Great complimentary videos; you and Arvin are my two favorite science content creators. I love the way you both make math and physics less intimidating. Looking forward to future collaborations between both of your channels.
An approximation is the most valuable part of what you said. Some people get lost thinking you have described actual reality, and not just a portion of reality. Love your work.
Yep, even inside a proton, this is what quarks are doing, stepwise. Thanks Arvin, I'm always trying to interest my students in springs. It's up and down frankly 😁
Glad to hear that you are promoting this to students! I did not have fun learning about the physics of springs either...but much later in college when I learned that EVERYTHING works this way, I was Hooke-d!
A proton is a collection of 1836 expanding electrons and add a bouncing expanding electron makes a hydrogen atom. “The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy”. Mark McCutcheon.
This is a fairly advanced conceptual topic to be landing on a popular YuTub series! Add in the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian and you pretty much have QFT in a nutshell (but with 30 hours of lectures at University). Susskind was the first person i heard describe the workings of particles as harmonic oscillators, and it was (eventually) an "ah ha" moment for me. Especially when you consider harmonic motion is also a rotation that has been collapsed by one dimension (i.e. a 2D shadow of a 3D wheel, with one point going back-and-forth in 2D, or round-and-round in 3D.) I strongly believe there is much more to explore in the mystery that is ROTATION, a mystery that no-one, absolutely nobody understands. Really liked this one. Keep up the good work tackling advanced concepts. Looking forward to more "jumping-off points" that these videos can provide.
@@ArvinAsh It kinda' makes you wonder about the Holographic Universe hypothesis; where everything can be looked at as either 2D or 3D, and the math works-out both ways. Are we, the Universe: a 2D subspace projection onto 3D space, or a 4D collapse into 3D space? Or some combination of fluid multi-dimensionality that selectively manifests itself just like "location"? (Or is our concept of "dimensions" itself incomplete? That would make physics a bit challenging! ...or clear-up some challenges?) Two things seem to be consistent with the Universe: Harmonic Oscillation and Rotation. (The differences between those two may be less than we think). I think this video will give people a lot to think about, which is job well done. Looking forward to the next one!
@@patinho5589 Yes, to clarify: You are looking at the wheel edge from above, ( edge-on), and shining a light down on it.. The rotation of a given point is exactly a Harmonic Oscillator. The same rate is observed, with the fastest change at the middle, and the slowing as that point reaches the extremes of travel. This is also the exact solution for kinetic and potential energy of harmonic oscillation. Same rate of change, same distance travelled. They are exactly the same.
@@onebylandtwoifbysearunifby5475yup. I was imagining a circle (2D) and a line (1D). I suppose you could give them both an extra dimension(width) and therefore be talking about 3D and 2D :).
Thanks Arvin, you are so good at explaining the deepest scientific concepts. You really help those of us who can't grasp the complex equations involved, at least understand what they might mean.
I note that the very beginnings of QM was formulated with the idea of harmonic oscillators in the black body thought experiments...i.e that the equipartition of energy assigned to the harmonic oscillators 'inside' the black body would lead to the ultraviolet catastrophe, which led Planck to suggesting that there was a quantization of energy levels. And so the the early forms of QM. So this idea was pretty much built into QM.
Love this video, not String Theory, but Spring Theory, which sounds incredibly apt to describe the universe. Springs vibrate too, so it’s vibrating springs, it’s all energy! Love the graphics in this video, absolutely fascinating.
Well, to be fair, strings can be harmonic oscillators, too, like with the example of musical strings. So, if some people find it easier to envision, they can imagine the universe not as complex-dimensional mattresses, but as the most difficult piano ever. Every field is its own set of keys, and each key can be pressed any which way to produce a uniquely different quality of sound, rather than just "press down". Also, there are probably about 42 pedals. At least, those without aphantasia can imagine that...
Thank you for this tutorial, Arvin. IMO it's much clearer than the spring analogy Anthony Zee writes about in his otherwise wonderful book, "QFT in a Nutshell." And yes, Schrodinger's "wave" equation is actually a heat (or diffusion) equation!
Thanks Arvin - for another excellent, concise video, which explains Quantum things simply & clearly. Your QM videos are some of the best and easiest to understand available anywhere. Thanks again.
Back during my physics undergrad I took a machine shop course and my teacher had put together his own theory of everything about how all materials have some springiness you need to account for. He called it: "Spring Theory."
I’ve found this channel via nicks channel, and I wanted to say thank you for being a communicator of science to the world in a way that young kids can find you engaging and entertaining and adults can re spark their curiosity. You’ve got a new sub in me 😊
If you make a PDF I will buy it, and probably I will not be the only one. This really associates the formal math and the intuition in a striking way. Well designed, brilliant accomplishment.
Your title makes perfect sense. If you take any wave and compress it the shape it will take looks like a spring and the same if you pull apart a spring it will look like a wave.
I love that creators are acknowledging each other, cooperating instead of competing. It bothers me when one creator, paraphrase the contents of another without acknowledging the source. After all it is not a zero-sum game, the audience does not need to choose which to watch, but instead can watch both. It is a win, win, win for the creators and the audience. More crossovers please.
Amazing animation. Really helpful in understanding the whole scenario Dr. Arvin Ash. I am further curious about how will be the matter spring mattress and energy spring mattress would have interacted in the animation. Like in terms of Feynman diagrams style. It would be really great I can imagine.
Good job! I wish this had been explained to me this way when I was an undergraduate. I didn't learn about this until graduate school and even then, it wasn't very clearly explained conceptually.
