Einstein's Relativity and the Quantum Revolution Lectures Continue!

  • April 12, 2013 · 6:30 PM
  • This location is shown only to members

Hey Physics Enthusiasts!

(Rescheduled from February due to bad weather back then) This month, on April 12th, we continue with the series of 24 video lectures "Einstein's Relativity and the Quantum Revolution", produced by 'The Great Courses' Company. We'll show two more 30-minute lectures with discussions following each, from this Series:

19. Quantum Uncertainty - Farewell to Determinism - "The uncertainty principle states that it is impossible to measure simultaneously and with arbitrarily high precision, both a particle's position and volocity (actually, its momentum, the product of mass and velocity)."
and
20. Particle or Wave? - "Because wavelength also depends on velocity, it can become significant even in macroscopic systems, when particle velocities become very small..something that happens only at temperatures close to absolute zero."

NB. At the beginning of each lecture, there is a brief review of the preceding lectures.

These lectures are about fundamental physics, and the input from those of you with strong physics knowledge (You know who you are!) is seriously appreciated in the discussions that follow each video showing. We thank you for your continued participation and support to bring the rest of us up to speed in order to progress in the complexity of our favourite subject, Physics.

Thank you to David for suggesting and providing the video recordings for these lectures.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Whether you're an expert or a neophyte in whatever Physics topics we cover, it will be an interesting meeting for all. Come join us on the 2nd Friday of the month and share and discuss your Physics interest and knowledge and have fun while you do!

If your not a member already, sign up so you can as a member contribute to the feedback that makes the group mutually viable..and members, do RSVP for our next meeting..and don't forget "The Afterwards"!"

If members are interested in making a presentation about a favourite physics discipline to our Physics Group, we'll love to hear from you! Many thanks to members who have already committed to making future presentations. And of course your suggestions and ideas are welcome.

Here's how to get to the Meeting:
By Subway: Take Yonge St. line north to ‘North York Centre’ station. Remain on the Lower Level, follow the signs to the North York Civic Centre. Or go outside overground to the North York Civic Centre - on the West side of Yonge Street (just behind Mel Lastman Square).

By Car: From highway 401, exit North on Yonge St. past Sheppard Ave., turn left at Park Home Ave, then left at Beecroft Rd. Entrance to underground parking is on the left. Parking fee is around $3.00. Follow the signs to the Civic Centre on the lower level.

If your still not sure how to get to the meeting, email Betty.

Hope to see you at our next meeting. Out of respect for special guests, we like to start at 6:30 pm sharp. And don't forget the Afterwards!

Betty and Mohsen

Join or login to comment.

  • Vera B.

    thank you Shane i just think that old questions have to be asked again

    April 19, 2013

    • Shane

      Couldn't agree more, Vera. :)

      April 20, 2013

  • Vera B.

    this only brings more questions
    - is the property/quality of one photon fundamentaly different from properties of many photons?
    - would one set of laws be working on the quantum scale and another on classical? really
    - we know once light hits the earth , the earth is irrevocably changed and never goes back to the previous state. why would something different happen in a quantum world?

    April 19, 2013

    • Shane

      - a grand unified theory has not been developed to tie together classical, relativistic and quantum phenomena

      April 19, 2013

    • Shane

      - the discussion engine on meetup needs some work, so maybe these matters should be discussed in a different forum, whether on-line or in-person

      April 19, 2013

  • Vera B.

    Thank you Mohsen for setting up my account so i can actually receive posted coments. One sentence stayed with me from the last lecture " you can't observe something without affecting it" so in effect "sheding light" on something changes the nature of the "something". Somebody before me asked good queston "what happens to that something once light has gone?"

    April 18, 2013

    • Joe P.

      Best I can say:It must be emphasized that measurement does not mean only a process in which a physicist-observer takes part, but rather any interaction between classical and quantum objects regardless of any observer.[

      April 19, 2013

    • Victor

      IMHO In reality there are no classical objects, only in our complex large number of qm aggregate of particles (life), does life perceive it. E.g. classical in our life measurement is an act of mapping and comparing our classical "inch" with a fuzzy qm world or object, what else can you expect other than answers in terms of "inches"? If we had measurement instruments in units of qm superposition units, we would get answers in non-classical units. Also our consciousness is unitary, single value (not superpositional) - we never experience dual or many consciousness or dual or many "I"s , so the measurement "buck stops" in our single perception (see Schrodinger's book 'what is life') Stapp has some good books too. See http://arxiv.org/ftp/...­

      April 19, 2013

  • Shane

    Note: The actual term 'photon' wasn't coined until the mid-20s in reference to Einstein's 'light quanta' model.

