduce additional phases to the wave, which synchronizes it with those frequencies that are not suppressed/blocked by the waves within the splitter itself, then the resulting wave interferes with itself from that point forward so that only the quanta that weren't entirely blocked or that don't tunnel through the detector are measured by interacting with the obstacle/detector at exactly the frequencies that it can; namely the phase/anti-phase points of the waves that it encounters that are also in anti-phase/phase with the frequency introduced by the splitter. If you add in a detector along one path, it will introduce additional phase interactions that will cause additional interference of the original/proceeding splitter in exactly the phases it needs to in order to detect the quanta (otherwise it wouldn't detect anything), and quantized detection of quanta is what removes the oscillation/frequency interactions in the first place...
    Am I missing something? No matter how many fields or dimensions you add to the waves, the interactions within a single wave calculation can only occur at one value (or at least a constrained limit of values near a single value, depending on scale/precision) for each variable and each point in an oscillation pattern of anything moving through spacetime (though there are multiple ways they can enter different energy levels where they might interact with a different set of waves in different fields/along different dimensional variables).

  • @pedrocardoso3407
    @pedrocardoso3407 3 года назад

    Lovely video, just a question, did you used FEM to do this simulation?

  • @prydin
    @prydin 3 года назад +46

    You’re doing something that few educators bother to do: You actually solve the equation! Most of the time we are just supposed to look at an abstract equation without any connection to something tangible. This made all the difference in the world. Thanks Sabine!

  • @m_jackson
    @m_jackson 3 года назад +87

    Thank you. The way you convey concepts is the most understandable I've yet seen.

    • @crystalgiddens7276
      @crystalgiddens7276 3 года назад

      @@dixztube total gibberish. I cannot understand because it is total gibberish.

    • @frankdimeglio8216
      @frankdimeglio8216 3 года назад

      THE THEORETICAL, SIMPLE, ULTIMATE, CLEAR, LINKED, BALANCED, AND EXTENSIVE MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION OF PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE IS PROVEN, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA:
      Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.
      Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. The perpetual motion of THE PLANETS in RELATION to WHAT IS THE SUN is the result of the fact that gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, as this IS proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. GREAT !!!! ACCORDINGLY, a given PLANET sweeps out equal areas in equal times; AS GRAVITY IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. THEREFORE, this NECESSARILY represents, involves, and describes what is MOTION AND NO MOTION IN BALANCE. SO, THE SPEED OF LIGHT (c) IS THEN understood as a POINT; AS the SPACE that envelopes THE EARTH IN BALANCE IS the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE. E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand.) Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Indeed, gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Again, E=mc2 IS F=ma. OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/with WHAT IS THE EARTH. NOW, LOOK at what is the translucent, semi-spherical, AND BLUE SKY. THE EARTH is ALSO blue. SO, objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Great. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy.
      ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This is proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. Indeed, a PHOTON may be placed at the center of THE SUN (as a POINT, of course); as the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the SPEED OF LIGHT (c). GREAT.
      ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy IS gravity. This is proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. "Mass"/energy involves balanced inertia/inertial resistance consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/energy, as electromagnetism/energy is gravity. Gravity AND electromagnetism/energy are linked AND balanced, as electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ACCORDINGLY, gravity/acceleration involves balanced inertia/inertial resistance; as gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Carefully consider what is THE EYE along with the falling man. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
      ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This is proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. (E=mc2 is directly and FUNDAMENTALLY DERIVED FROM F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. That is where Einstein got it from.) This NECESSARILY represents, involves, AND describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. THOUGHTS are invisible. Very importantly, the ability of THOUGHT to DESCRIBE OR RECONFIGURE sensory experience is ULTIMATELY dependent upon the extent to which thought is SIMILAR to sensory experience. SO, BOTH equations apply to, represent, AND perfectly describe the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE as invisible AND VISIBLE ELECTROMAGNETIC/GRAVITATIONAL SPACE in FUNDAMENTAL equilibrium AND BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The BALANCE of being AND EXPERIENCE is essential.
      "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Consider THE MAN who is standing on WHAT IS the EARTH/GROUND. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Take careful notice of WHAT IS THE ORANGE SUN. Beautiful. Now, carefully consider the role and RELATIONAL significance of what is the eyelid. Consider what is lava. The viscosity of lava is BETWEEN that of what is water AND what is the Earth/ground. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity.
      Time DILATION ALSO ULTIMATELY proves that GRAVITY IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Indeed, this not only explains the term c4; but it ALSO explains the significance of the fourth spatial dimension. GREAT !!! Notice that THE DOME of a person's EYE may also be visible. THINK. IT IS CLEARLY PROVEN. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper understanding of physics/physical experience, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
      E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Moreover, objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy.
      INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper understanding of physics/physical experience, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Ultimately and truly, time is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (E=mc2 IS F=ma.) This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
      The INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of thought (AND description) is improved in the truly superior mind. THINK.
      Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. The full distance in/of SPACE is thus LINKED and BALANCED with what is the middle distance in/of SPACE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. GREAT !!!! The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky.
      SO, stellar clustering ALSO proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Carefully consider what is A GALAXY. (BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand.)
      By Frank DiMeglio

  • @IZn0g0uDatAll
    @IZn0g0uDatAll 3 года назад +74

    Loved the wooooops, that made me laugh out loud

    • @jimmyzhao2673
      @jimmyzhao2673 3 года назад

      Ha Ha, so true. I loved following along with the animations, then came the 'wooops'

    • @doommaker4000
      @doommaker4000 3 года назад

      Whoops, we broke physics.
      Or have we?

