Speaker 1: Get in touch with technology with tech Stuff from how
Speaker 1: stuff works dot com. Hey there, and welcome to tech Stuff.
Speaker 1: I'm your host, Jonathan Strickland. I'm an executive producer with
Speaker 1: how Stuff Works in love all things tech, and it's
Speaker 1: time for another classic episode of tech Stuff, and this one,
Speaker 1: Lauren Vogelbaum and I go over the contributions of Heisenberg.
Speaker 1: What do you do? I'm not certain. Ah, that's a joke, no,
Speaker 1: But seriously, we wanted to talk about Heisenberg. Heisenberg's work
Speaker 1: in theoretical physics and how that made a huge impact
Speaker 1: and continues to make a huge impact in technology. So
Speaker 1: sit back, relax, and enjoy this classic episode of tech Stuff.
Speaker 1: I'm just not sure about this topic. Heisenberg, right, okay,
Speaker 1: wall I think I have some notes on him too,
Speaker 1: are you? This is he was born on December five,
Speaker 1: nineteen o one. Yes, that one, the physicist. Yes, the
Speaker 1: famous theoretical physicist. All right, well, all right, maybe I
Speaker 1: won't get a geek out about breaking bad, but that's fine.
Speaker 1: We can talk about Vernon Heisenberg. I like that your
Speaker 1: German pronunciation is better than the lady with the last
Speaker 1: name vocal bomb. That's pretty that's pretty great. Um. So
Speaker 1: born on December five, nineteen o one, in Verzberg. Uh
Speaker 1: and yeah, Heisenberg has played an incredibly important role in
Speaker 1: the establishment that that's the foundations of what is quantum mechanics. Right.
Speaker 1: If you've heard of something something called the uncertainty principle,
Speaker 1: that is a k A. Heisenberg's n certain new principle,
Speaker 1: that that is, he is the operative Heisenberg. In this
Speaker 1: we will explain what that uncertainty principle is in certain terms,
Speaker 1: but that'll be towards the second half of the podcast.
Speaker 1: First we wanted to kind of talk about who he was,
Speaker 1: sort of his background. His father was an expert in
Speaker 1: Middle and modern Greek languages. That's a Dr. August Heisenberg.
Speaker 1: His mother was any Winklin. Winklin Winklin was w. Yes,
Speaker 1: there's no W sound in German. It's um. Yeah, so vs,
Speaker 1: r F S and w s or vs. That's easy
Speaker 1: to remember, simple, all right, Yeah, so yeah, he he um.
Speaker 1: It's funny because I understand that his his own background
Speaker 1: in Greek, his father was an expert in Greek. His
Speaker 1: own background in Greek meant that when they got to
Speaker 1: the point where physicists were starting to name theoretical and
Speaker 1: he would correct people's use of Greek, saying things like,
Speaker 1: you cannot spell it this way because that's not how
Speaker 1: it would be actually spelled if such a thing existed
Speaker 1: in the Greek language. So so he was, um, you know,
Speaker 1: helping us stay on the rails as far as the
Speaker 1: use of Greek, right while he was growing up. When
Speaker 1: he was twelve, that is when Neil's Bore present did
Speaker 1: his general theory of of quantum existence. Yes, so Bore
Speaker 1: would be incredibly important during Heisenberg's education. But Niels Bore
Speaker 1: also known for making the Bore model of the atom.
Speaker 1: So that was the model the atom that suggested that
Speaker 1: you had a central nucleus and then electrons that were
Speaker 1: orbiting nucleus. Yeah, so that's you know, anyone who's taken
Speaker 1: any any class in chemistry or physics has seen the
Speaker 1: Boor model. It's still one of those things that um
Speaker 1: usually is. It's part of the history of the development
Speaker 1: of particle physics and quantum mechanics. Right, we we know
Speaker 1: now that it's a little bit um simplified. Yeah. In fact,
Speaker 1: Heisenberg would go on, would be the one who right
Speaker 1: exactly right. Uh, he was. While he was in high school,
Speaker 1: there was a major event that played out across the
Speaker 1: entire world and particularly in Europe. World War One. Yeah,
Speaker 1: World War One happened between nineteen fourteen and nineteen eighteen.
Speaker 1: Some of Heisenberg's academic contemporaries, or not even contemporaries, some
Speaker 1: of his mentors had actually served in World War One
Speaker 1: as various officers in the military, right right. Um, Heisenberg
Speaker 1: himself had to leave school, leave high school to go
Speaker 1: help harvest crops in Bavaria at the time. And um,
Speaker 1: by by the time he got back after the war,
Speaker 1: he was deeply involved in youth groups like the New
Speaker 1: Boy Scouts that we're trying to rebuild the science and
Speaker 1: artistic culture in Germany. Right, So keep in mind, like
Speaker 1: at this time in Germany, things are really tumultuous. I mean,
Speaker 1: World War One was already one of those events that
Speaker 1: that played upon certain sentiments in Germany, and after the
Speaker 1: war was concluded, that got even more messy because you
Speaker 1: had the rest of the world, uh, you know, trying
Speaker 1: to deal with this situation and make sure that it
Speaker 1: could not happen again. I mean, this was one of
Speaker 1: those wars that no one really expected whatever happened, because
Speaker 1: the idea was that everyone would be building up their
Speaker 1: armies to a point that anyone would be crazy to
Speaker 1: attack anyone else. And as it turns out, humans are crazy, y'all.
Speaker 1: So um, yeah, we it was. It was one of
Speaker 1: those things where where as in an attempt to prevent
Speaker 1: this from happening again, there were a lot of reparations
Speaker 1: demanded against Germany. This in turn ended up fueling a
Speaker 1: lot of resentment in Germany and would eventually give the
Speaker 1: Nazi movement sort of the kind of foothold. Yeah, exactly,
Speaker 1: it gave them that that that place to build some support,
Speaker 1: because you had all these Germans who felt that uh,
Speaker 1: that their lives had been ruined as a result of
Speaker 1: the actions that followed World War One. Now that plays
Speaker 1: a big role in Heisenberg's life because this is also
Speaker 1: a time when physicists are making incredible discoveries. We are
Speaker 1: learning more about the quantum world, that that atomic scale
Speaker 1: world than ever before. The instruments that were being made
Speaker 1: were becoming precise enough for us to look at things
Speaker 1: on a level that we never could have seen before.
