Quantum Electrodynamics and Feynman Diagrams

Quantum Electrodynamics and Feynman Diagrams ScienceClic English 807K subscribers Subscribe 23K Share Download Thanks 598,120 views Feb 27, 2021 How do we reconcile electromagnetism with quantum physics? How do we describe the interaction between two electrons? What are virtual particles? All these answers in 15 minutes! 0:00 - Introduction 1:27 - Quantum Fields 4:17 - Feynman Diagrams 9:32 - Sum and amplitudes 13:36 - Conclusion For more videos, subscribe to the YouTube channel : / scienceclicen And if you liked this video, you can share it on social networks! To support me on Patreon : / scienceclic or on Tipeee : http://tipeee.com/ScienceClic Facebook Page : / scienceclic Twitter : / scienceclic Instagram : / scienceclic Alessandro Roussel, For more info: http://www.alessandroroussel.com/en Transcript Search in video Introduction 0:02 [Music] 0:05 welcome back to science clique 0:08 today quantum electrodynamics 0:13 when two electrons get close they repel 0:16 each other 0:17 this explains why we don't fall through 0:19 a chair when we sit down 0:21 why we can exert a force on an object 0:25 and why the air exerts friction on a 0:28 feather 0:30 apart from gravity and radioactivity at 0:32 the nuclear scale 0:34 almost all phenomena in the universe can 0:36 be explained by how electrons behave 0:42 at first one would be tempted to 0:44 describe this repulsion by a force 0:46 the electromagnetic force but electrons 0:50 are not 0:50 small marbles that would obey classical 0:52 mechanics 0:54 they are quantum objects particles 0:57 and to describe their interactions it is 0:59 necessary to reconcile electromagnetism 1:02 with quantum physics to this end 1:06 in the middle of the 20th century the 1:08 most precise model 1:09 ever created in the history of physics 1:11 was developed 1:13 an elegant model which allows the use of 1:15 simple diagrams to calculate with 1:17 astounding precision 1:18 the most fundamental phenomena of 1:20 physics 1:22 quantum electrodynamics Quantum Fields 1:27 quantum electrodynamics is an example of 1:30 a quantum field theory 1:33 we consider our universe as a sort of 1:35 box 1:36 space time which contains two fields 1:40 fluids made up of mathematical objects 1:43 the electron field and the 1:46 electromagnetic field 1:49 [Music] 1:50 within these fields move about small 1:52 packets of energy that can appear or 1:54 disappear 1:56 called particles 1:59 electrons for example are disturbances 2:02 that propagate like 2:03 waves inside the electron field 2:05 [Music] 2:07 the electromagnetic field also contains 2:10 disturbances 2:11 quanta of energy which can appear or 2:13 disappear 2:15 photons 2:20 the field of electrons and that of 2:22 photons are of a different nature 2:24 the mathematical objects from which they 2:26 are made up are not of the same type 2:30 the electron field in particular is made 2:32 up of spinners 2:34 rather abstract objects that are 2:36 described by complex numbers 2:40 to simplify we can imagine a complex 2:42 number as having a size 2:46 as well as a color its phase 2:52 when an electron propagates in the field 2:55 the phase of complex numbers 2:56 rotates over time this is called 3:00 the electric charge electrons have an 3:03 electric 3:04 charge which transcribes the fact that 3:06 their phase 3:07 turns as they move towards the future 3:10 [Music] 3:17 apart from electrons this same field can 3:20 also contain disturbances 3:21 whose phases turn in the other direction 3:25 in a way we could say that this is an 3:27 electron but which is moving 3:28 in the opposite direction towards the 3:31 past 3:34 [Music] 3:35 from our point of view the phase of this 3:37 particle seems to turn in the opposite 3:39 direction 3:40 we perceive an opposite electric charge 3:44 this is called an anti-electron a 3:47 positron 3:53 on the other hand the photon field is 3:55 formed of vectors 3:57 which are expressed with real numbers 4:01 they are just ordinary numbers which 4:03 have no phase 4:05 so photons have no electric charge Feynman Diagrams 4:17 to understand how electrons interact 4:20 imagine that we place two of them 4:22 at the start of our quantum field 4:27 in order to schematically represent the 4:29 content of the universe 4:30 it is convenient to use lines to 4:33 symbolize the movement of particles 4:35 align with an arrow towards the future 4:38 to symbolize an electron 4:40 with an arrow towards the past in the 4:43 other direction 4:44 to symbolize a positron and a wavy line 4:47 to symbolize a photon 4:52 to describe how particles evolve quantum 4:55 electrodynamics allows our two fields to 4:58 interact 4:59 using interaction vertices 5:02 an interaction vertex involves a photon 5:06 and two particles of the electron type 5:10 these can be electrons or positrons 5:12 depending on their orientation with 5:14 respect to time 5:17 such a vertex can symbolize an electron 5:19 which emits a photon 5:22 an electron which absorbs a photon 5:25 a positron which emits a photon or 5:28 absorbs a photon 5:30 or even an electron and a positron which 5:33 annihilates 5:34 into a photon or a photon which converts 5:36 into an electron positron pair 5:40 all these interactions are allowed 5:43 provided that for each vertex 5:44 the overall momentum of the particles in 5:47 space 5:48 and time before and after the 5:50 interaction 5:51 remains the same the electric charge 5:55 must also be conserved 5:57 each interaction necessarily has an 5:59 arrow that enters 6:00 and another that leaves the vertex 6:07 by allowing our two electrons to 6:09 interact with these kinds of vertices 6:11 we can then imagine a whole variety of 6:13 different scenarios 6:15 in the simplest scenario the two 6:18 electrons continue in a straight line 6:21 in another more interesting scenario the 6:24 two electrons exchange a photon 6:26 which acts as a messenger carrying part 6:29 of the momentum of the first electron 6:31 to the second electron 6:35 it is important to note that particles 6:38 behave like waves 6:39 they can be exchanged along one 6:41 direction even though they carry a 6:43 momentum which is oriented differently 6:47 that way in some scenarios the exchange 6:49 will bring the two electrons closer 6:58 and in other scenarios the exchange will 7:00 push them apart 7:02 [Music] 7:09 we can then imagine more complex 7:11 scenarios which involve 7:12 many points of interaction electrons can 7:16 exchange 7:17 several photons at different places 7:20 and at different times sometimes 7:23 a photon converts into an electron 7:25 positron pair 7:26 which annihilates to form a photon again 7:29 we 7:30 call this a loop an electron can also 7:33 emit 7:34 and then reabsorb a photon 7:40 as long as the overall momentum and 7:42 electric charge are preserved 7:45 all imaginable scenarios an infinity of 7:48 more or less complex possibilities 7:50 can occur 7:53 and if we stop the evolution of the 7:55 field after a certain time 7:57 to look at the outcome of each scenario 8:00 we sometimes find 8:01 our two electrons and sometimes more 8:03 particles 8:04 with some having appeared between the 8:06 initial and final instance 8:10 each of these scenarios which start from 8:12 an initial situation 8:14 and reach a final situation is called a 8:16 refinement diagram 8:20 feynman diagrams transcribe the 8:22 different possible evolutions of our 8:24 quantum fields 8:25 from a given initial situation 8:31 apart from the initial and final 8:33 particles which are real particles that 8:35 can be detected 8:37 the particles that act as messengers 8:39 within these diagrams 8:40 are said to be virtual these are 8:43 particles that cannot be detected 8:45 and they can exhibit some rather strange 8:47 properties 8:50 they only serve as intermediaries to 8:52 describe how our two electrons 8:54 interact at a distance 8:57 mathematically each scenario each 8:59 feynman diagram 9:01 corresponds to a very rigorous equation 9:04 and virtual particles are only a way of 9:06 interpreting intuitively 9:08 certain parts of the equations 9:11 [Music] 9:13 that said although they are only 9:15 intermediaries resulting from our 9:16 mathematical model 9:18 it is essential to consider these 9:20 virtual particles 9:21 because they account for the 9:22 interactions of the fields 9:25 and therefore how electrons behave Sum and amplitudes 9:33 let's summarize what we have so far we 9:36 describe 9:36 a space-time which contains two fields 9:40 that have electrons and that of photons 9:43 from an initial situation with two 9:46 electrons 9:47 we are interested in all possible 9:49 evolutions 9:51 allowing interactions that link a photon 9:55 to two particles of the electron type 9:58 [Music] 9:59 from this we can create a catalogue a 10:02 list of 10:03 all the possible diagrams there are 10:05 infinitely many 10:07 some are simple contain few interactions 10:10 and others are more complex involving 10:12 many interactions 10:16 but this doesn't help us too much if we 10:19 wish to predict 10:20 the actual behavior of electrons we'd 10:23 like to know which of these scenarios 10:25 actually occurs if we carried out the 10:28 experiment 10:29 is it this scenario or this other 10:31 scenario that would occur 10:34 the answer to this question is subtle 10:36 and may seem counter-intuitive 10:38 but it is precisely what makes quantum 10:41 theory so 10:42 powerful 10:45 our universe does not follow just one of 10:48 these scenarios 10:49 it evolves at the same time according to 10:52 all possible scenarios 10:55 in a way starting from a given initial 10:57 situation 10:59 all possibilities occur at the same time 11:02 in parallel as a superposition of 11:05 every imaginable scenario 11:08 to describe the behavior of electrons it 11:11 is necessary to take into account all 11:13 finement diagrams 11:21 in quantum electrodynamics each diagram 11:24 corresponds to an equation 11:26 which allows us to calculate a number 11:29 for each scenario 11:30 and amplitude we can imagine the 11:33 diagrams as 11:34 layers and their amplitude as a sort of 11:37 opacity that sometimes adds up 11:39 constructively 11:41 and other times destructively 11:44 the many different scenarios have 11:46 different amplitudes 11:47 but for the sake of calculations we can 11:50 usually neglect 11:51 the more complex scenarios considering 11:53 only 11:54 the first few simplest diagrams and 11:57 still get 11:57 reasonably accurate results 12:02 it is by performing the sum of all these 12:04 scenarios with their different 12:05 amplitudes 12:07 as if we superimposed more or less 12:09 opaque layers 12:10 that we obtain the real evolution of the 12:13 physical system 12:16 when we carry out the experiment in the 12:18 real world if we throw two electrons and 12:20 observe them a little later 12:22 the amplitude of each diagram allow us 12:25 to calculate the overall probability 12:27 that we observe a specific 12:29 outcome as the output of our experiment 12:33 and in particular the most likely 12:35 outcome is that we observe our two 12:37 electrons with slightly different 12:39 momentum 12:40 they repelled each other 12:44 in a way feynman diagrams are not so 12:47 much descriptions of real phenomena 12:49 but rather very powerful tools that 12:52 allow us to calculate the probability of 12:54 observing 12:55 such or such an outcome 12:58 we have a greater chance of finding our 13:00 two electrons with outward momentum 13:03 the most likely outcome is that they 13:05 repelled each other 13:06 thanks to the exchange of virtual 13:08 particles 13:11 at our scale we have the impression that 13:13 the two electrons undergo a continuous 13:15 force 13:16 while fundamentally this force is only 13:19 the probabilistic 13:20 synthesis of all possible interactions 13:23 in which the electrons exchange motion 13:26 through virtual particles 13:34 [Music] Conclusion 13:36 to conclude quantum electrodynamics is a 13:39 complex theory 13:40 but it allows us to predict in an 13:42 astounding way how electrons 13:44 positrons and photons interact 13:48 by synthesizing all possible scenarios 13:51 with their different amplitudes 13:53 this theory explains and predicts at the 13:55 fundamental scale 13:57 all the laws of optics the behavior of 13:59 light when it interacts with a material 14:03 maxwell's equations which govern 14:05 electric and magnetic fields 14:08 and interactions between electrons from 14:10 which at our scale 14:11 almost all forces arise 14:15 historically this model was the first 14:17 great success 14:18 of quantum field theory by describing 14:21 matter as quantum fields 14:23 interactions as virtual particles and 14:26 proposing a very elegant calculation 14:28 method 14:28 based on diagrams and amplitudes quantum 14:31 electrodynamics has in particular 14:33 allowed scientists to predict with an 14:35 unprecedented precision the way in which 14:37 an electron reacts to a magnetic field 14:41 through virtual photons the magnetic 14:43 field causes the spin of the electron to 14:46 process 14:47 and this precession motion is perfectly 14:49 predicted by quantum electrodynamics 14:52 to almost 10 significant figures 14:55 to this day all theories considered this 14:58 is the best verified experimental 15:00 prediction 15:00 in the history of physics the anomalous 15:04 magnetic moment 15:05 of the electron 15:13 [Music] 15:32 you _ To learn more : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feynman... Chapters View all Transcript Follow along using the transcript. Show transcript ScienceClic English 807K subscribers Videos About Support on Patreon Support on Tipeee Facebook Twitter SoundCloud TikTok 15:53 Quantum Field Theory visualized by ScienceClic English 980 Comments rongmaw lin Add a comment... @LouisWongPhysics 4 years ago I am a high school physics teacher. I would say this is the best animated video on Feynman diagram I have ever seen on YouTube. This will certainly be played in my lessons. 1K Reply 50 replies @vjfperez 4 years ago Having spent a significant fraction of 35 years getting education in related STEM fields and having read many books or watched many popular science talks with famous people, I have to say you are the first to make it crystal clear. 140 Reply 4 replies @dr_cheez811 4 years ago this channel is like a crossover between 3blue1brown and pbs spacetime. altogether a better mix of the physics and math 1.8K Reply 42 replies @hotlinkster123 4 years ago The animations are great, as always! And as someone currently studying these topics it's a great overview 365 Reply ScienceClic English · 4 replies @cloudy3538 4 years ago My man, your animations interact perfectly with your explanations making very conceptually difficult subjects easy to understand. Keep up the good work, we believe in you 213 Reply ScienceClic English · 4 replies @минусдваминусодинноль 4 years ago i really love how some parts of your videos are easy enough to get you interested (eg the animations), but also informative enough for you to come back to the video with more knowledge and still learn something new. and the more complex the topic is, the more times you can rewatch the video! honestly amazing 201 Reply 1 reply @pa.l.2499 4 years ago You are a gifted scientist, but also an artist. Rare combination of animator and physicist. Here is my praise for this gift: You are destined for sparking a virtual qft and physics interest, much like the elegance found among the particles in our universe which you've animated so creatively. This video, as well the previous ones, serve to rekindle an interest in learning new physics that I never could grasp. Awe-inspiring content. Quantum Art. 🎨 30 Reply @oneluminary 19 hours ago I am an undergrad studying physics and I have to say that this kind of videos motivate me every time I am tired of memorizing formulae. These give me motivation to keep on going; so that some day I will too discover unknown mysteries of the universe by my own. Thankyou! Reply @quanghaita5555 3 years ago As an architect who is curious about physics, I’m grateful of your creations: the combination of visualization graphic, your music, your voice and especially your own way of explaining. Thank you. 5 Reply @hooya27 4 years ago You guys keep knocking it out of the park! Amazing description, with no fluff. I've been consuming popular physics media for decades, and this is some of the best! 113 Reply ScienceClic English · 7 replies @JoshMeihaus 2 years ago It would be impossible for me to express how thankful I am for your beautifully-animated and clear explanations of these ideas. Thank you. 4 Reply @MrKreidel 4 years ago it's absolutely awesome how you squeeze such complex matter into 15 minutes. 17 Reply @IKEMENOsakaman 4 years ago I failed physics while in High School. I wish you were my high school physics teacher back then. 102 Reply 8 replies @OnumLCT 4 years ago Your accent and your voice are honestly unbelievably satisfying 59 Reply @okspaceman2168 4 years ago This is the best explanation of Feynman diagram on internet. 5 Reply @wayneyadams 2 years ago Excellent presentation. I am a retired Physics teacher who taught the subject for 33 years, and appreciate the simplicity with which the topic is introduced at an elementary level. 1 Reply @floydmaseda 4 years ago I was hoping you'd mention the fine structure coupling constant as an explanation of why we can neglect higher order diagrams (perhaps also why "higher order" is intuitive language). This could lead into a nice future video explaining the computational differences between QED and QCD, where the coupling constant is much larger so we cannot neglect the higher order diagrams. 