    • @mabd7340
      @mabd7340 3 года назад

      Is Sabine Russian?

    • @jimmyzhao2673
      @jimmyzhao2673 3 года назад +1

      @@mabd7340 German

  • @manucitomx
    @manucitomx 3 года назад +48

    Thank you, Dr. you’re surely one of the best science explainers of this century. I look forward to your videos every week.

  • @LowellBoggs
    @LowellBoggs 3 года назад +23

    absolutely outstanding video. this is really high quality education. thank you so much.

    • @LowellBoggs
      @LowellBoggs Год назад +1

      Replying to my own reply from 2 years ago, I have watched several videos by different youtubers, and still feel this is the best that I have seen. It has great animations and discussed the key controversies in a manner that is understandable to educated non specialists. Thanks Sabine!

  • @clmasse
    @clmasse 3 года назад +2

    The speed is not discussed to day anymore. There is the phase velocity and the group velocity. Only the group velocity is the velocity of information transfer, and it is smaller than the speed of light. The phase velocity could transfer information only if it was possible to measure the whole wave function, which is not. In some situations, the group velocity is larger than the speed of light, but it has been calculated that the velocity of energy transfer is smaller all the same. This is usual textbook material. Some people still discuss, but they are definitely wrong. Many more people have wrong ideas about quantum mechanics, that even date back to old quantum mechanics, before 1924.

  • @dekenba6482
    @dekenba6482 3 года назад +12

    Just superb. Sabine has a real passion for physics, she fully understands what she is explaining, she has a dry sense of humour, she doesn't mind being controversial when it's necessary and she has one of the world's largest wardrobes.

  • @LeopoldoGhielmetti
    @LeopoldoGhielmetti 3 года назад +35

    So if I want to go faster than light, I just have to run against a wall and if I have enough luck I can found myself on the other side of the wall after having traveled faster than light.
    I don't know why but it seems to me that it hurts a lot, maybe because I'm not lucky enough. 😂😂😂

    • @tTtt-ho3tq
      @tTtt-ho3tq 3 года назад +11

      Theoretically yes, I'd say! However, you may have to try many times ... many many times. Never give up. Science is hard.

    • @allthe1
      @allthe1 3 года назад +6

      You have to get a headstart on your other trials but not tell the observer

    • @stefanguels
      @stefanguels 3 года назад +13

      So the wave function that represents you is too sharp. As you've seen your actual location needs to be a bit blurred . So getting drunk before might help, and certainly makes hitting the wall less painful :-0

    • @trucid2
      @trucid2 3 года назад +2

      The trick to faster than light travel is to cheat and have a head start.

    • @AndreasHLux
      @AndreasHLux 3 года назад +2

      Wait until the Earth is in speed of light , may be easier.
      Zwischenzeitlich kannste einfach ein Sieb nehmen, kommt auch was durch.

  • @luudest
    @luudest 3 года назад +15

    2:37 thank you for visualizing the developement of the propability distribution over time. It‘s the best visiulation and explanation about this behaviour on youtube that I‘ve seen!!
    Historical question: When was this developement of the probability over time first described?

    • @dlevi67
      @dlevi67 3 года назад +4

      I think it dates back to the 1920s - Schroedinger himself developed the equation to represent the "spread" of an electron's charge through space. Max Born published what I believe to be the first interpretation of Ψ as probability density through time in 1926.

    • @sirmclovin9184
      @sirmclovin9184 3 года назад +3

      You would have to specify the question a bit more. Heisenberg was the first one to give a quantum mechanical-evolution equation (Heisenberg equation), but Schrödinger's discovery of the Schrödinger equation really clarified things a lot. Schrödinger actually later showed that it was equivalent to Heisenberg's equation. As for the statistical interpretation, it is true that Max Born really got the ball rolling, but it took quite some time to get things right (Mara Beller has written an article on it). If you are asking when the tunnel effect was first described, I actually don't know but googling it should help you to answer the question.

    • @whatitis4872
      @whatitis4872 3 года назад +5

      @@dlevi67 It turns out that without even knowing it was a probability density Born was doing something way more advanced. His understanding of this stuff was astronomical (as in amazing) He was doing an analysis that was later fleshed out by Mott and as a passing comment in a footnote he noticed that |psi^2 was a probability density.| He was studying collisions. its like putting the horse before the cart yet Born was doing it very well. By the way the best example off tunneling is Hunds Potential.

