The Quantum Conspiracy: What Popularizers of QM Don't Want You to Know

Before you invest three hours to watch these lectures you should know that the title is terribly misleading. These lectures are not about QM at all, they are about the history of QM, albeit told by someone who was actually part of it. But the coolness of hearing the history of QM firsthand is undermined by the fact that Bethe is clearly well past his prime, and he's not particularly good at telling stories. If you want a video that is true to this title I'd recommend this: [LINK] EDIT: And if you want to really understand QM, there's this: [VIDEO] :-)

This Google Talk [VIDEO] uses entanglement and quantum information theory in a clear and understandable way to explain 'spooky' quantum phenomena, like the quantum eraser, de-coherence, the aspect experiment, and the measurement problem. Even if you don't know any QM, just basic algebra and calculus, it's really approachable. I used to be a fan of the Many Worlds interpretation, but after seeing this, I'm now a big fan of the Quantum Information Theory explanation. Starting about 43 minutes in, he goes into the QM Information Theory explanation, but I'd recommend watching the entire prezo. Link to my original post on the subject: [LINK]

If I may recommend a lecture given at Google Tech Talks-- "The Quantum Conspiracy: What Popularizers of QM Don't Want You to Know", It really clarified some things for me. [VIDEO]

This is the video that finally made it click for me[1]. Despite the somewhat click-baity title ("What Popularizers of QM Don't Want You to Know") it actually goes into quite a bit of detail of what is and isn't a measurement, in the sense of interactions in a quantum mechanical system that strongly resemble classical behavior (it can be said that the quantum mechanical world is a simulator that can run classical mechanics). [1]: [VIDEO]

In fact, the Copenhagen interpretation has been proven wrong by fellow lisper Ron Garret. You can read his paper here: www.flownet.com/ron/QM.pdf and watch his google talk about it [VIDEO] . The problem is, that most people (not scientists, mind you) do not really care anyway, and the Copenhagen interpretation gives you a nice story to tell, which is fairly "strange", yet somewhat understandable. I hate the fact that even science magazines still 100% subscribe to the Copenhagen interpretation, just to attract a greater readership and to be able to use catchier headlines.

This Google Talk from last year provides an argument and interpretation of this that's fairly understandable with a programmer's mindset: [VIDEO]

Anyone interested in this can find an excellent lecture here [VIDEO] and of course by looking up leonard susskind's stuff on the black hole wars and universe as a hologram

> (whatever that means) That (implied) question has an answer: measurement is the mutual entanglement of a number of degrees of freedom. See: [LINK] Or the movie version: [VIDEO]