Science Assylum cutting in clears up a confusion I've had for a long time. How can something be both a first derivative in time (heat) and a second derivative in time (wave). The fact the wave function does not mean a wave equation in a Partial Differential Equation sense removes the contradiction. This is why I leave so many questions on science videos asking if the way I understand a term as a mathematician is to be understood the same way in the science or if the term refers to something else.
I was glad when you coupled the oscillators in the QFT spring model..and you showed that a and a-dagger have a subscript "p", meaning hbar*omega = ((pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2) ^ (1/2)...which means your spring mattress only works for one momentum. Each quantum field needs and continuously infinite number of mattresses for each value of momentum (times 3/2 for 3-dimensions). tl;dr QFT is not intuitive.
For every action there is an equal opposite. For nearly every word there is an antonym. The spring theory hold up as a solid explanation of how the universe works, we need to also take into consideration that the springs are actioned by the cyclic behaviour of duality which is essentially two equal opposite rotating vortices moving through space and time. You can see example of the pair of vortices in fluids like under the waves at the beach, also solar flares, plants and trees which rotate out of the ground as they grow, the shape of electricity as it passes along a conductor and even the pattern our solar system makes as it moves through space.
Natural frequency of a spring is c=sqrt(E/M) ; Expressed for E, becomes E=mc2 ; Right? And continuum mechanics based on F = E*U becomes super computer (parallel computation) compatible, if us use strain space (not stress space) envelopes. And the work of P.J.Yoder, 1980 - derivation and implementation of strain space plasticity, provides all the mathematical proof that this "parallel spring system" is not only computed faster - but super compatible with nonlinear stiffness and thus... could help model things described in this video greatly :)
funny, I just received a couple of springs yesterday and also thought about the nature of the smallest things there are and that they are oscillations... nice!
Well, the pendulum and swing are not the same as the spring and don't have the same motion. The pendulum motion gets arbitrarily close to simple harmonic as the maximum angle approaches zero. Just for those might assume simple harmonic motion in some other situation or on a test.
Food is not your expertise. Many things are not your expertise. I do love your work. It is your expertise. I am annoyed that many experts are confident in their particular skills that they easily advise in other areas outside their knowledge. Nuclear specialists will expand into world energy solutions. They do not have a clue. Nuclear specialists are angry if you tell them your own ideas about their area of expertise.
Very nice and timely when VSL is catching up . Good we have seen many technical and technological game of science advancement. It matches prediction upto 14 decimal point. Nature is indeed simple when you have an operator. Thank you ASH The Friend.
10:19 "as it's quantum, it will never be still" what exactly does it mean? Aside of what we observe, is there some kind of never-stillness used to define the quantum objects? Are some "local" solutions for a local stillness impossible? Also, if everything is quantized and multiply by some Planck's unit, preventing the value from being between that unit and zero, shouldn't zero be locally possible?
This means that there is alway some energy at the lowest ground state of any quantum system. Thing are vibrating. All the fields have waves (or particles) coming in an out of existence.
@@ArvinAsh Thank you! I think than now I understand the whole concept better, I had to spend a moment to change my way of thinking and transpose into imagining nigh everything as a vibration! More things make sense now.
What Schrodinger's equation does is square the Hamiltonian, turning a spring motion (back and forth) into a rotation (back and forth in two directions: forward-backward and side-to-side), representing a particle moving in a rotation. This is then mixed with the imaginary corollary to express the total wave, which is easily explained in the presence of two (not one) particles orbiting each other or a third particle. The 4 resulting spring directions are then expressed as the quaternions that make up the Hamiltonian of a larger particle to which the orbits of the smaller particles lend to the spin of the larger.
@@ArvinAsh okay well, here's my next genius question😂... where do the fields come from? my guess is no one knows yet, but it seems the more scientist dig the more structures they find. might be turtles all the way down after all. but then again the planck lenght is a thing, not sure if that's more than a theoretical limit
The Schrödinger equation is an eigenvalue equation, it’s differential form results from the operators acting on the eigenfunction (the wave function), What this means is that on the left, you have a “differential equation” which yields a function, and to the right you have a scalar that is a multiple of the eigenfunction. Long story short you can say Function eigenvalue Hence, Wave particle
You are more correct than most people would think. What happens if we add one extra spatial dimension to the "Twistor Theory" of Sir Roger Penrose? Can we make something analogous to a higher dimensional spring, which can be "chiral" because the twist could be Right-handed or Left-handed and can be "Quantized" based on the number of twist cycles? Is "gravity" produced by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms, instead of particles called "gravitons"? Can all matter be described as a form of spatial curvature, as in the twist of a thread? If Physicists describe electrons as point particles with no volume, where is the mass of the particle? Can one extra spatial dimension produce a geometric explanation of the 1/2 spin of electrons? The following is an extension of the old Kaluza-Klein theory. Can a twisted 3D 4D soliton containing one extra spatial dimension help solve some of the current problems in Particle Physics? What do the Twistors of Roger Penrose and the Geometric Unity of Eric Weinstein and the exploration of one extra spatial dimension by Lisa Randall and the "Belt Trick" of Paul Dirac have in common? Is the following idea a “Quantized” model related to the “Vortex Theory” proposed by Maxwell and others during the 19th century? Is the best explanation of the current data a form of “Twistor Theory” first proposed by Sir Roger Penrose during 1967? During recent years Dr. Peter Woit has explored Twistor Theory as a possible solution to help explain the current Standard Model. Has the concept of the “Aether” been resurrected from the dead and relabeled as the “Higgs Field”? In Spinors it takes two complete turns to get down the "rabbit hole" (Alpha Funnel 3D--->4D) to produce one twist cycle (1 Quantum unit). Can both Matter and Energy be described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature? (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Mass= 1/Length, with each twist cycle of the 4D Hypertube proportional to Planck’s Constant. In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) If quarks have not been isolated and gluons have not been isolated, how do we know they are not parts of the same thing? The tentacles of an octopus and the body of an octopus are parts of the same creature. Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. Are these the “Flux Tubes” being described by many Physicists today? When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. The "Color Force" is a consequence of the XYZ orientation entanglement of the twisted tubules. The two twisted tubule entanglement of Mesons is not stable and unwinds. It takes the entanglement of three twisted tubules to produce the stable proton. The term “entanglement” in this case is analogous to three twisted ropes being wrapped around each other in a way which causes all of the ropes to move if someone pulls one of the ropes. Does the phenomenon of “Asymptotic Freedom” provide evidence that this concept is the correct interpretation of the experimental data now available? Can the phenomenon of "Supercoiling" help explain the "Multiple Generations" of particles in the Standard Model? The conversion of twist to writhe cycles is well understood in the structure of DNA molecules. Within this model neutrinos are a small, twisted torus produced when a tube becomes overtwisted and breaks producing the small, closed loop of tube and a tube open on each end, which is shorter than the original. (Beta Decay)
Thank you Arwin. Your explanation helps me understand the equations of quantum fields. I do not understand much or even clearly or well. But as you point out, the springs accept only quantum displacement as defined by Plancks constant. There is absolutely nothing anywhere or in any way in the equations anything that is quantum. What is the analogue of your finger imparting a quantum displacement? I have long claimed the mathematics of CONTINUOUS functions has no hope of defining our quantum reality. When I studied engines the equations of gaseous states were clearly pointed out by the professors to be statistical. The gas equations worked well for an engineer but the equations said nothing about the state of any individual gas molecule. There is no mathematics for discrete quantum bits. Even your spring diagrams have EVERYTHING connected into continuous states, perhaps that is a reflection of the continuous functions of the mathematics. Yet the clue is in Planck's constant and in the discrete energy states of electrons. There must be DISCRETE conditions that the mathematical wave and or heat equations do not consider. Consider the equations of heat flow. These heat equations work well, yet in NO way consider the individual atoms and molecules of the substance within which the energy flow of the heat manifests. Similarly the quantum field equations of which one is Schrodingers, cannot hope to describe the fundamental reality of what the universe is made. What we need is a new mathematics of discrete states and this utterly is beyond my understanding, I can barely grasp the mathematics of continuous functions.
هو القادر على انقاذكم فستجيبوا له لينقذكم انت من تختار هو لن يجبرك على اي قرار (قل ادعوا الذين زعمتم من دونه فلا يملكون كشف الضر عنكم ولا تحويلا (56)الاسراء
An ideal pendulum (massless thread with one fixed point and the other having a point mass attached to it) behaves like a harmonic oscillator only in the specific situation where the initial displacement angle from the equilibrium position is small. Only then does the general equation of motion of a pendulum reduce to the one for harmonic oscillations. Otherwise, the equation of motion is nonlinear. Its solutions are no longer simple trigonometric functions, but rather elliptic functions. The ubiquitous nature of harmonic oscillators throughout physical theories is owed largely to two aspects. First, the low-amplitude motion around the minimum of any potential is always harmonic in nature, whether we are discussing about classical or quantum systems. Second, given the existence of simple analytical solutions having many useful properties, the harmonic oscillator is often a useful basis for the development of more advanced solutions to complex problems. One example is the nuclear many-body problem. One can start from harmonic oscillator solutions in order to solve for the single-particle motion in the nuclear mean field and then follow up with additional many-particle correlations through whatever approximations are suited to the specific nuclear phenomenon under study.
Ooh well.. 3000 year old Eastern science have always stated that everything was vibration. Wonder how much more they were right about. I guess that’s something Einstein, Nikola Tesla and more prominent scientists recognized, since they read and drew inspirations from the Vedas
That 11:48 part doesn't look like wave at all, or there is something more to it I don't understand. I mean that unlike typical wave, it doesn't follow Huygens principle, propagating only in one direction. Also, springs don't go down below center position after reaching it.
Rest position is their starting position because although the clip doesn't show it nicely....... the yellow balls can all be thought of as attached to springs from the top and bottom (the vid only shows bottom) ...( this is simplified to make the harmonic motion less complicated looking)... but yeah the balls already sit at rest because if u imagine the same rows of springs attached above and below each balls, they are each oscillating... together creating an overall oscillation pattern which is indeed a wave. The top and bottom spring unaffected would suspend the balls where they sit level, so for example a disturbance by pulling one spring from below upward (like the clip is doing) In turn compresses the springs that would be connected to top, and they then return to equilibruum (should oscillate more freely tho this is a rigid and like viscous example in the clip)
Thank you, Arvin Ash, so much!!!!! Order The Ultimate is Set of Prime [יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֵ֖ינוּ יְהוָ֥ה אֶחָֽד] , an infinte collection of prime numbers, therefore, p and 1/p is in a superposition state.
Very interesting video. It is really good. I would also like to add that "integrating over the whole universe" is practically impossible, because no one knows the size of the universe, and it really doesn't make sense at all, because at certain distances matter is not causally connected. Moreover, integrating in time presuposes a newtonian timeframe for the whole universe, which I feel is a wrong thing to do after reading about GR. At short distances, that is for a solar system, the integration might work, but for larger systems it doesn't make sense.
11:28 What is the rubber band made of and where does it come from and how does it operate such as attaching and unattaching from both virtual and missing particles? What is the force that directs and keeps the rubber bands together? I can imagine all entangled particles entangled by a network of rubber bands all connected to a single unknown and special particle which in turn is entangled to a very special and greater particle outside the Higgs field :)
I think the rubber bands are just a visual aid to show that it's a connected field and not just a bunch of individual springs. I guess the closest thing to it would be the permittivity and permeability of of free space ε0 and μ0. At least for the EM field.
