How Electricity Actually Works

  görünümler 6,272,902

Veritasium

Veritasium

3 aylar önce

This video is sponsored by Brilliant. The first 200 people to sign up via brilliant.org/veritasium get 20% off a yearly subscription.

Special thanks to:
Bruce Sherwood, Ruth Chabay, Aaron Titus, and Steve Spicklemore
matterandinteractions.org
VPython simulation: tinyurl.com/SurfaceCharge

Thanks to Ansys for help with the simulations: www.ansys.com/products/electr...

Huge thanks to Richard Abbott from Caltech for all his modeling

Electrical Engineering TRshowrs:
Electroboom: trshow.info
Alpha Phoenix: trshow.info...
eevblog: trshow.info
Ben Watson: trshow.info/on/gZU.html...
Big Clive: trshow.info
Z Y: trshow.info
NYU Quantum Technology Lab
trshow.info/on/k7i.html...
Dr. Ben Miles
trshow.info/on/UeZ.html...
Further analysis of the large circuit is available here: ve42.co/bigcircuit

Special thanks to Dr Geraint Lewis for bringing up this question in the first place and discussing it with us. Check out his and Dr Chris Ferrie’s new book here: ve42.co/Universe2021

▀▀▀
References:
A great video about the Poynting vector by the Science Asylum: trshow.info/watch/C7tQJ42nGno/video.html

Sefton, I. M. (2002). Understanding electricity and circuits: What the text books don’t tell you. In Science Teachers’ Workshop. -- ve42.co/Sefton

Feynman, R. P., Leighton, R. B., & Sands, M. (1965). The feynman lectures on physics; vol. Ii, chapter 27. American Journal of Physics, 33(9), 750-752. -- ve42.co/Feynman27

Hunt, B. J. (2005). The Maxwellians. Cornell University Press.

Müller, R. (2012). A semiquantitative treatment of surface charges in DC circuits. American Journal of Physics, 80(9), 782-788. -- ve42.co/Muller2012

Galili, I., & Goihbarg, E. (2005). Energy transfer in electrical circuits: A qualitative account. American journal of physics, 73(2), 141-144. -- ve42.co/Galili2004

Deno, D. W. (1976). Transmission line fields. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, 95(5), 1600-1611. -- ve42.co/Deno76

▀▀▀
Special thanks to Patreon supporters: Inconcision, Kelly Snook, TTST, Ross McCawley, Balkrishna Heroor, Chris LaClair, Avi Yashchin, John H. Austin, Jr., OnlineBookClub.org, Dmitry Kuzmichev, Matthew Gonzalez, Eric Sexton, john kiehl, Anton Ragin, Diffbot, Micah Mangione, MJP, Gnare, Dave Kircher, Burt Humburg, Blake Byers, Dumky, Evgeny Skvortsov, Meekay, Bill Linder, Paul Peijzel, Josh Hibschman, Mac Malkawi, Michael Schneider, jim buckmaster, Juan Benet, Ruslan Khroma, Robert Blum, Richard Sundvall, Lee Redden, Vincent, Stephen Wilcox, Marinus Kuivenhoven, Clayton Greenwell, Michael Krugman, Cy 'kkm' K'Nelson, Sam Lutfi, Ron Neal

▀▀▀
Written by Derek Muller
Edited by Derek Muller
Filmed by Trenton Oliver and Petr Lebedev
Animation by Mike Radjabov and Ivy Tello
Additional video/photos supplied by Getty Images
Music from Epidemic Sound and Jonny Hyman
Produced by Derek Muller, Petr Lebedev, and Emily Zhang