42 Reply 2 replies @FactsNReason 3 years ago This channel is amaze-balls: 1. Great summary explanations —not too complicated, not too simple 2. Great graphics and representations 3. Great connections between branches of science Reply @jimstanfield5615 4 years ago This is, by far, the best explanation of QED and Feynman diagrams I have ever seen. 3 Reply @mariociencia12 10 days ago Your videos are amazing! Every person on Earth that search for knowledge should be aware about your videos! Reply @Bitmaker64 1 year ago so what I'm getting is that there's an infinitesimally small chance of me just falling through my chair. 30 Reply 2 replies @AnkleSpur 1 year ago I have consumed science media for the layman for as long as I can remember. This is absolutely top-tier among some truly excellent competitors. Thank you! 1 Reply @bradbadley1 3 years ago The momentum of the 'wave' pulling them together!!! Mind blown! Finally an explanation that I can grasp. 3 Reply @TheyCallMeHacked 4 years ago I'm happy there is now an english version of this channel. I watch both, because I have the feeling that although both have the same information, I get a fuller understanding than if I were to watch only one of them... 5 Reply @TheCobaqua 4 years ago (edited) Your channel hits exactly my sweet spot in terms of difficulty of material 5 Reply @3dgar7eandro 1 month ago (edited) 11:00 Ok my brain is officially blowing up! Richard Feynman was truly a Titan in his own right, how he could even managed to grasp such complex topics in a manner so elegant an simple is what truly made him an instant genius! And also a Noble winner of course haha. 1 Reply @sumansaha295 2 years ago This is really really really excellent. I very much appreciated that you allow pauses for my brain to process information between the animation and the explanation. I have always wanted to know more about this field. 3 Reply @olexanderchepil9410 4 years ago Man, your explanations, as well as visualizations are just... uhhhngh. HUGELY talanted 2 Reply @MrShenCat 4 years ago As a theoretical physics major, I cried for this video. 96 Reply 10 replies @theinnaing9794 8 months ago The best explanation I have seen so far. What a great genius! 1 Reply @quahntasy 4 years ago Wish we were taught physics in high school like this This is an amazing channel. 4 Reply @ryanbaker7404 2 years ago This is, hands down, the best visual explanation of QED and Feynman Diagrams I have ever seen. It's amazing to try to wrap your mind around the fact that the electron and these processes drive almost every single thing every created and experienced in our cosmos, "physical" or otherwise. If we're not in The Simulation (TM), I'll kiss everyone's arse and give you all two weeks to draw a crowd, LOL! Well done! Reply @vento2175 4 years ago You still amaze me everytime on how much better you explain complex theories and topics than basically everyone else. Hope you never stop :) 5 Reply @alabanesuileabhain6613 3 years ago Thanks for making these i rewatch them all the time. Highly underrated. 1 Reply @edoardoferretti5493 4 years ago I love how quantum theory makes me see things in a deep different way, making me ask what is real, and if asking such a question makes sense in the first place 10 Reply @youfilin 3 years ago (edited) It doesn't matter how good the animations, voice, sounds and author's understanding of topic are, because it's even more frightening more simple explanation more difficult to understand the complexity of the place we are living. Great job, Alessandro! 1 Reply @sevisymphonie5666 4 years ago (edited) This week I had a Quantum Mechanics 2 exam. That was basically quantum field theory. I actually had enough of it. But when Sciene-Clic makes a video. Good summary of the principle of QFT. 19 Reply 2 replies @EyeoftheAbyss 4 years ago Few times am I genuinely impressed by an explanation that is truly informative, visual, and summarizes much that others fail to clarify. In other words, all these years and you've shown me what a Feynman diagram is in rich variety what no one else has every done via video or writing, that I've come across. 1 Reply @Rationalific 4 years ago Please keep doing what you're doing! Through your videos, I am learning things that I never had any idea about before, and even if I'd looked into it (and I do like science), I probably wouldn't have understood nearly as well as with your videos. You are opening up a new world to people like me! Thank you! 5 Reply @Kavee_3 9 months ago (edited) Thousands of my questions were answered, thousands of new ones were made. You have strengthened my curiosity. Reply @ahusky4498 4 years ago Damn, it feels like the previous video came out yesterday and now there is a new one! 5 Reply @honey4clover 1 year ago So glad this is the first video I clicked on QED. Haven't touched theoretical physics since high school besides occasional pop science books. The clean visualization and no-nonsense explanation makes it so easy to digest. Much appreciate the work! Reply @24emerald 4 years ago One of best videos I've seen on the topic. Very impressed. 3 Reply @-_Nuke_- 3 years ago This is the BEST video on the entire youtube about Quantum Mechanics. No bullshit, no Quantum woo - just facts and real maths. Youtube is filled with Quantum bullshit - even well known physicists have been saying all kinds of bullshit about QM on YouTube and other platforms. We need more videos like these. 2 Reply @canyadigit6274 4 years ago (edited) Minor criticism here. At 9:16 you say that virtual particles although intermediary are essential to consider them. This isn’t true. Non perturbation QFT (Also known as lattice QFT) does not use virtual particles at all to do calculations. Otherwise, great vid! 6 Reply 1 reply @hoseashpm7810 4 years ago This video is a beautiful simplification. Keep up the great work 4 Reply ScienceClic English · 1 reply @WiteBot 2 years ago $2.00 Thanks! Reply @supreetsahu1964 4 years ago That yoink photon blew my mind, never thought such a thing could exist. Albeit Transiently 18 Reply 2 replies @MKDSLeone 3 years ago This is the best quantum electrodynamics video in the history of youtube. Reply @qayiran 4 years ago I was like "Aha!" at 12:12. Brilliant presentation, as always. 3 Reply ScienceClic English · 2 replies @theunknown1426 3 years ago this is THE BEST channel on youtube explaining complex scientific subjects for normal people to understand Reply @mikakadu 4 years ago I would love a video series about the mathematics of QFT ! 3 Reply @Name-js5uq 3 years ago This music is so incredibly awesome that you play I hope you never stop using it because it helps me learn because it's just so incredible to have playing in the background while I'm thinking 2 Reply @olafdilios9047 4 years ago outstandingly well explained, thank you 4 Reply @luisfernandoalves2748 3 years ago This is by far the best science channel on youtube. Reply @idirkhial9422 4 years ago Your videos are insane! Keep up the amazing work! 5 Reply ScienceClic English · 1 reply @the_hypnotoucan 1 year ago I am just left mind blown after every one of your videos. You explain things in such an intuitive way. I come back to rewatch your videos all the time, just because they are so captivating to watch. Reply @증걸대라쫌 1 year ago Amazing video again...👍 Thank you very much for helping me to understand QED. Would you please make a video about the Re-normalization? 3 Reply @maksimrakhman 8 months ago The art of combining the theory with the visual makes this explanation superb to anything I have heard or seen to date. You are truly the JSBach of physics - combining the what with the how and making it fascinatingly interesting and beautiful! Reply @carzyman5 4 years ago Love your videos. Please can you make a video about magnetic and electric fields, while exploring Maxwell equations. Thank you! 3 Reply @zaidyounas1602 3 years ago I accidentally came across this channel and boy am I enjoying this. Thank you for explaining complex theories in a very simple and concise way. Reply @zzztopspin 4 years ago Your videos have my favorite visual representations for these ideas! I dream of a full-team collaboration between yall and PBS space-time, on any mechanism in the standard model or relativity! As many know, the "color" analogies used for complex phase-space in QED, as well as for gluon colors in QCD is a compelling narrative to delineate linear amplitudes from modal phases for many charge concepts in physics. But, would you consider making a side-by-side animation where the rainbow diagrams (going from 2:40 to 3:53) are juxtaposed with a grayscale diagram, where the "color" of the rainbow is replaced by a spectrum of thick-to-thin textures? I imagine a visual aid that depicts a low-energy red color expressed by a thinly-textured space, transitioning to a thickly-textured space for high-energy blue colors - flowing through "R-G-B" space for electrons, and "R-B-G" space for positrons would be like flowing through thin-to-thick or thick-to-thin grayscale textures respectively. I think this would both help people with standard color vision transcend the color analogy by seeing an alternate but equal expression for quantum phase, as well as expand the accessibility of the color analogy for people with alternate color perception. 4 Reply @farmerjohn6192 2 years ago As a Chemist who understands molecular orbitals, bonding, anti-bonding and the Schrodinger equation, this explanation that there are multiple Feynman diagrams now makes sense. Thanks Reply @saudzahirr 4 years ago It is such an incredible topic! I always wanted to see it ♥️ 4 Reply @inmemoryofin 2 years ago I love the excellent PACING of this video. Those little breaths that give it all a moment to sink in. Thank you. Reply @3Space1time 4 years ago (edited) Your animations are sooo cool Your explaanations are also great thanks for electrons existence 5 Reply 3 replies @darkangel-gw4wk 4 years ago Wow, this absolutely blew my mind. The explanation of the probabilities and the amplitudes was one of the clearest and best I have ever seen. 1 Reply @Zywl 3 years ago what triggers particles to emit a photon? It just decides like "hey I feel like I want to emit a photon... why not?" 25 Reply 5 replies @Anonymous-m9f9j 3 years ago The narration on these is really good. Always the conclusion with the music is so fitting excellent job and strangely moving 2 Reply @knifetex 4 years ago Well done video, thanks! 3 Reply @vaedkamat484 3 years ago This finally goes into depth the charge of electron, positron, and quantum field. thank you!! 1 Reply @emigrek 4 years ago greatest channel in the world 3 Reply ScienceClic English · 1 reply @stefanblue660 1 year ago The best explanation I have seen so far. What a genius! 1 Reply @andreacosta2238 4 years ago This is beautiful, as always! 3 Reply ScienceClic English · 1 reply @aktuelPL 3 years ago (edited) Absolutly astonishing! I admire your talent of understanding so complex theories and producing so detailed and understandable animations noone else on YouTube could do that. 2 Reply @TeenyPort 4 years ago that moment when the music changes always makes me hyper focus 😂 3 Reply @rushofblood994 1 year ago These videos turn science into an art form. 2 Reply @firstnamelastname3468 4 years ago (edited) @ScienceClic Wow, thank you for explaining something so complex, so well, that it could be quickly and visually understood. I have just a BSME, and mechanical things seem intuitive,,, atomic/electrical/optic& quantum things previously seemed less intuitive, so this is great, with excellent, logical animations! I ask also: does the fact the Ben Franklin and others got the electron flow direction backwards and we keep that mistake currently(no pun intended), i.e. are forced to call charge negative (e-), [cause I know this complicates my understanding of diodes]... What I'm getting at is; that "negative", as when used for numberlines has the idea of debt or lack of something, whereas charge positive and charge negative are just two different real things, and electron flow(vs conventional flow) models for circuits seems to help the intuition to match the actual happenings,,, just curious if there is an alternate/better way to think about "charge" 4 Reply @austintaylor8664 3 years ago These are the best made explainer videos on YouTube I've ever watched. Amazing work. Reply @nightdiver6 4 years ago incredible 3 Reply @maybeanonymous6846 2 years ago The more I watch your videos the more I feel like science makes sense. Reply @meowwwww6350 4 years ago (edited) Feynman was a genius!!! 9 Reply @chineduecheruo8872 3 years ago (edited) I cannot thank you enough for this video. Youve told a very exciting story with mathematical precision. This video should be required watching for humanity. Thank you! Reply @pabloboswell 1 year ago Isn’t this just kicking the can down the road? Sure this says virtual particle interactions can predict observations in the lab. But it doesn’t explain why virtual particles exist. 3 Reply @stevemonkey6666 4 years ago Wow. The videos on this channel are shockingly good at explaining these concepts for a lay-audience. Please keep up the good work. 2 Reply ScienceClic English · 1 reply @timbroussard4305 1 year ago So Intuitively you can claim anything! 4 Reply 1 reply @Rationalific 3 years ago About a month ago, I watched this video for the first time. And I'm back. This video really opened up so much to me that I never knew. You illustrate this so well and bring up things that I haven't heard elsewhere, even though I've looked. Things like the nature of the actual fields, how all Feynman diagrams and their amplitudes are added up to come up with a final probability of the movement of electrons, anti-particles seeming to move backwards in time, and more...these were so eye-opening to me! Thank you again! Reply @canyadigit6274 4 years ago Is it possible that electrons would actually attract for a brief period of time, since there is a small chance of it happening? 3 Reply 2 replies @RomanShchekin 2 years ago Simply the best explanation, no one not even close as good as you in visual explanation! Reply @bennybooboobear3940 4 years ago I think I’ve struck gold. I know I have. 3 Reply @orbismworldbuilding8428 4 years ago These vids are so well put together and make perfect sense, also I love the way it's taught in these videos since the abstractions, math etc is spoken of not as the cause of the phenomenon but as a description of a real, physical thing. 1 Reply @xaviermillot2433 4 years ago My god where did this channel come from? 2 Reply @timothykirkpatrick485 3 years ago This is the best elementary explanation of quantum field theory I have ever heard. Kudos! Reply @jaysalbhatt2501 4 years ago “If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself.” ― Albert Einstein 3 Reply 2 replies @Sandshrew27 2 years ago I never thought I'd understand any quantum physics, but somehow you've done it. You've taught something about quantum physics that I've actually understood, after only like 3 hours of watching your videos. Absolutely amazing, I never thought I'd find physics cooler than chemistry but I do now. I've found a new special interest and her name is physics :) Reply @juchipratt 4 years ago The place in your QFT video where you described how electromagnetic repulsion represents the superposition of all possible interactions blew my mind. It's great to see you treat just that concept here in more detail. 1 Reply @brunoeugenio2809 6 months ago Thanks for taking me deep into the rabbit hole of how the behavior of fundamental particles in this case electrons and positrons can be explained through Quantum Electrodynamics! I'm beginning to get the sense of why in Hollywood movies physicists will have these long equations on the board! so at times they are just dealing with a few of the infinite probabilities, and coming up with highly approximate results. 1 Reply @sudharsanvanamali1514 4 years ago Really hatsoff. I have no word to say. I have seen ur general relativity mathematics video. Even as a 11th grader I was able to understand. I really appreciate ur work from the bottom of my heart sir. And for my entire life I won't forget this channel and still I owe u more than just a sub or like sir 1 Reply @tanvirfarhan5585 4 years ago underrated channel u deserve more 2 Reply @LoZiOcErCa 4 years ago These videos are insanely well made 2 Reply @CosmoConstant 3 years ago Wow this is an incredibly enlightening video. Of all the hours of videos I have seen in trying to understand the fabric of reality, this has been the most informative. Reply @solapowsj25 2 years ago The electron quantum particle in the electron orbital field and the photon quantum in the electromagnetic field. Very clear. The electron, positron and photon interaction vertex at the nuclear shell layer. Feynman diagrams. Thank you🌹. Reply @helmutalexanderrubiowilson6835 3 years ago (edited) you deserve more viewers and subscribers as a Physics hobbyst... this is gold. Reply @megablademe4930 1 year ago I am studying electrical engineering. I had a quantum physics class. Passed it with a pretty good grade. Understood almost all phenomena, aside from why two of the same charge repel from eacother. I just thought it was a given thing that we can’t prove. This video made me understand this very simple concept if a very beautiful way. Thank you. Reply @peterk3474 4 years ago You show that elegant, simple (yet complete) explanations can help clear up lifetimes of mass confusion. Reply @Golgot100 3 weeks ago Thanks so much for this. (I've seen Feynman diagrams so many times, it's great to finally be able to interpret them somewhat). Great vid :) Reply @ronitroy8333 2 years ago This channel is gift of god deserves more than 20 milion subscribers. 1 Reply @vivekpathak2632 3 years ago I am from India .I love your content so much and l respect all of guys . which sacrifice your time to make such content. Special thanks to you r friend who are doing PhD. 1 Reply @Gunth0r 3 years ago (edited) Thank you, oh great algorithm, for the great ScienceClic! I wish I was born with a brain more suited to the study of QM,QED,QCD,... (specifically, the maths to support it all) but you've helped me understand so much more than any other video on those topics. 