Beautiful and illuminating work, thank you! I know we're not to push visual models and analogies too far, but I'm curious; does the chosen grid spacing and the zone of spread around a local excitation in a field relate to any familiar or definable quantities? Regarding the "fields" themselves, would it be correct to simply think of them as allowed modes or symmetries of deformation "allowed" at all points in space-time rather than as actual entities unto themselves? I realize that this might be a distinction without a difference and therefore without a point, but somehow the "fields" give me ontological indigestion.
What if spacetime (dimensionality and causality across it) are emergent from orders of particles (excitations) or interactions between fundamental particles that involve multiple fields? Why would one quantum field have any spacetime dimension at all? Wouldn't it make more sense that interactions between the fundamental fields (quarks and such) cause resonance between those excitations in multiple fields, thus necessitating an additional "dimension" or descriptor for the interaction? If quantum fields are aligned at different orientations to each other, or if there is simply ONE field with its own dimensionality separate from spacetime, then it's entirely possible that excitations peaking and then resonating at different orienations with other peaks could be the foundational soure of fundamental particles, and then those fundamental particles interacting would cause excitation "loops" in the substrate field dimensionality that cause the axial dimensional and causal separation of spacetime. Just a thought.
Arvin can we see an animation with all the layers of the mattress including the bosons oscillating - interacting with each other to see a dynamic system?
Us Mystery Science Theater 3000 fans have known the importance of springs ever since we saw the short film "A Case of Spring Fever" starring Coily the Spring Sprite, whose influential catchphrase was "NOOOOOOO Springs!" whenever someone needed a spring and didn't have one and realized they needed it.
The Hooke spring puns are an oscillating, great video! As some below have mentioned, what about the quark gluon plasmas contained inside protons and neutrons, is the whole plasma springy, or just the gluons, but what about the quarks too? Basketballs are 3D spheroidal springs, what about the proton's boundary surface being springy rather than gluons? That is, the proton containment surface boundary? Just a query, we need Planck scale microscopes that disobey Werner's uncertainty diktat to really see into the small scale machinery?!
A spring it tied to one point, while the harmonic is tied to two points. Can argue about what those anchor points actually represent in space-time (likely nothing). Then there is wave entanglement, or... quantum crystallization of particles.
In mechanical engineering, any structure / material can be modeled as mass-spring-damper; F(t)=mẍ+dẋ+kx. Not only spring. But the each of those constants (m, d, k) might be zero.
Great video, Arvin! I'm really happy with how both videos turned out. This worked out great!
Great collab!
Spoilers! 😂
Very cool collaboration. I wonder what the quantum analogue of Laplace’s equation would be.
Great complimentary videos; you and Arvin are my two favorite science content creators. I love the way you both make math and physics less intimidating. Looking forward to future collaborations between both of your channels.
Two of my favourite science channel s made a collab!!! What a day!
The universe is the most intricate musical instrument playing the most complex piece of music ever improvised
As a physicist myself, I've gotta say you guys are killing it with these excellent presentations! I love it!
An approximation is the most valuable part of what you said.
Some people get lost thinking you have described actual reality, and not just a portion of reality.
Love your work.
"All models are wrong. But some are useful."
Yep, even inside a proton, this is what quarks are doing, stepwise. Thanks Arvin, I'm always trying to interest my students in springs. It's up and down frankly 😁
Glad to hear that you are promoting this to students! I did not have fun learning about the physics of springs either...but much later in college when I learned that EVERYTHING works this way, I was Hooke-d!
A proton is a collection of 1836 expanding electrons and add a bouncing expanding electron makes a hydrogen atom. “The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy”. Mark McCutcheon.
A proton is like a pool of waves which have become swirling vortexes together making complex cyclic interactions we call a particle.
@@watamatafoyu Arnold Gulko spent- wasted- 70+ years on his “The Vortex Theory “ all to no avail.
@@ArvinAsh that was slinky 🤣🤣🤣
This is a fairly advanced conceptual topic to be landing on a popular YuTub series! Add in the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian and you pretty much have QFT in a nutshell (but with 30 hours of lectures at University). Susskind was the first person i heard describe the workings of particles as harmonic oscillators, and it was (eventually) an "ah ha" moment for me. Especially when you consider harmonic motion is also a rotation that has been collapsed by one dimension (i.e. a 2D shadow of a 3D wheel, with one point going back-and-forth in 2D, or round-and-round in 3D.) I strongly believe there is much more to explore in the mystery that is ROTATION, a mystery that no-one, absolutely nobody understands.
Really liked this one. Keep up the good work tackling advanced concepts. Looking forward to more "jumping-off points" that these videos can provide.
Great comment regarding how Harmonic motion can be looked upon as a rotation collapsed by one dimension! Thank you.
@@ArvinAsh It kinda' makes you wonder about the Holographic Universe hypothesis; where everything can be looked at as either 2D or 3D, and the math works-out both ways. Are we, the Universe: a 2D subspace projection onto 3D space, or a 4D collapse into 3D space? Or some combination of fluid multi-dimensionality that selectively manifests itself just like "location"? (Or is our concept of "dimensions" itself incomplete? That would make physics a bit challenging! ...or clear-up some challenges?)
Two things seem to be consistent with the Universe: Harmonic Oscillation and Rotation. (The differences between those two may be less than we think).
I think this video will give people a lot to think about, which is job well done. Looking forward to the next one!
The 1D shadow of a 2D wheel, no?