YORUMLAR: 18 316
ElectroBOOM
ElectroBOOM 3 aylar önce
This was a greatly detailed video and I think we are pretty much on the same page! Thanks for the shoutout and going through the trouble of clarification. P.S. by the way, the resistor in your experiment didn't quite match the lien impedance, other you would get half your supply voltage right away. But I mean with such small capacitance and inductances, the probing itself could d have added some parasitic components to the lines. PPS: Like I said above "pretty much on the same page"! It is a complex subject, and I think some nuances could have been addressed better. Maybe Derek and I could sit together and react to nuances to clarify things!
Travis Collier
Travis Collier 6 gün önce
@Fabrizio The way Derek explained the toy problem was just bad. He ends up being "right" in a very superficial way which is counter-intuitive for the wrong reasons. It seems like there are a number of folks like me, who already knew this problem, are disappointed / a bit annoyed at Derek's treatment of it. The fact that a properly tuned setup could actually get about 1/2 the power delivered in 1/c is actually pretty amazing. I don't dislike Derek... He seems to be one of the good guys. But this isn't his best work and his defensiveness about it is pretty off-putting to me. The model he uses for explaining it (Poynting vectors) is also totally inappropriate IMO for anyone who might have that "chain in a tube" misconception... It is like using general relativity to try and explain why heavier objects don't fall faster. (Science Asylum has a old video with a similar explanation, but he's doing theoretical physics where that approach is actually appropriate.) The basic concept of inductive coupling leading to a transmission line model does the job just as well here (is just as "true"), is simpler, and leads into an interesting discussion of impedance matching/tuning.
Fabrizio
Fabrizio 7 gün önce
@Travis Collier The fact that the bulb lights up a bit at 1/c seconds and then increases its light after, doesn't mean Derek was wrong. It was all about the misconception of the energy brought by electrons that pushes one another in the wire (the chain showed in the first video). So, all the point is: the energy reaches the bulb after 1/c seconds. That's all we needed to know and this was what Derek said from the beginning.
maverick creations
maverick creations 19 gün önce
@Veritasium What if the wire is in a huge square with the wire surrounded by insulators. Like the wires in a wall. How does the electric field generate across the wire surface? Why is it still instantaneous and faster than an electron drift? Please explain it with a bit more simplicity and patience than you normally would. I really want to know, but don't want it going over my head and sometimes when they type, I've noticed that people tend to indulge themselves. Thank you.
ANISH THE RIPPER
ANISH THE RIPPER 23 gün önce
@Debaditya Chakraborty amio bangali
LeoTheNinjaTurtleMan
LeoTheNinjaTurtleMan Aylar önce
@Jay Smith the comment I was looking for, I could be into the boom dudes content if he didn’t come off so arrogant and aggro
Scraz
Scraz 2 aylar önce
Fantastic to see experts, engineers, and scientists calling each other out in the interest of providing good science and accurate information. Then we see competitive and collaborative discussion that results in getting to the heart of the matter and getting as close as we can (for now) to the truth of it. Without vitriol or maliciousness.
Zach Falbe
Zach Falbe 4 saatler önce
@sstillwell Scientusst had been propagandized to forego the scientific method, in favor of peer-reviewed papers.
Blue Radium
Blue Radium 7 gün önce
I'm learning way more about electricity than I ever thought I would and I'm here for it - please keep nitpicking each other's videos have been loving it
Widodo Akrom
Widodo Akrom 8 gün önce
True
Senior Manager at PragerU
Senior Manager at PragerU 15 gün önce
It's illustrative of the lesson that science is also a process, not just a body of knowledge.
sam7iam
sam7iam 19 gün önce
@Seth Bowden The problem with gas flow is compressibilty, viscosity, and phase change. You need to postulate a fluid free of these issues. Imho
Gilder von Schattenkreuz
Gilder von Schattenkreuz Gün önce
As Electricians we actually Learned this Differently. We effectively Learned that Electricity effectively means a Charged Status in terms of Seperated Charges. In this case this is Provided by the Battery. The Battery consists of two Electrically Seperated Components. One where we got an Overabundance of Electrons thus the Electrons Outnumbering the Protons and creating a Negative Charge. And One where we got a Lack of Electrons thus the Protons Outnumbering the Electrons. Once we connect a Circuit. This Charge will be Released and the two Sides will start working towards Equalizing their Charges. The Energy therefore comes from the Battery being Charges. Thus Energy being Expended to Seperate Protons and Electrons in the Battery to Create an Inbalance. The Electrical Field is actually considered Wasted Energy. its effectively Energy Lost to the Process as the Magnetic Field from this Inbalance Extends and if its impeded by anything the Energy given away to whatever Impedes it being lost to us. Albeit that Principle can of course be used to Heat things via Induction or to Transfer Energy in a Transformer. Energy is properly Expended at whatever User is Linked into the Curcuit. And once the Energy the Battery is Charged with has been used up and the whole Circuit is Equalized in Charge. The Battery is Empty and we need to Insert a New one. Of course depending on the Resistances inside the Circuit and depending on the Charges added. The whole Circuit might still have a Charge towards the Earth or other Objects. Which in General we Avoid by Grounding the Circuit. To make sure that the Circuit will not have any Voltage towards Parts where we dont want it to have that. (Its Dangerous otherwise as a Human or Animal might Touch it and Close a Circuit with the other side and therefore Fry himself on it) If the Circuit is Cut before the Energy is Emptied. And we still have Electrical Fields up. (Veeeeeery Long Lines or Electrical Parts that create an Electrical Field for their Purpose) these actually turn into Ghost Energy because they are effectively now a Charge Stored in the Circuit itself which is Charged Opposed to the Direction we actually led Energy through. Thats why we usually have Diodes in there to Allow that Charge to Dissipate backwards to the Ground and Equalize the Circuit down to a safe Voltage again. Albeit that is not to say that this is Scientifically accurate. Simplification is often used for such Education. As its more Importand to Relay the way it works than to accurately Relay the Physics behind it. Just an Interesting Difference.
Calcifer
Calcifer 2 aylar önce
Amazing animations, this visuals really help into understanding the fields gradients moving through space. Thank you very much for this !
Matthew Crites
Matthew Crites 3 gün önce
I just love the fact that scientists and engineers, use the scientific process on each other in order to produce better information
Michael Permana
Michael Permana 3 aylar önce
This… this is what science is all about. Thought experiment, theory, peer review, experiment. Well done everyone.
Hiker John
Hiker John 5 gün önce
@永恒的中国 Watch it again to just what the battery provides.
Hiker John
Hiker John 5 gün önce
@Leroy Dubois As soon as you think something that does not support their narrative. Or as soon as they think this knowledge is a threat to their control.
celery
celery 9 gün önce
@Doctor Fate the third reply
Doctor Fate
Doctor Fate 13 gün önce
@Gary for now bro wtf does that have to do with this guys comment... no one asked you to explain batteries wtf???
Gary for now
Gary for now 13 gün önce
Basically any battery will simply sit with no ion or electron movement but indeed as batteries get used they do breakdown and a tiny bit of exchange between the anode and cathode. About that simple.
Ravi Sundaram
Ravi Sundaram 2 aylar önce
When we explain or understand AM/FM radio stations, we imagine a giant coil oscillating in the radio station. It emits waves. The electrons in the antenna vibrate in synch. And we pick up the signal. We never think about return current, completion of circuit etc. So we had the basics to understand this. But because we were given a short hand simplistic model of circuits and currents flowing through wires, it is difficult to unlearn that short hand and understand the wave propagation.
Andre D
Andre D Gün önce
@bhjgblhll isn’t special relativity theory giving an approach of explaining the phenomena of E creating B and vice versa? And the EMW ripping off due to the B not able to adapt fast enough is given by a lot of sources. At low frequencies the B balloons and contracts without an EMW ripping off. At high enough frequency the balloon (=B) cannot contract as fast. I know it’s probably a explanation based on a simplification but it gives an intuition behind a lot of things happening and especially explains why higher frequencies are needed to efficiently create EMWs. If you have a more true to life explanation, I am happy to listen
bhjgblhll
bhjgblhll 4 gün önce
