Every time I see a physical or experimental explanation of superposition it seems like what's actually described is an object that isn't actually "in both states at the same time" but is actually "in neither state" because the actual state is the combination of multiple factors. For example, the 45 degree polarization isn't both vertical and horizontal, it's just describable as a combo of the two, it "is" 45 degrees. And we only say it "collapses" to either vertical or horizontal because our measurement device forces it to align to either vertical or horizontal. That's not a measurement, it's a filter. And the entropy of the experiment means we can only know which way it'll go via probability instead of classical mechanics near 100% certainty.
Nice thanks for the video! A friend of mine works on making quantum computers and it's crazy how the engineering is very exotic condensed matter type physics.
@TimoBlacks Geez I'm not sure, but supposedly the math checks out and predicts exactly the same results as observed. Something to do with a caveat Bell made. In it, reality is fundamentally random/probabilistic though. But consider that pilot wave, which has a particle only at one location at all times (uncertainty principle being a lack of knowledge instead of real) does produce the interference pattern because the waves interfere with itself or something. This has been reproduced macroscopically if I understand correctly. It's not pilot wave though and not deterministic like pilot wave.
As an x-ray tech trained in the military, the maths were almost non-existent. The highest math I took was college algebra. If I took the class, would the math be overwhelming? Thanks!
No I don’t think so at all! If you want an idea of the level, check out the first 4 videos in this series. If that looks ok, you’ll be fine! Plus I will be there to help as much as possible, so you can email me with your questions and I can help you before the tutorials
🍎If you want to learn quantum mechanics by doing problems, I'm running a course Jan 6 - 31st 🍎 For 4 weeks you will have homework and weekly tutorials with me📝There's no math prerequisite - it's for curious people from all backgrounds. Last time we had people from many walks of life, but all of them had wanted to understand quantum mechanics for a long time. If you're in the same boat, I think you'll enjoy learning together! looking-glass-universe.teachable.com/p/quantum-mechanics-fundamentals1
@fullfungo Classical bit have two positions either 1 or 0. Quantum bit can be in any position between 1 to 0. Pendulam like Quantum bit can be in any position between -1 0 +1 and independent of temperature. just an imagination!
How do we know if the result of a quantum computer operation is correct? It could take decades to validate it using current supercomputers. I image that even one misbehaving q-bit could radically alter the result.
There are many problems that are hard to solve but easy to check once you have an answer. One example is finding factors for very very large numbers, which is one of the kinds of things that quantum computers would be good at while supercomputers are much slower.
The nature of quantum computing is such that we do not use any one trial as the answer to the quantum question we are asking. This is for two reasons. 1. Quantum computing relies upon the spread of measurements across a wavefunction to find the answer. This means that the result is statistical and requires many (thousands of) measurements to gain a spectral understanding of the resulting wavefunction for the system. In other words, the noise will affect the spectrum’s clarity, but any one trial, noise and all, is not the “result”. 2. To reduce noise, quantum computing engineers have come up with ways to “error correct” by using groups of qubits to represent one “logical qubit”. So that when one qubit inevitably flips due to noise, the overall group can still be interpreted correctly. This reduces the effect of noise in the system.
Please! be my physics teacher 🙏. Jokes aside, you are quite good at explaining concepts 👍
1:38 Nitpick: If the first is at 45 degrees, shouldn't the second be at 135 degrees (not 130)?
Every time I see a physical or experimental explanation of superposition it seems like what's actually described is an object that isn't actually "in both states at the same time" but is actually "in neither state" because the actual state is the combination of multiple factors. For example, the 45 degree polarization isn't both vertical and horizontal, it's just describable as a combo of the two, it "is" 45 degrees. And we only say it "collapses" to either vertical or horizontal because our measurement device forces it to align to either vertical or horizontal. That's not a measurement, it's a filter. And the entropy of the experiment means we can only know which way it'll go via probability instead of classical mechanics near 100% certainty.
Nice thanks for the video! A friend of mine works on making quantum computers and it's crazy how the engineering is very exotic condensed matter type physics.
Dr Jacob Barandes has developed an interpretation of QM that features local realism with no superpositions needed.
What's the general idea?
Eg, how would he explain interference pattern, resulting from at atom source placed in front of 2 slits. Roughly?
@TimoBlacks Geez I'm not sure, but supposedly the math checks out and predicts exactly the same results as observed. Something to do with a caveat Bell made. In it, reality is fundamentally random/probabilistic though. But consider that pilot wave, which has a particle only at one location at all times (uncertainty principle being a lack of knowledge instead of real) does produce the interference pattern because the waves interfere with itself or something. This has been reproduced macroscopically if I understand correctly. It's not pilot wave though and not deterministic like pilot wave.
This is brilliant Mithuna, thank you
As an x-ray tech trained in the military, the maths were almost non-existent. The highest math I took was college algebra.
If I took the class, would the math be overwhelming? Thanks!
No I don’t think so at all! If you want an idea of the level, check out the first 4 videos in this series. If that looks ok, you’ll be fine! Plus I will be there to help as much as possible, so you can email me with your questions and I can help you before the tutorials
@LookingGlassUniverse I think it was okay for me... But definitely scraping the edge of my defeat. 😄
🍎If you want to learn quantum mechanics by doing problems, I'm running a course Jan 6 - 31st 🍎
For 4 weeks you will have homework and weekly tutorials with me📝There's no math prerequisite - it's for curious people from all backgrounds. Last time we had people from many walks of life, but all of them had wanted to understand quantum mechanics for a long time. If you're in the same boat, I think you'll enjoy learning together! looking-glass-universe.teachable.com/p/quantum-mechanics-fundamentals1
Awesome, so cool you doing this.
Sure, Got it, I will be there with Einstein!
Awesome! is it free? i would like to do it so much!
Every time I hear someone explaining Qubits, my mind automatically goes "so it's basically a variable resistor?". I like your teaching style 👍
Your videos are absolutely incredible !thank you!
IN YOUR EXAMPLE THE POLARIZED LIGHT QBIT DOESN'T SEEM TO COLLAPSE IN ONE OF THE TWO STATES WHEN YOU MEASURE/OBSERVE IT. PLEASE ELABORATE
I find superposition to be disturbing. If physicists ever discover super-duper-position, I'm probably going to have a conniption.
6:30 Why is your electron so unhappy?
Too negative
@@LookingGlassUniverse Ohhhhhhhh!!!!!! Makes sense.
@@LookingGlassUniverse😂😂😂😂😂😂🎉😊
Finally! It was one of the most confusing things ever! Thank you!
I'm totally confused now, and thinking about a purely mechanical bits using pendulums.
How are bits related to pendulums???
@fullfungo
Classical bit have two positions either 1 or 0. Quantum bit can be in any position between 1 to 0. Pendulam like Quantum bit can be in any position between -1 0 +1 and independent of temperature. just an imagination!
How do we know if the result of a quantum computer operation is correct? It could take decades to validate it using current supercomputers. I image that even one misbehaving q-bit could radically alter the result.
There are many problems that are hard to solve but easy to check once you have an answer. One example is finding factors for very very large numbers, which is one of the kinds of things that quantum computers would be good at while supercomputers are much slower.
The nature of quantum computing is such that we do not use any one trial as the answer to the quantum question we are asking.
This is for two reasons.
1. Quantum computing relies upon the spread of measurements across a wavefunction to find the answer. This means that the result is statistical and requires many (thousands of) measurements to gain a spectral understanding of the resulting wavefunction for the system. In other words, the noise will affect the spectrum’s clarity, but any one trial, noise and all, is not the “result”.
2. To reduce noise, quantum computing engineers have come up with ways to “error correct” by using groups of qubits to represent one “logical qubit”. So that when one qubit inevitably flips due to noise, the overall group can still be interpreted correctly. This reduces the effect of noise in the system.
Would it be so difficult to use better and more accurate terminology so that people are not confused into believing that quantum mechanics is magic?
Your name should be photon
Excelent Job.tks
brilliant video
Awesomesauce!!
Any bit you do in your videos is a cute b- oh i seem to have misréad it.
😆
Mmh Mmh yeah... I know some of these words 😂