Speaker 1: So there is a figurative explosion in physics at this time,
Speaker 1: and a lot of and sometimes literal explosions. But a
Speaker 1: lot of the physicists that were active at this time,
Speaker 1: particularly in Germany, were of Jewish descent. Now, of course
Speaker 1: that would cause play another important role once we talk
Speaker 1: about the rise of the Nazi movement and the entry
Speaker 1: into World War two. Obviously that's going to to really
Speaker 1: shake things up. But before we get to that point,
Speaker 1: we talk more a little about about Heisenberg's educational background.
Speaker 1: Once World War One had concluded, he attended the Maximilian
Speaker 1: School at Munich and then eventually the University of Munich.
Speaker 1: He originally went to study math, but according to reports,
Speaker 1: a professor wouldn't let him into an advanced seminar, and
Speaker 1: that's when he switched to physics. And just imagine what
Speaker 1: the world would be like without the I mean, quantum physics,
Speaker 1: for example, might have a very different approach, particularly when
Speaker 1: you start talking about people like Schrodinger, and we will
Speaker 1: and maybe we'll even mention his cat so uh. He
Speaker 1: at the university, he studied physics with professors like Arnold
Speaker 1: Johannes Wilhelm Sommerfeld, who was a theoretical physicist. Uh he
Speaker 1: was a physicist who would stay on teaching even during
Speaker 1: World War Two, so he stayed in Germany and continued
Speaker 1: to teach. He did get a little upset that the
Speaker 1: more than a little upset that his departments were being
Speaker 1: completely yet purged of anyone who had any sort of
Speaker 1: Jewish background, whether they self identified as Jewish or if
Speaker 1: they had maybe an ancestor the three generations back who
Speaker 1: was Jewish. Sure. Also, according to some reports, the Nazis
Speaker 1: considered the theoretical physics as a field to be Jewish. Yes, yes,
Speaker 1: because there were there were so many Jewish thinkers who
Speaker 1: were the leaders of theoretical physics that the Nazis looked
Speaker 1: down upon the entire discipline as being something that was
Speaker 1: impure and should be completely purged. And in fact, instead
Speaker 1: they wanted to have Deutsche physique that's German physics as
Speaker 1: a study as opposed to theoretical physics, so that would
Speaker 1: also disrupt the advances that could have happened during that time.
Speaker 1: Another professor was Wilhelm Karl Ferner Otto, Fritz Franvien. You're
Speaker 1: just enjoying saying these names, aren't you. Wil Helm veen
Speaker 1: Is usually how we we say that, but yes, you're
Speaker 1: The answer to that question is yes, I love I
Speaker 1: love saying German names. Uh. He was a physicist and
Speaker 1: he focused on black body radiation and electromagnetics magnetism rather
Speaker 1: and he passed away in so he died before World
Speaker 1: War two began. He died before the Nazis had really
Speaker 1: taken control of Germany. Um there was Alfred Pringsheim who
Speaker 1: was a professor of mathematics and had Jewish roots. During
Speaker 1: the Nazi regime, he would see his entire fortune taken
Speaker 1: from him. Everything he had inherited a huge fortune and
Speaker 1: everything he owned was taken by the Nazis. He was
Speaker 1: eventually forced to change his name to Alfred Israel Prinsheim
Speaker 1: because of his Jewish ancestry. One wonderfully racist, you know,
Speaker 1: the Nazis were not known for being subtle with the
Speaker 1: way that they treated any one of Jewish heritage. And
Speaker 1: then a fourth professor was Arthur Rosenthal, who had a
Speaker 1: focus on geometry as well as dynamical systems, also had
Speaker 1: Jewish roots. He would be forced from his position in
Speaker 1: nineteen thirty six by the Nazis and would eventually immigrate
Speaker 1: to the United States and nineteen nine and taught at
Speaker 1: the University of Michigan, which has come up a lot
Speaker 1: in our conversations recently because that's where Sid went to.
Speaker 1: But he taught the University of Michigan, then eventually taught
Speaker 1: at the University of New Mexico and then later at
Speaker 1: Purdue University. So these were the four professors who really
Speaker 1: kind of sparked Heisenberg's fascination with physics and mathematics, and
Speaker 1: this is founding in in those subjects exactly, So Somerfeld, Veen, Pringsheim,
Speaker 1: and Rosenthal Uh. Then in nineteen two Heisenberg went to
Speaker 1: Goodingen Goodingen as a University of Goodingen to study physics
Speaker 1: under some more famous physicists, including Max Bourne, whose focus
Speaker 1: was on quantum mechanics, particularly in statistical interpretation of the
Speaker 1: wave functioned, which we will talk about again and a
Speaker 1: little bit because Schrodinger was definitely a wave functioned guy.
Speaker 1: As it turns out, Heisenberg was different. He did not
Speaker 1: really look at the wave function of quantum physics. He
Speaker 1: was looking at something else. And now I'll explain that
Speaker 1: when we get there, because that's fun for me. Um.
Speaker 1: The born Max Boorne was also the director of theoretical
Speaker 1: physics at the university and was Jewish, so he immigrated
Speaker 1: to the United Kingdom when the Nazis came into power
Speaker 1: in Germany and continued to research particle physics, well well
Speaker 1: not quite particle physics, quantum physics, and theoretical physics, as
Speaker 1: well as teaching in the UK. Then you had James Frank,
Speaker 1: who was a physicistant, studied atomic and subatomic collisions, particularly
Speaker 1: electrons colliding with adams, and also was of Jewish heritage.
Speaker 1: So he would leave Germany in nineteen thirty three for
Speaker 1: the United States and would later participate in what was
Speaker 1: known as the Manhattan Project. We could do a full
Speaker 1: episode on the Manhattan Project that in fact. Yeah, it's
Speaker 1: an amazing story. Um. And here's another great story with
Speaker 1: James Frank. So he won the Nobel Prize in n
Speaker 1: for physics. He left the gold medal, the Nobel Prize
Speaker 1: medal back in Germany when he left to essentially flee
Speaker 1: to the United States. Um. There was another physicist named
Speaker 1: George de Heavasy. And I know I'm saying that name wrong,
Speaker 1: so I greatly apologize. But for once, we're talking about
Speaker 1: someone who's not German, so I can't say his name,
Speaker 1: but he he in order to protect this gold medal
Speaker 1: from being taken by the Nazis and melted down, he
Speaker 1: dissolved the metal and acid and then put the solution
Speaker 1: on a shelf, so it's a solution with dissolved gold
Speaker 1: on the shelf. World War two is over, he goes back,
Speaker 1: the solution is still on the shelf. He then precipitates
Speaker 1: that solution, precipitating the gold out of the acid, and
Speaker 1: he used the gold to melt it back into the
Speaker 1: metal and meant a new and meant a new metal
Speaker 1: so that they can give it uh back to James Frank.