@Andre D hi. So there is no explanation for why changing E generates B or why changing B generates E. It’s consider first principles which means it’s the one thing that can’t be explained like why does mass generate gravity on other masses Additionally, there isn’t any limit on how fast E or B can change. I mean they are limited to c but aren’t we all lol
Chris Idema
Chris Idema 6 gün önce
@David Carlsson Not inductance. It's the electric field that does most the work here, not the magnetic field. It's stray capacitance basically.
David Carlsson
David Carlsson 8 gün önce
Am I wrong to understand this video to simply explain the most basic of inductance? (Also surface charges)
Dark Matter
Dark Matter 19 gün önce
@Andre D For the single wire antenna, there is the ground plane. I'm not an antenna expert. Feyman Lectures on Physics is a terrific resource to build concepts on Electromagnetism.
UnMomento
UnMomento 2 aylar önce
You know what Derek I always struggled to accept the regular model because It was really weird to me that electrons move inside the cable just like a they do in a battery. I always thought to myself that it is a oversimplification because of the difference between the two mediums. Concept of electricity really clicked inside my mind after I saw your video.
Mark Lenet
Mark Lenet 4 gün önce
When I joined campus, I took an introduction to electrical engineering course, I was so confident that I knew completely what electricity was...then I studied AC circuit analysis and electromagnetics and became even more confident...but now after studying the quantum nature of waves, electrons and entanglement, I am totally confused, I think am back to square one. What really is electricity?
Vern Crisler
Vern Crisler 21 saatler önce
Well, as the engineer said, if you get it wrong, you will be a very unhappy person.
VforVaLiAnT
VforVaLiAnT 12 gün önce
One of my professors once said, "remember the concepts, not the answers." This idea clashed with my stubbornness many times while I was in school. You bring up a very significant point about using shortcuts even if that was not your intention. My teacher for a statistics course would become annoyed with my questions about "why" we used specific formulas for certain problems. His answer to me was, "don't bother yourself with why, just know it works." He was obviously more concerned with my passing his class. That answer never sat right with me. I did later, outside of my institution, find the answers to my questions. My point here is that shortcuts always seem to reduce our visibility on the importance of concepts, which can sometimes be it's relation to another process.
AlphaPhoenix
AlphaPhoenix 3 aylar önce
Fantastic revisit! The animations and the simulations were spot-on, and great at showing the difference between the transient “first-second” effect, and the steady-state “rest of time” behavior. The whole “expanding loop of current” thing is a great way to phrase it, because after that poynting loop expands to match the actual physical loop of wire, then stuff starts to behave normally and all of the power is transmitted around the loop very close to the wire. I still hold that for this simple circuit, turning on a lightbulb with wires much smaller around than they are long, the effect of surface charge vs internal charge is negligible, so you can ignore any skin-effect stuff and say that “mobile” electrons are indeed pushing on other “mobile” electrons using their fields, but I totally agree that that’s a simplification, just a simplification that makes the intuition a lot easier. I also need to do some math about how far the average “electron” is displaced in order to build the initial charge distribution around some typical circuit elements - axial flow is the only way I understand those charge distributions getting built, and this whole endeavor has made me think hard about what that means. Someday when I think I understand it better I’ll edit up my pt.2 response video - thanks for the shoutout! I’ve got a great experiment in the works to show the “expanding poynting loop” 😁
simon6071
simon6071 2 aylar önce
​@مجاحد You being a student of biology instead of electrical engineering can certainly explain why you think Derek's explanation is amazing when it is amazingly wrong. He cannot even tell the difference between the function of a battery and a capacitor and don't know that a circuit carrying a steady direct current does not produce an electric field OUTSIDE the circuit. Electricity does not work as Derek wrongly explains when a circuit is carrying a steady direct current. You should stick to studying biology instead of being misled by him in physics.
مجاحد
مجاحد 2 aylar önce
Despite being in class 12th and being a student of biology instead of engineering student , the explanation and simulations are so amazing that I understood each and every thing. I have never thought that electricity works in such a way.
simon6071
simon6071 2 aylar önce
@sangamo Who did you reply to with the word "No"? Did you reply to the original poster AlphaPhoenix or to me? If you are not able to put your disagreement to words because you just disagree without any sensible reason, you are not making contribution to the discussion at all.
Rider0fBuffalo
Rider0fBuffalo 2 aylar önce
Waves are the transferrers of energy... It's crazy that we walked around with radio devices all day transferring energy via fields, but that is still above high school physics. Just learning about non lumped element electricity after college now.
Patrick Tho
Patrick Tho 2 aylar önce
that is 2nd classical physics course in our uni for physics etc
abbsnn cose
abbsnn cose 2 aylar önce
This… this is what science is all about. Thought experiment, theory, peer review, experiment. Well done everyone.
Shaun Steven
Shaun Steven 2 aylar önce
Derek, can you do a video using the same tools and simulations to illustrate how the electric field would look in this situation with an alternating current instead of a direct current? I am very interested to see this aspect of the more detailed explanation of circuits.
Eren Arslan
Eren Arslan 15 gün önce
+
Silvio Martinez
Silvio Martinez 14 gün önce
Well, it's a little controversial, because in maxwell's equations, especifically the fourth, he introduce the concept of displacement current, refers a flow of energy due a variation in electric and magnetic field in a capacitor (this concept was introduced for completing the amper's law called amper-maxwell equation). It means, in a simple circuit like show in the video, if you introduce in series a capacitor, the flow of energy continuous but it depends on if the source is a direct o alternating current. What is that means? the flow of energy occurs if the magnetic and electric fields are variables, for that reason, there are not electrons moving around the circuit (that model tells you, the electrons don't jump from one plate to another). the same happens, in transformers, variables magnetic field induced variables electric fields and then a current appear (maxwell's third law). Let's talk about potential and kinetic energy (the misconception mentioned in the video), How do we can transfer energy over long distances? the trick is to increase the voltage and decrease the current, because with currents the losses are high, what is that means? that is, we must reduce the amount of electrons moving to the load, increasing the potential energy of the system (electric field). at the end of the transmissions lines (Low Voltage) we use transformers (step down) for increasing the kinetic energy and decrease the potential energy; so the energy reaches the load. Another concept that are not mentioned are the reactive energy, active and complex power. They are so important for understanding the principles of electricity... Then we conclude that the transfer of energy is carried out by the conductor
David Carlsson
David Carlsson 9 gün önce
This was the most amazing video I've seen in years, 2 years after graduating from computer engineering (10% was theoretical electrical engineering) I always promised myself that I would find a better visual understanding of the theoretical thesis and names that was used, that I barely understood the use for and barely scraped by. Thank you, I will carry on this visual understanding to my nephews and nieces.
Sir Pemberton S. Crevalius
Sir Pemberton S. Crevalius 3 aylar önce
Respect for admiting to some mistakes. It's refreshing to see someone both rationally defend their side and also admit to some mistakes and fix said mistakes.
Graeme Abernethy
Graeme Abernethy 17 saatler önce
I didn't see any mistakes but alot of people misunderstanding
Right Hand
Right Hand 15 gün önce
Nikola Tesla
Stefan Hoffmann
Stefan Hoffmann 15 gün önce
@max luthor sorry but at least one rocket exploded because of this kind of error
Amazonian Custodian
Amazonian Custodian 25 gün önce
Wait, you mean actually doing science proper?
Andrew Troye
Andrew Troye Aylar önce
better watch out the reality is vanguard and black rock run the world lol
sk
sk 14 gün önce
