A Brief History of Quantum Mechanics - with Sean Carroll

I highly agree and also recommend: ▶ this video And I will add: The Big Picture: From the Big Bang to the Meaning of Life - with Sean Carroll link Mysteries of Modern Physics by Sean Carroll link

Sean Carroll is a master of making quantum mechanics approachable to non-physicists. Here are a few of his talks: - Fermilab 2013: link - The Royal Institution 2014: link - The Royal Institution 2020: ▶ this video

The confusion with the Copenhagen interpretation comes from two main sources in my opinion: 1. What can count as a measurement? 2. Quantum ‘thing’ interacting with a classical world One of my favorite talks on this subject is by Sean Carroll and offers the ‘many worlds ‘ interpretation as an alternative, mainly for its simplicity. Recommend watching the whole thing but if you want just the “debunking”: 25:11 ▶ this video

Sean Carroll's Royal Institution lecture discussing the many worlds interpretation and using a similar app: ▶ this video link

Sean Carrol addressed this in his royal institution lecture (a brief history of quantum mechanics, 37m30s). As far as I understood those universes aren't created, you're just selecting a slice of phase space of the (very big) number of possible universes. ( link: ▶ this video )

Funny to see this now. One of the things my wife and I have been doing to engage our brains during the pandemic is to brush up on our knowledge of hard science. Of particular fascination for both of us has been cosmology and the frontiers of physics. We knocked into Sean Carroll's video series on YouTube by first encountering one of his lectures at the Royal Institution [1],[2]. We've been working our way through his "Biggest Ideas in the Universe!" series where he talks through history of physics and cosmology through to modern practice. I've also been reading through one of his books (and have read Stephen Hawking, Kip Thorne, Roger Penrose, Brian Greene, Lee Smolin, and others) and all of this has gotten me to a point where I could listen to an actual presentation to physics students and faculty on quantum mechanics and understand what was being discussed, despite not being up to doing the math myself. Yet this expedition over the last few months has made me wonder how someone who only encounters science through the media's presentation of it as "truth" could even know where to rest their hands to grapple with these ideas. Perhaps I'm being fooled into thinking I have some grasp of the matters discussed. Though I certainly feel as though I have a much better idea of the limits of my understanding, maybe that's wrong. Yet, I wonder how much of what the author opines of here is the usual emergence of Sturgeon's Law. Maybe 90% of "science writing" is crap. Is there evidence o

As someone who did a PhD in particle physics, this is very hard to understand (and not just apply math) This is actually just one of the interpretations, there are more and some are gaining traction (see for instance ▶ this video , S Caroll is a great speaker but you need to stay concentrated :)