    April 18, 2013

  • Shane

    Sometimes I get angry at Albert for having (even if unintentionally) kicked off this quantum quest-cum-quagmire by creating the cockamamie photon in the first place. In his explanation of the interactive relationship between light and electricity ('photons' and 'electrons') he used the familiar notion of particles and waves (a duality first aired by Newton and Huygens) to compare them as particulated peers. And then I forgive him.. and myself, too -- for having thought ill of the professor simply because so many have misapprehended his masterful metaphor as corporeal truth. :)

    (Sorry for the re-post. Couldn't resist the chance to polish my prose and to squeeze a few more ka' sounds into my earlier alliteration.)

    April 18, 2013

  • David

    It is a very common confusion that I have seen repeatedly made in the various QM books I have read.
    It seems people either glom onto the measurement-problem version of uncertainty, or the wave-nature-of-QM-entities version of certainty. And I am not sure Heisenberg himself clearly elucidated what he meant! Victor, I have never read that after collapse, the quantum entity then goes back to being in superposition. It seems every measurment causes the wave-function-superposition to collapse.
    For instance, electrons hitting the back of the TV screen do not then go back to being in superposition within the phosphorus atom....... or do they? Hmmm.
    Are electrons in an atom in superposition? They are in a wave function I believe, so I suppose they might be?

    Anyone have an answer?

    April 17, 2013

    • Victor

      Think about it. The decoherence/collapse is caused by our conscious measurement intervention, it goes back to its natural state thereafter in superposition, otherwise if we measured all particles in the universe QM superpositions would disappear and our QM states oddness would disappear, leaving with a classical universe! WIKI: Quantum superposition is a fundamental principle of quantum mechanics that holds that a physical system—such as an electron—exists partly in all its particular, theoretically possible states (or, configuration of its properties) simultaneously; but, when measured or observed, it gives a result corresponding to only one of the possible configurations (as described in interpretation of quantum mechanics).

      April 17, 2013

  • Ramesh B.

    Quantum Uncertainty ?

    1 · February 14, 2013

    • Joe P.

      Historically, the uncertainty principle has been confused[4][5] with a somewhat similar effect in physics, called the observer effect, which notes that measurements of certain systems cannot be made without affecting the systems. Heisenberg offered such an observer effect at the quantum level (see below) as a physical "explanation" of quantum uncertainty.[6] It has since become clear, however, that the uncertainty principle is inherent in the properties of all wave-like systems, and that it arises in quantum mechanics simply due to the matter wave nature of all quantum objects. Thus, the uncertainty principle actually states a fundamental property of quantum systems, and is not a statement about the observational success of current technology.[7] It must be emphasized that measurement does not mean only a process in which a physicist-observer takes part, but rather any interaction between classical and quantum objects regardless of any observer.[8]

      April 17, 2013

    • Joe P.

      I always thought the principle was an observer phenomenum. I found the above explanation that clears that up for me. Interesting that all this time I had it wrong..... Dave, I now understand what you were saying ..... epiphany for me!

      April 17, 2013

  • Betty

    Thanks. Looks good. I enrolled!

    April 15, 2013

  • Victor

    April 15, 2013

  • Hermogenes

    Interesting topics. Thanks to David and Betty for sharing the lectures.

    April 14, 2013

  • Mohsen

    As far as I understood, the uncertainty is not because of error in measurement. The uncertainty is because properties are overlapped. It is fundamental of nature. The properties are not clearcut

    April 14, 2013

  • David

    Heisenberg uncertainty seems to be due to the fact that quantum entities are being used to measure other quantum entities.
    Ergo, fuzzy entities are being used to measure fuzzy entities, giving you fuzziness squared - quite the problem!

    Tunneling in QM, and in semi-conductor electronics, has not been explained. It is something that occurs, and we have measured how much of it goes on and have come up with a mathematical rule, but do not know how or why it occurs.