In my post USSR high school during physics class I remember fairly well our lessons on electric fields - I very much remember being totally WOW'ed about this concept as in "wow so this is how electricity and all the circuits work so fast". We weren't given this idea of electrons pushing each other - and this explanation was totally new for me and made me very skeptical of it as I'd imagined if it was the case then kinetic movement instead of electromagnetic fields would dominate the timings of electric currents and thus wire communication would be incredibly incredibly slow almost like trying to pass information through pressurized water pipes - even though electrons are very light and faster than atoms - still they don't travel nearly as fast as light. I can't say that our education was good in every respect - far from it - for example the explanations and diagrams that we were given were so rough and so much left to imagination that it all totally went over the heads for majority of the class students who weren't as curious in physics - but still I'm very proud that this particular question they got it right in USSR high schools teaching material.
GLAZZ INFO
GLAZZ INFO Aylar önce
This video have much better explanation than the previous one. I am impressed by this explanation. It shows us facts and figures.
Denis Stoychev
Denis Stoychev 15 gün önce
After watching these 2 videos I feel like I have a better understanding of this subject than my university professors .
Cade Perkins
Cade Perkins 24 gün önce
First thing, Veritasium's videos are great! They inspire deep learning and fun experimentation! However, just like the video about gravity and force, sometimes the messages tend to dismiss "old" concepts as incorrect just because something new is learned which seems more profound. But It is unnecessary to dismiss the "old" view of electrons and currents in a circuit just because we also discover that radiation and fields play an important role. And I don't mean this merely due to the practical use, I mean as part of the fundamental explanation. The flow of electrons is still key to explaining and understanding a circuit. I could go on and on about various details, but instead I'll cut to chase. The radiated field apparently plays an important role in the circuit, although one must then ask the most crucial follow-up question: What generates the necessary electric field which the video claims is the "more fundamental" element here? The direct answer is the charged particles, the electrons. Although the video does indeed point out that the electrons arrange themselves to establish the necessary fields in the wire, the treatment of the electrons thereafter is set aside for a preference of "the field". However, as the electrons begin to drift, the only way for the field to maintain its necessary configuration is for the electrons to also continuously shift and move to maintain that field. Guess what? That also requires energy! Energy can also be stored in the charged particle configuration! In other words, if the "energy is in the field", that energy would quickly dissipate and the field alone could not power the circuit unless the charges continuously rearranged themselves to maintain that field throughout the circuit. The field would not exist, or at least the necessary field to do continuous work would not be maintained without the flow of electronics, the current. Thus the current remains just as fundamental a part of the circuit as the field. Like so many other concepts in physics that are first explained in isolated, pure environments--think about frictionless surfaces and "no air resistance"--when teaching basics of kinematics, as we add more detail and learn how to contemplate more complex examples, we don't necessarily need to drop the old while we grasp the new concepts as "more fundamental". What if we wrapped the wires in radiation absorbing/attenuating shields... how would that affect the outcome? Would making such an equivalent "no radiative field" scenario contradict the classic concept of current in the wire? No. It could however prevent the lightbulb from behaving as it did in the experiment. Rather the new knowledge needs to be incorporated into a more complete and mature understanding. It is incorrect to say that "all the energy is in the field" when the configuration of the entire circuit system is necessary for the light to continue working as part of the circuit. Just like when dealing with gravity where both potential and kinetic energy must be included in the same equation, in a circuit we need to include both the energy in the fields and the potential energy of the charged particle configuration.
bhjgblhll
bhjgblhll 3 gün önce
@Cade Perkins sorry. I had no idea you’d be so interested. I would have spent more time writing a better comment. So, I know two things. The first I learned formally the second via wiki armed w knowledge of the first. The electrodynamics consideration of current. Which predates any understanding of electrons starts with ohms law. This is what I am referring to w the E external part, but Honestly, I don’t remember this model as well as I should. I was thinking of the differential form of ohms law, and mixed up E ext w Potential difference (like standard ohms) which can be solved for w E. This Information comes from intro electrodynamics by that asshole Griffith’s (class is just hard. He’s fine author). The course and text are standard and taken all us physics majors in junior or senior year. It’s chapter 8. You can find book on lib gen. This model is the purely EM model for current. It is one step above second semester physics and the model pioneered by Drude (see below). Griffith’s good place to look if you really wanna work through it. Drude model which which allows formulation equivalent differential of ohms law equivalent ohms historically follows ohms. This is the model that Griffith’s touches on to motivate his model. Not too much depth in Griffith’s into background assumption abt drift velocity and such in the text though. At this time Ppl didn’t understand atoms or e-. Following this, you get summerfield-drude model which arrives 1930 so post the most fundamental QM work like schro eq, Heisenberg, and Dirac formalisms. I believe/hope post bloc theorem and qm solution to infinite crystal lattice using Kroniger and Penny model/potential. I don’t understand either drude model or summerfield-drude that well abd certainly don’t pretend to be an expert. Therefore, I can’t provide much further guidance. It is likely that the models have been further refined since.
Cade Perkins
Cade Perkins 4 gün önce
@bhjgblhll Hmmm, but the models you mentions are only models for the transport (i.e. flow, current) of electrons in a metal. Those models do not explain all aspects of a real circuit. They don't explain (even attempt to explain) radiative fields or the operation of a chemical battery (which are not made of only metals). It's confusing that you consider the external electric field ("E external" as you call it) as an "older way of understanding" when the electric field is inserted into all of these models. In other words, the electric field is an external parameter to these models also. These models offer a refined understanding of how quantum mechanical electrons are a "free gas or liquid of electrons" scattered by a metal lattice, etc. Along with the basic models of resistivity and Ohm's law, they can explain nuanced effects within the metal conductors, but they do not satisfy questions about the overall details of the electric fields in the circuit, the flow of energy in the entire circuit system, etc., etc. Take the battery out of the circuit and close the circuit. Any reasonable, predictive model of electron flow still applies to this rather useless circuit. Without the battery, there are still electrons in the metals that interact (i.e. are scattered) by stray fields and other environmental perturbations, but there is nothing which will maintain the flow of energy, nothing that will generate an electric field sufficient to direct an ongoing current of electrons which in turn provides energy to another part of the circuit. The chemical battery is what drives the circuit. If you still differ in this opinion, try posting more than names of models. This is a public forum for those learning about these concepts, so give us more than abstract references.
bhjgblhll
bhjgblhll 4 gün önce
I’m w you but uhhhh E external driving I is by far the older way of understanding circuits. It’s derived from Lorentz law. I believe fully in 1901 microscopic ohms law. See drude model. This utilized drift current which was not understood because no one understood e-. Summerfield-Drude model follows.
Bai Su Zhen
Bai Su Zhen 6 gün önce
@Cade Perkins Thank you Cade, I've read your entire effort post and it was worth it.
Cade Perkins
Cade Perkins 11 gün önce
@Morning Lift It's NOT wrong to say that. The chemical potential energy inside the battery is what drives the circuit. Like any system where useful work is done, energy is continually converted and transferred to different forms of energy. Chemical potential energy of the ions in the battery (in other words, the potential energy of the electrons bound to each atom) is transferred to the free electrons which move out one side of the battery and into the other (the current), and these "free" electrons in the metal wires configure themselves to establish fields which then push along other electrons. Without the continual chemical reactions going on inside the battery, the electric field would quickly come to an equilibrium and there would be no more movement of electrons and no more radiated energy by fields outside the wires. The battery is certainly the source of energy to keep this happening.