@@patinho5589 Yes, to clarify:
You are looking at the wheel edge from above, ( edge-on), and shining a light down on it.. The rotation of a given point is exactly a Harmonic Oscillator. The same rate is observed, with the fastest change at the middle, and the slowing as that point reaches the extremes of travel. This is also the exact solution for kinetic and potential energy of harmonic oscillation. Same rate of change, same distance travelled. They are exactly the same.
@@onebylandtwoifbysearunifby5475yup. I was imagining a circle (2D) and a line (1D).
I suppose you could give them both an extra dimension(width) and therefore be talking about 3D and 2D :).
Science Asylum and Arvin Ash!! OMG OMG OMG OMG 😱😱😱🎉🎉
From string theory to spring theory we all grew up
I just took a dump that I thought would tear open.
@@Robin.Tussin That's hot 🔥
Haha, right
Different visual perceptions
String theory is spring theory lol.
SPRING THEORY!!! WOO HOO!
Thanks Arvin, you are so good at explaining the deepest scientific concepts. You really help those of us who can't grasp the complex equations involved, at least understand what they might mean.
Great analogy man! It helps me conceptualize the quantum field state.
I note that the very beginnings of QM was formulated with the idea of harmonic oscillators in the black body thought experiments...i.e that the equipartition of energy assigned to the harmonic oscillators 'inside' the black body would lead to the ultraviolet catastrophe, which led Planck to suggesting that there was a quantization of energy levels. And so the the early forms of QM. So this idea was pretty much built into QM.
Thanks
That's quite a large donation actually, @ArvinAsh should be happy with that.
@@PhilipMurphy8Extra he deserves.
Bro its rupees not dollar
@@kkuj8314 it's still a big amount for me. It's a token of appreciation.
A great idea to see Arvin and Nick cooperating like this. If one presenter isn't working for you, the other might.
Love the cross over with Nick! Two of my favorite science communicators.
Love the colab with Science Asylum! He has a great channel as well.
Love this video, not String Theory, but Spring Theory, which sounds incredibly apt to describe the universe. Springs vibrate too, so it’s vibrating springs, it’s all energy! Love the graphics in this video, absolutely fascinating.
Well, to be fair, strings can be harmonic oscillators, too, like with the example of musical strings. So, if some people find it easier to envision, they can imagine the universe not as complex-dimensional mattresses, but as the most difficult piano ever. Every field is its own set of keys, and each key can be pressed any which way to produce a uniquely different quality of sound, rather than just "press down". Also, there are probably about 42 pedals.
At least, those without aphantasia can imagine that...
Quite easily among your top ten videos of all time. Love every min. of it, especially the collaboration with Nick! God Bless You Both ❤
Awesome! Man, thank you. I understand my (usually confused) point of perception in 'The Big Deal' of our Universe more better. Seriously!
Thank you for this tutorial, Arvin. IMO it's much clearer than the spring analogy Anthony Zee writes about in his otherwise wonderful book, "QFT in a Nutshell." And yes, Schrodinger's "wave" equation is actually a heat (or diffusion) equation!
Thanks Arvin - for another excellent, concise video, which explains Quantum things simply & clearly. Your QM videos are some of the best and easiest to understand available anywhere. Thanks again.
Wow, thanks!
This is such an elegant easy to digest explanation of this topic. Great thanks to these wonderful educators.
Back during my physics undergrad I took a machine shop course and my teacher had put together his own theory of everything about how all materials have some springiness you need to account for. He called it: "Spring Theory."
Uh, this is basic materials science.
Everything had a young’s modulus
@@maalikserebryakovyea but that wasn’t as cool lol
Arvin, you continue to amaze me with your videos.
I’ve found this channel via nicks channel, and I wanted to say thank you for being a communicator of science to the world in a way that young kids can find you engaging and entertaining and adults can re spark their curiosity.
You’ve got a new sub in me 😊
from india?
If you make a PDF I will buy it, and probably I will not be the only one. This really associates the formal math and the intuition in a striking way. Well designed, brilliant accomplishment.
Omg I love nick as well thanks for having him on. You guys should collaborate more often. My two favorite RUclipsrs.
Before you can blow a mind you have to open it enough. Arvin Ash is pretty good at this and I thoroughly enjoy these. 😍
Your title makes perfect sense. If you take any wave and compress it the shape it will take looks like a spring and the same if you pull apart a spring it will look like a wave.
From this, I can deduce that it wasn't the Big Bang, it was the Big Boing.
👽 Thank you so much Arvin for sharing your knowledge; Humanity needs full access to science.
I appreciate your modesty: understand the universe.
Arvin thank you now I got a good picture of quantum world I saved this video to decipher the equation need more
I love that creators are acknowledging each other, cooperating instead of competing. It bothers me when one creator, paraphrase the contents of another without acknowledging the source. After all it is not a zero-sum game, the audience does not need to choose which to watch, but instead can watch both. It is a win, win, win for the creators and the audience. More crossovers please.
Amazing animation. Really helpful in understanding the whole scenario Dr. Arvin Ash.
I am further curious about how will be the matter spring mattress and energy spring mattress would have interacted in the animation. Like in terms of Feynman diagrams style. It would be really great I can imagine.
Good job! I wish this had been explained to me this way when I was an undergraduate. I didn't learn about this until graduate school and even then, it wasn't very clearly explained conceptually.
Science Assylum cutting in clears up a confusion I've had for a long time. How can something be both a first derivative in time (heat) and a second derivative in time (wave). The fact the wave function does not mean a wave equation in a Partial Differential Equation sense removes the contradiction.
This is why I leave so many questions on science videos asking if the way I understand a term as a mathematician is to be understood the same way in the science or if the term refers to something else.
Marvelous explanation as ever!
Thank you Arvin!
