How Physicists Proved The Universe Isn't Locally Real - Nobel Prize in Physics 2022 EXPLAINED

I think Scientists are Rockstars 🤘so I made t-shirts to celebrate it. More links in description Einstein Rockstar Tee: www.drbenmiles.com/merch/p/rockstar-scientist-tee-…

I met a theoretical physicist the other day. I was surprised to learn they actually exist.

I can confirm this with my daily observations. I can place an object on my table, countertop etc. It appears stable and should not fall over. The moment I turn my back, at a random interval of its choosing, the object will fall over, or end up on the floor. Initially, I believed it to be poltergeists, but I'm now convinced it's Matthew McConaughey

I find these concepts a struggle, and I had to watch this twice, but I ultimately obtained a better understanding of local real-ness than I’ve previously been able to muster. Thank you for laying it out so well.

I couldn't imagine a bigger flex than having gotten the Nobel Prize for keepin' it real.

As someone who pays attention to quantum theories, my feeling is that the universe has infinitely more details and twists the more we look. It’s basically making details up the more we look, keeping up with what we’re capable of measuring.

Put the information sources in the description. It will make the video much better.

Thanks for another great video, look forward to many more!

Great! So, next time I'm faced with a situation I don't want to deal with in life I can say it's not real and run away! Thanks Quantum Physics!

Thank goodness this had a "So what?" chapter. Whenever I read or watch items concerning quantum theory I often end up wondering if it's significance is "locally real".

Your explaining skills are amazing! Subscribed.

Awesome video. So clearly explained and much easier to follow than many other videos I've watched on quantum physics. I'll be checking out your other videos. Thanks and keep up the good work.

Man Alice and Bob have had a lifetime of stories together.... they should make a scifi tv show at this point jeez lol

They way I had "understood" so far, was that according to quantum physics, the property of a particle is random until it is measured. However, if I am getting this right, whenever we measure again the same particles, the value of the property will change again, to a previously unknown value (so that it's value sometimes is or isn't 180-Δθ) . If that is the case, the value of the particles' property could be changing randomly all the time and we just get a snapshot of it's value at the precise moment that we measured it.

Thank you for the great explanation! I have learned a lot because of you. What I'm wondering is, how come the winners of the Nobel Prize in 2022 only won it then when the experiment was already conducted in 1972 and John Clauser wrote a paper about it and already proved back then that the universe isn't locally real? Does somebody know what I'm missing here?

That bit with the 3rd polarized filter totally surprised me. My mind is in knots. Thanks!

Questions of science suddenly become questions of philosophy and psychology the deeper we move into them, science and philosophy essentially look like brothers.

Einstein (Podolsky and Rosen) weren't proven wrong. They proposed a question as a response. It just took a long time for subsequent theoretical physicist to respond. The question was so good it deserved a Nobel prize worthy answer.

I was actually happy when I heard Alain Aspect won a Nobel prize. It's well deserved.

1:49 Schrödinger's cat is often misunderstood. It was originally meant to critique, not exemplify, quantum mechanics by showing the absurdity of applying quantum superposition to everyday objects. The experiment highlights the complexities and non-intuitive nature of quantum mechanics, rather than suggesting objects can exist in multiple states simultaneously in the macroscopic world. It's crucial to understand the context and intention behind it to avoid spreading misconceptions about quantum mechanics.