Comments by "David Glickman" (@live_free_or_perish) on "Can particles really be in two places at once? Featuring @ArvinAsh" video.

  1. Excellent explanation. I love the way you handle the frustration with humor. Math and physics appear mystical and totally opaque to most people. Since I rarely comment let me just say I watch all of your videos and really enjoy your content even though I never made it past differential equations and dropped out of a complex analysis class. Switched from math to engineering - much easier 😏
    5
  2. Have always suspected that QM is like celestial mechanics before Copernicus. Epicycles were used as close approximations before then.
    3
  3. I've read similar articles. Would love to know what Sabine thinks about this.
    3
  4. Engineering is a lot easier than QM. It was a lot more empirical than I expected when I was in school. In most of my classes we learned "ideal" equations for phenomena and switched to calculations based on tables of empirically derived values.
    2
  5. 3blue1brown is the best math explainer I've ever seen
    2
  6.  @everythingisalllies2141  how do you explain the effectiveness of math in describing the physical world? Math can exist without physics but physics cannot exist without math.
    1