Nice seeing Arvin and Nick in the same video! Does that lend itself to the "multiple worlds" theory?
No, it's more like Quantum Entanglement.
Gay
Jada Pinkett Smith entanglement
Brilliant! Extremely lucid! 😉
This makes sense of why energy remains conserved over so many different situations. I want to call it "radical spring theory": everything is a spring!
Wow. Wow wow wow wow wow. Wow. I'm glad I'm learning all this stuff before I die. Don't know why, but I'm glad.
Fantastic video, you are the best Arvin!
I was glad when you coupled the oscillators in the QFT spring model..and you showed that a and a-dagger have a subscript "p", meaning hbar*omega = ((pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2) ^ (1/2)...which means your spring mattress only works for one momentum. Each quantum field needs and continuously infinite number of mattresses for each value of momentum (times 3/2 for 3-dimensions).
tl;dr QFT is not intuitive.
Understanding that way is so much enjoyable.👌
Great video! The visuals really help with understanding (general comment for all your video's). Thanks 🙏
Impressed with the animations and Nick appearance
My God, its full of springs!
thumbs up for the 2001 reference!
And then POOFph!, There's Nick! What a treat that was❣
I've always said that literally everything in the universe is comprised of waves, from micro to macroscopic. So this vid is perfect!
For every action there is an equal opposite.
For nearly every word there is an antonym.
The spring theory hold up as a solid explanation of how the universe works, we need to also take into consideration that the springs are actioned by the cyclic behaviour of duality which is essentially two equal opposite rotating vortices moving through space and time. You can see example of the pair of vortices in fluids like under the waves at the beach, also solar flares, plants and trees which rotate out of the ground as they grow, the shape of electricity as it passes along a conductor and even the pattern our solar system makes as it moves through space.
This guy is great. Thank you for making these wonderful videos
Natural frequency of a spring is c=sqrt(E/M) ; Expressed for E, becomes E=mc2 ; Right? And continuum mechanics based on F = E*U becomes super computer (parallel computation) compatible, if us use strain space (not stress space) envelopes. And the work of P.J.Yoder, 1980 - derivation and implementation of strain space plasticity, provides all the mathematical proof that this "parallel spring system" is not only computed faster - but super compatible with nonlinear stiffness and thus... could help model things described in this video greatly :)
funny, I just received a couple of springs yesterday and also thought about the nature of the smallest things there are and that they are oscillations... nice!
Well, the pendulum and swing are not the same as the spring and don't have the same motion. The pendulum motion gets arbitrarily close to simple harmonic as the maximum angle approaches zero. Just for those might assume simple harmonic motion in some other situation or on a test.
Great video !!! , So the Resonance in these can explain field interactions, which require right amount of conditions !❤
Food is not your expertise.
Many things are not your expertise.
I do love your work. It is your expertise.
I am annoyed that many experts are confident in their particular skills that they easily advise in other areas outside their knowledge.
Nuclear specialists will expand into world energy solutions. They do not have a clue.
Nuclear specialists are angry if you tell them your own ideas about their area of expertise.
Thank you Arvin , always great topics 😊
Very nice and timely when VSL is catching up . Good we have seen many technical and technological game of science advancement.
It matches prediction upto 14 decimal point. Nature is indeed simple when you have an operator.
Thank you ASH
The Friend.
10:19 "as it's quantum, it will never be still" what exactly does it mean? Aside of what we observe, is there some kind of never-stillness used to define the quantum objects?
Are some "local" solutions for a local stillness impossible?
Also, if everything is quantized and multiply by some Planck's unit, preventing the value from being between that unit and zero, shouldn't zero be locally possible?
This means that there is alway some energy at the lowest ground state of any quantum system. Thing are vibrating. All the fields have waves (or particles) coming in an out of existence.
@@ArvinAsh Thank you! I think than now I understand the whole concept better, I had to spend a moment to change my way of thinking and transpose into imagining nigh everything as a vibration! More things make sense now.
We need more science video collaborations!!
These are great!
Who needs string theory when we can have spring theory! 😅
Great video! Looking forward to watching it at least a couple more times :-)
Circular for motion includes spring motion toward both horizontal and vertical directions.
What Schrodinger's equation does is square the Hamiltonian, turning a spring motion (back and forth) into a rotation (back and forth in two directions: forward-backward and side-to-side), representing a particle moving in a rotation. This is then mixed with the imaginary corollary to express the total wave, which is easily explained in the presence of two (not one) particles orbiting each other or a third particle.
The 4 resulting spring directions are then expressed as the quaternions that make up the Hamiltonian of a larger particle to which the orbits of the smaller particles lend to the spin of the larger.
10:40 in the real world where would the energy come from to give the field a "punch" and create a measurable particle?
Great question. The "punch" or energy comes from another field.
@@ArvinAsh okay well, here's my next genius question😂... where do the fields come from?
my guess is no one knows yet, but it seems the more scientist dig the more structures they find. might be turtles all the way down after all. but then again the planck lenght is a thing, not sure if that's more than a theoretical limit
@@erickgarcia6494 they're created with spacetime.
The Schrödinger equation is an eigenvalue equation, it’s differential form results from the operators acting on the eigenfunction (the wave function),
What this means is that on the left, you have a “differential equation” which yields a function, and to the right you have a scalar that is a multiple of the eigenfunction. Long story short you can say
Function eigenvalue
Hence,
Wave particle
this is cool how both channels interact
The fact that beauty like this is free blows my mind
You are more correct than most people would think. What happens if we add one extra spatial dimension to the "Twistor Theory" of Sir Roger Penrose? Can we make something analogous to a higher dimensional spring, which can be "chiral" because the twist could be Right-handed or Left-handed and can be "Quantized" based on the number of twist cycles?
Is "gravity" produced by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms, instead of particles called "gravitons"? Can all matter be described as a form of spatial curvature, as in the twist of a thread?
If Physicists describe electrons as point particles with no volume, where is the mass of the particle?
Can one extra spatial dimension produce a geometric explanation of the 1/2 spin of electrons? The following is an extension of the old Kaluza-Klein theory. Can a twisted 3D 4D soliton containing one extra spatial dimension help solve some of the current problems in Particle Physics?
What do the Twistors of Roger Penrose and the Geometric Unity of Eric Weinstein and the exploration of one extra spatial dimension by Lisa Randall and the "Belt Trick" of Paul Dirac have in common? Is the following idea a “Quantized” model related to the “Vortex Theory” proposed by Maxwell and others during the 19th century? Is the best explanation of the current data a form of “Twistor Theory” first proposed by Sir Roger Penrose during 1967? During recent years Dr. Peter Woit has explored Twistor Theory as a possible solution to help explain the current Standard Model. Has the concept of the “Aether” been resurrected from the dead and relabeled as the “Higgs Field”?
In Spinors it takes two complete turns to get down the "rabbit hole" (Alpha Funnel 3D--->4D) to produce one twist cycle (1 Quantum unit).
Can both Matter and Energy be described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature? (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Mass= 1/Length, with each twist cycle of the 4D Hypertube proportional to Planck’s Constant.
In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137.
1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface
137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted.
The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.)
If quarks have not been isolated and gluons have not been isolated, how do we know they are not parts of the same thing? The tentacles of an octopus and the body of an octopus are parts of the same creature.
Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. Are these the “Flux Tubes” being described by many Physicists today? When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. The "Color Force" is a consequence of the XYZ orientation entanglement of the twisted tubules. The two twisted tubule entanglement of Mesons is not stable and unwinds. It takes the entanglement of three twisted tubules to produce the stable proton. The term “entanglement” in this case is analogous to three twisted ropes being wrapped around each other in a way which causes all of the ropes to move if someone pulls one of the ropes. Does the phenomenon of “Asymptotic Freedom” provide evidence that this concept is the correct interpretation of the experimental data now available? Can the phenomenon of "Supercoiling" help explain the "Multiple Generations" of particles in the Standard Model? The conversion of twist to writhe cycles is well understood in the structure of DNA molecules. Within this model neutrinos are a small, twisted torus produced when a tube becomes overtwisted and breaks producing the small, closed loop of tube and a tube open on each end, which is shorter than the original. (Beta Decay)
Thank you Arwin. Your explanation helps me understand the equations of quantum fields.
I do not understand much or even clearly or well.
But as you point out, the springs accept only quantum displacement as defined by Plancks constant.
There is absolutely nothing anywhere or in any way in the equations anything that is quantum.
What is the analogue of your finger imparting a quantum displacement?
I have long claimed the mathematics of CONTINUOUS functions has no hope of defining our quantum reality.
When I studied engines the equations of gaseous states were clearly pointed out by the professors to be statistical. The gas equations worked well for an engineer but the equations said nothing about the state of any individual gas molecule.
There is no mathematics for discrete quantum bits. Even your spring diagrams have EVERYTHING connected into continuous states, perhaps that is a reflection of the continuous functions of the mathematics.
Yet the clue is in Planck's constant and in the discrete energy states of electrons. There must be DISCRETE conditions that the mathematical wave and or heat equations do not consider.
Consider the equations of heat flow. These heat equations work well, yet in NO way consider the individual atoms and molecules of the substance within which the energy flow of the heat manifests.
Similarly the quantum field equations of which one is Schrodingers, cannot hope to describe the fundamental reality of what the universe is made. What we need is a new mathematics of discrete states and this utterly is beyond my understanding, I can barely grasp the mathematics of continuous functions.
If the only tool u have is a linear differential equation hammer, then everything looks like a spring.
Damn, that's a cool concept. Thanks Arvin!
هو القادر على انقاذكم فستجيبوا له لينقذكم
انت من تختار هو لن يجبرك على اي قرار
(قل ادعوا الذين زعمتم من دونه
فلا يملكون كشف الضر عنكم
ولا تحويلا (56)الاسراء
An ideal pendulum (massless thread with one fixed point and the other having a point mass attached to it) behaves like a harmonic oscillator only in the specific situation where the initial displacement angle from the equilibrium position is small. Only then does the general equation of motion of a pendulum reduce to the one for harmonic oscillations. Otherwise, the equation of motion is nonlinear. Its solutions are no longer simple trigonometric functions, but rather elliptic functions.
The ubiquitous nature of harmonic oscillators throughout physical theories is owed largely to two aspects. First, the low-amplitude motion around the minimum of any potential is always harmonic in nature, whether we are discussing about classical or quantum systems. Second, given the existence of simple analytical solutions having many useful properties, the harmonic oscillator is often a useful basis for the development of more advanced solutions to complex problems. One example is the nuclear many-body problem. One can start from harmonic oscillator solutions in order to solve for the single-particle motion in the nuclear mean field and then follow up with additional many-particle correlations through whatever approximations are suited to the specific nuclear phenomenon under study.
Arvin your videos are fantastic. Thank you
Glad you like them!
such a great explanation!
Ooh well.. 3000 year old Eastern science have always stated that everything was vibration. Wonder how much more they were right about. I guess that’s something Einstein, Nikola Tesla and more prominent scientists recognized, since they read and drew inspirations from the Vedas
That 11:48 part doesn't look like wave at all, or there is something more to it I don't understand. I mean that unlike typical wave, it doesn't follow Huygens principle, propagating only in one direction. Also, springs don't go down below center position after reaching it.