1 Reply @mt841000 3 years ago this channel is brilliant! I wish this Video was there 6 years back! Reply @AVESTANARTHURAMINMoe 2 years ago Thanks for teaching me so much things about electrodynamics ! Now, I know quantum so much more Reply @zwonderfulz 4 years ago The way you present the theories is amazing. It helps me visualize those theories easier. I would love if you made a series of "Group theory" and its applications. 1 Reply @rainjurfox1230 3 years ago I like how he gives us time to think and we don't even notice it like there could very well be an hour break and I wouldn't have known. Reply @Loraine2030 1 year ago I just love these videos. The graphics are incredible and the ideas are conveyed in an unbelievably clear way! Even the music is lovely and fits in perfectly without distracting. I have a vague background in science and it's thrilling to see what they meant, LOL. Reply @FineArtLab1 4 years ago the best video i watched in 2021. thank u 2 Reply @titchglover2601 2 years ago It's great to have these videos that go deeper. Keep them coming thanks! Reply @motif123456 4 years ago Its a great time to be alive...with scienceclick,arvin ash,veritasium,eugene. 1 Reply @leonidyakubovich8515 4 years ago The quality of animations and content in these videos is a game changer! Looking forward to new work!! Reply @Kosmologi-Indonesia 4 years ago The best explanation ever for Feynman Diagram and QFT. Reply @MoshkitaTheCat 2 years ago Your videos are the height of my day. Thank you! Reply @WilliamDye-willdye 4 years ago I already knew much of this, but the animation alone makes it well worth watching. Bon travail! 1 Reply ScienceClic English · 1 reply @leooe9853 4 years ago (edited) Guys, your content is a treasure on Youtube. Keep it up, and you going to hit the million subs for sure. Reply @snaydenoff 3 years ago The best depiction of QED I’ve ever seen. Keep up the good work! Reply @imaseeker100 4 years ago The best illustration of QED I have seen. 1 Reply @narayanbandodker5482 2 months ago (edited) One teeny-tiny little mistake at 12:18: We are not actually "throwing" the electrons as they are initially stationary and moving through time, so we are actually throwing them into the future. They start at some distance apart but motionless, but over time they interact and move further apart. The diagram left to right is the dimension of time. Reply @juanluisclaure6485 4 years ago some very nice visual art, i am speachless. just wanna say Gracias por tanto. Saludos from Bolivia 1 Reply @ManasturNights 4 years ago Very inspiring way of presenting these concepts. One thing that would deserve more exploration is a description of the magnetic field (mentioned at the end) in QFT terms. That's because magnetic fields are a phenomenon that occurs around electric current, while quantum fields are not localized like that. So we're talking about related, but different, uses of the term. Reply @timurpryadilin8830 4 years ago this is undoubtedly the best physics channel on youtube! Reply 1 reply @danielsigursson6215 1 year ago Amazingly elegant explanation. Bravo. Reply @waynelast1685 2 years ago Loved this summary and approach. I have some additional questions now…. 1) Where does the probability for each diagram come from? 2) What are the relative magnitudes in the first few terms ( diagrams), and 3) What differences exist if any between electron charges and electric charge from say nucleons or quarks? Reply @rdnowlin1206 4 months ago I'm stating the obvious - Feynman was a genius. He created a way to understand QM without all the crazy MATH. Great Professors explain complex subjects in a simple manner. 1 Reply @soumavakundu5850 4 years ago Understanding virtual particle were awesome need a video on quasi particles like phonons 1 Reply @luudest 4 years ago (edited) 6:48 what is the underlying process that the exchange of a photon leads to the attraction of the electrons? 2 Reply 2 replies @pravinmahendran2004 4 years ago Wow !!! The way that the interaction between the electrons was explained is very intriguing!! Amazing work Reply @LaszloKorte 3 years ago one of the best explanations I have ever seen, ever Reply @webx135 1 month ago I love, in your QFT video, how you compare this superposition to the superposition of frequencies on a guitar string describing the guitar's final sound. It probably doesn't help much for people hopping into physics. But if you are familiar with any sort of frequency analysis, the "spectrum analyzer", or fourier/laplace/z transforms, this pretty much made all the pieces click together for me. Reply @NovaWarrior77 4 years ago I eagerly look forward to this video after my lab. 2 Reply @neo_tsz 4 years ago 14:55 This is so fascinating that it gives me goosebumps. Great video! Wonderful topic! 1 Reply @marishkagrayson 3 years ago The visualization of superposition is gorgeous! Reply @ricardoavilav.4651 3 years ago This is such a fantastic explanation of QED!!! Marvelous done! recommend to everyone Reply @benmcreynolds8581 2 years ago 🧲🌡️📡🔆☢️🔌🔊🔋♻️🌐☯️⚛️ I feel magnetism and electromagnetism play such a crucial aspect of the cosmos. It's really facinating how so many properties with-in Nature use: ~{"Differences"}~ That factor seems to be a key factor in keeping dynamic systems functioning. High pressure/low pressure, hot/cold temp, different densities, static electric charges/discharges, electromagnetism north/south poles, different velocity/angular momentum, different amounts of energy/mass/frequency/vibrations. The different layers between different regions such as, land, water, air, edge of atmosphere, space, the different regions in space with different particle density, background radiation, creating bubbles/membrane layers, cloud regions, nebula's/ Galaxy's, Galaxy clusters, less dense voids regions of space compared to dense regions of space. All of these things are basic differences but create a way for the dynamic engine with-in Nature to continue flowing and operating to create and convert energy. Just Like How a battery transfers + charges through a membrane layer to a - charged side. Like how regions of high/low pressure and temperature ️differences create winds. In water or a planets core- add some factors and It creates ocean currents and flow. Then internally in our planet it creates plate tectonics, planetary convection, geothermal activity, magnetic field around our planet, to hold a atmosphere. ️️️️️ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~{Hypothetical idea}~ What if our universe is 1 half of a sorta ying yang ️ universe where there's a membrane layer in-between 2 layers. Quantum fields could be entangled with that membrane layer. Which allows for quantum particles to pop in and out of existence and decay from that membrane with the other half. The 2nd half could be our universe but maybe be an anti-universe. Where anti-particles go? Where the anti-matter can create this balancing act with-in the system. (It doesn't mean there is multiple versions of ourselves and all that stuff when people talk about a multiverse. No, not that.) It just seems like a natural way to balance things out, yet also describe the fluctuations we see in quantum mechanics & the electromagnetic field, waves, vibrations, frequencies. I just had a random daydream thought and obviously I hope more professional people's minds end up diving into this sorta theoretical physics idea. I think Neil Turok had a similar theory. ️ ️️️️️ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I'm curious about Gravity. There is the Gravity layer we seem to know pretty well. (to a point) ~Now adjust our perspective; to observe the Massive scale of the Cosmos? Like Entire galaxies/nebula's/ & any other diversely complex objects. They definitely have all sorts of behaviors interacting with-in them. I'm sure those factors need to be improved with how we factor them in to get our calculations of this layer of the Cosmos more accurate. Grand scale gravity must be so difficult to get correctly, mathematically. (Because it must be so hard for us to even imagine what things that massive could be like?) Then we know there is quantum mechanics for the super small sub atomic micro gravity level. That's 3 hypothetical layers to gravity. The smaller layer, the normal layer. (Which relates to our solar system type scale) -Then there could be this 3rd layer: {The Massive Layer} (Maybe it just is "we don't fully understand how to accurately measure the correct values, then factor in the right equations, to get the actual correct outcomes?) Dealing with things that are light years across, vast temperature differences, vast mixture of density's, velocity's. Intense pressures, electro static charges, electromagnetism, plasma, gas clouds, black holes, pulsar, quasars, neutron star's, super Nova explosions, background radiation, solar winds, tons of interwoven orbital interactions and angular momentum velocities, multiple galaxies interacting upon other galaxies. Just so many things that probably all have to be accounted for when we are dealing with scales with such vastly massive intracity. So much complexity with that 3rd layer of gravity (hypothetically)? This is just a gut feeling, and I'm just doing a thought experiment and I'd love it if someone else wants to improve onto it. I'm all for that. ~~~~~~~~~~ Reply @muhammadhumzaashraf8110 4 years ago Extremely informative and the quality of animation is absolutely marvellous Looking for QCD and Collider Physics 1 Reply @BobStein 4 years ago (edited) Did you use color to represent unrelated phenomena? 2:50 electron phase 11:45 feynman diagram phase or amplitude or something 13:25 virtual photon energy or momentum or something Or are they related phenomena? Reply @anthonyoates7663 3 years ago Brilliant piece, I have been studying this for 5 years and this is the best, graphical explanation I have seen. It has also made clear some of the difficulties I was having with some aspects of QFT/QED... Feynman's excellent book, 'The Strange Theory of Light and Matter', goes a long way in explaining this material, but is a bit out-of-date now... What's more, you appear to know how to spell the abbreviation for MathematicS, i.e. mathS, not the awful 'math'... Dr. A 1 Reply @varunahlawat9013 2 years ago 6:37 this is the most counterintuitive line my ears have ever heard, and my eyes have ever seen! Reply @softmusic-HD 1 year ago The best youtube Chanel I have ever seen Reply @lilith2023-physics 1 month ago The animation is amazing, how beautiful Reply @Inspective_realist 3 years ago sciencecclic english is my favourite youtube channel Reply @randall3785 1 year ago I like this explanation. It’s similar to how I imagine an individual’s decision making process. Reply @tommysullivan 4 years ago Dude this is awesome so clear! Really great blend of concise clear explanation with visuals!! 1 Reply ScienceClic English · 1 reply @SidneyPontesFilho 4 years ago (edited) Hi! I watched your playlist "The Maths of General Relativity". It is amazing! I have a suggestion to a video related to that. It would be nice to show the general relativity math behind gravitational waves and collision of black holes. It would be great! 2 Reply @andreyassa7638 2 years ago Thanks for this great video and all the effort behind it! 1 Reply @dioelgo3436 2 years ago The animations are incredible, however, putting general ambiguities aside, all of the basic vertices shown are wrong. They violate conservation of momentum in the center of mass frame; they are kinematically impossible. 4:18 - 6:11 2 Reply @Plank8642 2 years ago This was truly an incredible video. I have recently been trying to understand electrodynamics at a much more fundamental and was afraid to get into quantum mechanics. The animations and visualizations your video provides completely nullified my fears and gave me a great start to understanding! You really did a great job at show how "like charges" repel...would you be able to creat a veideo visualizing and explaining how opposite charges attract with QED?? Thank you! 1 Reply @mdoerkse 3 years ago I think I understood about half of that. Which is a lot more than I usually understand about quantum physics! Reply @TristanCleveland 4 years ago I think this is the best physics channel online today. You explained three things in this video alone better than I have seen before. Those Feynman diagrams would make a good tshirt pattern. 2 Reply @ryanhutchins2634 2 years ago This presentation is outstanding, and the material is fascinating. Is it known: 1) how to determine the electronic structure of matter from its atomic/molecular/crystal structure, and 2) how to use QED to determine the optical properties of a bulk material from its electronic structure? If it is known, where might I find more information? Are there good textbooks or research journals? 2 Reply @elliottitommyngo2501 3 years ago I feel high-educated after watching this, thank you! Reply @tooflyable 4 years ago Great video, I didn’t want it to end Reply @gegurotgoku4419 2 years ago I want to add one really surprising thing going on here, by visualising these Electrodynamic Interactions and QFT, we can now start to wok on math with more intuitively rigorous and open mind. This video also raises more important questions than before but our understanding physics can only evolve by asking both right and wrong questions. Reply @jimmehdean012 6 months ago Great video, so well done! 1 Reply @HappyLittleDeco 4 years ago Wonderful video, thank you! I’d love to see one on quantum decoherence. 1 Reply @ProbablyTurtles 3 years ago Thank you for sharing such a great video. From what I understand, these models are used to explain observable and repeatable phenomena. I would love to learn more about the physical experiments that are used to justify these models. If the takeaway is simply that electrons move away from each other, I have difficulty appreciating the motivation for such complexity. Reply @GodzillaGoesGaga 4 years ago What a brilliant and crystal clear explanation. Reply @arnoldduran4953 3 years ago I did a "thought expierment" and realized that if the 3d cube represents the "world" the "straight" line that was shown with phase shift of "color" that was represented @ 3:15 makes essentially a wave pattern when drawn out. Basically if something is stationary, it going in a vertical axis but in a continuous cirlce will just look like its going up and down. But when you apply movement in a foward direction - the trace of point of phase will make a wave pattern. Reply @rolandsilver7742 2 years ago yeah this is awesome work! you make learning these concepts soooo much easier. Thank you mate! Reply @paolaschiaffini3931 3 years ago This channel is great! would love to see you explaining the Higgs Field/Higgs boson 1 Reply @mux000 3 years ago best channel ever 1 Reply @rainzhao2000 4 years ago (edited) I got chills form that ending Reply @Paul-ty1bv 4 years ago Genius video with remarkable visuals. Superb! 1 Reply @victorhakim1250 4 years ago Very informative, very intuitive, and very well animated. Thank you. Reply @maxsager139 3 years ago My favourite new channel. Reply @jakublizon6375 2 years ago Feynman diagrams seem so simple and obvious when you first encounter them. They also elegantly embed mathematics into them with the vertices, etc. 1 Reply @محمدالزريقات-ز1ه 4 years ago Thank you so much for this explanation, it's very useful and clear. 2 Reply @kamyar.g90 1 month ago Thanks for your awesome video. I searched for quantum chromodynamics in your videos but I couldn't find it. If possible, please make another good video about quantum chromodynamics (QCD). Reply @saradabanerjee574 4 years ago We wait for it's video through out week 2 Reply @sdsa007 2 years ago Excellent Visuals! Great! visual explanation of all the complex variation in QED... I came up with a 'merch' idea for what I saw: QED diagrams with phase-shift colored lines for t-Shirts and wallpaper! Cheers! Reply @MaskedMarble 3 years ago Great job! 1 Reply @botdamian5688 4 years ago After this video I started understanding Quantum computers and the way Superposition works :O This is so interesting :O 2 Reply 1 reply @b0bl00i 3 weeks ago (edited) Great explanation Reply @swamiaman7708 2 years ago Such a good channel .... so neat and clean .......thanks a lot .... Reply @Etobio 4 years ago I love this so much! You’ve such a great way of explaining things clearly through your speech, and visually through a clever combination of 2d and 3d examples. Great work! Reply @yashen12345 4 years ago wow i think i actually understand this now. Thank you so much please keep up the good work 2 Reply ScienceClic English · 1 reply @ThatCrazyKid0007 4 years ago Absolutely brilliant video mate. Hope to see more QFT videos as a series on this channel soon. 1 Reply @ian6083 2 years ago Thank you so much for making this video. It helped put a lot of things into perspective! Reply @Winkelknife 1 month ago Thank you so much for such great videos! Reply @nightlyowll 2 years ago Amazin illustration and explanation!! Reply @karlbjorn1831 4 years ago Really great animation and explanation Reply @muhammad.2 3 years ago 9:45 very smooth animations 2 Reply @Kaatamarii 3 years ago (edited) I feel like this would have been a good time to incorporate the double slit experiment too, just a thought. good stuff ! Reply @ubergeneral1947 3 years ago Your explanations are outstanding! Reply @Summersloth1482 5 months ago (edited) If a positron is an electron moving backwards in time, does that mean that your left hand is your right hand moving backwards in time? 3:33 1 Reply @nicoladube4175 2 years ago really interesting topic! cool to see the potential of feynman's legacy. food for toughts, it is frightening to consider this into predictive data analysis, with the help of Ai,supercomputer/quantum computer. if we have the capacity to gather and collect a precise enough database about particles in the visible universe or more locally, we can start to extrapolate and predict to some extent the future of astrophysics on a scale so small with so massive impact. it's terrifying how smart some people are and how complexe those things get. shout out to the channel for talking about the relativity of space and time for a given observer! Reply @danielkay5165 2 years ago To be more precise: only if the intitial and final set of particles and momenta are given can we say that nature follows all possible scenarios (between said states) simultaneously, and that the correct S matrix can be computed by adding up all S matrices corresponding to these alternative scenarios. 