Speaker 1: So that I thought was a really cool story. Then
Speaker 1: there's another professor he studied under was David Hilbert was
Speaker 1: a mathematician who focused on geometry and functional analysis who
Speaker 1: retired in n so he lived to see the Nazis
Speaker 1: purge Germany of Jewish mathematicians and physicists, and was later
Speaker 1: asked at a state dinner. He was actually asked a
Speaker 1: question about what was the state of mathematics after it
Speaker 1: had been quote unquote free of Jewish influence, and his
Speaker 1: response was, there's no study of mathematics anymore. He was
Speaker 1: essentially saying that the actions of the Nazis had effectively
Speaker 1: into the entire field because they had they had removed
Speaker 1: or or had caused to flee all of the leading
Speaker 1: thinkers and instead, including like Einstein. So they were turning
Speaker 1: mathematics and science into a political thing, and by doing that,
Speaker 1: they were saying that these other things that did not
Speaker 1: fit that political regime as invalid. And that's not the
Speaker 1: way science works, not the way mathematics works, but that's
Speaker 1: how we're demanding it. It can be a very effective
Speaker 1: means of controlling a population by controlling their education. Sure,
Speaker 1: but also it also ends up meaning that you really you,
Speaker 1: you just throw a huge monkey wrench into any kind
Speaker 1: of advancement in those fields. So before World War two,
Speaker 1: this is this is all happening before World War two,
Speaker 1: and Heisenberg is studying under these different professors, so during
Speaker 1: these years he has the ability to really pursue his
Speaker 1: interests in theoretical physics and mathematics. So, uh, this was
Speaker 1: on the in the nineteen twenties, and so it was
Speaker 1: before even the Third Wreck was coming into power at all, right, Right,
Speaker 1: So that these are in the years between World War
Speaker 1: One and the Nazis rise to power. So during those years,
Speaker 1: that's when Heisenberg was studying. And while many of his
Speaker 1: professors would end up having to flee or would be
Speaker 1: removed from their jobs, at this time none of that
Speaker 1: was necessarily evident that that was going to happen, So
Speaker 1: he spent his time really talking with some of the
Speaker 1: leading thinkers of the day when it comes to theoretical
Speaker 1: physics and mathematics, right um so Ine he earned his
Speaker 1: PhD from the University of Munich and um went to
Speaker 1: become an assistant to his old professor Maxi Born at
Speaker 1: the University of getting In and so in four he
Speaker 1: would go to the University of Copenhagen and begin work
Speaker 1: with Niels Henrik David Bore, who was Danish, not German,
Speaker 1: but a Danish physicist and uh and of course he
Speaker 1: was really interested in atomic radiation and atomic structure, and
Speaker 1: we talked about the Boor model of the atom earlier
Speaker 1: in the podcast um so. In nineteen six Heisenberg would
Speaker 1: go to the University of Copenhagen for about a year
Speaker 1: and then leave. But in ninety six there was a
Speaker 1: position opening opening up at the University of Copenhagen for
Speaker 1: a lecturer in theoretical physics. So Boor recommended Heisenberg, thinking
Speaker 1: that Heisenberg was an up and coming leader in this space,
Speaker 1: and so Heisenberg became the lecturer and theoretical physics at
Speaker 1: the University of Copenhagen. Bore himself would be at Copenhagen
Speaker 1: for quite some time until nineteen forty three, where he
Speaker 1: would eventually flee to Sweden to escape the Nazis. Nineteen five,
Speaker 1: that's when Heisenberg publishes his theory of quantum mechanics. So
Speaker 1: he was of the ripe old age of twin d
Speaker 1: three years old, twenty three years old, and he is uh,
Speaker 1: he is he is presenting a completely um well, he's
Speaker 1: presenting his own, his own perspective on what quantum mechanics
Speaker 1: actually is. As we'll see, that ends up getting kind
Speaker 1: of assimilated into a unified view by looking at some
Speaker 1: some other theories that Heisenberg did not necessarily agree with
Speaker 1: at the time. Nope, not so much at all. As
Speaker 1: it turns out, physicists, like any other type of human being,
Speaker 1: can occasionally get very married to specific ideas and maybe
Speaker 1: a little bit snarky. Yeah, there's some there's some great
Speaker 1: quotes that will be reading. Yeah, but yeah, it turns
Speaker 1: out that not everybody agreed on the behavior of particles
Speaker 1: at that level because they were first of all, there
Speaker 1: was no way to really directly observe them, so it's
Speaker 1: all hypothetical, and it was mostly things like your equations
Speaker 1: are are not as easy to understand my equations, therefore
Speaker 1: my equations are better. That kind of thing. In fact,
Speaker 1: that really is one of the arguments. So in n seven,
Speaker 1: at the age of twenty six, you know, he's he's
Speaker 1: definitely hitting that that middle age there for physicists. Twenty
Speaker 1: six years old, he becomes the professor of theoretical physics
Speaker 1: at the University of Leipsig and this made him the
Speaker 1: youngest full professor in Germany at the time. Yeah, so
Speaker 1: he was certainly making a name for himself in the
Speaker 1: in the academic world. In nineteen nine he goes on
Speaker 1: a lecture tour of the United States and Japan and India,
Speaker 1: uh and in nineteen thirty two he received the Nobel
Speaker 1: Prize in Physics for his discovery of the allotropic forms
Speaker 1: of hydrogen. It was is for from that paper that
Speaker 1: he had published about quantum mechanics. Out of that, one
Speaker 1: of the applications was this discovery. Right. So, in case
Speaker 1: you're wondering what the heck is an allotrope, it's a
Speaker 1: different structural modification of an element. So let's take carbon.
Speaker 1: Carbon is a great example. When you have a certain
Speaker 1: structure of carbon, it forms graphite. Different structure of carbon
Speaker 1: forms diamond too, slightly different substances. Yeah, these these different
Speaker 1: these different manifestations of the same element. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: it's the exact same element, it's just the way that
Speaker 1: it's been or the way that it arranges itself determines
Speaker 1: its qualities. And graphite and diamond are like nine day
Speaker 1: they're incredibly different. So that's what an allotrope is is
Speaker 1: these different manifestations of an element that have very different qualities.