    • @jjeherrera
      @jjeherrera 3 года назад +1

      Regarding the tunnel effect, although I'm not 100% sure, I believe it was first proposed by Gamow, in the context of understanding alpha decay.

    • @whatitis4872
      @whatitis4872 3 года назад

      @@jjeherrera Yes I kinow Gamow mentioned it to explain alpha decay
      which I mention in my video on this
      in my channel. Though the effect nust have been known before since its just something that quantum systems do.

  • @iphotobomb
    @iphotobomb 3 года назад +8

    One of the best visualisations of the probability wave I've seen.
    Love to see explanation of other aspects of the wave seen here (eg those many peaks when bouncing) or some other examples

  • @johnwilson4909
    @johnwilson4909 3 года назад +2

    Hello Sabine, I really enjoyed your description of quantum tunneling. The idea that a portion of the waveform can make it through because it has sufficient potential is clear. In your animation at 5:53, you show the wave colliding with the wall. Some portions of the wave rebound with a height greater than the wall. Does this represent the portions of the wave that have enough potential to make it past the wall? I am hoping I understood this analogy correctly. - sincerely, John.

  • @imaytag
    @imaytag 3 года назад +7

    7:23 Hahaha! That 'Whoops!' reminded me so much of Mathologer for some reason :P

  • @BardaKWolfgangTheDrug
    @BardaKWolfgangTheDrug 3 года назад +6

    I watch tons of physics and math videos and I've never seen the part with faster than light tunneling :o Thank you!

  • @randywa
    @randywa 3 года назад +9

    I love how she explains stuff. It’s much more simple but specific and makes a lot more sense than most science explanations.

  • @youtubeuser8232
    @youtubeuser8232 3 года назад +6

    This video stopped at the most interesting point!
    In any case, amazing video!

  • @Y2Kvids
    @Y2Kvids 3 года назад +5

    Hi Can you make a explainer on the recent verification of Hawkin Radiation and how Black Hole Preserve Information which was thought to not occur .

  • @jonashartmann6687
    @jonashartmann6687 3 года назад +1

    Can the effect be described in the same way with the path integral formulation? I'm asking this because that formulation specifically doesn't require the particle to take a certain trajectory at all.

  • @loganh2140
    @loganh2140 3 года назад +11

    I love this lady

    • @thewaytruthandlife
      @thewaytruthandlife 3 года назад

      then marry her....good luck

    • @Blowfeld20k
      @Blowfeld20k 3 года назад

      @logan H
      EVERYONE loves Sabine m8 ...... Except boisterous sharp elbowed lads with a TOA they want to push .... lol

    • @thewaytruthandlife
      @thewaytruthandlife 3 года назад

      @Ben Louis is she your mom ???

    • @thewaytruthandlife
      @thewaytruthandlife 3 года назад

      @Ben Louis just kidding ....man....relax

    • @CollyDoo
      @CollyDoo 3 года назад

      She reminds me of Yeardley Smith.

  • @connorkearley7381
    @connorkearley7381 3 года назад +2

    it’s called quantum mechanics

  • @arctic_haze
    @arctic_haze 3 года назад +4

    Sabine, you have achieved the look of an advanced civilization being from the original Star Trek. Even including the background. Perfect! The same is true about the science content, as always. Thanks!

    • @anatomicallymodernhuman5175
      @anatomicallymodernhuman5175 3 года назад

      That’s true. To achieve the same for TNG, she’d need a weird forehead.

    • @IZn0g0uDatAll
      @IZn0g0uDatAll 3 года назад +1

      Sabine is kind of a vulcan when you think about it.

  • @GururajBN
    @GururajBN 3 года назад +1

    Excellent explanation of a rather obfuscating topic. To some extent, the popular science writers are responsible for the misunderstandings about tunnel effect. I recall reading one book on quantum mechanics where the writer describes it with the analogy of two pieces of dices in a cup. now inside the cup and next moment sitting outside the cup! Evidently tunnel effect is neither so miraculous nor mysterious. 👍 to a wonderful presentation.

  • @CyberiusT
    @CyberiusT 3 года назад +11

    I would love to know Feynman's reaction to this were he still with us.

    • @Paul_Ch52
      @Paul_Ch52 3 года назад +4

      Feynman is one of the guys who put us here. His reaction probably would be "Yeah, I know," as he hit a riff on his bongos.

    • @edwardlulofs444
      @edwardlulofs444 3 года назад

      I do remember him saying that anyone who says that they understand QM, doesn't. Maybe it's just a paradigm shift: after living with the incomprehensible long enough, it just becomes the new normal. For me, that just takes the mystery and awe out of life.