Vee Soho
Vee Soho 3 aylar önce
I love the "peer review" reactions and the dialog. This is what we need. Everywhere, in science, politics etc. This is what the most powerful neurologic network looks like. Cheers ! Let's keep arguing ! Peacefully and intelligently if we can !
Uni Corn
Uni Corn 3 aylar önce
@George vvv also, think I may have responded to you more than once in the same vane/vein of thought... Apologies, chasing duplications.
Uni Corn
Uni Corn 3 aylar önce
@George vvv no, not clicks. I had Ve paid to instigate a social forum to pull out intentional gaps through scientific method and discussion. Awareness. 🤗 ..(edit addendum).. 'Drawing' people out into the discussion; because, there are many individuals who'd be qualified, by knowledge, to wear the branded institutions insignia on payroll.
Ralph Bell
Ralph Bell 3 aylar önce
Taking the internet back to its roots when it was a means for universities to exchange ideas without needing phones, snail mail, etc.
Uni Corn
Uni Corn 3 aylar önce
@George vvv it's a to get people like you to come out and engage the discussion further. Keep it up. 🤗
Uni Corn
Uni Corn 3 aylar önce
@lobsterbark 🤔rhetorical purposes = use of rhetorical tools; I believe these to be useful in 'skillful *hands' ... Hiding info etc... Oh, wow; I'm opening such a 'can of worms' ... So many biases in social stuff. Working on getting my agreements to your statements with refinements & additions. (How do I set a notification that brings me, here like some one interacted, only on a timer ... My mind isn't ready at the moment)
njan nannavilla
njan nannavilla 3 gün önce
That's the thing about science that I love: When the opinions and results of two science enthusiasts differ, science develops. When the opinions of people from two different religious communities differ, it leads to violence.
Thunderbolt Wisdom
Thunderbolt Wisdom 3 gün önce
That's a great description of the difference between the two. Yay science.🤓👍
Murray Thom
Murray Thom 2 aylar önce
Great video! This presented almost all of the analysis I was curious to see after having watched your first video. There is only one further correction I'm hoping you'll detail in another follow-up (or maybe you have already). Which is a quantum wave explanation for the transfer of energy from the electrons to the lattice in the bulb, to photons leaving the bulb. This can all be field-based at large scales but if you reduce it down to single-electron emission, you run into the wave/particle duality associated with "measurement" or the transfer of energy at the quantum level that people find so mysterious about quantum mechanics. I'm curious to see how you could help explain and visualize this in a video. Great work!
Savage Gaming
Savage Gaming Aylar önce
I can imagine how this could be problematic in small sensitive circuits
Adrian Kraft
Adrian Kraft 14 gün önce
which is why i assume we shield everything
Happy Me
Happy Me 5 gün önce
I like watching your channel because of the interesting stuff you come up with. I am not a very smart guy but I’m very very curious about science and cosmology. Keep producing great content, stop worrying about “clickability” rates.
William
William 3 aylar önce
This was a good revisit. After watching the original I didn’t feel like it made enough sense. It wasn’t until Alpha Phoenix posted his experiment that I understood the point you were actually aiming for.
Yuval Talya Nehemia
Yuval Talya Nehemia 2 aylar önce
+
asktwice2
asktwice2 3 aylar önce
@ctwardy nobody challenges Maxwell equation, but he didn’t tell it works for VARIABLE field. What he register is a pulse erupting with the switching of the key or pulse from the oscilloscope. But he claimed a battery would let the bulb lit independently on the wholeness of the circuit. As I said - a bunch of correct statements giving a totally wrong cocktail. It is called “artifact” as I know - you take the known result (flash of the bulb light) and then made an artificial explanation mixing highlighting what you believe support the statement and hiding/bypassing the boundary conditions needed to make this statement true. The result is awful fooling of the common audience hypnotized by animations, names/titles, speeches that are cut off the contexts, etc. This is excellent example of manipulation of the audience, typical for mass media nowadays.
ctwardy
ctwardy 3 aylar önce
@asktwice2 The experiments match his prediction for both 10m arms and 1000m arms. Would 100km arms be more persuasive? What about the bits showing that this also follows from fully solving Maxwell's equations?
William
William 3 aylar önce
@永恒的中国 That's because this video (and the related videos) aren't focused on the physical and chemical workings of a battery. A battery is only being used as an example of a DC electrical source. There are plenty of videos focus on how a battery works if that's what you want to know.
永恒的中国
永恒的中国 3 aylar önce
@William and video shows they dont
Account Deel tussen ma
Account Deel tussen ma Aylar önce
Thank you for taking your time and making awesome videos for us. I appreciated the video and it opened my mind of how electricity really works.😀
Frode Flem
Frode Flem Aylar önce
12:29 It is misleading to visualize the B-field magnitude here, because it has nothing to do with the generation of current in the top wire. If you visualized dB/dt instead of B, it would present a much sharper wave, and it would be much more apparent that the changing magnetic field induces current in the top wire. Also, it's difficult to tell how big dB/dt is from the simulation because of low sensitivity (B-field magnitude per color intensity) at the front of the wave. You're quite explicit in saying it's the electric field that causes current to flow in the load, but with electromagnetic waves, it's not just one or the other. In the near EM field in particular, you have electromagnetic and electrostatic induction. I'm no expert, but per my intuition at least, B-fields dominate energy transfer in an application like transformers, and E-fields dominate in a tesla coil. It's not clear cut. In the far EM field where the emitting particles are so far from the receiver that there are no feedback effects, the E and B field strengths are proportional, so I guess the dominant contributor depends on the shape and direction of the antenna (?)
Perry G
Perry G 2 aylar önce
Thank you for these videos. While I don't understand all the concepts, it does help me understand why I can't run high and low voltage lines in parallel in residential construction because of the field interference
Francesco Belmonte
Francesco Belmonte 4 gün önce
ANOTHER AWESOME VIDEO! THANK YOU FOR EXPANDING ON IT, Hydro in Canada charges a "delivery fee", so if this misconception, along with the fact that electricity DOES NOT actually flow to ANY home can be proven in a court of law AND if enough people speak up about, then Hydro will be facing their downfall and many would be celebrating the crumbling of such empires. If we think about how our Sun gives us FREE energy in the form of Light, Heat, etc.. everyday throughout our lives and without discrimination or judgement then it justifies that NO ONE should be paying for electricity in any part of the world. Tesla knew it was possible and created Wireless Electricity but was stopped and shutdown by those in power, that's another story altogether but realizing these are the things which connect us all gives "power" back to the people.
Lucas Wilian
Lucas Wilian 3 aylar önce
What a great time to be alive. Hundreds of years ago this discussion would be hold in books or university talks that were unavailable to the vast majority of society. Now, it is being done publically, everyone with access to internet can live this experience. It is amazing and it makes me feel like one 17th century student watching a heated physics debate.
Deep Bits
Deep Bits 2 aylar önce
What baffles and scares me is that despite of all the access to the global information and ability for high level education a war like the one in Ukraine is still a possibility.
Hyperlapse Videos of Cebu
Hyperlapse Videos of Cebu 3 aylar önce
TRshow University, right
Vittorio Zamparella
Vittorio Zamparella 3 aylar önce
@ToyKeeper >>he answered "how long does it take to see non-zero current when two antennas are placed near each other with one connected to a power source". You nailed it!
Jeremias H
Jeremias H 3 aylar önce
Debates in universities are history now, so thank god they are still allowed in the internet.
Thomas Burley
Thomas Burley 3 aylar önce
@NoLocker Hi NL, thanks for the suggestion. , subscribed.
Laura Nicholson
Laura Nicholson 2 aylar önce
Thank you Derek, for all that you do. I was excited to watch this as I recently saw Electroboom's video response to your previous video. I think this gets close to a recent thought experiment/theoretical question of mine. Standard teaching is that electricity needs a circuit to flow. I describe a circuit as a "circle" when I teach about solar, but recently I was thinking about how, when you connect a battery up, you're not connecting it back to the "same" place, since there is some kind of separation between the positive and negative ends of the battery. The assumption: What I need for electricity to "flow" is a voltage difference between two places in space, and a suitable (conductive) medium to get a decent (measurable) current. The experiment: Can I hook up a circuit that starts on one battery and ends on another, i.e. connected to the positive terminal of one battery and the negative terminal of another? Pretty quickly, the voltage across the "circuit" would equalize, but what about before that? The internet tells me that the poles of any given battery aren't necessarily the same, so does it matter if instead I attach the positive to the positive end? Is the amount of electrical flow here going to be happening at the speed of light? Batteries have a chemical flow that maintains the voltage difference, so we also don't have that. I FEEL LIKE MY PREMISE IS RIGHT (with the caveat of not understanding what the voltage difference across two different batteries would be) HOW CAN THIS BE MEASURED. Also, is this what happens with lightning? Conceptually, does lightning count as a circuit, or is it more like a single wire from sky to ground?
Alexander Quilty
Alexander Quilty 11 gün önce
Also I like the better explanation, and this is a small detail but, at ~17:00 you flipped the battery terminals, but the charge distribution was still shown the same way. Thank you for the video Veritasium 😁
plwpahi
plwpahi 22 gün önce
This brought a tear to my eye. I loved this. Thanks, learning is fun.
APHI FPV
APHI FPV 2 aylar önce
Ok, this was quite helpful for me too. I knew about EMC issues in all time life but also about the delay, electrical signals actually have dependend on wire length, so it left me quite confused. Understanding, that the initial electrical field transmits some of the energy right over before the rest comes in really fixes this knot in my head and I think it brings us all back on the same page. Thanks for this update and also the experiment and real signal-comparison. This helps a ton to put it in perspective and also a ton in servicing faulty electrical systems ;) You rock!
Will Krause
Will Krause 3 aylar önce
Veritasium in the last year or two has really revived my hope that youtube science can be more than either crazy conspiracy videos or purely informational. He's doing the closest a pop-scientist has done to science since the mythbusters, and he's arguably added the important step of peer review into his process.
Saim Khan
Saim Khan 3 aylar önce
@Kyu Kyu wonderful list . THANKS ALOT🙏🏻
Cryinmonkey
Cryinmonkey 3 aylar önce
@Will Krause I think you misread my comment, I said Kursgesagt in a Nutshell is a good source of highly informative and entertaining educational animations about all aspects of Science and reality. Never said they "Do science" or anything lol, although they do raise many hypothesis in their videos and provide LOTS of supporting info on their conclusions There's just not any self-made experiments because it's a channel made from a conglomerate of many researchers and animators. Your replies I've read seem quite pretentious. I'm sure you're a bright individual but your unpleasantness is outshining your intelligence.
Will Krause
Will Krause 3 aylar önce
Dude, you listed GM hikaru and Gotham Chess as science channels, your definition might be a little too broad, haha. And experiments don't have to be on a university, like his wind car thing wasn't, but they still have to be purposeful and repeatable, that is a required part of anything that can be called science. Your hypothesis also needs to be falsifiable, it can't just be a question you ask with a guess for how it can happen. Finally, the peer review part is the most important thing that separates messing around with some chemicals, wires, doing some writing, etc. from doing science and research. Showing it to your peers is the most important part, because then they can ask all the questions you never thought of. We live in a time when science is increasingly not trusted, when anyone can go on TRshow and claim to be a "science" channel as they tell us why to not take vaccines or how their essential oil will heal us or start doing faulty math that proves the 2020 election was a fraud. Defending the rigor that is required for science, whether it's done in someone's backyard or at a university (tho admittedly, you really shouldn't do much biology at home, don't be an animal hoarder), it still has to follow the scientific method to be science, and that is a step few on this platform have really taken.
Kyu Kyu
Kyu Kyu 3 aylar önce
@Will Krause I don't think there is anything I can say to you if you cannot see how those channels I posted are doing science! No offense! You seem to have an extreme viewpoint on what "doing science" must look like or else it somehow isn't science anymore... To me, science is a matter of principles that guide sense making in an attempt to answer questions. You have done a good job describing some methods used to answer questions, but those methods are only a small handful of ways we can apply scientific principles to solving questions! You do not need peer review to do science, you do not need formal experiments, you don't even need repeatability. Or scientific language. Those things are only necessary if you want other people to believe in what you have discovered and also to perhaps convince yourself! Haha. But science as both of us can agree is a method of inquiry. Or is it not? Do you really believe that if you where to be asking questions about, let's say how do plants grow? That your question asking would only be considered science if you ran an physical experiment? Or if you had peer review? Or if you repeated your experiment? Surely you are familiar with pure mathematics? Many of those ideas cannot be tested in physical experiments. They exist purely as mental objects. But both of us can agree that the type of thinking it took to formulate those ideas was of a scientific method. If you are asking any question and guessing what the answer will be you are forming a hypothesis, regardless if you have written a formal report or just made a mental note. You don't even need to know what the word hypothesis is, you'll still be doing it! It makes no difference if you are a chemist in a lab, a biologist in the rainforest, or Joe in his garage. Same goes with experimentation. It makes no difference if your experiment takes place in a university, on an air force base, in a hospital, or in your living room. The quality of the experiment is the only thing that matters. And quality has nothing to do with formality and everything to do with the type of rigorous and thorough thinking that went into formulating and defining the experiment, it's protocols and it's goals. I hope you can see that even very simple and crude experiments, or even just spontaneous observable events can answer very complex problems and are as much science as any other more sophisticated experiments. The technical complexity of an experiment, or how nicely it's worded in scientific language, or even how well funded it is, says nothing to it's content or significance or impact. This isn't a dig at you or an attack on what this channel does! I love science! But I absolutely despise the way people try to control the narrative of what is science and what isn't! The great thinkers of our past where practicing and developing scientific principles long before we had an agreed upon language to share those ideas! But it was still science! And it still is! Believe it or not all those channels I posted will inform people of how to perform rigorous scientific method. How to formulate questions, how to think deeply, how to experiment, even how to ask for critique! (Though perhaps not in a way you understand!) Which I think is cool! You might respond to completely different styles of communication and learning! Maybe you have other channels you can share with me!!!!!! I'm always searching for new cool stuff!!!! Peace! Sorry for the long ass reply!
Will Krause
Will Krause 3 aylar önce
@Kyu Kyu "Doing science" and "being educational" aren't the same thing. Gotham Chess does great chess teaching, Numberphile does great math teaching, and Ants Canada is a super interesting hobby channel. But they don't follow the scientific method to form a hypothesis, test it, get feedback, and repeat. Cody's lab, sometimes Smarty every Day, and certainly Journey to the Microcosmos do at least the hypothesis and testing, but the addition that Veritasium has brought to the youtube science-adjacent channelverse is properly responding to peer review by other science channels and adjusting experiments accordingly.
P.J
P.J Aylar önce
I loved your previous videon on how actually electricity moves and power things. I found your explanation quite clear that it was the magnetic wave that was going from the start to the finish (being juxtaposed to each other) made it possible to transmit energy at what seems faster then light. All because the energy didn't really travel the whole 300000m long wire but "jump" from start to end that was a mere meter away. That was like a revelation to me and very exciting!
Thor Asguards Electrician
Thor Asguards Electrician 2 aylar önce
electrical theory is a huge key to the physics of the universe. love seeing things progress.
ben benazzi
ben benazzi Aylar önce
This is why I love TRshow. Thank you all who have contributed and responded. I am an engineer who up until now thought electrons moved the “current”…even though I spent two years studying Maxwell’s equations. I feel dumb but relived ❤️