Rest position is their starting position because although the clip doesn't show it nicely....... the yellow balls can all be thought of as attached to springs from the top and bottom (the vid only shows bottom) ...( this is simplified to make the harmonic motion less complicated looking)... but yeah the balls already sit at rest because if u imagine the same rows of springs attached above and below each balls, they are each oscillating... together creating an overall oscillation pattern which is indeed a wave. The top and bottom spring unaffected would suspend the balls where they sit level, so for example a disturbance by pulling one spring from below upward (like the clip is doing) In turn compresses the springs that would be connected to top, and they then return to equilibruum (should oscillate more freely tho this is a rigid and like viscous example in the clip)
Ur right tho bad animation bit (unclear if you look deep enough)
Arvin, your videos are brilliant.
Nick and Arvin 👍
what a surprize 🤩
Very cool to see Nick receive some love from you. Thsre cross pollinations are a great add on
Thanks. I'm glad we finally got to do it.
Excellent graphics!
At 8:36, a leading h_bar factor is missing from the expression for H the Hamiltonian after math substitution.
arvin you really do a great job man, cheers!
I appreciate that!
Thank you, Arvin Ash, so much!!!!! Order The Ultimate is Set of Prime [יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֵ֖ינוּ יְהוָ֥ה אֶחָֽד] , an infinte collection of prime numbers, therefore, p and 1/p is in a superposition state.
Very interesting video. It is really good.
I would also like to add that "integrating over the whole universe" is practically impossible, because no one knows the size of the universe, and it really doesn't make sense at all, because at certain distances matter is not causally connected. Moreover, integrating in time presuposes a newtonian timeframe for the whole universe, which I feel is a wrong thing to do after reading about GR. At short distances, that is for a solar system, the integration might work, but for larger systems it doesn't make sense.
11:28 What is the rubber band made of and where does it come from and how does it operate such as attaching and unattaching from both virtual and missing particles? What is the force that directs and keeps the rubber bands together? I can imagine all entangled particles entangled by a network of rubber bands all connected to a single unknown and special particle which in turn is entangled to a very special and greater particle outside the Higgs field :)
I think the rubber bands are just a visual aid to show that it's a connected field and not just a bunch of individual springs. I guess the closest thing to it would be the permittivity and permeability of of free space ε0 and μ0. At least for the EM field.
@@DFPercush OK, thanks for your comment.
One of my Professors once said - joking - there are just two models in Physics : the harmonic oscillator and the perfect gas equation 😊
For those of us that don't speak math language your videos are very helpful in furthering our understanding of the mysterious world of the very small.
Beautiful and illuminating work, thank you! I know we're not to push visual models and analogies too far, but I'm curious; does the chosen grid spacing and the zone of spread around a local excitation in a field relate to any familiar or definable quantities? Regarding the "fields" themselves, would it be correct to simply think of them as allowed modes or symmetries of deformation "allowed" at all points in space-time rather than as actual entities unto themselves? I realize that this might be a distinction without a difference and therefore without a point, but somehow the "fields" give me ontological indigestion.
What if spacetime (dimensionality and causality across it) are emergent from orders of particles (excitations) or interactions between fundamental particles that involve multiple fields? Why would one quantum field have any spacetime dimension at all? Wouldn't it make more sense that interactions between the fundamental fields (quarks and such) cause resonance between those excitations in multiple fields, thus necessitating an additional "dimension" or descriptor for the interaction? If quantum fields are aligned at different orientations to each other, or if there is simply ONE field with its own dimensionality separate from spacetime, then it's entirely possible that excitations peaking and then resonating at different orienations with other peaks could be the foundational soure of fundamental particles, and then those fundamental particles interacting would cause excitation "loops" in the substrate field dimensionality that cause the axial dimensional and causal separation of spacetime.
Just a thought.
Arvin baby, the quantization arises from the boundary conditions. That is, there must be a set of waves that contain the oscillatory energy levels.
Simple harmonic oscillators are everywhere!
Arvin can we see an animation with all the layers of the mattress including the bosons oscillating - interacting with each other to see a dynamic system?
See this video, where I show the different layers of fields in 2D. The layers of mattresses would be similar: ruclips.net/video/jlEovwE1oHI/видео.html
Us Mystery Science Theater 3000 fans have known the importance of springs ever since we saw the short film "A Case of Spring Fever" starring Coily the Spring Sprite, whose influential catchphrase was "NOOOOOOO Springs!" whenever someone needed a spring and didn't have one and realized they needed it.
The ups and downs of life. Cannot live without it.
Great video! I am subscribed to The Science Asylum too!
The Hooke spring puns are an oscillating, great video!
As some below have mentioned, what about the quark gluon plasmas contained inside protons and neutrons, is the whole
plasma springy, or just the gluons, but what about the quarks too?
Basketballs are 3D spheroidal springs, what about the proton's boundary surface being springy rather than gluons? That is, the proton containment surface boundary?
Just a query, we need Planck scale microscopes that disobey Werner's uncertainty diktat to really see into the small scale machinery?!
A spring it tied to one point, while the harmonic is tied to two points. Can argue about what those anchor points actually represent in space-time (likely nothing). Then there is wave entanglement, or... quantum crystallization of particles.
In mechanical engineering, any structure / material can be modeled as mass-spring-damper; F(t)=mẍ+dẋ+kx. Not only spring. But the each of those constants (m, d, k) might be zero.
Interesting point.
well d=0, for stable particles. For real particles k/m = (h*omega/2pi)^2. for virtual particles: m^2 can be any real number on (-infinity, +infinity).
@@DrDeuteron can we assume d>0 for radioactive elements?