    • @CyberiusT
      @CyberiusT 3 года назад +1

      @@edwardlulofs444 That was the comment I was referring to. I'm not doubting Sabine's understanding - just wondering aloud how much of the subtlety was lost in dumbing it down enough for us. ;)

    • @rogerthomas1982
      @rogerthomas1982 3 года назад

      ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/104_2012_web_projects/Ian_MacDougall/Electron%20Tunneling.html
      You don't have to wonder.

    • @gyro5d
      @gyro5d 3 года назад

      Feynman would say. "There's an old women, that slips on the ice."

  • @blinkingmanchannel
    @blinkingmanchannel 5 месяцев назад +1

    "Tunneling." Unfortunate metaphor in an attempt to talk with classical-only colleagues in prewar academia.🤦‍♂️
    It's like a misclassified dinosaur fossil or a book placed on the wrong shelf in the library. It will take a long lifetime to find, let alone undo that early academic mistake. Quite to your point, the gobbledygook in this field is coming from the teaching assistants, not the reality we want to understand.
    Who is working on a heuristic approach to molecular orbitals? I'm sure we don't care how that tunneling thing works, but we do need to understand how to work with it in physical chemistry. We really need to be able to build lipids at will in the lab.

  • @sebastianelytron8450
    @sebastianelytron8450 3 года назад +6

    Sabine is the Einstein of our time.
    Change my mind.

    • @eugen10min
      @eugen10min 3 года назад

      What did Einstein knew about quarks? dark matter? in this day and age all of us should be at least at his level...

    • @itsbs
      @itsbs 3 года назад

      Ok. From a scientist perspective, being compared to Einstein would not be a complement, since he brought imaginary ideas into science that created many paradoxes (non-logical thought). Examples like, wave or particle light, peer-to-peer reference frames that both slow time. He made simple math mistakes like E=hf for a particle of light, which is a 1 second wave energy equation -- it is based on frequency or Hz which is a 1 second timeframe and makes the energy of a photon 300,000,000 meters long.

  • @nikospitr
    @nikospitr 3 года назад +2

    Thanks Sabine.
    I was just wondering, is the lead of the tunneled wave proportional to the width of the barrier?
    Thank you!

    • @markrichards9646
      @markrichards9646 2 года назад

      The same thought occurred to me. After reading more comments, kallala heythem notes that according to the Hartman Effect, tunneling time is independent of the barrier width.
      This got me thinking about Cherenkov radiation which is caused by electrons moving through water faster than the speed of light in water. What I was thinking was, are the electrons tunneling through the reactor, which acts as a barrier, and appearing within a medium that acts like a barrier but one in which they can pass through instead, revealing their presence as Cherenkov radiation.

  • @petarcuric5003
    @petarcuric5003 3 года назад +3

    Sabine can you do a video or just say what you think abouth people people explaining abouth science but who are not real science like Bill Nye or its too pointless to talk abouth them.

    • @SabineHossenfelder
      @SabineHossenfelder  3 года назад +7

      I am not sure there is much to say. You don't need to be a scientist to communicate science, though it certainly makes things easier.

  • @heaven4247
    @heaven4247 3 года назад +1

    Thank a lot your a Genius
    Love you ! I only had to listen twice !The best time to learn is when a black hole is forming or two black holes collided together , Hahaha the Gamma Rays will Make You or Brake you !In our Lives the Wall would be Time Space Continuum.
    Or Old Age ! Hahaha

  • @discogodfather22
    @discogodfather22 3 года назад +8

    I wish my brain could tunnel into an understanding of quantum mechanics.

    • @thewaytruthandlife
      @thewaytruthandlife 3 года назад

      quantum mechanically spoken there is a small chance depending on the thickness of your skull (your energy barrier) !

    • @EK-gr9gd
      @EK-gr9gd 3 года назад +1

      It is not that difficult. But to comfort you a bit E. Schroedinger wished to have a better mastery of mathematics.

    • @AndreasHLux
      @AndreasHLux 3 года назад

      ...no hope!

    • @frun
      @frun 3 года назад

      Just ask questions. People wi!l explain it to you.

    • @antoniomaglione4101
      @antoniomaglione4101 3 года назад

      I believe most minds could easily grasp quantum mechanics. The problem is, from the cradle we are taught a number of facts and concepts and, as we grow, we become convinced that the world is made up of these facts and concepts. Reality is, there is a great deal more of other facts and concepts, most of which cannot be described or managed correctly with words, and require mandatorily the language of mathematics. When scientists do their best and try to describe these facts with words, they get a mixed result and can confuse further many listeners. Then, there is a wrong approach by many schools about the teaching of mathematics, where many pupils become convinced that they aren't shaped for math; possibly, they just got a bad teacher.

  • @Petercookintaiwan
    @Petercookintaiwan 3 года назад +1

    The most important statement of the video is that quantum mechanics is only hard to understand if you are constantly told this. We are hardwired to conform to tradition and the norm neither of which reflect reality. The norm is that we teach in isolated university departments which is also tradition but reality all works together so the norm and tradition are wrong.

  • @paulthompson9668
    @paulthompson9668 3 года назад +11

    Sabine, that was well done in the short amount of time you had to explain it in. In a longer video, I would emphasize how the "wall" does not completely fill up the space that the particle may pass through. As a result, the tunnel effect can simply be interpreted as the particle making its way through the "gaps" in the "wall".

    • @sven_lu_
      @sven_lu_ 3 года назад +8

      That's not what tunneling is, though. The 'wall' in this standard calculation is just symbolic für any potential that could hinder a particle's movement, not just a literal wall. For nuclear fusion there is tunneling involved, where the nucleus of one atom tunnels close enough to another nucleus so they can interact with the strong nuclear force, even though they would be repelled classically, since both have a positive charge which dominates the interaction at larger distances. So the particle tunnels through the potential barrier, which is the Coulomb potential in this case. There are no gaps.

    • @paulthompson9668
      @paulthompson9668 3 года назад +2

      @@sven_lu_ You bring up exactly what makes this topic difficult to present to someone with little to no knowledge of physics. When you combine a description with "symbolic", "tunnels close enough", "tunnels through", and "no gaps", it would leave the neophyte confused.

    • @sven_lu_
      @sven_lu_ 3 года назад

      @@paulthompson9668 I can see that that may have been a bit too much. Sorry about that. May I ask instead what exactly you meant by
      1) gaps in the wall that the particle can make its way through
      and
      2) the wall not completely filling up the space?

    • @robharwood3538
      @robharwood3538 3 года назад +2

      @@sven_lu_ Perhaps he is pointing towards a potential misunderstanding of the concept of a 'wall' by a lay person who might imagine that it means a real wall, with possible imperfections (thus 'gaps') through which an imagined 'probability substance' could thus 'flow'? The point being, exactly as you've stated, that this 'wall' is a mathematical ideal used to illustrate the more important theoretical insight that -- even without any gaps, for a 'perfect wall' -- tunneling would still happen. Not sure if that's what he meant, but it seems to me a potentially reasonable interpretation. Cheers! 😊

    • @sven_lu_
      @sven_lu_ 3 года назад +1

      @@robharwood3538 I thought that as well, which is why I reacted as I did. But to try and explain it in good faith I wanted to make sure I understood what they meant so I could respond to that specifically. :)

  • @flippert0
    @flippert0 3 года назад +5

    Haha, just when you think everything's neatly solved, there comes a bummer at the end. OK, finally I think, no one can understand quantum mechanics despite Sabine's best effort to convince us otherwise ;-)

  • @matthiasthalmann1387
    @matthiasthalmann1387 3 года назад +1

    Doest that mean that there is also an "anti-tunnel" effect? If the quantum particle has just enough energy to pass the barrier there will still be some part of the wave-function that is reflected back anyways, while the majority passes through?

  • @gabrielcecatto6992
    @gabrielcecatto6992 3 года назад +11

    Amazing video. As someone still on the side of not being able to do these calculations, I completely agree with your argument that what makes QM so confusing is that every single time I read/see something about it, there is an interpretation, and it completely messes up everything, sometimes even forgetting basic principles to create some mystical interpretations of QM.
    On another note, I feel like a practical example of quantum tunneling would also be useful to understand it, is there any (relatively) simple experiment documenting the phenomenon?

    • @eljcd
      @eljcd 3 года назад +2

      Hello, Gabriel.
      You could look at this:
      www.scientificamerican.com/article/quantum-tunneling-is-not-instantaneous-physicists-show/
      a different take:
      www.quantamagazine.org/quantum-tunnel-shows-particles-can-break-the-speed-of-light-20201020/
      Or you could give up and trust Sabine. It's what I do!

    • @josiahslack8720
      @josiahslack8720 3 года назад +1

      You might want to look up "tunnel diode" or "Esaki diode"

    • @jagatiello6900
      @jagatiello6900 3 года назад +1

      ruclips.net/video/5f2xOxRGKqk/видео.html

    • @En_theo
      @En_theo 3 года назад

      Excellent and easy to understand video here : ruclips.net/video/-IfmgyXs7z8/видео.html

    • @Merilix2
      @Merilix2 3 года назад +2

      Tunnel effects are part of memory technology for a long time. E.g. eproms used on early computers already used tunnel effects to trap electrons within insulated transistor gates... the same tech is used on modern flash memory.

  • @MrHotlipsholohan
    @MrHotlipsholohan Месяц назад +1

    A brilliant scientist, its a strange world she is describing and is undoubtedly part of our reality which we cant define yet but it exists.

  • @123Shel12
    @123Shel12 3 года назад +20

    As someone who never made it past Algebra 1, I was able to understand the “tunneling effect” concept thanks to your illustrations. Well done!

    • @En_theo
      @En_theo 3 года назад

      If you really want a good explanation of QT , I suggest this easy and step-by-step video of PBS : ruclips.net/video/-IfmgyXs7z8/видео.html

    • @crystalgiddens7276
      @crystalgiddens7276 3 года назад

      total gibberish. I cannot understand because it is total gibberish.

    • @whatitis4872
      @whatitis4872 3 года назад +1

      The people that invented this stuff were very good at math---past calculus etc. It is impossible to understand this stuff without the math. Quantum mechanics is mostly Linear Algebra so you must at least understand matrices and their properties such that AB is not equal BA in general and you need to know functions to understand probability etc. Mat REALLY is the language with which G-d wrote the universe as far as we know.

    • @crystalgiddens7276
      @crystalgiddens7276 3 года назад

      @@whatitis4872 Are they then therefore "godlike?" Cause you have "believe" them if you "believe' what they claim. aka take it in "faith."

    • @whatitis4872
      @whatitis4872 3 года назад

      @@crystalgiddens7276 You take things on faith when you begin to study a subject, and then to really understand it you start hunting down the reason for each thing they do. More often than not each assumption and construct is for a reason.

  • @eulogionavarro6935
    @eulogionavarro6935 Год назад +1

    If I had had this videos back in the 90s... oh dear! Thank you so much for this Sabine!!!!

  • @cmilkau
    @cmilkau 3 года назад +4

    please place important information in the center of the screen, not at the bottom. remember closed captions

  • @moses777exodus
    @moses777exodus 2 года назад +1

    Very informative. Thanks for sharing. Best wishes, Lord-Jesus-Christ dot

  • @Desperajoe
    @Desperajoe 3 года назад +1

    I'm a 14 year old student making a year project about microscopes. I think I may have went a bit too far by searching up the tunnel effect. Wish me good luck to understand the whole thing :D

  • @despectable
    @despectable 3 года назад +1

    Sabine, what I didn't understand is that you showed us 2 cases where the potential wall was "much" higher and only a little higher. In the case where it was much higher you pointed out, the probability wave will be reflected and it seemed it will be reflected 100%. Isn't it true, that there is a non-zero probability for a particle to tunnel even if the wall is much higher (but not infinite)?

  • @reitze01
    @reitze01 3 года назад +2

    You're intelligence and down-to-earth descriptions are absolutely beautiful. I love you like a little girl might love a rock star. :D

  • @marcusbeau
    @marcusbeau 9 месяцев назад +1

    the last 3 days have been an honor to learn at your feet, /sit and prepare to ponder OMY GAWDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD , tap ol' einstein for good luck, amazing course ty,

  • @johnpapish9409
    @johnpapish9409 3 года назад +1

    this lady offers some brilliant explanations of things, and rather than regarding her as an 'outsider' or a loose cannon if you will, i believe we should pay very close attention to her interpretations. look at her explanation of 'faster than light' illustration of quantum tunneling effect'. now this is worthy of serious consideration and explanation

  • @bigeteum
    @bigeteum 3 года назад +1

    Awesome video, really helped me understand tunnel effect. I thought it was more magic than that 😂 l

  • @dsc4178
    @dsc4178 3 года назад +1

    That was interesting. One would hope someone someday soon will make the same kind of breakthroughs in such science as Einstein did with matter, energy, and gravity on the 'bigger than an angel on the head of a pin' part of the universe.

  • @clmasse
    @clmasse 3 года назад +1

    So for understanding quantum mechanics, shut up and calculate! Thank you so much, it is the biggest contribution ever.

  • @sirnukesalot24
    @sirnukesalot24 3 года назад +1

    I can't be the first or only person in the world to notice that the graph of the tunneled signal is offset by exactly the width of the step function.
    Isn't this just an artifact of the mathematics, or is the instrumentation fine enough to catch this offset in the experiments as well?

  • @harshitsingh-wd1bm
    @harshitsingh-wd1bm 3 года назад +1

    What will happen if the barrier u said here is actually electric potential barrier?
    That is if an electron shoots at the plate having negative charge.then will electron tunnel stilll!!!

  • @mediocrates3416
    @mediocrates3416 3 года назад +2

    When you look at part of the wave function you're looking at a sampling of particles. You can't do it with one particle just like one particle probably won't tunnel.

    • @alexandertownsend3291
      @alexandertownsend3291 2 года назад +1

      1. I love the username you chose. It is delightful. 2. I just watched a video from the Science Asylum and what you described sounds similar to what Nick Lucid described as the ensemble interpretation.
      3. I have nothing else to say here. I just love lists.

  • @ivobrabec1500
    @ivobrabec1500 Год назад +1

    Amazingly interesting and finally explained for normal person….

  • @hendryborn135
    @hendryborn135 Год назад +1

    well done presentation, I think it's the interactions of the masses of energy distributed in space time

  • @nicolasduguay4
    @nicolasduguay4 3 года назад +2

    Increadible how you, Sabine, are able to clarify decades of quantum mystisism in a video shorter than 10 minutes!
    This schrodinger equation visual representation is absolute gold.
    I'm also so glad to have learn what is the current scientific quantum struggle and challenge!
    Thank you Sabine, please go on in your very constructive educative journey!