Michael Black
Michael Black 2 aylar önce
I would love to see this same experiment (and simulations) done with a 50-Ohm coax cable and RF energy (i.e. radio transmission) and show the effect of a BALUN on the field strength.
Jeff Grills
Jeff Grills 2 aylar önce
That would interest me as well. I had the idea to do the experiment with a faraday plate between the wires. I suspect it's quite similar.
marsgizmo
marsgizmo 3 aylar önce
Impressive explanation Derek! Well done! 👏
Vegan_Semih_Cyprus_33
Vegan_Semih_Cyprus_33 3 aylar önce
Crucial 👉The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 💖
Taejun Chang
Taejun Chang 3 aylar önce
I love your 3d printing videos
Jeff Grills
Jeff Grills 2 aylar önce
Love the videos and the awakening that came with it. I've been thinking about what would happen if you put a huge Faraday plate between the wires. There is a video at 13:30 in this video with an extra wire below the circuit - I would love to see that simulation done with the free wire in the space inside the circuit. I think it will act like a Faraday hyperplate (forgive the terminology) and prevent some/all of the propagation into the far wire.
Moocow P
Moocow P 28 gün önce
Thanks for these videos, I watched the original, some response videos, and this video. I didn't understand everything everyone said (including in this video) but I understood some, and the videos have definitely changed my perspective of how electricity is transferred through circuits.
Eddie de Beer
Eddie de Beer 16 gün önce
The other aspect i also found interesting was the war between the what was at times referred to as the Vectorians versus the Quaternions. The Scientists siding with the Vectorians won. Including the Maxwell Quaternion calculations was just to difficult to understan and do it was totally left out in the University text books. Much like the "War of Currents" referring to Tesla vs Edison or AC vs DC. It would be smashingly awesome to see the level of explanation and detail you gave to show the resultant design of our present circuits that left out the Scalar Potential which includes (G) gravity versus the Vector designed circuits.
Lars Lundholm
Lars Lundholm 2 aylar önce
This was really interesting! Can you make a video explaining why we need different sizes of wires depending on load? 😊
TroubleChute
TroubleChute 3 aylar önce
I'm glad this was clarified. This is super advanced, but incredibly interesting.
simon6071
simon6071 2 aylar önce
It is deplorable that Derek of Varitasium doubled down on his mistakes and misconceptions of how energy from a 12 V battery is transferred to a light bulb at full power when connected by wires instead of admitting them. Derek of Varitasium is behaving like a shock jock in science instead of a real scientist as far as this video is concerned.
simon6071
simon6071 2 aylar önce
@ibrahim kasim What is "this"?
ibrahim kasim
ibrahim kasim 2 aylar önce
@simon6071 this.
ibrahim kasim
ibrahim kasim 2 aylar önce
@sintered Man honestly thank you, these are exactly my thoughts too as a senior electrical engineering student. So many people seem trying to be constructive and use overly nice words but I believe in brutal honesty, which must be addressed here.
simon6071
simon6071 2 aylar önce
@whuzzzup Derek has still made a lot of misleading statements in his second video on electricity. For example, he still tries to give people the wrong idea that energy from a battery is transferred to a light bulb by electric field outside a circuit carrying a steady direct current when a wire carrying a steady direct current does not produce an electric field outside the wire.
Salamon Shevda
Salamon Shevda Aylar önce
awesome! I wish we had this kind of channels when we were learning science in 90's ))
D I
D I 26 gün önce
It is a very satisfactory explanation. This is a question I always had when I was studying as an undergrad and the answers I got were close to “it is just magic”
NorthernDruid
NorthernDruid 5 gün önce
I really enjoyed both the original video and this deeper dive. And I think they worked quite well as standalone videos. I wouldn't mind more coupled videos with a more in-depth explanation follow-up exploring the topic further.
UMANG CHAUHAN
UMANG CHAUHAN 2 aylar önce
As an electrical engineer ,this was eye opening. Just brilliant...
John Thompson
John Thompson 3 aylar önce
Electricity drama continues.
Scott
Scott 7 gün önce
Lol
cupid ok
cupid ok 7 gün önce
Wow school lied to me.... TRshow better
Michael Thompson
Michael Thompson 11 gün önce
Electric Universe Theory has entered the chat.
Juan Beans
Juan Beans 13 gün önce
1timothy 6:19 kjv
Right Hand
Right Hand 15 gün önce
Nikola Tesla
Aulis Vaara
Aulis Vaara 14 gün önce
A long time ago I read or heard about AI generated circuit boards that had unconnected circuits that you couldn't remove without stopping the circuit board from working. Now I understand better why this is the case.
michael D
michael D Aylar önce
It's cool to see these back and forth, sorta friendly science feud explanation videos. Like the wind sail one too. Makes these complex ideas more obtainable for the rest of us, even if this is over my head. TRshow actually helping to further scientific discussions with the public.
Física o algo por el estilo
Física o algo por el estilo Aylar önce
Yes! now you're right, it's a great improvement over the original video. I see a lot of intellectual honesty in your videos, you get better without fear of admitting when not everything you explain is quite correct or when it needs polishing (excuse my bad english level)
Jan Bunes
Jan Bunes 6 gün önce
@veritasium I am so very grateful for the brilliant lessons you are giving to us on TRshow! I particularly like that you approach, not dogmatic, and humility where warranted, observation based knowledge discovery! thanks! :) By the way, do you play Raft, or just like the music? Would be fun to play the game with you, take care!
The Action Lab
The Action Lab 3 aylar önce
Very good video. Remember there is a difference between what’s true, and what matters. Derek does a great job showing the whole truth of how circuits really work. The other videos that critique it do a great job at showing what matters. For most situations the small increase in voltage at 1/c seconds is negligible compared to the overall voltage needed to light the light bulb.
bla bla bla
bla bla bla 3 aylar önce
@agafaba Derek is coming from a place where he is umm actuallying his entire audience. He got called out because the answer he gave doesn’t follow from the question. This video is him sweeping under the rug the criticisms of the setup of the question then proceeding anyway to present the answer he wanted to present as if that was the correct one all along. There’s so many video responses of very smart people telling Derek he’s missing the plot. They wouldn’t be getting this if Derek wasn’t ambiguous with the setup.
bla bla bla
bla bla bla 3 aylar önce
@agafaba I’m not being pedantic. The layman definition is the one I’m using. Which is the societal norm. Derek isn’t concerned with just presenting the thought experiment. He’s proposing that the average engineer isn’t getting it right. That’s a pretty hard stance.
agafaba
agafaba 3 aylar önce
@bla bla bla I am arguing that you are being overly pedantic on purpose to dispute a thought experiment. This comment only helps support my stance considering you want to discuss the definition of "on".
bla bla bla
bla bla bla 3 aylar önce
@agafaba that’s absolutely not true. In fact, the definition of “fully on” lightbulb that I and other people who responded to Derek’s video are in-line with the layman’s definition of on. It is the niche hyper technical crowd that cares about _any_ and _all_ transient response that would accept Derek’s definition. Derek is the one proposing the _umm actually_ definition.
agafaba
agafaba 3 aylar önce
@bla bla bla If veritasium was a youtube channel targeted towards the top experts of each field I would say your arguments hold weight, but considering that its targeted towards people who often have no training in the field I think that should be taken into consideration. If we held teachers to the same standards as you hold veritasium then we would be saying "well actually" after every sentence the teacher says and the students would learn nothing.
Abhishek Madhu
Abhishek Madhu Aylar önce
Thank you so much for this video. I have a degree in engineering and I didn’t know about this. I always thought its electrons that flow from one end to the other.
Christopher Bourn
Christopher Bourn Aylar önce
What causes the surface charge gradient? I know it's because a battery is hooked up to a wire with a load, but can it be explained on a quantum level?
Dan Chilson
Dan Chilson 18 gün önce
awesome video. great use of the scientific method and general productive collaboration. i love the internet. sidenote- why did they build their experimental circuit so high off the ground?
Ankit Meena
Ankit Meena Aylar önce
It's interesting to note that although the bulb would turn on in almost 1/c sec, the farthest point of wire in this setup (c/2 light seconds away) would develop local electric field only after 0.5 seconds [since information can't travel faster than speed of light]. Hence, the bulb would have turned on even before electrons in most part of the wire have even started drifting.