1 Reply @minhthinhhuynhle9103 4 years ago Decent videos, rather than trashes from other youtuber <3 1 Reply @realmetatron 4 years ago (edited) Lie Groups and the hidden geometries attached to every point in space (like a circle for EM) would be nice to see. Always had problems visualizing that. 2 Reply @chrisgardner4022 4 years ago cool job on the graphics also 2 Reply @MaxKoscisz 8 months ago (edited) Please make similar video about Chromodynamics, Weak Interactions and Higgs 1 Reply @douglas5260 4 years ago If we experiment many times can we observe electron's attracting each other in some results? 1 Reply @rupnikj 4 years ago Great work! Motivates me to learn more technical details on the subject. Reply @rainerwahnsinn3262 3 years ago My man Feynman... All those scientist starring at these crazy complicated formulas, and he just invents another branch of physics that calculates the results using high school physics for billiard ball trajectories using conservation of momentum. I couldn't imagine him leaving a better legacy! 1 Reply 1 reply @NuclearCraftMod 4 years ago (edited) Just look at 8:59 or 11:20 to see how Richard Feynman's diagrams turned QED into a subject that physics undergrads could study. Yes, that maths looks ridiculously complicated, and it is (partly because it's a complicated diagram), but imagine having to generate that mathematical expression from equations. Feynman's rules allow you to take a huge shortcut, by systematically drawing the diagrams and immediately determining what the formulae are. Of course, actually calculating them is often tricky whichever way you get them :P Reply @Valourrex 3 years ago I love this channel 1 Reply @Venched 4 years ago Amazing! Waiting for more! 1 Reply @chrisrothwell2440 1 year ago at 6m45s: '...particles can be exchanged along one direction even though they carry a momentum which is oriented differently... that way the exchange will bring the electrons closer'. I would really like to understand that statement better. How does a photon travelling in one direction carry momentum pointing in the opposite direction? 1 Reply @kashu7691 4 years ago This channel is so perfect Reply @ferp.2078 4 years ago Great vid! If there are more videos, I'll be sure to check them out soon. 1 Reply ScienceClic English · 1 reply @claudiahocking8475 2 years ago in reference to 6:15, If photons don't have mass, how can they change the momentum of electrons? 1 Reply ScienceClic English · 1 reply @simonestrizzolo5357 4 years ago This video is gold. Reply @pietervandermerwe6833 3 years ago That was a great video! 1 Reply @mosab643 3 years ago Your videos are full of keyframe magic. Please tell me you have a whole team working them. Reply @TheLocoUnion 2 years ago $1.99 Thanks! Reply @ahmetemin1721 3 years ago Thank you, it was a great video. But there is one thing that I'm not sure if i understand it correctly: Although the probability is low, there is a chance for 2 electrons to attract each other instead of repelling, right? 1 Reply @wendelsantana2190 4 years ago Excelente trabalho! Os vídeos são muito bons! 1 Reply @pendalink 3 years ago these videos get me so excited to get back to learning fundamental physics when i get free time away from physics work Reply @stevenschilizzi4104 2 years ago Brilliant as usual! Reply @pranayranjan3777 3 years ago Presentation as well as narration both are of no match across the entire platform Reply @g3452sgp 4 years ago This is great. All the more the video picture is so beautiful. Reply @MrNagaPhysics 4 years ago Why is the Feynman diagram in which electrons repel more likely than one in which they attract??? 2 Reply 6 replies @MariaGomes-jo4dl 2 years ago Thank you for the great video. It is magnific! Reply @Joeleo 4 years ago Great editing/narration; quality vid Reply @silentbullet2023 3 years ago Brilliant explanation 👏 Reply @StainlessHelena 3 years ago This is a great explanation! I was wondering why the electron interaction is more likely to produce apparent repulsion. My guess is that the closer the electrons get to each other, the quicker they can exchange photons. Photon exchange happens at the speed of light but not instantly. If the electrons happen to get further away from each other at one point, another photon exchange that could bring them closer again or repel them more would take more time to happen, allowing them to part ways a little more. Further interactions would take even longer, and in a sense become less likely. Reply @redpower6956 4 years ago Amazing channel ! Keep up the good work 1 Reply @TheFatherCharles 3 years ago I wish I knew what you were talking about but I thoroughly enjoyed this nonetheless Reply @taxpayer239 2 years ago Exellent video..good narration!!!!!!!!! Reply @nemurerumaboroshi 4 years ago Amazing stuff as usual. 1 Reply @paulcurry8383 3 years ago If the result of adding up the fienmann diagrams is a probability of seeing a result, doesn’t that violate the information paradox because upon seeing a result you couldn’t determine if the past system was more or less likely to produce it? 1 Reply @ludzkipan1650 2 years ago Great video 1 Reply @itsiwhatitsi 2 years ago If the Bosons W+ and W- are Vectors how they can have both charge (+ and -) ? If vectors are represented with real numbers with no phases? Reply @timhowell6929 3 years ago Great videos and explanations, but I have a question for the group. At the 3:08 point the narrator was talking about the electron “phases”. Can someone elaborate a little more on an electron phase? I’m not really following the meaning there. Thanks… Reply @islamicstuff133 3 years ago Thanks for amazing video, 👏 the way you explain give feeling that quantum physics easy 😀 😉. As non physics student, please allow me to ask below two questions: 1-Why one photon can create two patricals I.e an electron and anti-electron ? 2-while the conservation of charge is clear in the case creation of electron and anti- electron , how the mass is conserved ? The electron and the anti- electron have both masses however a photon does not have mass ( as far as I know please correct me if I am wrong) Reply 1 reply @willcollins9470 3 years ago another brilliant video! Reply @wytho3751 3 years ago 2:52 Does the rotational speed of the electron phase signify any particular property? Energy level? -> in which case would there be discreet "speeds" allowed? Reply @klebbonk4493 4 years ago amazing video 1 Reply @niekwielders8804 4 years ago The diagram of pair annihilation shoud produce 2 photons to conserve momentum right, so the diagram at 5:00 isn't possible? 2 Reply ScienceClic English · 5 replies @user-vg7zv5us5r 3 years ago (edited) 2:46 Does the changes in color effects both real and imaginary number of the particle it describes? Reply @iuhh 3 years ago So for the scenario posed at 00:17, when I sit down on the chair, it's entirely probable that light would shine out of my bottom? Reply @hugoguzman4985 4 years ago Where were you when this absolute madlad finally explained what electric charge is? I was on the toilet. 1 Reply 1 reply @gotbread2 4 years ago Awesome as usual. I would love some more explanation of the math behind it. For example the electron field. What exactly "is it" ? A field of 4 complex numbers? What do they represent? When trying to research that i quickly find something about spinors but afterwards the explanations become too theoretical to follow. A series "the mathematics of QED" would help a lot here. Also is the result of each feynman diagram a complex amplitude (which we can use to get all the probabilities) ? Is it possible to calculate a very simple diagram (like one electron without interaction going from one place to another) without 6 semesters of theoretical physics? The GR mathematics was very well understandable, but QED/QFT math feels so unapproachable 2 Reply 4 replies @LiuMicMac 2 years ago Very well explained video. Here my concern: The calculation needs millions of Feynman diagrams. By cherry picking few of the m you can always get as close you want to the experimental data. Does somebody consider the calculation of all diagrams? Does the calculation converge? Reply @executive 3 years ago so electrons are not disturbances in the same electric field that the photon perturbs? 1 Reply ScienceClic English · 2 replies @wobbblefoot 4 years ago Seeing videos like this for free feels like a crime to me 1 Reply @photelegy 3 years ago 8:04 Is this a "wrong" Feyman Diagram or is it possible, that at a moment there is electron/positron with no clear indication which one it is? Because there is a vertical line with a arrow upwords where I can't know if it's a positron or electron or even if it came from the upper or lower starting electron. 🤔 Reply @Littlekkat 3 years ago again, bright and exciting. Reply @judo-rob5197 4 years ago Nice video and illustrations. However, can you make a future video explaining the relationship between Feynman diagrams and the equations. Perhaps concentrate on a few simple ones. 2 Reply ScienceClic English · 2 replies @umamigo1 4 years ago Superb class! Reply @schoobydooby 4 years ago great video! 1 Reply @sunilgaur1 4 years ago Wow. This is a great explanation. Reply @MrKoval-nm9ky 4 years ago 12:45 so if it describes a probability, it means there is a chance to electons to be atracted to eachother? 1 Reply @pmiecz 4 years ago Great explanation! 1 Reply ScienceClic English · 1 reply @shiloheaston9839 3 years ago Very cool! Great channel! Reply @jimb4549 11 months ago Would you be willing to make a similar style of video for every single topic/concept in existence? This is one of the most intuitively accessible and beautiful descriptions of quantum field theory full stop. 1 Reply @kaushalgagan6723 4 years ago Great content keep it up 🔥🔥 1 Reply @ΜαρίαΤασούλα 3 years ago 2:01 what do you mean disturbances ? Reply @eric3813 4 years ago Damn, i really love this channel !!! 1 Reply @mgb495 4 years ago Wow. Well done. 1 Reply @benji376 4 years ago This is what confirmed my suspicion about photons⚡️ 1 Reply 1 reply @carlosgarcia3341 4 years ago Wonderful as usual. Reply @olliegrant5375 4 years ago why are there four rows in each matrix for light at 4:00 shouldn't there only be three because there are three spacial dimensions? Reply @rv706 2 years ago You should make a T-shirt with all those Feynman diagrams from QED at 7:50 Reply @ivanfedak4517 9 months ago Allways awsome videos❤ Reply @Pao234_ 3 years ago Fuck, i like these videos way too much. At this point you are gonna fix my life! 2 Reply @DmitryShevkoplyas 3 years ago Thank you! This is awesome! Reply @chinchi4293 3 years ago Super video! Reply @benjaminschnedler6841 4 years ago Do math behind Schödingers equation. love your videos 1 Reply @JMnyJohns 3 years ago Very helpful - can't thank you enough. Reply @lookatmypie6168 3 years ago Thank you for the great educational content! Reply @nickst2797 4 years ago I just discovered a new channel. Insta subscribed Reply @NovaWarrior77 4 years ago Question: the electromagnetic field here is shown made of vectors of four components. Are these the same as the 4 vectors that are used to keep the classical electromagnetic field consistent with special relativity? Do we not need to modify that classical 4 vector at all to account for quantum stuff? 1 Reply 1 reply @georgeindestructible 4 years ago (edited) 10:59 how can they all occur at the same time in the same position in space(and time?)? Reply 1 reply @hubert2340 4 years ago Alessandro Roussel. Hi is God. Only God could create such brilliant animations. 2 Reply @sandboxgamer1739 4 years ago thanks for such quality content Reply @BowieZ 2 years ago How do we know these so-called virtual particles (or waves) aren't just waves of information we can't accurately detect or see, but which are likely to proceed in certain patterns in certain directions over time? Reply @Villaboy78 4 years ago Would love to have something delve Into how/why the em field and the electron field are coupled together so one particle is so intimately affected by one of another type , virtually speaking 1 Reply ScienceClic English · 1 reply @LK-cq4qq 4 years ago You are the best !! 1 Reply @mehmetalivat 3 years ago 8:18 could you share this all diagrams pdf format or jpg format? Reply @themar.i.per3374 6 months ago 7:44 but doesnt an electron need to omit a photon to change its trajectory? 1 Reply @shouryashukla5817 5 months ago Doesn't this also allow for two electrons to attract each other at a very very low probability ? So is there any "observed" case where the electrons were attracted even for a moment ? Reply @lyuboslavilov 4 years ago Stunning explanation as always! I still have problems with that part " waves can be exchanged along one direction even they cary momentum in another". Is there classical analog of that? I am trying to make sense of that for the last 20 years in the context of "realism". 2 Reply 4 replies @salmanzafar86 4 years ago thank you sooooo much for content like this.......... Reply @antoinebrgt 4 years ago Great vid! 1 Reply ScienceClic English · 1 reply @vithalbhaipatel1013 3 years ago Well show. Good information. Well show. Reply @paris_mars 3 years ago Oh my god, this is amazing! Reply @miscellaniousnothing 4 years ago this is awesome! 1 Reply @ngocbao297 1 year ago Is that mean the spin of electron is the change of phase, and how different the color change of phase in the video compare to color in quark? Reply @hariprasadoo 2 years ago omg! what a animation!! Quantum Electrodynamics Reply @supreetsahu1964 4 years ago Can you share what music you used 0:44 onwards? Reply ScienceClic English · 2 replies @herrsan 2 years ago so do virtual particles actually exist or are they simply a suitable analogy in order to relatively precisely predict quantum objects? 1 Reply 2 replies @efraimcardona8452 4 years ago Wonderful, thank you very much 1 Reply @MRods47 3 years ago Great video. "To compute the outcome from superposition, the amplitudes have to be computed for every possible scenario" - is this the reason why quantum computing is difficult? how does it change classical computing?. I'm trying to link this to quantum computing but not sure if they relate, need answers. Reply 2 replies @yung_bobri 4 years ago What do you mean when you say that electric charge transcribes the change in phase as they move? Is charge a consequence of phase? Reply @DrDeuteron 4 years ago Remember that Julian Schwinger said Feynman diagrams are pedagogy, not physics. 1 Reply @_nikeee 3 years ago Would be awesome if you'd make a video about quantum chromodynamics! Reply @Levanos18 4 years ago I hope you guys realise how beautiful this video is. I thank you guys for existing and sharing your awesome knowledge and diagrams 1 Reply @VoidHalo 4 years ago (edited) I'm no expert in math, but I was under the impression that vectors are complex numbers in polar form as well, since they both have a magnitude and an angle,. Am I mistaken in thinking this? Or is there more to it than what I'm saying? I got the notion from a site that teaches electrical engineering called All About Circuits from their textbook section. It was explaining how phase and voltage (or current) in an AC signal relates to complex numbers and seemed to use complex numbers interchangeably with vectors. Or maybe I just misunderstood what I was reading since I usually read that sorta thing late at night when I'm tired. But I questioned this notion when trying to do calculations on the polar forms of complex numbers and then doing the same calculations on vectors using my TI calculator and having it come up with 2 different answers for each. Or how it would let me work out the dot or cross product of vectors, but not polar complex numbers. So I'm kind of confused about whether vectors and complex numbers are the same. Or if all vectors are complex numbers, but not all complex numbers are vectors. Or how that works. Obviously I need to read up on this some more. And revisit the section on All About Circuits' site about AC and complex numbers/vectors. Regardless, this was an amazing video and I'm glad I stumbled across it. You sir, have earned yourself a subscriber. Cheers. 1 Reply 10 replies @frun 2 years ago In general relativistic terms the precession of an electron is called Frame dragging. 