Speaker 1: With the case of hydrogen, we're talking about ortho hydrogen
Speaker 1: and parahydrogen. Don't ask me what that actually means, because
Speaker 1: I'm not a physicist or a chemist, so I am
Speaker 1: incapable of answering me neither. I am. I'm at a
Speaker 1: loss there, but I do know that In ninety seven,
Speaker 1: Heisenberg married Elizabeth Schumacher, who he would go on to
Speaker 1: have seven children with over the course of their marriage. Wow.
Speaker 1: Now this is also the time when we're starting to
Speaker 1: see the Nazis come into power in World War Two
Speaker 1: is beginning, uh, and this was this becomes a pretty
Speaker 1: muddy area of Heisenberg's life because it's hard to know
Speaker 1: which historical records are the most accurate. Right, There's there's
Speaker 1: a lot of contention within the historical community about um
Speaker 1: what exactly Heisenberg's personal views and u and roles were
Speaker 1: in In all of this, he had become the target
Speaker 1: of of Johannes Stark. Na, I'm just er apologize our English.
Speaker 1: Our English pronunciation in German pronunciation are different and and
Speaker 1: and to be fair, the vocal downside of my family
Speaker 1: is is really more like Polish Russian. So Johannes Stark
Speaker 1: was also a physicist, but he was and he was
Speaker 1: a physicist in fact, who in his UH in the
Speaker 1: twenties had published a paper by Einstein. He had act
Speaker 1: um Uh solicited Einstein to write a paper for the
Speaker 1: publication that he was editing, and it was a publication
Speaker 1: that would eventually lead Einstein to ruminate upon the general
Speaker 1: theory of relativity. It was sort of a kind of
Speaker 1: a precursor to his general theory, which meant that in
Speaker 1: a way, Johannes Stark was very much part of what
Speaker 1: made Einstein a worldwide phenomenon. Now, the reason why I
Speaker 1: say that's really interesting, or perhaps he might even say ironic,
Speaker 1: is that Johannes Stark would align himself with the Nazi regime.
Speaker 1: He wanted essentially to be the fewer of physics, which
Speaker 1: is that's I mean, that's exactly the way I saw
Speaker 1: it worded when I was reading the biography, which is
Speaker 1: kind of terrifying. But he he also aligned himself with
Speaker 1: the Deutsche Physics movement, the the German physics movement, and
Speaker 1: he said that because Heisenberg continued to teach Einstein's theories
Speaker 1: and the classroom in Einstein's theories, of course we're not
Speaker 1: part of this Deutsche physics, uh movement, that he was
Speaker 1: what what Stark would call a white Jew or an
Speaker 1: arian Jew, someone who is not Jewish by heritage, but
Speaker 1: is by association, because he continues to teach these thoughts
Speaker 1: that Jewish mathematicians and physicists had come up with, so
Speaker 1: that somehow that meant that he was a traitor. Yes, so,
Speaker 1: um So Stark was very much opposed to Heisenberg and
Speaker 1: didn't feel that Heisenberg should should have any sort of
Speaker 1: position of authority. That did not stop Heisenberg from having
Speaker 1: that position. He was obviously very important to the university
Speaker 1: and was one of the few protected. Of course, part
Speaker 1: of it was that he did not actually have any
Speaker 1: Jewish ancestry that anyone could determine, so that kept him
Speaker 1: somewhat safe, right sure, um you know, there's part of
Speaker 1: the debate about Heisenberg is whether or not he um
Speaker 1: he stayed in order to uh to help preserve Germany's
Speaker 1: scientific and cultural communities, or whether he was actually working
Speaker 1: for the Nazi Party. Um he he was made the
Speaker 1: director of the German Adam bomb project and spent about
Speaker 1: five years working on that, supposedly, during which another portion
Speaker 1: of the debate is whether he was working towards a
Speaker 1: nuclear reactor or nuclear weapons, and no one is really
Speaker 1: entirely sure. Supposedly he gave a report to Nazi official
Speaker 1: Albert spear Um that as of one or so, it
Speaker 1: would take three or four years for them to build
Speaker 1: a nuclear weapon and that that is part of why
Speaker 1: the Nazi Party said, I'll forget this nuclear weapon thing,
Speaker 1: let's go with nuclear reactors to help drive Sure, um
Speaker 1: and uh so, but but you know, that's that's There's
Speaker 1: been other research. Um. For for example, one Paul Lawrence
Speaker 1: Rose wrote an entire book called Heisenberg and the Nazi
Speaker 1: Stomic Bomb Project that stated that, uh, Heisenberg wasn't being
Speaker 1: evasive to the Nazi Party, that rather, he was being
Speaker 1: truthful due to a basic misunderstanding of the way that
Speaker 1: nuclear fission worked, and that by the time he figured
Speaker 1: it out, it was when the war was already winding
Speaker 1: down and he started to hear about the atrocities that
Speaker 1: the Nazi Party had committed and kind of reactively recreated
Speaker 1: this image of himself as as having been an anti
Speaker 1: Nazi the entire time. And that's the thing is that
Speaker 1: it's it's impossible for us to say one way or
Speaker 1: the other because there are conflicting reports and and really
Speaker 1: it's you know, it's just it's a it's a difficult thing. Again.
Speaker 1: Once again, we take our our our podcasting hats off
Speaker 1: to our sister podcast Stuff you missed in history class
Speaker 1: that deals with this kind of stuff all the time.
