HackerTubewatch
Surprise me
Frame from Some light quantum mechanics (with minutephysics) Plays via YouTube's privacy-enhanced embed

Some light quantum mechanics (with minutephysics)

43 videos recommended on HN
YouTube
2 HN users recommended this explainer1 month2020–2022 score 1.5
Years with an HN recommendation, 2007–2026

Recommended as an approachable way to understand the quantum nature of light and basic quantum math without heavy machinery.

3Blue1Brown, in collaboration with minutephysics, introduces the math of superposition and quantum states using polarized light. It builds up the quantum behavior of photons as a simple counting and probability problem.

“I found these two videos very helpful in understanding the quantum nature of light” (HN, 2020)

1 strong recommendations · 1 recommendations · 2 citations · Explainers · intro

4 Hacker News comments

From the HN archive; up to 20 kept per video, favoring different commenters. Recommendations first.

Citations, criticism and jokes

@guerrilla Jan 2022 Cites it
on HN thread Why Quantum Mechanics?
> I have a lot of trouble imagining any experiment which could completely rule out every other influencing factor It's called Bell's theorem and it can even be tested at home[4]. There are no local hidden variables in quantum mechanics.[1][2][3] 1. [link] 2. [link] 3. [link] 4a. [link] 4b. [this video]
Home test of Bell's theorem
@gus_massa Oct 2022 Cites it
on HN thread Chaos theory eliminates quantum uncertainty
Read more
What you are describing is a "hidden variable" theory. They are disproved by the experiments of the Bell's inequality. It's more weird, much more weird. Let's continue with your experiment about the pair of red or green socks. If you and your friend measure if they are red-or-green, both will get the same results. This can be explained with a classical theory. Nobody disagree with that. The weird part is that you can measure if they are 50%red and 50%green! Can I call it yellow? This makes no sense with classical socks and colors, but it makes sense for quantum particles and other properties. But there are two ways to combine 50%red and 50%green, the technical notation is (R+G)/sqrt(2) and (R-G)/sqrt(2), one with a plus and one with a minus. Can I call them good-yellow and bad-yellow? Or you prefer yellow and blue? In one of the experiments, red means vertical and green horizontal, so one of the combinations is a 45° diagonal like this / and the other is a 45° diagonal like this \. You don't need fancy equipment to measure the combinations, it's just a polarizer rotated 45°. Can I call them yellow and backyelow? I prefer good-yellow and bad-yellow because it's more clear that something weird is happening. If you measure red-or-green and your friends measures good-yellow-or-bad-yellow, then the results will not be correlated. If you got "red", your friend has a 50% probability of getting good-yellow and a 50% probability of getting bad-yellow. There is nothing to explain here.

Video list and Hacker News comment labels from HackerTube (prompted by @karpathy), released under ODC-By 1.0, built on the open-index/hacker-news archive. Hacker News data is provided by Y Combinator; comments remain the work of their authors. Video titles, channel names and thumbnails belong to their creators and are shown via YouTube. HackerTube Watch is an unofficial edition. Data export of 2026-10-31.

Keyboard shortcuts

/
Search
j k
Next / previous video
r
Surprise me
l
Like (video page)
w
Watch later (video page)
?
This help
Esc
Close