  • @sohlbergk
    @sohlbergk 3 года назад +1

    @Sabine, excellent animations. What numerical strategy did you use the time propagate the wavefunction?

  • @Amipotsophspond
    @Amipotsophspond 3 года назад +2

    3:59

  • @tTtt-ho3tq
    @tTtt-ho3tq 3 года назад +2

    She talked about quantum tunneling in our 🌞Sun last time. That's what I've learned recently. I always thought that elements gathered in empty space and as they get bigger they compressed further by its own gravity. As they're compressed further the temperature and pressure inside get higher and higher. They become in a plasma state and neucleus start to bounce each other and fuse together. Bam! Nuclear fusion! A star is born. That's what I always thought. It was not. It never get hot enough to start nuclear fusion because neucleus are all positive so it's very very hard to fuse together. So it's not supposed to happen. It supposed to stay lin ow grow, no nuclear fusion, no star. No star means no heavier elements. No elements no molecules, no planets, no Earth, no multilayered organic molecules, no life on Earth. Life on was not supposed to happen.
    But thanks to quantum tunneling what's supposed not to happen happens. The odds to tunneling through positive neucleus are very very low but there are so many many elements there inside stars. It's about happen anyways. What the least likely to happen happens and a star is born. Galaxies are bron. What the most likely to happen didn't make this universe. The what the least likely to happen have happened and made this universe as we know it today. (Search; quantum tunneling in stars)

  • @StefanTravis
    @StefanTravis 3 года назад +1

    It takes a German to explain so well in English.

  • @guillermogonzalez6346
    @guillermogonzalez6346 Год назад +1

    Buenísima explicación, muy clara.

  • @Paul-fs1er
    @Paul-fs1er Год назад +1

    It's out of Tune... it needs another to be in tune, it takes a bit from the others passing..

  • @dennisbauer3315
    @dennisbauer3315 3 года назад +2

    You are absolutely extraordinary at making me, and no doubt thousands of others, understand, and at least get a concept of Quantum Mechanics. Thank you is never enough, but thank you so much.

  • @name1483
    @name1483 3 года назад +2

    Question: can't we consider quantum effects analogous to classical ones if we just replace the probability wave with uncertainty in our measurements?
    That is there is a probability wave of the ball being in a specific position and the wall having a specific hight that represent inaccuracy in the measurement, that way the probability of finding a ball on the other side doesn't have to be zero

    • @clmasse
      @clmasse 3 года назад

      No, if you define correctly "quantum effect." A quantum effect is an effect that has no counterpart in classical physics. Many effects in quantum physics have, but not all. Often, demystifiers purposefully omit the true quantum effets.

    • @name1483
      @name1483 3 года назад

      @@clmasse Quantum effects are merely an interpretation, the true nature can only be described in math at this point.
      what I was thinking it that we can have similar math that shows the same weirdness if we allow for very high inaccuracy in the measurements

    • @clmasse
      @clmasse 3 года назад

      @@name1483 No.

  • @aSpyIntheHaus
    @aSpyIntheHaus 3 года назад +1

    I love watching these vids, then heading over and listening to one of her songs, then coming back and watching some more physics vids.

  • @armandos.rodriguez6608
    @armandos.rodriguez6608 Год назад +1

    You get to the bottom line,like either a great investigator or highly skilled attorney,seems nothing gets by you. I believe the top physics people would be proud to have you in there ranks,like Planck,Einstein,Bohr,and the other 7 likely,you fit right in. Thanks

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 Год назад

      Sabine is a lot of things, but she is not an important physicist. ;-)

  • @swarnendudas3057
    @swarnendudas3057 2 года назад +1

    The best channel ever to have a crystal clear understanding of the fundamentals of Quantum Mechanics. ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️

  • @QuicksilverSG
    @QuicksilverSG Год назад +1

    One way to understand quantum tunneling is to recognize that the wave-function does not literally predict the movement of an individual particle over time, it only predicts the probability of detecting "a" particle at any particular location each time you make a measurement. Since all such particles are identical and indistinguishable, it is only our assumption of continuous motion that leads us to conclude that all such measurements are of the "same" individual particle. In the case of quantum tunneling, the wave-function predicts there is a small probability that a particle will appear on the opposite side of the barrier, regardless of how we might imagine "it" manages to "tunnel through" the barrier.

  • @mikelouis4496
    @mikelouis4496 3 года назад +1

    tunneling is a resonance wave. the atom loses nothing.

  • @NeferkaMichael
    @NeferkaMichael 3 года назад +1

    Sabine you are an excellent teacher, fantastic.

  • @babyoda1973
    @babyoda1973 3 года назад +1

    That was how I see it in my mind . Dang you are good

  • @fluffy_tail4365
    @fluffy_tail4365 3 года назад +1

    wow I thought I knew tunneling but I never considered that weird "ooops". Mind blown this time

  • @aurelienyonrac
    @aurelienyonrac 3 года назад +1

    First time that it makes sense. Amazing

  • @Dolores5000
    @Dolores5000 3 года назад +1

    I wish to kiss Sabine via quark magic

  • @alwaysbored47
    @alwaysbored47 3 года назад +2

    And the tunneled peak is always faster?
    Can it be slower as well?

  • @usandthen
    @usandthen 3 года назад +2

    I just love you! you give one of the best's "one on one with myself times" on the pc.

  • @BlackbodyEconomics
    @BlackbodyEconomics 3 года назад +2

    This is one of the best explanations I've heard. Thank you :)

  • @geko1098
    @geko1098 3 года назад +1

    It seemed my understanding of many of these concepts had hit a wall before I found your videos. Fantastical metaphorical devices, so widely used in this subject, have led to more confusion than clarity. The discipline in how you choose to employ them has aided me greatly.

  • @jamesmahoney4525
    @jamesmahoney4525 3 года назад +1

    I like your use of dynamic graphing techniques and your explanation, you should do an entire physics course using these techniques!

  • @briankrebs7534
    @briankrebs7534 3 года назад +1

    Can I make an argument that any quantum particle with any energy ought to produce some sufficiently high probability of colliding with a "complete wall" at a sufficient distance, such that the front-running components of the waveform would be detectable on repeated testing. That is to say, if we know the speed of a particle and blast it into a barrier which we know the momentum of, then this model of quantum physics ought to be consistent with some cases in which our pre and post test measurements of particle speed are inconsistent. If it is proper to conclude that particles really do sometimes just pass through a wall, then it must also be proper to conclude that particles occasionally go faster than light. If we shot photons down a long enough chamber, into a wall of appropriately tuned potential, wouldn't we expect to see an unusually higher than expected rate of ftl rebounds?
    I'm imagining a similar set up to a two slit experiment in which you vary the size of the slits and observe the probability distribution. Only, we are not measuring location, but speed.

  • @ATSF854
    @ATSF854 3 года назад +1

    Very interesting. I honestly want to study this in more detail

  • @AJoeshful
    @AJoeshful 2 года назад +1

    absolutely enlightening

  • @clmasse
    @clmasse 3 года назад +1

    It isn't true the particle sometimes gets in the other side of the wall. That's with these inaccuracy that quantum mechanics become difficult to understand. The concept of particle in QM is not the same as a corpuscle un CM. A particle is something we can measure the position or the momentum of (or any function of both, called an observable.) In the tunnel effect, there is a small probability that the measured position of the particle be on the other side of the wall (a better word is a barrier.) We can't talk about the tunnel effect without this measurement of position. A measurement of momentum would not give anything particular.

  • @alanday5255
    @alanday5255 3 месяца назад

    I appreciate your attempt. However after 2 years of high school Physics (my teacher HATED his job) and 1 year of college Physics (my teacher had 1 year till retirement ) strings of words are confusing to the uninitiated. A simple truth in most languages is a picture is worth a thousand words. If I had a video like the one I am sharing, I probably would have stuck with Physics since it is AMAZING! ruclips.net/video/RF7dDt3tVmI/видео.html

  • @timm4811
    @timm4811 3 года назад +2

    This phenomenon reminds me a little of Osmosis at the molecular level.

  • @gretalaube91
    @gretalaube91 2 месяца назад

    I am an old retired EE, and just got some tunnel diodes for fun. I started to play with them, and noticed that the thresholds are really "noisy". This video is a great explanation, but I had to go back and watch all the previous ones, too.
    Each device and oscillator circuit has different thresholds, and is "fussy" and unpredictable. Now, it makes some sense. Sometimes they oscillate one way, and other times, they go to some completely different loci. ...amusing little fellows! No wonder! Thanks for your explanation.

  • @peteabc1
    @peteabc1 3 года назад +1

    Ok, I'm still confused. Why don't they measure the distance the whole system traveled to see any travel time diffs?

    • @AliothAncalagon
      @AliothAncalagon 3 года назад +2

      Well, how do you measure that?
      If you had a water wave that transformed itself into another distorted wave while hitting an obstacle, how do you measure the travelled distance of the wave at a certain time?
      You will run into massive problems as soon as you start trying to define which part is even moving into what direction and what actually characterizes the "wave" as a whole.

  • @danielbizarro1
    @danielbizarro1 3 года назад +2

    Beautiful

  • @chitskirits
    @chitskirits 3 года назад +1

    Oh yes, remember R.Feynman "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool" and "What I cannot create, I do not understand"

  • @madmillerphysics
    @madmillerphysics 2 года назад +1

    An amazing teacher ☘️❤️☘️

  • @MrXrisd01
    @MrXrisd01 3 года назад

    Isn't there a real video of this effect happening in transistors or something? So according to quantum physics, I'll never truly know anything about anything🤣

  • @wayneyadams
    @wayneyadams 2 года назад +1

    This is the best explanation I have seen, read, or heard to date. The animations were excellent.