1 Reply @arthurharris89 1 year ago So the electrons that are in the field together are they separated far enough where they don’t bump into each other or are they so close that they should be bumping into each other and the way they’re set up makes it so they just don’t? Reply @eulefranz944 4 years ago Wow! Well said 1 Reply @paulcooper8818 4 years ago Does interaction of the Feynman Diagram represent the total outcome of the interaction for all time or just a slice of time? If it is a slice of time how is that slice determined and when are enough slices calculated to say the interaction is solved/determined? Reply @NScott45 3 years ago there are several ways to get a sum of 7 from 2 integers: 1+6, 2+5, 3+4, 4+3, 5+2, 6+1 if I threw 2 six-sided dice and told you I got a total of 7; and you calculated the probability that I obtained that result, would that mean that the dice went through all possible combinations at the same time ? And if not, why do we treat quantum mechanics a different way ? It seems we confuse calculation of probabilities for the actual underlying phenomenon Reply @marcinkrzeszowiec1538 4 years ago (edited) I don't get one thing (ok, there are more things...but this one bothers me...), at the beginning it's noted that the electron and photon fields are of different nature. Separate things described by different type on values altogether. Why would they want to interact with each other? What does the electron field have to do with the photon field in the first place? Do the virtual photons in any way influence the actual photon field? I semi-get the idea that superimposing all the possible outcomes of interactions will lead to a viable prediction that we can calculate. That part is cool and well explained...I'm not sure I get why an interaction (disturbance) in the electron field, has anything to do with influencing a wave/disturbance in the photon field... I'm sure there is an answer. The video omits this and I think it would be a great addition. Great content overall ;) 1 Reply 1 reply @rustyfox81 7 months ago does a cooper pair of electrons have a Feynman diagram ? 1 Reply @Han-dn7ne 1 year ago so is this are actual cause of electromagnetic force? the exchange of momentums are the electromagnetic force? Reply @gwenturo9550 2 years ago (edited) "We are the cosmos, dreaming of itself." - Kate Siegel as Erin Greene, Midnight Mass 1 Reply @SedatKPunkt 3 years ago Just convinced & subscribed… Reply @muskanmaheshwari121 2 years ago Loveddddd it!!! Reply @p.kristofiak45 4 years ago Exceptional 1 Reply @giorgossrth9672 2 years ago Very helpful video for my studies. Can you make one for QCD too? Reply @choobv2 4 years ago Perfect music at a perfect level. Reply @mathnerd97 4 years ago 5:45 Someone explain something to me. Don't electon-positron pairs annihilate into a pair of photons, not a single photon? And doesn't it take a pair of photons to form a particle pair? Reply 1 reply @DanteKG. 4 years ago Still wanting that video on color charges and >1 spin particles :) Reply @Xalzia 4 years ago electrons and protons are just the same particle going in different directions in time? 1 Reply ScienceClic English · 2 replies @srki22 3 years ago Why is photon represented by a single number? What about the polarization of photon? 1 Reply @binderchannel9454 4 years ago would you please name the music of this video, it is so illusive and very well fits the topic. 1 Reply ScienceClic English · 2 replies @v44n7 4 years ago omg this is gonna be good! 2 Reply @jasonv2203 3 months ago Is it possible then these photons can be gamma ray photons as well?? Perhaps in high-energy situations like this may mean there could be many possible scenarios within SPACETIME itself to CHANGE IN STRUCTURE VIA inflation. Reply @gkillmaster 2 years ago Thank you for this! Is there a way to find the large chart of possible interactions around 8:15? We are looking for these symbols for engraving. Reply 2 replies @manu_221b 4 years ago Fantastic! 👌 Reply @onlyguitar1001 1 year ago Can we neglect most of the more complicated scenarios because they are less likely or because most have a similar, destructively interfering scenario? Reply @matiisalvo7846 3 years ago Now a better challenge, quantum chromodynamics!!! I want to know how to reconcile the fact that the gluons have spin 1 (so said here, a field formed by vectors), and the fact that they also have charge, which is said here is "generated" by the rotation of complex numbers. Reply @ThomasHaberkorn 4 years ago what triggers electrons to interact at all? for example: do they have to be close to each other ? Reply @orbismworldbuilding8428 4 years ago This is beautiful 1 Reply @david203 4 years ago This theory and calculation method is ingenious. I never learned this in my physics courses. In a way, it is the ultimate codification of the Copenhagen Interpretation, which placed probability at the heart of particle behavior. But I can't help wondering at the complexity of using virtual particles to mediate forces between two electrons. Surely Occam's Razor should apply. So, my question would be this: why not use David Bohm's insight that the movement of fundamental particles obeys an apparently fictitious force described by the wave function for the experiment? If the goal is describing the apparent force between two electrons, or to investigate an electron's spin precession, why not simply apply the wave function, which not only describes the two electrons, but also the all-important boundary conditions set by the experimental configuration, which in this video is ignored? Interpreting the wave function as a deterministic force instead of a probability field simplifies quantum mechanics and makes it much more compatible in the tradeoff region with classical physics, removing the mysteries at the heart of the Copenhagen Interpretation. Reply @ian731 4 years ago If possible put more math was amazing the mathematical explanation of the diagrams 1 Reply @snazzymcnazmy 2 years ago I really wish this was around when I was in high school, I probably would have been more into math Reply @drelper 2 years ago very good video Reply @aljawisa 2 years ago (edited) How do you at low (hopefully) energy levels begin to alter the unusual behavior of electrons, and make that behavior more predictable, and what could you achieve by more refined control of that behavior, as applied to our practicle world? Reply 1 reply @rdramser 3 years ago I want that catalog of diagrams on a poster. Merch idea? 1 Reply @AA-gl1dr 4 years ago exceptional 1 Reply @edenb329 2 years ago yes yes, you're getting it! Reply @dirkschwann 3 years ago Prizeworthy. Thank YOUUU ! Was it that difficult to explain the quantum computer backround ?Understandable ? Reply @uvofsam 4 years ago We want a qna video of you 2 Reply @futurisold 3 years ago Maybe as a follow-up to this video, you'll consider animating the g-2 experiments and their implications. 1 Reply @roner61 4 years ago Excelent video. Reply @aniksamiurrahman6365 4 years ago (edited) But without any other influence, why ud a photon or an electron travel in such 7:28, 7:40 tightly curved path? Reply 1 reply @honkhonk8009 9 months ago Im clueless about physics, but I thought photons were just oscillations in the electromagnetic field? How does that relate to the photon field? Why even give photons a separate field if my first statement was correct? Is it a mathematical convenience? Reply @codyw518 4 years ago Will you do a video on amplituhedrons? 1 Reply @philipkim3667 2 years ago Why does the color phase change at all? And what causes the opposite phase change between electron and positron? Reply @po3-doc159 3 years ago Great Vid! Reply @javadyeganeh4001 4 years ago thank you for your video. what's its music name ? 1 Reply ScienceClic English · 2 replies @Pavan_Gaonkar 2 years ago 10:54 you said that every scenario is possible but if that is that case then every single case should have a counter case so they must cancel out right? for example you said that in some cases electrons attract, and repel in some cases, then both of these cases should cancel out right? Reply 2 replies @BarelyScience 4 years ago It seems fitting that the fields are real because the energy in particles remains constant; one can consider all particles derived from the same energy source. Virtual particles support the idea well. I wonder if there is a way to incorporate time (even space?) into the particles themselves so as to get rid of the 'space/time' graph. This might rectify gravity and such because the slowing of time and bending of space can be part of the particles. If a universe with a single electron emits a photon, does it also absorb the photon? Reply @supermoochgaming4934 3 months ago Have less likely outcomes actually been observed? Reply @Bizija123 3 years ago Incredibly complicated. Wow. The one thing I don't understand is how does Schrödinger/Heisenberg stuff come into play here (wavefunction) or is this a separate theory? Reply @iagonicolasulacco7358 4 years ago Very good job!! But I don't get something, so electrons don't repel each other? and if that is a probabilistic instance, why all nature seems to work with electrons repeling each other because of their equal charge?, I mean, within the infinite interacctions among them, why don't we observe electrons attracting each other? or we do? Reply @user-ve3cj3hm4t 2 years ago Brilliant! Reply @Serotonindude 4 years ago so would it be possible to observe two electrons which have been put next to each other CLOSER after some time as to some possible scenarios in rare occasions or are those just mathematical intermediates and we will always observe the sum of all possibilities and therefor always electrons which are farther apart after some time? Reply @idegteke 1 year ago Even though this definitely has a lot of truth in it, a few adjustment could straighten the theory out significantly while making it more compatible with all other valid theories. Reply @cinereus3601 11 months ago Thank you sir Reply @danielash1704 4 years ago The thing that gets me is that a plane that has a charged wing span has a lesser friction than a wing that is ordinary. The draw back is the charging of a wing takes more power on the system and radios and communications are affected. Reply @lluisteixido 4 years ago What about the electormagnetic interaction between protons (or quarks) and electrons? Does QED study those? Reply 1 reply @EnchantedGardenGnome 1 year ago Hey! I'm looking to understand what's the relationship between magnetism and particles. Does anyone understand? For example in quantum computing, does the direction of the qbit have anything to do with magnetism? And why is the electron responding to a magnetic field? I know MRI's use magnets and the particles in hydrogen all orient the same way. But is it because the particles have a magnetic field? Reply 1 reply @maultwo 2 years ago How is conjuring up "virtual" particles to make these equations work accepted as a solution? 1 Reply @marikselazemaj3428 4 years ago You are amazing ❤️ Reply @SubEthaEngineer 4 years ago excellent 1 Reply @amirrezatanevardi3542 3 years ago what does the size of the complex number describing electron represent ? its mass? Reply @austin-multicellular 3 years ago why do different charges attract then? 1 Reply @flexmode17 3 years ago Me watching this, sitting back and realizing... we are living in a magical ass place! Reply @salem_ahmad1680 2 years ago (edited) Can any on recommend a book help me to understand quantum physics Reply @TheLocoUnion 2 years ago I just subscribed! Reply @lucaug10 4 years ago I love the animations! How do you create the QED simulations, is there any code we can check? Thanks! :) 1 Reply ScienceClic English · 3 replies @mynameisgleeriplaypiano4620 2 years ago this also applied to other particles too right? not just electron, such as quarks etc(?) Reply @bobnavonvictorsteyn9017 4 years ago What’s the music called? 1 Reply ScienceClic English · 1 reply @ovencake523 4 years ago and then there's a different macroscopic explanation that explains electromagnetism as a result of special relativity... are both models compatible 2 Reply ScienceClic English · 4 replies @user-vn9ld2ce1s 3 years ago This channel is so underrated, you should stand side by side with 3blue1brown sunscriber-wise, great videos 1 Reply @tomcat1112k 4 years ago I want to make similar animations like you too. what software or language did you use? 1 Reply ScienceClic English · 2 replies @tanmaydeshmukh3517 4 years ago Please tell which animation application you use Reply @johnnycash4034 3 years ago Language/communication is the only barrier to human evolution. Changing the language to Feynman diagrams, changes one's perception of the field of this science. Reply @anywallsocket 4 years ago Perhaps ironically, given the phase ticking of the electron, and the lackthereof for the photon, it'd be more intuitive to draw the charged particles as wiggly lines, and the photons as straight lines. 1 Reply @fghgffgvbgh 1 year ago So is there a small probability that two electrons attract each other, if that's the case what will happen if they touch each other , will they repel then? Reply @sobreaver 4 years ago Yet, the importance of intuition in being able to connect what is not yet understood is vital to 'progress', it is the link between language and essence. Reply @sedevacantist1 3 years ago @ 2:18 the narrator states particles appear and disappear, but isn't that a little misleading. These particles are produced by collisions or absorption, they do not appear singularly out of a theorized quantum field without an interaction of matter. Isn't this omission the Lawrence Krauss universe from nothing embarrassment repackaged. . Reply @Overtime123 4 years ago (edited) Can you elaborate on how an exchange of photons between say an electron and a positron results in attraction? I’ve never understood that despite having a degree in physics Reply 2 replies @yuvalbechar5429 4 years ago You said un the video that the electric charge is the mathematical phase of the spinor. dies it mean that spin and charge must go together are they caused by the same reason or im confusing stuff together Reply 1 reply @alwaysdisputin9930 4 years ago brilliant. TY Reply @majidifrahim6583 4 months ago lot of love ❤ for you Reply @Eridanus_13 2 years ago All the outcomes of all the equations seem to be at the same time altogether indicates that we're in a simulation but if we could see their functionalities isolated or forming some distinct patterns in near future then, we're living a reality! We just lack the ability or senses to see their possible pathways as of now lol😅😅 Reply @marcoponts8942 3 years ago What do you use to create the animations? Reply @ИНФОДЭНАС 3 years ago hello! very cool animation , how you Do all of kind of works when you using layers with dots!! Please answer me! I need to now which programm of animation you use Reply @paulsaulpaul 1 month ago I'm trying to use some four-wave mixing with low frequency EM waves on a human brain in a way like RFID backscatter modulation to get some sort of hologram of the electrical activity of the brain returned on the phase conjugate wave. Like some kind of remote MRI so that I can use some AI to analyze the signal patterns over time and get a mind reading device. Then we need to do the math to make it work with an arbitrary arrangement of beamforming phased array antennas. Hopefully we can use the existing 5G frequency bands and equipment. I need help with this. If anyone knows how to do this, please respond. I saw a Feynman diagram for this process at a Holiday Inn Express last week, and I thought it would be cool to build. Reply @dimension2788 1 year ago Since positrons travel backwards in time isn't it possible to predict the future? Reply @marias2636 3 years ago Beautiful ¡ 1 Reply @aixpress7665 4 years ago Mind blowing 1 Reply @thinkmachine_ 4 years ago (edited) What software do you use to make these videos? 2 Reply @jaker721 3 years ago amazing 1 Reply @keshavbhanu5788 4 years ago Best visualization ever Reply @FLASH24x 3 years ago I can't thank you enough! Reply @TheLooking4sunset 1 year ago A profound video! Reply @PaulMcWheels 9 months ago All possibilities yet all in only one direction, forward , frame to frame. Reply @niloy5673 4 years ago Sir please more on quantum mechanics..... Reply @mustafashaban7193 4 years ago Please consider adding Arabic subtitles or even Arabic narration Your content is powerful and beautiful Reply @richlv422 3 years ago Can you use this for medical 1 Reply @Alphadestrious 4 years ago My mind is fucking BLOWN WHAT THE FUCK! Brilliant. Wow. Unbelievable 1 Reply @lukemarcic2688 3 years ago Song? 1 Reply @grumpy_8186 3 years ago I probably missed something. From what i'm getting to predict probability ? it can be infinite. So any answer is correct ? Dosn't make sense too me. I would love to sit down and talk to someone about this. Reply @gigajet3390 3 years ago Baby: I- I Mother: Aww, he’s about to say his first words Baby: is this a geometry dash reference??!! Reply @Hkj2000 3 years ago I took screenshots of the colourful Feynman diagrams and applied it as wallpaper. Reply @stevenanderson236 3 years ago Wonderful Reply @ian731 4 years ago Show feynman rules step by step so that everyone can create their expression for each diagram 1 Reply @idjles 4 years ago Feynmann diagrams brought me to tears in 4th year theoretical physics. I loved Schrödinger, but never got Feynmann. I hope you can help me here! The concept of virtual particles sounded so wrong to me, my brain couldn't accept it. Reply 2 replies @niloy5673 4 years ago If you do a vdo on double slit experiment..... It would be best sir... Please Reply @TheRambo010 4 years ago hol up, if photons can carry momentum with opposite direction to the travel direction, does this mean that tractor beams could be a thing? 1 Reply @shaantanukulkarni5668 2 years ago amazing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Reply @dosomething3 2 years ago 12:23 “throw” but they are stationary in space 😮 Reply @Heaven42-l4s 3 years ago (edited) That tells me there's no one way. Right way ,One Shoe fits all scenario ,Don't you think ?I love it when this guy is Right ,tell them we don't just live in one universe but 3 There one in the Middle ,noone live in , a universe just the same! 1 Reply @MinYangLeong 1 year ago Great video! Btw, how do you do these animations? Reply @Mouse-qm8wn 1 year ago What is the definition of an “Electron phase” ? Reply @tmo314 2 years ago I enjoyed the visuals in this, but a lot more rational explanation is needed -- that's coming from someone who learns very well with abstract visuals... For example, it would be great if you emphasized that the diagrams depict positrons behaving AS electrons moving backwards through time; the positrons themselves are not moving backwards in time despite being labeled as such. A lot of the visuals in this are exciting but the lack of clarity makes it moot. Reply @erichodge567 3 years ago While watching this video, for best results keep repeating to yourself, "this is real...this is real..." Better than LSD. I swear it. Reply @dosomething3 2 years ago 6:50 the two electrons are attracted to each other? 😮 Reply @aditya1010100 4 years ago Nice, 😀😀 Reply @flamurbedrolli802 3 years ago I do not understand ,why dont you do some videos for Calculus , as I find your videos in other subjects very interesting . Reply @meet_gondaliya 3 years ago Please make a video on Quantum Chromodynamics.... Reply @pectenmaximus231 4 years ago (edited) Can someone elaborate? If there are infinitely many cases and we take a kind of average, then won’t the result be the same every time? Under what conditions do we experimentally see that the probabilities for the outcome of the electrons is meaningfully different? Does the outcome depend on the starting conditions, and are those conditions captured by the complex numbers we use to represent the properties? Also, in the beginning of the video, it was said that Feynman diagrams are highly accurate - but what does the error quantity relate to? Reply 1 reply @coledavidson5630 1 year ago Do virtual particles have energy? 1 Reply @VvVv-x2u 1 year ago Im having a doubt ig its silly That is,, photons are very speedy particles as from its perspective the time should be very very slow as it is having speed of light ,but form our perception the travelling of photons taking very very small time so the dimensions are changing as per the perception??😅 Reply @andygyakobo7122 4 years ago This is beauty Reply @Djake3tooth 4 years ago I kinda still get confused by the loops... why did you draw them like they both change direction in a mirrored way to form a circle-like path? Reply @clairelesaffre249 2 years ago (edited) Does this mean that our reality is like a book with many pages on each there is a feynman diagram and to "find" reality we should read the book and understand it's overall meaning? (but in reading a book, finding an general meaning is a bit useless, what's important is finding OUR meaning. If reality is a book with many pages, should we find the ones that resonate with us the most? And accept that there is no "overall meaning"?) I mean : Those diagrams are symbols like letters and numbers, they superpose like pages of a book. Reply @uvofsam 4 years ago The Physics teachers in my university do teach and we get to know the rigourios mathematics behind all these but i miss this kind of explanations there. Looks like i need to "shut up and calculate".... 2 Reply @crystalearth33 10 months ago What do you mean, backwards in time? Reply 1 reply @-be-blank- 3 years ago (edited) 10:19 mind blown 1 Reply @charlesbenca5357 4 years ago The english translations are great 1 Reply @onbuttonup8200 4 years ago (edited) This video indicates that electrons are spinors and photons are vectors. How does the idea of polarized light fit into such a picture ?? 2 Reply 1 reply @Zmunk19 4 years ago how do we know those virtual particles are in fact the same thing as photons? Reply @radekg1095 2 years ago A very educative video, but when you talk about the quantum field theory, you firstly say it divides into the electric field and the electromagnetic field, and afterwards when you get to explaining the second field you say it's the photon field. I'm not sure if this is wrong since my understanding of this subject is still somewhat lacking but i would like to point it out Reply 1 reply @tootalldan5702 4 years ago I'm confused in the fact the electron shell step wasn't mentioned for charge change of the electron. If the state of the electron returns back, hence giving up the energy as a photon, the photon frequency is always the same (observed by the color emitted). Overall the video was good. I would like a video on proton and Nafion (proton exchange). Reply @arbaazm1409 3 years ago Can you please make a vedio on how to visualize 4th dimension or make a vedio on Higher Dimension? Please!!! Reply @robertohvargas 3 years ago Pinche Feynman, se mamo.! La neta bien merecido el nobel. La idea le vino al instante mientras su maestro explicaba en clase... cuenta la historia que lo tomaron de loco. Ironicamente las leyes de la fisica parecen sacadas de una historia escrita por un loco. 😄😄.. Verdaderas, sea que algo o alguien les encuentre un sentido (o proposito) o no... Reply @antoniovieira8994 4 years ago ei mister instagram good video YEAH! 1 Reply @BrentLeVasseur 3 years ago As much as I love Richard Feynman…. Nikola Tesla, Steinmetz, Heaviside, and Maxwell were right about the fact that particles don’t exist. Electrons don’t exist. All that exists is the Aether or what we call the Zero Point Energy Field today. Everything is an aether field torsion. The electromagnetic field and the dielectric field are the same thing, two parts of a single whole, the Aether. An electron or a photon doesn’t exist. All that exists are corpuscles of Aether which vibrate and oscillate between the dialectic and magnetic of the Aether field. Reply @geertdejonge4194 1 month ago @14.54 The the Riemann Zeta function somehow seems to know about the electron and its magnetic moment as Feynman diagram computations of QFT give rise to expressions involving special values of L-functions, and more general periods.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OxVsVUesSc 1 Reply @jakublizon6375 2 years ago I always think of quantum fields as like this network. Electrons and quarks are connected to the photon field, so you can't do anything with one field without affecting the others. Reply 1 reply @trangep7540 3 years ago This video makes the LHC seem like a 3D printer for reality. Like they're possibly going to learn the layers needed for specific outcomes. A new periodic table of sorts where (such and such layers equals this moment in time). But on a nearly infinite scale which quantum computing is needed to decode. Reply @OllytheOzzy 3 years ago Brilliant Reply @burieddreamer 3 years ago Do I emit photons when I sit down? Reply @akivanov554 4 years ago It's still unclear for me what is the rule that makes an electron to emit a photon at a certain moment? is it also some random event that have a probability? p.s. great content :) thank you. Reply 1 reply @timetoerist1313 3 years ago Idk why i watch these video’s, im 17 and don’t understand nearly enough about quantum mechanics to need to watch this Reply @quocthai5529 1 year ago So is there a chance that 2 electron attract each other??? Reply @eastindiaV 4 months ago Maintenance of a vibration between 2 points in space/time Reply @chreinisch 4 years ago thx guys for that :-) Reply @Aloocurt 4 years ago Wow 1 Reply @mjfk872 11 months ago So let's say electrons are emitting elecromagnetic waves all the time while spinning at a random initial phase, then you break the waves into photons, when you add them up you are basically superimposing the waves. The only reason Feynman integral works is because it is Fresnel's integral in disguise. Reply @zakirhussain-js9ku 1 year ago According to Quantum Particles Theory(QPT) Matter, Energy & Space are made of infinitely small submicroscopic quantum particles. When free they make up Space & Fields, when assembled the are particles of matter like electrons. Free quantum particles & fields behave like waves. When in motion quantum particles carry force, energy & momentum. When electrons get closer their electric fields interfere constructively. This increases quantum particles density b/w the electrons which induces a repelling force. Whe electron & proton get closer their fields interfere destructively. This reduces quantum particle density b/w electron & proton which induces an attractive force. Forces & motions result from imbalance in quantum particle density. Reply @savera6750 4 years ago Would you kindly explain quantum and quantum number Reply @ianalen1687 2 years ago (edited) 14:35 but why did not he explain what is a magnetic field first Reply @lalilopez6899 4 years ago No entendí nada pero excelente vídeo 😀👍👍 1 Reply @augustlandmesser1520 10 months ago Now I understand Hawking radiation also. Reply @ΠΡΟΔΡΟΜΟΣΠΑΠΑΔΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ-ζ9ρ 4 years ago Thanks. Reply @pigsnotts 3 years ago But how do electrons just emit and/or absorb photons? and were do neutrinos come in?? Reply 2 replies @sine_187 4 years ago wait, I'm not quite sure if I got that right So basically, the reason why electrons are spinning is because of all the mathematical possibilities of photon transaction that an electron and a positron could have, right? but how is it possible for an electron/positron to emit a photon without quantum jumping? because in the video he doesn't solely talk about the electron's interaction within an atom, does he? Please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm a bit confused. Reply @feynstein1004 4 years ago Wow 😍 1 Reply @Killer_Kovacs 1 year ago (edited) They can't prove a theory of everything until the consolidate the fields. The lines act like troths that particals move through together and interactions change their expression; like the contents of a vehicle when it hits a speed bump.. 1 Reply 1 reply @dbzeensun5527 3 years ago This is the real structure of reality. Infinitely complex Reply @davemacaroni7024 2 years ago Could Feynman diagrams be thought of as logic gates of a computer? Reply 1 reply @Cthulhu897 3 years ago as other said the content is super well explained and the animations are on point!, what software was used? i would really like to learn to use it Reply @bawadevau 1 year ago Thanks Reply @ruparkyitin 2 years ago One particle electron born and in the mid of lifetime, it supplies some energy to form a new particle in its mid period. And the new particle is born . then, the old particle decsys completely.. The new particle grows and it gives off a new tiny particle (Photon) at the mid period of its lifetime again. The new particle arises from Photon like very small particle that is given off from the old particle. ......... That is the cycle of all fundamental particles in Universe. Reply @likaspokas5481 4 years ago I still don't understand why electron fields are more likely to repel each other. What makes most of possible interactions cancel each other while leaving the interactions that have repulsion patterns? Reply @visionkrypto6760 2 years ago If the photon doesn´t have an electric charge because its a vector boson, then why does the W-Boson have an electric charge, even though it is a vector boson too? Reply @MichelleHell 3 years ago If you're wondering what the point of all this is, it is to do DFT, to make predictions for novel chemistry. Reply @SoniaJackson-dp3jv 11 months ago Mirror effect? 1 Reply @jarikosonen4079 3 years ago (edited) Electromagnetic field = photon field ? Let's say there is static electric field between capacitor plates. How is it modeled in this QED? There would be fluctuations at light speed in the photon field between the plates? The electric field as in Maxwell's equations is kind if average of the fluctuations, but still very stable. Let assume field average is 1MV/m then what is the standard deviation caused by the quantum fluctuations? Could that approach to zero? Maybe the the quantum field is cause for noise in some geometries? In my experience Maxwell's equations are quite dumb in handling noise. To make it meaningful it should be converted into databases...? Reply 1 reply @vivekpathak2632 3 years ago Special thanks to octave Thomas and lyla 1 Reply @oUncEblUnt420 4 years ago I almost feel like I'm stealing for watching this for free 1 Reply @shuaishuai2009 2 weeks ago I think the diagram make no contribute for the result. Two ball in boolan motion will convergence to helf length of distance of its volume. Your think two electron incline separate because they are two close. If they are too far.they will incline close to each other Reply @rodneypantony3551 3 years ago Complexity seems like a half formed science. However I'd guess that the mathematics of quantum mechanics and QED would be the same as complexity at any scale. "Darwin's Black Box" covers complexity at the biological scale. The biological scale might encompass viruses. Query whether computational biologists, like Dr Rommie E Amaro apply the above math? Reply @prithwiraj1462 2 years ago Which Books are followed for this Vidio? Reply @SpotterVideo 3 years ago Does the following quantum model agree with the Spinor Theory of Roger Penrose? Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: "A theory that you can't explain to a bartender is probably no damn good." Ernest Rutherford When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. (More spatial curvature). What if gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks. (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are actually a part of the quarks. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Force" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" make sense based on this concept. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons. Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension? Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons . Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process. Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. ………………………………………………………………………………….. Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms. Reply @DRKcompany 3 years ago This is Fucking Brilliant Reply @jannis11 4 years ago nice Reply @TURNKEYiNK 4 years ago (edited) I’ve got $50 that says the constellation of Orion, is really a Feynman diagram 🍺😎👍🏻 Reply @pausole-vilaro945 3 years ago You gota love physics Reply @rangelmagalhaes9792 4 years ago 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 1 Reply @Qwerty8 4 years ago ❤️❤️❤️ Reply @Heaven42-l4s 3 years ago (edited) Nobody's talking about once these things are paired can they be separated ? I think Not, Good job forever. Hahaha Working on my Mad scientist , 1 Reply @AshitBaranKanjilal 2 years ago Why didn't I get to learn Physics like this? Reply @KryogenKeeper 4 years ago I don't know the math, so this may be obtuse. It sounds like the math mandates the "existence" of virtual particles. Could this disturbance actually be something similar to the ever-so-slight fluctuations of the zero-state exhibiting a sort of "wake"? Perhaps causality? Perhaps entanglement? Pick a theory, any theory! =) Thank you! Reply @DrewishAF 3 years ago The problem I have with the whole "virtual particle" concept is that it amounts to use trying to determine what, specifically and in an unverifiable manner, happened in the course of an interaction between two particles. I don't actually have an issue with describing an interaction which we cannot verify, it's the gap in the middle where people tend to assign purpose and intent with their pseudoscience (such as saying a particular interaction was caused by "intentional influence" or something stupid that grants unwarranted power to some mystical force). In fact, I think this is where most of the bullshit problems arise when we start to describe the concept of "virtual particles." Hell, most of what we try to describe in quantum physics comes from words (with which we are already familiar) that we use in our everyday lives. We say "virtual particle" but what we actually mean is a disturbance in a particular array of quantum fields which carries the same momentum as "X" particle without the apparent cause of anything we can currently identify. Using the world "particle" like this has a connotation of an actual, discreet point which confuses most laymen. If you describe Hawking radiation as "a pair of virtual particle springing into existence where one of the two particles gets sucked into the black hole while the other flies away" then people hear "there are little random physical bubbles that constantly blip into existence but sometimes one flies away at the edge of a black hole" and that makes NO sense at all. The way I understood many of these concepts was by either: completely isolating my understanding of the fundamental quantum objects with words that don't currently mean anything OR to change the specific terms we use now that we have a much better understanding of what (we believe) is happening. Maybe this will help someone. Quantum fields don't hold zero values they are like the surface of an ocean with random increases and decreases in values which are always changing, regardless of what the values represent. Like the rippling waves on the surface of the ocean, an area may appear to be flat (zero) but that is caused by the random fluctuations interacting and temporarily cancelling out while the constituent waves move. Even though these spots may SEEM to be zero values, they each store some unknown potential energy which is simply in the process of converting into/from kinetic energy. The "positive" parts of these waves are what we call "matter" while the "negative" parts are the "antimatter." You cannot have only a positive or negative part of the wave as any wave MUST include both of them due to the nature of how waves function. As these waves randomly move around and interact, positive points and negative points randomly emerge which borrow kinetic energy from both other points around them as well as the potential energy stored within them. Near a "black hole" (which is really just a giant vortex seated in the environment), one of these wave parts can be absorbed by the vortex where it's energy is absorbed by the vortex but the energy which isn't absorbed (the part of the wave moving away) escapes. Because the vortex absorbs part of this wave, the vortex also loses a nearly imperceptible amount of energy. This, in turn, contributes to the vortex slowly evaporating over time. I know that this visualization doesn't completely encompass the massive complexity of Hawking radiation or quantum mechanics, I just find that more people are able to follow along a bit more easily than some of the esoteric explanations that quantum physicists try to give. Reply @shreyasrd2034 4 years ago Dude you are the fucking best ...... 1 Reply @rangelmagalhaes9792 3 years ago 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 Reply @osotanuki3359 4 years ago wait, if a positron and electron annihilate, they make a spatially stationary photon? isn't that illegal in some way? Reply 1 reply @siquod 3 years ago I think the following claims are wrong: "If the phase of the electron field changes in the other direction with time, it describes a positron" and "The photon field does not have a phase and therefore no charge". As I understand it, everything in quantum mechanics has a phase, and everything with positive energy has a phase that rotates in the same direction as time passes, as described by the Schrödinger equation. The charge comes from how that phase additionally transforms under the U(1) gauge transformations of electromagnetism: Photons don't transform, the matter components of the electron field transform in one direction and the antimatter components in the other direction. Reply @kingdomofsaqulu7623 3 years ago QFT is a beauty. Reply @drbonesshow1 2 years ago To draw all possible Feynman diagrams you would require an infinite amount of ink or crayons. Reply @simonhanson5990 3 years ago Wow! Reply @danielash1704 4 years ago Dielectric energy will be used in the following phase of aircraft development that won't use electricity for the next generation air crafts. Reply @marisanya 3 years ago Feynman Diagrams remind me of Organic Chem a little, honest Reply @gegurotgoku4419 2 years ago sry for being lame but I don't understand that how are all possibilities of interactions can be taken into consideration given that we can only get a single outcome, can we say that this implies possibility of multiverse or infinite universes Reply 1 reply @physikokonomie7511 3 years ago (edited) I like your Videos on the different subjects very much. Nonetheless I'm not quite satisfied with some remarks made in this one. Mainly the use of the term 'superposition' for the power series of Feynman diagrams. The amplitudes (or S-matrix elements) are the ones which can superimpose. The diagrams do not describe possible ways in which the particles could interact. They are just terms of an perturbative approximation. pure math. No offense. 1 Reply @stargazer7079 2 years ago Wait how does a photon carry momentum when they are massless? Reply 1 reply @cesarfavela520 3 years ago what if everything existing is a manifestation of one element originating from the big bang at different speeds/rates/phases, and only can interact with itself with favorable variables of its different speeds/rates/phases. idk just thinking Reply @paul_tomate1612 2 years ago is this a gd reference? 1 Reply @trangep7540 3 years ago Makes me think the yin and yang symbol is a simplified math equation for everything. Reply @elizabethayon1448 2 years ago 💜 Reply @articar1675 3 years ago 3:18 some tenet stuff is happening Reply @alchemistsanonymous6558 4 years ago What if the fluctuations of the electrons are oscillating through vertices of parallel dimensions. Each vertex point a new dimension... tied to each vertex point in an ongoing evolution of the entire "organism" Reply @joshuachan6317 2 years ago (edited) Electron only does two things actually. Work as a hitboxes for objects in real life, or Calculating hitboxes for objects in simulations. Reply @tupaicindjeke275 3 years ago This video= Sabine + Anton Petrov + SEA Reply @marcuscarana9240 2 years ago 3:00 I did not understand any of this all I know it looks pretty. Reply @Posesso 4 years ago I am going to make t-shirts with your name and wear them around. Alessandro The Boss. Alexander The Great is nobody compared with what you are doing. Man, I am kneeling and singing like a gregorian monk! aaaaAAaAAAaAAA Reply @angzarr9584 1 year ago only god could have made this shit this complex to slow our development 2 Reply @vulpritprooze 4 years ago In short, this shows us that quantum mechanics is such a headache of a field to study. Reply @tiendat3602 3 years ago (edited) The worse thing is that, those loop diagrams contains UV and IR divergences. The diagrams contain massless external vector bosons will also contain either collinear and soft IR divergence. While UV divergences can be solved with a proper renormalization procedure/scheme at given fixed order in perturbation series, the IR can only cancel out when all diagrams are summed correctly (ad-hoc procedure). Reply 2 replies @jonludwig8233 4 years ago 🤯 1 Reply @SomeoneCommenting 4 years ago Back when I was a kid in school, for me electrons were little moons orbiting the nucleus planet. This has become too complicated now lol Reply @jolez_4869 4 years ago (edited) Wouldn't the electrons shoot photons in every direction all the time if this theory was true? Why don't they glow and lose energy? Also what part of the electron emits and absorbs the photon since they are both fields? Reply @chinchi4293 3 years ago Maybe, in the future the possibilities will be more predictable by using thermodynamics and entropy to understand, like in evolution, why some states and combinations are more likely and the others are not. Who know. Reply @chreinisch 4 years ago hmmm, sow how I do think that is a 20 hour lecture. At least to me ;-) Reply @emin62bek 4 years ago That some Quality shit Reply @async03 3 years ago To summarize, we live inside a super advanced quantum computer generated simulation Reply 1 reply @davidwood2387 3 years ago They might do an exchange at the same time . Reply @eltinjones4542 2 years ago This has proven my stupidity 😱 Reply @questioneverythingalways820 4 years ago (edited) Ahhh virtual particles again. Ok. I can make things up too! The fallacy of modern “science” is the thought that maths can explain everything. Might describe it, but most of the time it has no actual experimental proof, or no way to even test it. But the maths says it’s “there” so we then invent something to “fill” that space. Reply 3 replies @edilgin 3 years ago I wonder something: How do we know this virtual particle is a photon if it is virtual? Is it because quantum field theory predicts there are only electrons and photons? Reply @carmenhendriks 2 years ago When and why does an electron emits a photon Reply @nelsonsantos2706 2 years ago It's crazy how he sounds so much like Jay-Z...if Jay-Z had an accent and was talking about Quantum Physics. Reply @Mifistofell 3 years ago Wow Reply @multicellll 1 year ago In short this is the electromagnetic way to say all charges all pathes leads to ROME LOL Reply @danielash1704 4 years ago Separating the cells from each other maybe the anti field. Reply @pruppe83 2 years ago I love the content but i really wish you'd stop flashbanging us with the bright background at the beginning and end of each video 😅 Reply @salvatorecorleone1008 3 years ago Are we just trying to justify magic by saying “sometimes things go back in time”? 1 Reply 2 replies @shoeskode136 3 years ago what would happen if a photon collided with another photon or what would happen if a elentron collided with another elentron Reply @SpahievDenis 4 years ago Opens Video - Insta Likes - Watches Video :) Reply @N.R.S.Viewpoint1025 1 year ago These are infiniteman diagrams 1 Reply @myfun1870 3 years ago By the way what does that crazy math mean? Reply @sonofthunder2665 5 months ago This is giving me cognitive dissonance, and I'm not sure why or what for. 1 Reply @JGS2295 4 years ago That damn g-factor just couldn't be an even 2 could it ;) Reply @TheGoat62607 6 months ago woah Reply @danielash1704 4 years ago The thing that gets me is that a plane that has a charged wing span has a lesser friction than a wing that is ordinary. The draw back is the charging of a wing takes more power on the system and radios and communications are affected. Reply @milandavid7223 4 years ago I know I've heard that music somewhere before Reply 1 reply @denisbogdanov7373 2 years ago о дааа это оно самое! Reply @jiujiu 2 years ago I love this shit Reply @tensevo 3 years ago What does it even mean to go forwards and backwards in time? Is time a function of moving through space? Is the universe 3 dimensional? or, as some say 4 dimensional? Is time a dimension? or simply a function of moving through dark energy field. Does time pass, if we are not moving through space? or will time stand still if we are able to stop our movement through space? Is time real? Is it just fantasy? Reply @nickpatella1525 4 years ago Something that doesn’t make sense to me is in the interaction where the electrons exchange a photon and intersect paths before heading away from each other, the electrons essentially switch places. If each of these were bound to an atom and we were describing the repulsion of the atoms, it doesn’t make sense to me how this would work. If we just averaged those three basic outcomes you narrowed it down to, it doesn’t seem like repelling would be the most likely outcome. Reply 1 reply @adomasgaudiesius 2 years ago tenet :) Reply @morningstar_37 3 years ago That moment when the video has 6.9k likes Reply @rbeEconomy 3 years ago Parallel universes Reply @joepalmer5251 1 month ago I like tacos Reply @digdug6515 4 years ago Good grief 🌺 1 Reply @davidhand9721 1 year ago (edited) "this explains why we don't fall through a chair when we sit down" is not true. The EM force is not enough; the Pauli Exclusion Principle is what holds you up. Your illustrations are also extremely wrong. QFT doesn't think of particles as localized balls of activity; they are plane waves. A spinor is not just a complex number! It's two complex numbers. You can technically represent them as one complex number only if you force the first complex number to be 1, but I don't think that flies for the whole field. I do give you points for pointing out that virtual particles are a mathematical fiction akin to a mnemonic device, though. That gets left out way too often. Reply @Heaven42-l4s 3 years ago They stop your likes a 10k there keeping you down 👇 1 Reply @oskarstenlund 1 year ago Some theories are so stupid only scholars can believe them. At some point you have to have a certain admiration for the level of deception. 1 Reply 1 reply @Akaiiro 6 months ago man i just started to understand what he was talking about and the video cut off lol Reply @ClinstarWoodard-lj1vt 1 year ago I have an 1 inch equation for the world.🤘🫅🤘 Reply @polychoron 4 years ago I still don't understand why virtual particles can't be observed... interrupt the path of a virtual particle with a detector, and then it's just a normal particle, isn't it? 1 Reply ScienceClic English · 3 replies @arnelarboleda2870 3 years ago They say the ones who show feynman diagrams in horizontal time are bad people. Reply @shashankchandra1068 4 years ago Can u send the 2D or 3D image of quantum field plz?(example:electron field,up-quark field) 1 Reply @slink4239 5 days ago Im sure this is impossible, but imagine if u could start with a photon and convert it into a electron/position pair, then both of those could emit photons, and then annihilate, creating a total of 3 new photons, then repeat for an infinite light gun lol Reply @scifisyko 2 years ago Paatickoows and Feeuwds. Reply @adram3lech 2 years ago Hey. Why don't you credit the animator? Reply @gustavoa8396 4 years ago Reality is often complicated af Reply @markuspfeifer8473 3 years ago Hmmmmmm... In statistics, there are a lot of situations where the expected value of a distribution is not at all the most likely outcome. Heck, it doesn't even have to be likely! Just look at gaussian mixture models. Somehow, physics seems to be simpler here. Reply 1 reply @RichMalishefski 3 years ago When we explain this shit to aliens they are probably gonna look at us like we are retarded for coming with such a complex explanation for a probably simple problem lol Reply 1 reply @reegodlevskiy395 3 years ago How does an electron emit a virtual photon? It can't just appear out of nowhere while the electron itself isn't changing too. Reply @whenyoudiporeosinmilktheyb8329 1 year ago So this means that the spiderverse is real Reply @BlueBeBlue 4 years ago I love your channel, but everytime I watch youb I get too sleepy in the middle of the video, maybe it is because u have no music at all, Idk. Great job anyways Reply @blacked2987 2 years ago (edited) 3 45 9 32 13 29 1 Reply @gpavankumar3193 4 years ago Amma baboi... Parthi scean ... Parthi shot .. mind blue.... Reply @specialk5070 6 months ago fail to mention 4th and how it works duh!!! 👽🛸 Reply @AMPProf 3 years ago Quantum Electrodynamics makes me think.. Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Reply @БогданМура 1 year ago А разве это не объясняет сильное взаимодействие? Ведь энергия этих фотонов больше в 100 раз чем энергия самих частиц Reply @Trandunz 3 years ago PAULI EXCLUSION! NOT GODDAMB CHARGES REPELLING EEEEK Reply ScienceClic English · 1 reply @hulksmash4311 3 years ago What? I thought 2 electrons always repel each other when they are squeeze close. Reply @TR0x-socra 3 years ago Geometry Dash Reference Reply @FranciscoMontoya-q2u 2 months ago HOLA Y MI NAVE SOLDADO FIRMES LES A ABLA SU LEJITIMO SALUDOS Reply @dhudfw 11 months ago photons have phase Reply @ytbasketball101 4 years ago I have a theory that light is the intermediary of space/time and that space time is emergent from light. I know it sounds crazy but I have a hunch that to unify General Relativity and Quantum Physics it has to do with light. I believe that light is the observer that causes all things and without it causality doesn't exists. But it is a paradox because from light from it's time frame doesn't have a space/time therefore the universe logically had to always exist yet we know this is not true. My theory is that before the universe existed there was a cosmic soup of quantum possibilities light interacted with these and caused the emergence of space/time and therefore everything that exists within it. Reply @nasimamitu6197 2 months ago But positron dont actually go back in time Reply @llllllllllllllIIlIllIIllIIIIll 3 years ago I pee in the shower every time Reply @CentralParkish 1 month ago (edited) How many GPUs are required for the computation of only two elections.. Reply @zlatkomargeta4788 4 years ago <3 1 Reply @--Valek-- 3 years ago Lost me at 3:35. Woo Reply @supreetsahu1964 4 years ago Aw yus Reply @prt01 1 year ago Turning off the strong force and going into ghost mode Reply @zedrin517 4 years ago Seems like God himself revealing the secrets of universe! 2 Reply @mirabelkitty2735 3 years ago Comment no. 555! Reply @Schattenrufer007 4 years ago (edited) The main repulsive force between atoms isn’t the Coulomb force but the Pauli exclusion principle. This is literally the first thing that comes up if you google „repulsive force between atoms“ Reply ScienceClic English · 1 reply @artiommatevosyan9822 1 year ago זה המצאה של האויב כדי לפלג את המדינה שלנו, תפסתי אותך. Reply @oraora8214 4 years ago It is kinda funny that after rejecting aether medium they still end up inventing another type of medium, or a field as they call it. Reply @starryfolks 4 years ago Insteresting 1 Reply @ummekulsummasuma3575 3 years ago Allah is absolutely brilliant Reply @arkevines7861 3 months ago Is this dialect guy Reply @AutomatonicChairman 2 years ago How does the interaction between electrons affect the interaction between atoms? So how does what we talk about here affect how atoms interact with each other Reply @lilyofluck371 3 years ago (edited) Did you know that this video's #evil? If not (cough) there you go. 1 Reply @bsmith577 9 months ago This is the effect not the reason. Reason is space within the electron being warped, like space being warped by planets. Reply @zinzhao8231 2 years ago 0 mathematics, super useless. Reply @sourcecaster 3 months ago Or they are all virtual. Reply @thomasbramwell9592 2 years ago You're getting the right result but seems like we're useing a drill to hammer in a nail? Reply 1 reply @betims 1 month ago Maxwells equations don't govern nothin'. There exist better equations for that. Reply @scottgreen3807 2 years ago Ok. Reply @alexandermcclure6185 1 year ago ...Time to over complicate this by making EVERYTHING have a field! Gluons get fields, The Higgs Boson gets a field, and they can interact on their own terms! (...Where have I seen this before?) Reply @nikolatesla8031 4 years ago I am back. 1 Reply @alectoraj 4 years ago Feels like Go∂ is just a programmer. Everything works, but go∂∂amn Go∂ has no freakish !dea about How !!! 🤣🤣 1 Reply @ucngominh3354 1 year ago hi Reply @SharonDavis-v6n 5 months ago White Laura Martin Jeffrey Perez Brenda Reply @averycuriousclumpofatom2159 4 years ago First :) 2 Reply @redfruit1993z 10 months ago My god, I don't understand anything. Reply @TokyoSoloRider 2 years ago Did Albert Einstein knew these things?!! Or are these knew findings ? Reply @sirknightartorias68 4 years ago My question is : Why do they exchange virtual particles? ( I know that is a dumb question) 1 Reply ScienceClic English · 2 replies @alonsovm2880 4 years ago mmmmmmmmmmmm....¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 1 Reply @empatikokumalar8202 4 years ago There is no particle called a photon. there is only a burst of energy caused by the coincidence of two waves that are about the same direction. This explosion is called a photon. But it's not a particle Reply @Kris-ox5pm 2 years ago Dunno what it means and ill never understand what it means. Ill never understand what anything means. None of you will ever understand what anything means. Reply @tsunningwah3471 1 year ago aaaaa Reply @waldwassermann 2 years ago So the question is: why do electrons repel each other? Anybody have any ideas? Reply 1 reply @gesat03 4 years ago Shall we say electrons are not a particle but encapsulated energy form like a drop of water in a vacuum ? Reply @travissheard6425 4 years ago 🤣😂 Hey AI...... Isnt that how computer monitors generate displays? Reply @ยาโพศรี 3 years ago ถ้าคิดตามความเข้าใจถ้าเรารู้มากขนาดนั้นเราก็รู้แล้วว่าใครเป็นผู้สร้างเพราะทุกอย่างเกิดได้จากเวลากับระยะทาง Reply @dcrespin 2 years ago I recently watched a very credible video entitled “Quantum Electrodynamics is rotten at the core”. Then what? Reply 1 reply @JohnSmith-ib4zi 4 years ago Makes no sense Reply @jorengore4jorengore566 3 years ago It´s great Feynaman Video Animation. Thanks. GORJEFERMION43 Reply @jezwilliams3162 2 years ago wtf Reply @timothy8426 2 years ago Gravity hasn't been proven. Physicist call Gravity the weak force. Yet they say stars can collapse in on themselves? Thermal energy singularity frequencies rebounding in mass is outward force of pressure in resistance as weight, according to the periodic table of elements. Maximum momentum velocity of thermal energy singularity frequencies in resistance is at maximum distance vibrating throughout the universe, as dark energy. Forward momentum vibrates the dark energy through us as we traverse point to point in exchange. Being that thermal energy singularity frequencies rebounding in mass is outward pressure held in magnetic fields of cycling circulation patterns of mass, what force compresses this force into a black hole? Unidirectional flow is both clockwise and counterclockwise at the same time, in maximum momentum velocity in resistance. Magnetic fields exist as quantum magnetic fields in resistance to forward momentum as entanglement of mass. Where mass loses distance in equalization of maximum momentum velocity which is mass cycling in resistance. Redirected flow of forward momentum into mass in conservation of maximum momentum velocity in resistance. All mass has quatum magnetic fields. Light is refracted from mass unabsorbed. It has a magnetic field as it hits mass. Conservation of maximum momentum velocity in resistance is the fabric of space throughout. We transition this energy in exchanges point to point of forward momentum. This transition of resistance and thermal energy singularity frequencies is why we age. We traverse through the universe at our maximum momentum velocity in resistance presently. We cannot exceed our current maximum forward momentum velocity cycling in us. It would disrupt our biological magnetic fields cycling circulation in us. At our present exchange of resistance and energy we decay slowly. If the forward momentum was to increase, decay would increase. Resistance from forward momentum would increase and thermal energy from behind slow down. It has to be equal to our present maximum momentum velocity in resistance to now. Our spacetime is our present maximum momentum velocity presently transferring in us. Equalization must be maintained for our existence. As mass reduces its forward momentum increases to its origin. Harmonization of the two opposing forces is why we exist in our time. 98.6 Fahrenheit. Mass is amplification of proximity space surrounding mass in transference from point to point interactions of exchanges of resistance and dark energy, known as thermal energy singularity frequencies, rebounding in magnetic fields of cycling circulation patterns, in resistance equalization of mass. Thermal energy singularity frequencies neutralizes cold resistance in mass. Neutrons? Thermal energy singularity frequencies and cold resistance coexist as space throughout. We transition these opposing forces in us as we exchange place to place in forward momentum. Space is us. It's not empty. We fill it as we surf through it as it. Since force is outward pressure, is it positive or negative? Cold is the opposing force to thermal energy singularity frequencies. In mass, it's weight of energy cycling in quantum magnetic fields of containment. Periodic table of elements. Area of resistance, amount of thermal energy singularity frequencies rebounding in magnetic fields of forced cycling circulation patterns, and distance of forward momentum of exchanging forces. Reply @tezlashock 4 years ago There's no way there's a "photon field". they MUST be an interaction between the electric and magnetic fields. Reply @luanramos4655 4 years ago Br Reply @hemmuhendishemkowboy9998 3 years ago what the fuck Reply @DarchoJandreoski-c2b 1 year ago Hier der Pegasus Galaktica 7 Cyborg Darcho J. / Gorilla Cyborg - mit diese Batterie Energie erreichen sie höchstens 6 Meter bis 61 Meter Flugbahn der mikro Weltraum Raumschiffe Boden Zentrale Robotik Flug Objekte Reply @crescenciocaraballo7739 2 years ago 3452839 Reply @lekhai9407 3 years ago Q vs F0 là một loài bướm đêm trong họ Lê Reply @Cicksavant 7 months ago Did he just say electrodynamics??? Reply 1 reply @benshithero3037 1 year ago (edited) I think your quantum physics thing is missing something. Its in how you think of probability vs inevitability. Yall kinda still to material like in ya thinking. Human thinking imagery based but it obviously has things to consider don't have a visible imagery. Like thems other electromagnetic frequencies you was talking about. You don't see em. We don't see em and maybe we ain't supposed to see em some things at for natural reasons. A not cause they ain't there but for a how it is, they are. Yain't added up even whatcha y'all even know yet, you see. Ya even know the universe began from outta nothing. Not necessarily the best way yo think of that is nothing. Sometimes best way consider it is the nothing were the inevitability of the there would become something, and that ain't nothing. Quite honestly of you consider it were nothing than you don't see that your supposedly nothing os still here. Even meanwhile there's something. Not being silly really to describe to you a zero in mathematics in fact exists, and it ain't nothing. Its an irremovable part of mathematics. Y'alls little quantum existence there is a bunch of constructs from outta nothing. Your supposed nothing is still here, snd its something. I'm sitting me here on a bench at the Renders super market. The bench gotta certain curvature. I got me a peanut butter jar about half the high a peanut butter jar usually is and to demonstrate to myself what I'm talking about to ya at to myself while I'm doing it. Im putting the peanut butter jar at top the back the bench and sliding it down to the seat. At the curve it at about one of 3 things happens. The jar wind up on its side. The jar wind up standing up like a jar should, or some other sh*t. Now, yall might think of this as random, but it's not random. It only winds up one of three things. Furthermore, like at the basic orientations in your quantum physics thingy. Ain't even random between these 3, things. In fact the 3 things cause 3 dimensions of your known physical universe. Now for a minute consider your intermediate axis theory if you would please. That ain't random, neither. Its very mathematically precise and the cosmonauts nuts flippy floppy in a completely certain way that mostly old alternate cause the chirality (handedness)@ in existence. Those 3 things happening with my peanut butter jar ain't random. They ain't a "probability". They a certain set of finite differences in and about the jars given orientation in a 3 dimensional existence and it ain't a random "probability" the results is what they is. Its an "inevitability". Now if yall can fix your quantum physics thingy to reflect that I'd be much obliged, thanks. The universe and its probably or randomness isn't its probability or randomness unless its inevitability makes it so, and yall got that completely a** backwards. I totally understand how y'all could make the mistake being how your something so married to your nothing, but it in fact is like that and your quantum probability don't stop a probability. The reasoning advances to inevitability and so if you could make it do that. It would work even better. To spite how proud of yourselves you are how accurate it is. Anywhere it ain't is likely explained by you got the inevitable coming out of a a random probability instead that your inevitability constructs even your random or probabilities. Cause yall probably might even find. Nah, lets say, you'll inevitability find. Yall can even design your own sub atomic particles and fields out the ones that already exist. So what if maybe yhat a little ahead of your time. Tine only a construct anyway. Don't worry, you'll figure it out later. I don't want to make things too confusing/paradoxical. That ain't how I mean. Your reality has its equals and opposites and sometimes yall confuse them and get sh*t backwards. Random comes out of inevitable not inevitable out of random. Like golden ratio. Its not random. Its a mathematical function that appears in nature all over the place because how fundamentally it works mathematically as a function. Yet one thing nature use that function for is randomization. Your quantum mathematics and equations ain't got the details added up yet to realize your probabilities are actually inevitabilities. It's most a problem resulting your thinking to imagery based in an existence your nothing at before yhe big bang is married to your something now. Equals and opposites married. Yall get blinded at where there's a switch in the dynamics sometimes and you don't see its dynamic. You still only see the object/object oriented, the ideal, the ideological imagery, and you don't see the limitless dynamic. Its like your object oriented computer programming was better than your procedural language programing. But reality goes even the steps beyond, and now you doing quantum computing and finding your way to use 3 dimensional but dynamic reasoning. You coming along, kid. Just fix your quantum brain fart. Its annoying and it will tie up your thinking for perhaps even centuries if you don't. Oh, ajd make those religious people stop conspiracy theorying the gosh darn world is still flat. Its f*cking dumb, man. When they still argue its flat. THROW A GLOBE AT THEM! "DAMNIT, ITS ROUND!". Why tradition gotta f*ck eith science? Well cause the sociopath say the facts don't care about your feelings but your science studies feelings and say it's your sociopath that don't care about your feelings and your sociopath a religious political finance major and his political party only make up 6%of people who cared enough about science to become a scientist, and that, folks, is how after centuries your world gets flat again. Immediately following the idea your planets transgender people somehow violate biology, according to people who just don't honestly giveva shit about biology, only money and power So, avoid that. Yes, throw the whole globe at such people. Pummel the sh*t out of them with it, please AND MAKE THEM GIVE A MONETARY CASH PRIZE FOR THE FIELD'S METAL. Just ain't right billionaires make billions off your science people and you only get a metal for can do mathematics that mske them billions that they can't do. It ain't right. They highjacked that Jesus guy's religion, but they never gave him a Nobel, did they? They just steal his religion and base everything on his penis and so basically really everything in the world about one guys penis but that one guy some old dude in an ugly misogynist hypocrites dress with wrinkly drag-on nuts. Don't you let drag-on nuts rule the world Reply @leovolin7525 1 year ago Guys - nothing this guy says can be trusted: he brings more questions than he answers. What is force? So, no electrons stuff should fall thru the chair - like light? Seems like smoke and mirror presentation. And no place for discussions. Yeah, there is God and then physics. All well explained. Can God fall thru the chair?🤣 1 Reply 1 reply @sanketvaria9734 4 years ago Then why do they always 100% of the time repel each other? If it is in an undetermined state then there also should be some amount probability that my ass would permanently stick with the chair because electrons decided to join instead of repelling. Reply 2 replies @mdb1239 4 years ago Why would/does mathematics (an abstract invention of rules based on logic) describe our physical universe? I really find this astonishing and bizarre. Reply 6 replies @tobystewart4403 3 years ago "Electrons are not marbles that would obey classical mechanics. They are quantum objects, particles." If you say so. What experiment proved the existence of "quantum objects"? People speak such nonsense about quantum theory. They don't even know what it claimed, when it was put forward. Quantum theory is the rather strange idea that things don't actually exist, at all, until they are measured, and that in this state of non being, they exist only as probabilities. This insane invocation of magic in the universe was predicated on the use of probability notation in mathematical postulations. Math, being a language, allows for magical terminology. It permits fantasy. One can pretend that things which are unknown in our minds can also be unknowable in the real world. That which is unseen is "magic". This is why so many scientists, including Einstein and even Schrodinger, who developed quantum probability models, abandoned quantum physics later in their lives. Schrodinger even said he wished he had had nothing to do with it, and regretted supporting it. Why? Because it's silly. It's also profoundly mischievous, and insincere. It tries to be clever in an ostentatious way. It is being clever for the sake of being clever, yet nobody ever really believed it. Not sincerely. It is a good way to mock other people, however. You can rattle off your complex jargon, and watch their eyes go wide, as they fail to comprehend how it might be real. You effectively force your audience to call you wrong, in which case you show contempt for their lack of math education, or else you laugh at them for being simpletons who believe in your nonsense. Quantum theory came from an elite group of objectively degenerate human beings, men who believed themselves better than other men, by virtue of their math culture. It's not a sincere theory. Reply 3 replies @guff9567 4 years ago Can you please switch if your annoying Radio? I cannot hear what you are saying. Reply @dusaanna9458 4 years ago (edited) Wait a minute. i prefered EINSTEIN experimental work (around 1902)°on with the brand new discovered electron (in 1897) photo electric effect on matter There he found that MAXWELL electro-magnetic waves did not exist in there and that light was a radiation (at light speed) of strange between matters pulsating photons (matter electron than matter (opposed spin, magnetic moment and potential outside)) positron one wave lenght later. ) EINSTEIN got the NOBEL price for the photo-electric PHOTON effect but what else did it further with that,: idioties because instead of reviewing all the electric and magnetic equations which used previously the charge Q as a basis of a MONOPOLAR ELECTRIC SOMETHING and which NEVER EVER EXISTED; He did not introduce the electron (and the positron) (they both are voltage dipôles generating huge magnetic moments by rotation) in the old equations in order to understand physically our matter and Universe interaction with deep space so called "vacuum" Same for FEYMAN, I prefered when he experimentally found that the sun actually bombard our earth with positrons (FEYMAN discovered the positron around 1960) propelled to earth upper atmosphere by Electric (and rotating ones the H field) fields (the sun is a plasma positive potential sphere, while the earth (crust only) is an electron (negative potential) "boxe". Well those two lost their time in elaborating and using receipt made of mathematical equations instead which are useless for our progress in electro-magnetic technology. Today almost no physicist is able to realise what we live everyday, matter made of atoms has shell electrons which are EXTREMELY easy to detach from it (be it conductor or dielectric) by rubbing (with a cat fur or air, ) by photo-electric effect, and by fields (especially antennas) Consequence, a permanent magnet attract or repel another permanent magnet because they constantly (partially) polarize and depolarize by emitting a sizable flow of electrons (swirling around the HField lines (swirling E field) at north pôle and reaccepting them at the south pôle. You dont need the FEYMAN diagrams to understand that an electron (dipôle matter-anti-matter voltages) ray (faster, see TESLA observed waves) can turn into a photon (slower) This confirm also the cosmological observation of magnetic field at galaxies (25.000 lightyear lenght) because of the synchroton effect and the colliders experiments: one proton equal one electron plus two positrons and one neutron equal two electrons plus two positrons (capture of vortices with enhancement of spin and reduction of size) Last but not least to prove that the reality of electricity and magnetism is as simple as it was 200 years ago, realise that a lightning bolt is simply a HUGE HUGE flow of electrons (thousand of amperes) coming from the earth "electrons boxe" and pulverising the air (even making nuclear reactions like ozone production) to neutralize the now positive upper storm cloud (lost his electrons by winds rubbings) and EVEN CONTINUE further trough the sun-earth electric field above the clouds (the sun is heavily positive) Reply 4 replies @MevMan 3 years ago (edited) wrong. space is expanding. Allah say it this in Kuran Reply 2 replies @guff9567 4 years ago I unsubscribed because of your annoying Radio music. When you record your speech, do it in a quiet room, so at least we can hear what you are saying. Reply @zach5968 4 years ago Ok.