    Similarly, with probability densities we have mathematical descriptions that accurately predict results, but we have no idea why the quantum entities behave the way they do.

    April 14, 2013

    • Victor

      Tunneling has a simple explanation: if a particle near a wall has a fuzzy location and momentum, in that its location can at any time be fuzzy or probable enough to be at the other side of the wall at any time, just like it may fluxuate in speed at any particular time (Brownian motion). Quantum has been as to be a probabilistic science, like social statistics provides social behavior probabilities without any exact understanding on the human brain.

      April 14, 2013

    • Victor

      On the other hand String theory seems to at last provide some mechanistic model and explanation on how QM works, but like a brain model will be hard to prove since the scale of strings are far smaller that what current technology can verify and prove to really exist. Anyway string theory has morphed a bit into "branes or surfaces" theory. There is also some suggestions that the planck scale of 10 to the minus 35 power but actually be to the -48. That would make it even harder to prove! See http://www.sciencedai...­

      April 14, 2013

  • A former member
    A former member

    I'm still planning to attend, but driving conditions may change that. I'll wait until around 4:00 p.m. and will change my RSVP if I decide the roads are too treacherous for me.

    April 12, 2013

    • A former member
      A former member

      Well, it's a clear afternoon, but, unfortunately, family aren't reliable sitters. Sorry to miss this and to miss what would have been my first meetup with your group :-(.

      April 12, 2013

  • Justin D.

    I do not think I can make it...

    April 12, 2013

  • Justin D.

    I maybe late!

    April 11, 2013

    • Mohsen

      It ok see you

      April 12, 2013

  • Elda

    Sorry. .not able to attend today...hope to make it next time

    April 12, 2013

  • Stephen K.

    Can't make it this week but still interested.

    April 12, 2013

  • Mario

    Looking forward to being here

    1 · April 7, 2013

  • Beverly B.

    No I don't want to delete my membership. Just don't see an option for deleting an event if you're unable to attend after you've RSVPed "Yes". Thanks for trying.

    April 3, 2013

  • Betty

    Hi Beverly..Plz check the link I added below. The option you are looking for I think is in your google calandar, not meetup. Do let me know if you have solved the issue..Thanks! Betty

    April 3, 2013

  • Shane

    Just fgo to the top right and click "Change RSVP" under the words "Your RSVP: Yes".

    April 3, 2013

  • Beverly B.

    Does any know how to delete this MeetUp event reminder in my Google calendar after I've changed my RSVP to No?

    April 3, 2013

    • Mohsen

      Dear Bev, I will try, but I am not sure how to. Unless you want to delete your membership. Although I hope you don't,

      April 3, 2013

  • Nancelita

    Now unable to attend. See you next time!

    April 3, 2013

  • Runster O.

    Hi fellow Physics buffs. I'm new to your group. I would love to attend your very interesting presentations, but I live in North Bay Ont. I travel south on business occasionally, but it would be a rare coincidence for me to be in North York at the right time. Could you video the lecture presentations and post them on the group website for out-of-town members, and for those who just can't make the date?

    February 23, 2013

    • Mohsen

      Hi Runster, Thank you for your interest. We do not have the means to video tape the gatherings. However, we normally post the PPPresentation in the site plus many other articles. You can also enter our discussions the related tap.

      February 24, 2013

  • Gloria

    I will be out of the city.
    I look forward to the next meeting. Gloria

    February 15, 2013

  • David

    Heisenberg's Uncertainty is due to the wave-like characteristic of quantum entities.

    But another type of uncertainty exists that Arnon and I were arguing about. Can we be 100% certain of anything? I argued that we can, but I was a lone voice in the group. Comments?

    February 14, 2013

  • Elda

    hi everyone! I am new here and look foward to participate in this lecture.

    February 14, 2013

    • Mohsen

      Welcome Elda, Mohsen

      February 14, 2013

  • Joe P.

    90%

    February 14, 2013

  • Annette

    Yes everything is relative.
    +

    February 6, 2013

Our Sponsors

Create your own Meetup Group

Get started Learn more
Henry

I decided to start Reno Motorcycle Riders Group because I wanted to be part of a group of people who enjoyed my passion... I was excited and nervous. Our group has grown by leaps and bounds. I never thought it would be this big.

Henry, started Reno Motorcycle Riders

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy