Friday, May 18, 2012

Feynman on Wave Particle Duality (QED Lecture in New Zealand)

August 21, 2010 by  
Filed under Videos

Feynman is doing a Q&A for his lecture series on QED. He answers a question about the nature of wave particle duality.

This is one of the most important numbers in physics and is “unimaginably small” – or does it just seems small? More symbols explained at www.sixtysymbols.com
Video Rating: 4 / 5

Incoming search terms:

Comments

51 Responses to “Feynman on Wave Particle Duality (QED Lecture in New Zealand)”
  1. MrWajax says:

    Truly an inspirational man! Thumbs up & favorite.

  2. nickharvey7 says:

    Wave-particle duality can be explained as a process forming the passage of time. Light could then be a wave as in Maxwell’s equations forming the future photon by photon or moment by moment. The energy or wavelength of the light will determine the rate that time runs in that reference frame. The probability is the same that the observer will have with any future event.

  3. Phranky says:

    Just keeping on nodding as if you know what he’s talking about.

  4. broadcastmyass4u says:

    A grand historical figure, for sure!

  5. AppliedCryogenics says:

    look at that epic tie.

  6. chrisofnottingham says:

    Too many physicists do popular science videos or books and confuse the armchair scientist by failing to make the distinction which RF is clarifying here.

    They talk about particle/wave duality and say “sometimes it’s a wave and sometimes it’s a particle.” This is wrong! QM is confusing enough as it is but this sort of talk makes it even harder to grasp.

    I respect RD for saying an electron is always a particle but between observations it disappears and is replaced by a probability wavefunction.

  7. lds8714 says:

    What a totally badass physicist Feynman was – original, elegant, but always practical.

  8. mohfoz77 says:

    You should…..

    Watch Richard Feynman on

    Symphony of Science – ‘We Are All Connected’

  9. CCTV9 says:

    @mikeroephonics

    There are books and audio books of his lecture from Caltech

  10. mikeroephonics says:

    @kq6up I found the Vega site. Thanks!!! And BIG thanks for uploading these videos! I’m in the process of reading ‘Surely, You’re Joking.’ Great read. :)

  11. kq6up says:

    Just google Feynman QED New Zealand. You can watch it on the web.

    Chris

  12. mikeroephonics says:

    Are there Feynman lectures available on DVD or VHS? Thanks!

  13. NRegals says:

    shoo? u have something to say or was that it?

  14. flyfarmer2010 says:

    shoo

  15. mugwamp4 says:

    a great man

  16. NRegals says:

    Hey friends… check out Binary Relativity on youtube and let me know what you think.

  17. THEREALghostlaced says:

    Or more accurately, its a mathematical possibility.

  18. Wcoltd says:

    something new.

  19. kq6up says:

    Auckland

  20. andina18 says:

    where in New Zealand did this take place ?

  21. keggs00 says:

    It’s not a physical wave, it’s a mathematical probability.

  22. Grundalizer says:

    so the last 30 seconds, if it’s not a wave function, then what is it

  23. nickharvey7 says:

    These are great videos
    In my video The Paradox of Schrodingers Cat an artist view Time has symmetry and geometry that can explaining the paradoxes of wave particle duality in Quantum Physics

  24. fc007 says:

    Where did you get this video lecture from

  25. al01ja15 says:

    nice rare video!

  26. ninjamaritz says:

    Aaw, you told him you were gonna edit that bit out, you left him looking like a gimp ;) Nice vid, first I’ve seen of these.

  27. Naddig74 says:

    So are receiving diodes to be forever called ‘Ned Kellys’ ?

  28. SaraCufer says:

    lol

  29. heyandy889 says:

    Love the Mr. Tompkins reference :D

  30. traditionsHome says:

    hilfzahl, i like it. still we are no closer to understanding the nature of matter or energy. it is only the proportionality of energy to matter that can be determined.

    A question – can matter exist that has no action, no motion, no energy? Energy, it would seem, is matter in motion, but can matter exist without action?

  31. agbz says:

    T-Mobile commercial? Really?

  32. alrexrod198 says:

    4:07
    By the photoelectric effect?

  33. 12thcenturyfox says:

    Very good Video I have to say!

    By the way, “h” comes from the german word “Hilfszahl” meaning “helping number” because that’s what Planck labeled this number in one of his early papers (as my quantummechanics Prof told us in one of his lectures).

  34. ryanmov says:

    all stab your wife in the bath

  35. robertwc82 says:

    it was either rate or rape. it sounds more like rape

  36. robertwc82 says:

    “you can just edit this afterwards? as he fumbles clumsily…” lol, scientists.

    so intelligent yet still just feeble minded humans haha

  37. ofreika says:

    @carlsontechnology
    forgive me if I: misunderstood or got it wrong,
    I don’t know if they found it with that equation.
    but yes every colour has his own frequency and wavelength(you can easily find the one from the other(f = c/lambda with c=speed of light) so they can measure the wavelength of the colour. sorry if it wasn’t any help

  38. rithem412 says:

    @carlsontechnology-They are using E=h*nu

    The photon hits the metal and is annihilated. The energy it possesses goes into 2 places.

    The metal in the photo diode has a “work function” equal to its first ionization energy. This is the minimum amount of energy required to eject an electron.

    The leftover energy is given as kinetic energy to the ejected electron. By determining the energy of the ejected electron plus the work function, you get the energy of the photon. Divide by nu to get h.

  39. realisoph says:

    This comment doesn’t deserve the bad rating. To me that testifies for your unwilligness and ignorance to consider what is rightfully to be considered.

  40. realisoph says:

    Since you think I’m stupid and seem to put it as if you understand these things better, maybe you try and explain to us what constants are or what they’re not.

    If you did, I would appreciate if you’d not mingle definitions with perceptions… such as pi and planck. Also, it’d be nice if you’d try to consider the significance and truthfulness of whatever you’re trying to say, instead of merely repeating the bits and pieces of someone elses reasoning framework.

  41. LunaticBob99 says:

    Just because you’re too stupid to understand something doesn’t mean it was “never such to begin with.”

    …bummer!

  42. carlsontechnology says:

    In order to find Planks constant using mercury, are you taking the initial equation (p=h/lambda) and solving for h (h=p*lambda)?

    If so, how is the momentum measured and is the frequency a measurement of the color detected by the photo diode?

  43. realisoph says:

    I like the parts about the experiment though… I don’t mean to come off as being anti-science or some such.

    But, how about not overly stressing the notions of discrete quanta and constants, but instead telling the truth about their variable and relaive (!) nature?

    You ever so conveniently seem to skip the part when it comes to variance, perspective and significance! As if it were meaningless, yet that is not so at all.

  44. realisoph says:

    How about you try to write that number of how much you would have to pay back if you had been given 1 cent 2000 years ago at a reasonable interest rate of – say – 5%?

    That would at least be telling you something about the (stupidities of today’s) world …far more significant to our everyday lives than one more of these ‘constants’ which never were such to begin with.

    You try to advocate science, wheras all you seem to say is “It’s to do with the fact that…”

    …bummer!

  45. CathySander says:

    Yep! There was another video on it somewhere on the Sixty Symbols youtube channel.

  46. SpacedTime says:

    He is asked “Do you rate Planck?” as in, I rate The Beatles as a great band, he, and all physicists rate Planck as one of the great ones.

  47. briealeida says:

    I thought he said ‘read’.

  48. roendm says:

    i still love it^^,

  49. libknocker says:

    when i first started listening to rush i hated him . but honestly he is misrepresentd in the liberal media . he is a brilliant political analyst. and a satarist making jokes about whatever is happening in news black white whateverhis best friend and producer is bo snerdly black conservative. you asked what happened to our brothers and sisters the democratic party thats what listen to rushs comments again and pretend for one sec. he says it with love!

  50. sacntity says:

    the word is rate, asin ,” Do you rate Planck

Trackbacks

Check out what others are saying about this post...
  1. DUSTIN says:


    CheapTabletsOnline.Com. Canadian Health&Care.No prescription online pharmacy.Special Internet Prices.Best quality drugs. Low price drugs. Buy pills online

    Buy:Valtrex.Prevacid.Human Growth Hormone.Lumigan.Actos.Mega Hoodia.Petcam (Metacam) Oral Suspension.Nexium.Zovirax.Accutane.100% Pure Okinawan Coral Calcium.Synthroid.Zyban.Prednisolone.Retin-A.Arimidex….



Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!

Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes