I am 56 years old and reviewing my old physics during the quarantine at home, this brings back memory of why I studied physics in the first place, it is such an elegant science, and you Sir made it even more fun than I could remember when I first encountered QM. Thank you so much for breaking things down for easy digestion.
At 2:44, the Uncertainty Principle is expressed by the following inequality: ΔxΔp>= ħ/2. In reality, what I think you were referring to was this version: ΔxΔp>= h/4π. A lot of people get this wrong. The confusion is that the reduced Planck constant of ħ is equal to h/2π. THAT is what some of the best professors tend to get confused about. Once you make the substitution, you then get the famous Uncertainty Principle expressed correctly as ΔxΔp>= ħ/2, and not ħ. I hope you don't take this the wrong way. It's a common mistake that almost every person on RUclips makes. It's no wonder why so many students get this wrong too.
Which software do you use for the scrollable blackboard thing? i like how it works! oh and btw your videos are pretty good and informative! keep it up!
These are always going to be specific to the model you use. In semiconductor physics, our go-to model is typically the quantum well, where the wavefunction must vanish at the boundaries of the region you are considering. Typically (but not always) this is all the information you need. The equation is second-order in space, and forcing the magnitude squared to be equal to 1 (called the normalization condition) gives you the second piece of information you need to solve the equation. Normally (but not always) you don’t use boundary conditions on the derivative of the wavefunction.
You got an embarrassing error: the uncertainty principle poses a *lower* bound on the multiplication of delta-X times delta-P, so it is greater or equal than h-bar (not smaller!)
Sir do you need a research assistant in Quantum Information and Computation by any chance, do let me know. I have completed the book Nielsen and Chuang thoroughly. I am an undergrad student.
Did you not find a way to make this comment sound any more condescending? I find these video extremely helpful despite the very small mistake of flipping the less-than-or-equal symbol.
@@tommyjosepovic195 How is that condescending? I think you're reading it with a negative tone in your head. He's simply pointing something out to help him.
I am 56 years old and reviewing my old physics during the quarantine at home, this brings back memory of why I studied physics in the first place, it is such an elegant science, and you Sir made it even more fun than I could remember when I first encountered QM. Thank you so much for breaking things down for easy digestion.
These are my favorite comments :)
Yes, thank you for sharing!!! 💖🍀💖🍀💖
I was thinking, less than makes no sense...thanks for pointing this out as I had just looked this up as I was watching the video. Great course!
As a 1st year undergrad taking this course on the brink of giving up, I cannot thank you enough.
The way you explain things blew my mind. I wonder how you can make any complicated topic so digestible. Thanks a lot Sir.
He is very precise at choosing what words he needs to speak..
this best video if u need to study quantum mechanics
Excelente job at explaining this for very beginners. I will show it to my kids, just to wake their curiosity. Thank you.
Sir, you are gem
I don't know how I found this video
Thankyou for sharing your knowledge to us 😊
Bro, it's really great course! You teach them in very simple way, and it helps me a lot:)
very appreciated video, point-to-point discussion...very nice work sir...thank you for making the videos.
That is a very good explanation. Nice overview I wish I had seen this many years ago.
I watched it and I took notes.
At 2:44, the Uncertainty Principle is expressed by the following inequality: ΔxΔp>= ħ/2. In reality, what I think you were referring to was this version: ΔxΔp>= h/4π. A lot of people get this wrong. The confusion is that the reduced Planck constant of ħ is equal to h/2π. THAT is what some of the best professors tend to get confused about. Once you make the substitution, you then get the famous Uncertainty Principle expressed correctly as ΔxΔp>= ħ/2, and not ħ. I hope you don't take this the wrong way. It's a common mistake that almost every person on RUclips makes. It's no wonder why so many students get this wrong too.
Yup, I botched this long before I ever took a real course on QM xD
this site needs more likes
非常感谢，通俗易懂。来自中国的感谢。
Thank you very much, easy to understand. Thanks from china
you guys have youtube ?
Keep doing videos!! We need more topics
3:08 shouldn't delta product be higher than h/2π?
At 2:44, you meant to write >= h/4PI right?
Yep, 100%. Mucking up the uncertainty principle already xD
infinite thanks for sharing your knowledge with us..
Great work, prof!
Amazing Sir!
you have a mistake with heisenbergs uncertainty principle it should be dxdp >= h/2pi
Thanks for posting these!
Thanks a lot sir.
Thank you sir!
Where can I get same quality content for "random variables, probability of error and communication".
I, from India. Thank you
MashaAllah, you have explained well
Fahaad Mobile Thanks!
Which software do you use for the scrollable blackboard thing? i like how it works!
oh and btw your videos are pretty good and informative! keep it up!
There is a mistake in your video, the uncertainty principle is greater than or equal to h/2.pi, not les than or equal to
Pls layman's terms
annoying Heisenberg Uncertainty error: greater or equal to, NOT less than or equal to.
Hi! Can you recommend a good book for problems solving?
You have made an error in expressing uncertainty principle.
Hi, may I have more details on the initial conditions to solve the differential equations?
These are always going to be specific to the model you use. In semiconductor physics, our go-to model is typically the quantum well, where the wavefunction must vanish at the boundaries of the region you are considering. Typically (but not always) this is all the information you need. The equation is second-order in space, and forcing the magnitude squared to be equal to 1 (called the normalization condition) gives you the second piece of information you need to solve the equation. Normally (but not always) you don’t use boundary conditions on the derivative of the wavefunction.
@@JordanEdmundsEECS Thank you sir!
thank u .)
Hey, I've been watching your videos. They have been pretty good. Will you be uploading videos about pn-junction?
Thank you! Yes, I will be uploading P/N junction videos in the next few weeks.
@ 5:03: The right pronunciation of DE BROGLIE is "DEBROY"; just like you pronounce the English word ''boy", but with a rrrrrolling R in it.
You got an embarrassing error: the uncertainty principle poses a *lower* bound on the multiplication of delta-X times delta-P, so it is greater or equal than h-bar (not smaller!)
got bored the only problem is that i’m in 7th grade going to 8th so i am very confused
Sir do you need a research assistant in Quantum Information and Computation by any chance, do let me know. I have completed the book Nielsen and Chuang thoroughly. I am an undergrad student.
I mostly do device physics / fabrication stuff, nothing in Quantum Information, but best of luck!
OK, so there is another person who doesn't understand quantum mechanics who is trying to teach quantum mechanics. Ain't the internet great?
At 4:10 minutes , u have written wrong equation for calculating uncertainty .
Did you not find a way to make this comment sound any more condescending? I find these video extremely helpful despite the very small mistake of flipping the less-than-or-equal symbol.
Thanks! I realized this afterwards, my apologies.
@@tommyjosepovic195 How is that condescending? I think you're reading it with a negative tone in your head. He's simply pointing something out to help him.
Siddharth Paudwal I really don’t get what you are said... What’s wrong???
@@vinothkannachandrasekar3921 it should be delx.delp>=h/4pi
please put an arab translation if you can
and thank you