Four Dimension block universe Shattered

How the idea of a four dimensional block universe is shattered by quantum physics and entanglement.

[abdelmajid]

I didn't discover your channel until a week ago, but you really changed a lot in my life and my mind. Thank you from my heart

[Zodiaczero]

I would love to see more videos about special relativity, such as Rindler coordinates, the Bell spaceship paradox, hyperbolic spacetime, or the mathematical applications of differential equations. I believe they have the potential to attract a significant number of views!

[ManyHeavens]

That was really good, Best always, it only looks likes a block, and the missing pieces is really night time

[zh]

I like the cat (Schroedinger's?) reading a book on quantum physics with the subtitle "Stop Testing On Animals"!

[Marcel-yufw]

Even if the universe is fundamentally non-deterministic, I still dont get how that would contradict the block universe. Just because it is a 'block' that could hypothetically be viewed as one by a higher dimensional observer, doesn't mean it has to be deterministic in any way. The question of determinacy just asks if those observers would be able to infer the 'future' part of that block from the 'past' part (if you cut it in half at our present).

[shadmanalshakib]

Your playlist makes me to visualise quantum mechanics.please make more videos related to quantum mechanics

[mikkel]

Amazing how there continue to be topics around the concept of Spacetime to think about (wonder about).. Thanks for this new video!

[Mr.Not_Sure]

Thanks for yet another thoughts provoking video!

[lamalamalex]

What Einstein got right: god doesn’t play dice.
What Einstein got wrong: time being a dimension.

[thecriss]

Am I the only one who finds those videos very interesting and informative, yet a bit creepy?

[davidjrwkldc]

Hello Eugene, your videos are helping me a lot to get an intuitive understanding of physics, thanks a lot!
I would love to see a video of you about Crystal lattice vibrations and phonons, I feel like there is really not that much videos regarding that topic, that would help a lot!

[lamalamalex]

What everyone is getting wrong:”observer outside the universe.” There is no outside the universe.

[digguscience]

The visual animation is very easy to understand. Learn a lot from here

[flyingbicycles]

Something I’ve noticed about quantum entanglement implying probability. “Observing” in quantum mechanics means a very specific thing: running a particle through a detector. But this requires energy to interact with the particle, which on such scales definitely affects the particles.

So there is no mystical property to “observing” a quantum spin, it’s a matter of needing energy to measure the spin and adding energy in a way that detects spin changes spin to align a certain way. I.e. going through a detector polarizes the particle.

If you detect a particle to have one spin, then run it through a perpendicular detector, does the particle change spin? If so, does its partner change spin? I know this doesn’t allow FTL because you’d need to compare notes later and all that.

The act of observing indeed changes the outcome, but it seems to me like that outcome could have already been determined. Even assuming we could never improve detection technology to NOT polarize a particle, i.e. a 360 degree spin detector, that doesn’t mean a “true” value doesn’t exist. It just means we cannot measure it without messing with it.

That’s fine in other sectors of science. We understand that a tree falling in the forest still makes a sound even if no one is around to hear it, and we understand that human behavior can affect if/when a tree falls, even indirectly.

[spencerwenzel]

Just some random ideas while watching: Could the situation be compared to an irrational number? Irrational numbers don't follow a pattern but further digits can always be calculated. (Genuine question) Would you classify irrational numbers as deterministic? Each successive digit appear random but still can be calculated. Maybe the universe behaves like an irrational number? It is computationally irreducible but just like we can write root(2), it all exists. Time would then be the computation pushing it along. Maybe I'm off base just a random thought.

Great video by the way! They always get me learning, thinking and questioning 👍

[AhmedAzizou]

@EugeneKhutoryansky, perhaps the following line of reasoning can be pursued to prevent the block from shattering: If we do not disregard Quantum Mechanics in its current understanding, the block universe can be conceptualized as akin to a frozen snapshot, encapsulating a series of measurements of outcomes—or a single observation—across the temporal dimension. Consequently, this notion of a block universe necessitates that an external observer MUST exist for a particular outcome to materialize. This external observer, conducting alternative observations, could potentially bring an infinite array of possible universes into existence, each one forming its own block.

[flamesblades]

Hi Eugene. Have you ever thought about making videos on the philosophy of chemistry/chemistry stuff in general?

[juanperez-ventana]

Very good video. What application do you use to make the animations?

[jq]

dear eugene, do you have reccomendations for how to learn physics oneself? which resources to use? i know itd be a many many year journey. im mainly interested in actually having fun doing and being able to understand the significance underlying the teachings as your videos help do.

[MM.x.]

Hope you guys keep making these videos for a long time to come