Speaker 1: Oh sure, and and especially you know, everything surrounding the
Speaker 1: Nazi Party is incredibly sticky. Um. You know, some some
Speaker 1: of my favorite favorite stories about that time or stuff
Speaker 1: like like like like Lenie Reefinstahl, who was one of
Speaker 1: the who was the propagandist or a documentary filmmaker for
Speaker 1: the Nazi Party, And I mean she she took tea
Speaker 1: with Hitler frequently and has claimed forever that she never
Speaker 1: knew about the atrocities that were going on. And so
Speaker 1: it's it's it's one of those things like who do
Speaker 1: you believe? Yeah, and uh yeah, getting back into into
Speaker 1: the what Heisenberg was going through at this time. So
Speaker 1: there is there's an argument to be made that he
Speaker 1: was trying to preserve the scientific community in Germany as
Speaker 1: best he could, because there were others who were also
Speaker 1: trying to do that. Max Planck, for example, was also
Speaker 1: trying to um to do that. Although Plank had hoped
Speaker 1: that the the rise of the Nazis was just a
Speaker 1: temporary kind of kerfuffle and that it wasn't going to
Speaker 1: balloon into this incredible conflict that would span the entire globe,
Speaker 1: he just had no he had no concept of that
Speaker 1: actually happening, so he had I had to stay and
Speaker 1: to try and keep the German departments of mathematics and
Speaker 1: physics as intact as possible. So it could be that
Speaker 1: that's the case, We honestly don't know. In ninety one,
Speaker 1: Heisenberg becomes the professor of physics at the University of
Speaker 1: Berlin and the director of the kaiserville Helm Institute for Physics,
Speaker 1: and in nineteen forty five Heisenberg is taken prisoner by
Speaker 1: American troops and is sent to England. UH. He's freed
Speaker 1: in nineteen forty six and returns to Germany and helps
Speaker 1: rebuild the Institute for Physics at Guttingen and then UH
Speaker 1: that eventually becomes the Max Planck Institute for Physics, which
Speaker 1: would eventually relocate, and I believe I believe Heisenberg personally
Speaker 1: renamed the institute them on Max Plunk. And he would
Speaker 1: continue to travel and give lectures about his work, in
Speaker 1: fact doing so almost right up to when he died.
Speaker 1: He died in on February one, nineteen seventy six, after
Speaker 1: developing cancer, so he was very much active in the
Speaker 1: world of lectures and academia. Well after the end of
Speaker 1: World War Two. Yeah, towards the end of his life
Speaker 1: he became interested in plasma physics and a thermonuclear processes.
Speaker 1: So see, it's uh, you know, it's certainly one of
Speaker 1: those interesting timelines. And in a moment, we're going to
Speaker 1: really dive into what his contributions were in the field
Speaker 1: of quantum mechanics and give a full explanation or as
Speaker 1: as full as we possibly can make it of what
Speaker 1: the uncertainty principle is all about, as well as why
Speaker 1: it's important in technology, because yes, this does have to
Speaker 1: do with tech. It's just going to take us a
Speaker 1: while to get there. But before we jump into that,
Speaker 1: let's take a quick break to thank our sponsor. Alright,
Speaker 1: So now it's time to dive into quantum mechanics. I
Speaker 1: gotta tell you, I'm not really certain about this. I'm
Speaker 1: just gonna keep making that joke excellent until it's funny. Um. So, yeah,
Speaker 1: he was. Heisenberg had worked in theoretical physics and quantum
Speaker 1: mechanics during the early early days of the discipline, and
Speaker 1: he was particularly interested in studying the radiation from an atom.
Speaker 1: But here's the thing that he was also interested in
Speaker 1: seeing what was actually observable, you know, really look at
Speaker 1: the atom and see what you could actually see it
Speaker 1: because we had all these hypothetical particles in these theoretical particles,
Speaker 1: things that that should exist based upon the math involved.
Speaker 1: But but but the science at the time was based
Speaker 1: on on bombarding these these tiny, tiny, tiny sub atomic
Speaker 1: particles with um with things like gamma radiation and then
Speaker 1: observing what we could observe, right, And so he began
Speaker 1: to differentiate between what you could observe and what you
Speaker 1: could not, and then he started to notice things. He
Speaker 1: said that, you know, we can't really always assign a
Speaker 1: position in space to a specific electron at any given time,
Speaker 1: and we can't follow electrons around their orbits. It's it's
Speaker 1: not like a planetary orbit that we can watch continuously, right,
Speaker 1: It's more like there's an area that an electron could
Speaker 1: be in, as opposed to we can specifically point out
Speaker 1: that this is where the electron is at any given moment,
Speaker 1: or this is the direction it is traveling at any
Speaker 1: given moment. And this would start to plant the seed
Speaker 1: in his mind for the uncertainty principle. So first he
Speaker 1: said that, you know, bores postulation that the the the
Speaker 1: orbits of electrons are around the nucleus was more or
Speaker 1: less correct. You couldn't actually be certain of what those
Speaker 1: orbits were because the unobservable nature of these. Yeah, there's
Speaker 1: just no way to assign a figure to this. You
Speaker 1: can't say the electron is in uh, this particular quadrant
Speaker 1: around the nucleus um and you couldn't talk about really
Speaker 1: the electron's velocity either. Velocity, by the way, is speed
Speaker 1: plus direction, right, And so he started to say that
Speaker 1: instead of using UM classic numbers, the kinds of numbers
Speaker 1: that we would use to describe human scale physics, that
Speaker 1: that we needed to use UM matrices. Yeah, and a
Speaker 1: matrix is essentially an abstract mathematical structure. So this was
Speaker 1: almost like talking about probabilities. It's it's kind of fuzzy,
Speaker 1: it's not specific, it's not precise. And in fact, that
Speaker 1: was Heisenberg's argument, was that precision is something that you
Speaker 1: could strive for, but you were never ever going to get. Uh.
Speaker 1: He kind of arrived at this gradually. So in nine
Speaker 1: he was involved in a bit of a spat, a debate,
Speaker 1: if you will, about a theoretical spat actually was real
Speaker 1: spat about theory. Uh, but it was on. So you
Speaker 1: had two sides to this debate. You had Heisenberg and
Speaker 1: his his fellow physicists who thought of quantum mechanics in
Speaker 1: the term of these matrix these these this abstract mathematic
Speaker 1: way of describing the position or motion of an electron,
Speaker 1: because again he was arguing that you could not define
Speaker 1: it in a way that was like it's at x,
Speaker 1: y and z coordinates. You could not do that, right,
Speaker 1: I was using the matrix. And there was another set
Speaker 1: of scientists who were trying to describe some atomic particles
Speaker 1: as as waves the way that we would electromagnetic radiation.
Speaker 1: Uli r own Trodinger, Yeah, Schrodinger Singer and is kitty cat?
Speaker 1: Actually Schrodinger and the cat story is kind of interesting,
Speaker 1: just a little side notes. So you've probably heard of
Speaker 1: Schrodinger's cat, where Schrodinger was, uh, kind of giving a
Speaker 1: thought experiment kind of thing to explain how how this
Speaker 1: this other form, the matrix form of quantum mechanics is
Speaker 1: a little weird. The idea that you have a cat
Speaker 1: inside a box, and inside that box you also have
Speaker 1: a little canister with poisonous gas in it. And there's
Speaker 1: some explosive that has a that that will go off
Speaker 1: at some point and I am giving a variation classic.
Speaker 1: So so within half an hour, there's a fifty chance
Speaker 1: that the explosive inside that canstor has gone off and
Speaker 1: released the poisonous gas and little killed the cat. Yes,
Speaker 1: Kitty is no more. One life down, eight to go.
Speaker 1: There's also a fifty percent chance that the that the
Speaker 1: explosion has not yet happened, and that Kitty is fine
Speaker 1: but possibly very bored inside this box. And so the
Speaker 1: thing is that because of uh, this this weird quantum effect,
Speaker 1: and keep in mind this is really something that only
Speaker 1: happens at the quantum level. When you get up to
Speaker 1: the macro level that we see this is not actually
Speaker 1: the case. But the idea is that the cat is
Speaker 1: both alive and dead at the same time, and superposition
Speaker 1: that has both states and superposition, and it's only when
Speaker 1: you open up the box and observe the cat that
Speaker 1: one of those two possibilities becomes true is true, and
Speaker 1: the other one just becomes yeah, it goes away, and
Speaker 1: that then you have either the live cat or the
Speaker 1: dead cat, so that the cat is said to be
Speaker 1: alive and debt at the same time until you observe it,
Speaker 1: and that's when reality snaps into place and you suddenly
Speaker 1: get one of the two results. And it was kind
Speaker 1: of a way of saying, like this is just, you know,
Speaker 1: kind of crazy to be one of those things we
Speaker 1: always refer to anyway. So Schroinger's cat and Heisenberg's and
Speaker 1: certainty principle both are trying to explain various weird things
Speaker 1: about the quantum level. There's another one that we can
Speaker 1: touch on also that gets confused with Heisenberg's and certainty principle,
Speaker 1: which is the idea that by observing something you actually
Speaker 1: affect the outcome. So, in other words, when we're looking
Speaker 1: at sub atomic particles, simply shining light onto them affects
Speaker 1: their movement because we're talking about photons impacting subatomic particles,
Speaker 1: which changes the pathway, which means just by taking an
Speaker 1: observation in a measurement, you have changed what as what
Speaker 1: was going to happen. So it makes it even more
Speaker 1: impossible to predict things based upon the behaviors of stuff,
Speaker 1: because just by observing it, you change what that outcome
Speaker 1: actually is. Now that's not heisenberg'sun certainty principle either, but
Speaker 1: it often gets confused. So we've got this debate. We've
Speaker 1: got the wave mechanics debate, and that's Schrodinger's side, and
Speaker 1: we've got the matrices debate, and that's heisenberg side. And
Speaker 1: the debate was not always civil. Uh, there was there.
Speaker 1: There was a quote that Heisenberg made to another physicist,
Speaker 1: Wolfgang Ernst Pauli, which was, the more I think about
Speaker 1: the physical portion of Schrodinger's theory, the more repulsive I
Speaker 1: find it what Schrodinger writes about the visualizability. Visualizability, Boy,
Speaker 1: that's a hard word. Of his theory is probably not
Speaker 1: quite right. In other words, it's crap thick burn. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that was a little that was a little rough. So
Speaker 1: here's what the difference was between these two. Schroedinger's approach
Speaker 1: required less complicated math to explain the relationship of a
Speaker 1: subotomic particles movement and and and uh, it's it's position
Speaker 1: around a nucleus, for example, an electron around the nucleus
Speaker 1: as an example. But it furthermore explained some of the
Speaker 1: things that Heisenberg's theory couldn't really fully explain. It's sort
Speaker 1: of it's sort of pushed them under the rug in
Speaker 1: a way, because Heisenberg's approach showed that there were these
Speaker 1: little quantum jumps quantum leaps as if, yes, exactly, there's
Speaker 1: quantum leaps when you cannot quite solve the problem, or
Speaker 1: you solve the problem and then you have to leap
Speaker 1: into the next body and hopefully your next leap is
Speaker 1: the one that takes you home. No, in this case,
Speaker 1: the quantum jumps were the fact that you would see
Speaker 1: electrons behave in a weird way, like suddenly an electron
Speaker 1: would behave as if it had a higher amount of
Speaker 1: energy than it normally would, and that was, you know,
Speaker 1: Heisenberg's approach showed these jumps well with Schroedinger's approach, because
Speaker 1: we're talking a continuous wave a wave function. It smooths
Speaker 1: everything out, so you don't have these jagged, you know jumps,
Speaker 1: you have just a smooth transition um. So the Schrodinger's
Speaker 1: argument was that, hey, you know, I've looked at the
Speaker 1: way you are calculating this, and I look at the
Speaker 1: way I'm calculating this, and it turns out the outcomes
Speaker 1: are the same. We're getting the same results, but mine
Speaker 1: requires less complicated math and not all this mathematic abstraction
Speaker 1: that you are insisting upon. So therefore I'm right and
Speaker 1: you're wrong, or at least mine is more eloquent. So
Speaker 1: you've got these two parties of physicists getting a little
Speaker 1: caddy schroedanjer caddy. Perhaps, um, there are alive cats and
Speaker 1: dead cats. But then, uh, it's interesting because you started
Speaker 1: getting into other physicists getting into the game, including Ernst
Speaker 1: Pascual Jordan's or Jordans I suppose, who was a German
Speaker 1: physicist who would actually later joined the Nazi Party become
Speaker 1: part of that movement, in fact enlisted in the Luftwaffe Um.
Speaker 1: And then you had Paul de Rak who was an
Speaker 1: English physicist who both created unified equations that took the
Speaker 1: wave function approach and the matrices approach and combine them
Speaker 1: into what was called a transformation theory, which is the
Speaker 1: very basis of quantum mechanics. So again this is all theoretical.
Speaker 1: It's essentially trying physicists trying to figure out how to
Speaker 1: to apply the same sort of observation that they had
Speaker 1: in classical interpretation of physics on the macro scale to
Speaker 1: the quantum level, which is the incredibly tiny scale, the
Speaker 1: atomic or subatomic scale at which the rules do not apply. Right. So,
Speaker 1: but the transformation theory ended up showing that there was
Speaker 1: a combination of both Schroedinger's approach and Heisenberg's approach the
Speaker 1: sort of wave particle duality that we know about with
Speaker 1: quantum mechanics. That's kind of what was coming out of
Speaker 1: this discussion. So instead of them both saying no, I'm right, no,
Speaker 1: I'm right, these guys are like, well, actually you're both right.
Speaker 1: Nic Yeah, light is a particle and a wave, and
Speaker 1: it gets boy, toy doesn't get even more crazy, Like
Speaker 1: it seems magical to those of us who are used
Speaker 1: to classical physics on that macro scale, because if things
Speaker 1: on the macro scale behave the same way that things
Speaker 1: in the quantum scale behaved, it would be like we
Speaker 1: were living in Harry Potter World or something right right there.
Speaker 1: There would be a lot of a lot of you know,
Speaker 1: people suddenly jumping to the left right, yeah, because you know,
Speaker 1: or you could never really be sure where someone was
Speaker 1: or how quickly they were moving and and emitting light.
Speaker 1: When they did it, they'd be half dead and half
Speaker 1: alive until you looked at them. Yeah, there's a whole
Speaker 1: bunch of things that would be pretty bizarre in our world.
Speaker 1: Lauren and I have a bit more to say about
Speaker 1: Heisenberg in this classic episode, but before we get to that,
Speaker 1: let's take a quick break and thank our sponsor. So,
Speaker 1: Heisenberg studied Jordan and DeRos papers and found that there
Speaker 1: were problems when ever each right to measure the basic
Speaker 1: physical variables appearing in the equations. And by physical variables,
Speaker 1: I mean an electrons position and its momentum. So that
Speaker 1: led Heisenberg to create the famous principle of uncertainty, which
Speaker 1: you did in ven. We usually call that Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.
Speaker 1: So here's here's how it breaks down. The more precisely
Speaker 1: you determine the position of a sub atomic particle, for example,
Speaker 1: an electron around the nucleus. So the more precisely you
Speaker 1: determine its position, the less precisely you can know about
Speaker 1: the momentum at that moment, and vice versa. So if
Speaker 1: you more precisely determine the subotomic particle's momentum, the less
Speaker 1: precisely you can know its actual position. Right, Um, So Specifically,
Speaker 1: he was saying that um that running the calculation for this,
Speaker 1: for this determination of the position and the momentum um
Speaker 1: necessarily contains errors, the product of which physically cannot be
Speaker 1: less than the quantum constant h plucks constant, which is
Speaker 1: that the smallest unit the quantum of action in an atom. Right,
Speaker 1: And so what he's saying here is that it doesn't
Speaker 1: matter how advanced your measurement apparatus is. In fact, there
Speaker 1: was one point where More criticized Heisenberg's approach because he
Speaker 1: said that he was using essentially microscopes that were not
Speaker 1: precise enough, and in fact I made an error. And
Speaker 1: then Heisenberg got really upset a Bore, and the two
Speaker 1: of them had a falling out that lasted about a year,
Speaker 1: and then Heisenberg eventually wrote a paper and acknowledge He said,
Speaker 1: you know, Bore has criticized this because of such and such.
Speaker 1: An acknowledged that in fact, there was an error, but
Speaker 1: said that ultimately that error was beside the point because
Speaker 1: it would not matter how precise that was, the fact
Speaker 1: remained that the more you would learn about one thing,
Speaker 1: the less you could know about the other. That's the
Speaker 1: uncertainty or complimentarianism is another way that some people have
Speaker 1: said that there's this complementary relationship between the momentum and
Speaker 1: the position. So in case you want to know what
Speaker 1: momentum is, that's mass times velocity, velossities that speed and direction.
Speaker 1: So that's important to know. So on the human scale,
Speaker 1: this uncertainty is completely negligible. There's you might as well
Speaker 1: just throw it out the window because on our scale
Speaker 1: it just doesn't that it doesn't factor into it. It's
Speaker 1: such a tiny thing. But when you look at the
Speaker 1: smaller scales, this tiny tiny thing becomes huge because you're
Speaker 1: looking at things on an incredibly small scale. And because
Speaker 1: we can't know but with precision both a subatomics particles
Speaker 1: a position and its momentum, we cannot really make predictions
Speaker 1: about what's going to happen in the future. And in fact,
Speaker 1: uh this is where Heisenberg says causality becomes a problem
Speaker 1: because if you cannot determine that subatomic particles position and momentum,
Speaker 1: you cannot actually know what's going to happen next. So
Speaker 1: if you were to expand this out, now this is
Speaker 1: this is to the absurd, But if you were to
Speaker 1: expand this out, you could say that you cannot for
Speaker 1: certain know that by doing a certain action, a particular
Speaker 1: effect is going to follow. That's not really the case
Speaker 1: with classical physics again because we're talking up the macro scale,
Speaker 1: but on the qualm scale, that's the case. We cannot
Speaker 1: really know what will happen from one moment to the
Speaker 1: next because we can't know enough about all the factors
Speaker 1: to make that determination, which is which is kind of
Speaker 1: wonderful and kind of terrifying right simultaneously, and though it's
Speaker 1: a cat in a box yep. And and then this
Speaker 1: also ties into that observation problem, right because if we
Speaker 1: even if we observe the phenomenon, then we're affecting, we're
Speaker 1: changing the phenomens. We're making it even more impossible to
Speaker 1: determine what the effect is going to be. The cause
Speaker 1: and effect at the scale is something that becomes purely
Speaker 1: theoretical because as soon as you try and apply practical
Speaker 1: approaches to it, it all breaks down. And we promise
Speaker 1: this really does relate directly to technology. Yep, we're getting there.
Speaker 1: So we then show that light can be interpreted as
Speaker 1: both wave functions and as a particle. That's with Boor
Speaker 1: and Heisenberg together working they were able to kind of
Speaker 1: come to this conclusion. And as soon as you decide
Speaker 1: how to observe a particular experiment, that interpretation becomes true
Speaker 1: and the their interpretation collapses. So in other words, if
Speaker 1: you're looking at light as a wave, you see it
Speaker 1: as a wave. If you look at light as a particle,
Speaker 1: you see it as a particle, and the other half
Speaker 1: of that interpretation goes away, which is insane. They were
Speaker 1: talking about it about how how you observe the experiment,
Speaker 1: we disturb untouched nature and we become limited and learning
Speaker 1: about nature as it really is. In other words, we
Speaker 1: have a very narrow view into what reality is, and
Speaker 1: once we focus that view on something, we cannot know
Speaker 1: everything else that's outside of that view. So imagine that
Speaker 1: you have a telescope and you are using that telescope
Speaker 1: to look at something that's on the distant horizon, and
Speaker 1: you can see that, you can see the thing that's
Speaker 1: on the horizon, but everything else has faded away. It's
Speaker 1: like all of that's just gone. That's kind of what
Speaker 1: the sort of an analogy as to what he was
Speaker 1: saying here, which is disturbing to think about in a way.