MihaiDesigns
MihaiDesigns 3 aylar önce
🤯 Amazing work, Derek! Thank you!
Vegan_Semih_Cyprus_33
Vegan_Semih_Cyprus_33 3 aylar önce
Crucial 👉The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 💖
Rainbows&Hulacorns
Rainbows&Hulacorns 2 aylar önce
I so applaud these videos and clarification Ms… mobile electrons never made sense to me and this makes so much more sense and matches more the ideas that I learned when learning power generation
CC
CC Aylar önce
I love when someone says your wrong lol I look forward to watching you prove yourself right
Patt Adams
Patt Adams 2 aylar önce
I'm just really glad you showed the Alpha Pheonix experiment since I'm sure he put so much work into that.
ConquestOfEnergy
ConquestOfEnergy 2 aylar önce
Ah yes the lumped model. We covered that in transmission line design during my EE degree. Never thought I'd see it come up in this context lol.
Geralt of Rivia
Geralt of Rivia 3 aylar önce
Anybody critical or skeptical of science should watch and learn how this conversation has progressed. Props to Derek and the other TRshow creators for a beautiful demonstration of the scientific method.
Rehoboth Farm
Rehoboth Farm 3 aylar önce
@Uni Corn I see a little silhouetto of a man Scaramouche, Scaramouche, will you do the Fandango? Thunderbolt and lightning very, very frightening me (Galileo) Galileo (Galileo) Galileo Galileo Figaro Magnifico-o-o-o-o
Uni Corn
Uni Corn 3 aylar önce
@Create Belief looking for the thread on compartmentalized social scapes and lies...
Uni Corn
Uni Corn 3 aylar önce
@永恒的中国 yes; there is the next video to be made with electron 💍's ...
Rehoboth Farm
Rehoboth Farm 3 aylar önce
​@Uni Corn I think that Galileo would probably be amazed at what we have accomplished and disappointed at how little we have learned. Is that a good answer?... 3 the answer is 3.
TRANS PON
TRANS PON Aylar önce
Hi, could fields or energy works as Mr Plank's said with light? Particle and/or frecuency... Thanks for your videos, they are great.
Blue Radium
Blue Radium 7 gün önce
Glad to see the age-old tradition of scientists/engineers ripping into a colleague's experiment and eventually ending on "huh you were right, that's pretty cool" is alive and well
PunCala
PunCala 10 gün önce
What a fantastic video! I really, really applaud your approach. I learned a lot. Sincerely, a guy with PhD in physics.
bhjgblhll
bhjgblhll 4 gün önce
Am I crazy or does lattice collision make no sense as a source of phonon generation. Seems like that should come from non radiative recombination. - guy w UG in physics
Geodesic Interpolation
Geodesic Interpolation Aylar önce
Hey I appreciate that you went on ElectroBoom's channel, that was pretty cool. Thanks for being active in the community.
Nathan Rich
Nathan Rich 3 aylar önce
Both videos were successful in that they taught many people, including myself, a very interesting aspect of electricity.
Mant101
Mant101 3 aylar önce
@Taytyaaytyat how do the electric fields go though that tinfoil hat?
Kris Battersby
Kris Battersby 3 aylar önce
@E. B. C. That's the spirit! Degrade one group to show how much you like this group! You are definitely correct.
Yerris
Yerris 3 aylar önce
@ARCHOCK ENCANTO Did you not watch his latest video? And hes a retired millionaire, an early investor in bitcoin. Why does he need any "payment"?
Those Weirdos
Those Weirdos 3 aylar önce
No, they didn't. They failed to teach you correct information.
Daniel Slomovits
Daniel Slomovits 4 gün önce
Very nice, this nails down all of the questions I had after the first video...but it does introduce two more: 1. Surely, in the case of a break in the wire 150,000km away, the bulb doesn't _stay_ on. I assume it would light dimly for 0.5s, then _go out_ instead of getting brighter? Using the transmission line analogy, it would be lit while the capacitors charge, then go out when they're done and no direct current path is available. 2. What happens if the switch interrupts _both_ lines immediately as they exit the battery terminals, not just one, so that when the switch is off the entire loop is electrically isolated from the battery? This reduces I think to two questions: a. Does the surface-charge effect spread at c _along the wire_ , or does that also propagate at c along the shortest path through open space? My guess is it's constrained to the wire, and as such when the _first_ terminal of the battery is connected to the loop in the original scenario, it takes nearly _two_ full seconds for the surface charge to settle. Is this correct? b. If I'm right about (a), does this prevent the electric field from inducing a current across the 1m gap and thus mean it takes the full second for the bulb to come on? I'm going to much more tentatively say it does _not_ , that the absolute values of the electric field will differ in this case but the _relative_ values, and thus the potential difference across the bulb, will be the same, and so the bulb will still light almost immediately. Or, using the transmission line analogy, if those capacitors were physically present, certainly the bulb would light immediately even with the switch interrupting both wires...
kerrywsmyth
kerrywsmyth Gün önce
I just want you to know that I am a very smart person who grew up with an electrician dad who went on to graduate with an electrical engineering degree, and despite all the Ohms law stuff he taught me, I believed you the first time. I never thought that you would post a video with false info.
Valen Tino
Valen Tino 2 aylar önce
I'm very pleased that you made an apologetic video and left the boulevard back into science. We have really known about transients, fluctuations in saturation, inductions, transmission line capacities and much more for more than 100 years. Respect for courage.
3dgar 7eandro
3dgar 7eandro 9 gün önce
Simply love how science can literally be so awesome 😎😌👌👌
Roman St. Croix
Roman St. Croix Aylar önce
Quick college engineering physics 2 class refresh, but entertaining! Never thought you could flip the learning process this way, great video.
Raquel Pesce
Raquel Pesce Aylar önce
Increíbles vídeos y representaciones!! Me encantaría poder debatir con mis alumnos viendo ambos, necesitaría este vídeo en español. GRACIAS!!
Barbara Lachance
Barbara Lachance 15 gün önce
Great video. I did a degree in Electrical engineering a long while ago that I never really used. It's nice to be reminded of all this mind bending stuff 😅😅
Philip Blank
Philip Blank 2 aylar önce
My brain gained mass from watching this. Incredible work!
Nicholas Garcia
Nicholas Garcia 3 aylar önce
It honestly feels like a brand new genre of TRshow Science. Idk how many other science videos are out there like this, but many of the best math and science TRshowrs were referenced in this epic meta-analysis of TRshow science thought. This felt bigger, like vlog peer review. Think of the potential!!! Thanks Veritasium!
himan12345678
himan12345678 3 aylar önce
@永恒的中国 I'm sorry if it came across that way, but I wasn't saying it works like that. I was trying to say that can be a helpful way to visualize the workings as I understand them. Another way would be each ion is like the switch but the electric field is what closes to switch and changes the states to then equalize. Neither of these is what is happening, but my attempts at a way to better understand/visualize it.
Vegan_Semih_Cyprus_33
Vegan_Semih_Cyprus_33 3 aylar önce
Crucial 👉The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 💖
永恒的中国
永恒的中国 3 aylar önce
@himan12345678 you missed important concept of Neil boht. Classical physics don't apply there
himan12345678
himan12345678 3 aylar önce
@永恒的中国 I could be wrong since I'm not properly educated on this, but I would say newton's equal and opposite reaction explains it well. The difference in charge potential is what initially sets off the electrical field cascade. The field acts on the charges within the battery so they drive each other continuously, equal and opposite. Until the potential charge difference is equalized, and so then the circuit charges can equalize to a stable state as well.
niq3d
niq3d 3 aylar önce
This was my thought as well, I made a note to use this video as an example of how the scientific method and peer review can work. it makes you see the real potential to educate among those who for whatever reason don't want to delve too deeply into the text books, but want to go further than the standard videos and documentaries will usually go. thoroughly enjoyable!
The Illusion Only Some People Can See
16:57
Veritasium
görünümler 7 Mn
Fully Operational Lift For The World's Largest Off Road Wrecker!
22:20
Instagram Fake Hesaplar Toplantısı
1:01
Halil İbrahim Göker
görünümler 116 B
Emanet 3. Sezon Tanıtımı | YAKINDA 😍
1:00
Emanet Dizisi
görünümler 98 B
What was so scary about Tesla’s ideas? | Decoded
15:18
Al Jazeera English
görünümler 2 Mn
The Simple Secret of Runway Digits
17:38
CGP Grey
görünümler 46 B
This is why we can't have nice things
17:30
Veritasium
görünümler 18 Mn
These Pools Help Support Half The People On Earth
19:25
3 Perplexing Physics Problems
14:00
Veritasium
görünümler 8 Mn
Why Gravity is NOT a Force
17:34
Veritasium
görünümler 9 Mn
Can We Throw Satellites to Space? - SpinLaunch
42:14
Real Engineering
görünümler 434 B
The 4 things it takes to be an expert
17:59
Veritasium
görünümler 3 Mn
Instagram Fake Hesaplar Toplantısı
1:01
Halil İbrahim Göker
görünümler 116 B