Speaker 1: But that's how reality works, so you've got to kind
Speaker 1: of deal with it um. So Heisenberg's uncertainty principle in
Speaker 1: Shringer's wave functions become the basis of the Copenhagen interpretation
Speaker 1: of quantum mechanics. And uh, the reason why we even
Speaker 1: did this podcast besides the fact that I think someone
Speaker 1: actually asked us to and Lauren's going to look that up,
Speaker 1: but the reason why we're doing this is because Heisenberg's
Speaker 1: uncertainty principle plays into the way that we use electronics today,
Speaker 1: because now we're working with electronics that have components that
Speaker 1: are on this tiny, tiny skin at least the nano scale,
Speaker 1: which is one one factor up from atomic but far away.
Speaker 1: The flow of electrons is critical for modern artronics absolutely,
Speaker 1: and while we're making these tiny transistors or transistor elements
Speaker 1: that are part of these integrated circuits, you know that
Speaker 1: the whole purpose of transistors is to guide the flow
Speaker 1: of electrons to allow them to pass or to not
Speaker 1: allow them to pass through a circuit. Well, if you
Speaker 1: make the gates really thin, then Heisenberg's and certainty principle
Speaker 1: tells us that there is a kind of a zone
Speaker 1: in which you might find an electron, and because of
Speaker 1: the uncertainty about the electron's momentum or energy, sometimes that
Speaker 1: electron can jump up an energy level because of our uncertainty.
Speaker 1: We we you know, it just will pop up an
Speaker 1: energy level and then pop back down, which means that
Speaker 1: can be found in a slightly larger zone than you
Speaker 1: would not necessarily expect based upon its actual energy level,
Speaker 1: which can be problematic when when you've got these incredibly
Speaker 1: thin gates that are supposed to be keeping an electrons
Speaker 1: on one side, right that that zone might extend beyond
Speaker 1: the far side of that gate. And if the zone
Speaker 1: extends beyond the far side of the gate, that means
Speaker 1: that it's possible for an electron to appear on the
Speaker 1: other side of the gate without having actually passed through
Speaker 1: that circuit, which means called electron tunneling. And since it's possible,
Speaker 1: it happens, which which means that, yeah, unless we figure
Speaker 1: out ways of getting around these you know, these these
Speaker 1: fundamental quantum phenomena that we you know, there's a point
Speaker 1: where you cannot make the components any smaller because the
Speaker 1: electrons just won't play ball you're just gonna go every
Speaker 1: way that the fundamental quantum traffic laws, as you put
Speaker 1: it in our exactly. Yeah, yeah, it means that that
Speaker 1: you're you're gonna get errors in your various chips because
Speaker 1: they will not be allowing the or or preventing the
Speaker 1: electrons from flowing the way they're supposed to, because the
Speaker 1: electrons are just gonna be able to tunnel right through
Speaker 1: when when those uh those energy levels bump up uncertainly.
Speaker 1: It's bizarre, it's so weird to think about um. But
Speaker 1: engineers have found ways of working around that, using different
Speaker 1: materials that uh that that minimize this so that they
Speaker 1: can continue to make things smaller and smaller. But we
Speaker 1: will reach a point when that is just not going
Speaker 1: to be the way that chips will be designed anymore.
Speaker 1: Either will will plateau and we won't be able to
Speaker 1: make chips with smaller components, or will find a different
Speaker 1: means of using suba comic particles to process information, and
Speaker 1: we'll move away from electron based chips, which is hard
Speaker 1: to consider. It's really weird to think about. Yeah, that's
Speaker 1: not that that that is beyond my entire brain right now. Yeah, No,
Speaker 1: I'm actually starting to feel a nosebleed coming on because
Speaker 1: I'm a I'm an English literature major. Al Right, well,
Speaker 1: let's let's let's bring this back to something, to something
Speaker 1: a little bit more peaceful and serene. I have I
Speaker 1: have a quote from Heisenberg via via pbs um. He
Speaker 1: once said, natural science does not simply describe and explain nature.
Speaker 1: It's part of the interplay between nature and ourselves. It
Speaker 1: describes nature as exposed to our method of questioning. That's
Speaker 1: pretty cool, which I thought was nice. I thought that
Speaker 1: that was a much less nosebleedy way of saying that
Speaker 1: that we mess stuff up scientifically. And also it also
Speaker 1: is less uh nasty than his note to U or
Speaker 1: note about Schrodinger. Right. So um oh, I found the
Speaker 1: name of the person who requested this via Facebook. This
Speaker 1: was from listener Peter. So Peter asked us about this,
Speaker 1: and I hope that we were able to answer your
Speaker 1: questions to uh your satisfaction. It was certainly to the
Speaker 1: best of our ability, keeping in mind that neither of
Speaker 1: us are theoretical physicists or mathematicians for that matter. Uh.
Speaker 1: Fascinating subject and there are a lot of books out
Speaker 1: there that are really really good about explaining Heisenberg's role
Speaker 1: and also the contributions of his contemporaries, everyone from Einstein
Speaker 1: to Somerville to Schrodinger to Toll, all the great physicists
Speaker 1: of the nineteen twenties and thirties who have really made
Speaker 1: modern technology possible through their discoveries. Well, guys, I hope
Speaker 1: you enjoyed this classic episode of tech Stuff. It was
Speaker 1: fun to go back and look at this episode from
Speaker 1: the archives. I hope you guys enjoyed it. If you
Speaker 1: have any suggestions for future episodes of tech Stuff, whether
Speaker 1: it is a technology, a person who is instrumental in tech,
Speaker 1: maybe a company, Maybe there's someone you want me to interview,
Speaker 1: let me know. Send me a message. The email address
Speaker 1: is tech stuff at how stuff works dot com. Or
Speaker 1: draw me a line on Facebook or Twitter to handle it.
Speaker 1: Both of those is tech stuff hs W. Don't forget
Speaker 1: we have an Instagram account. You should be following it
Speaker 1: by now. You naughty so and so, and I'll talk
Speaker 1: to you again really soon for more on this and
Speaker 1: thousands of other topics. Is it how stuff Works dot
Speaker 1: Com