วีดีโอ

huge thankss

Oh goddd, finally I get it damnnn you made it really easy for me to grasp the concept , Absolutely amazing <3

I can’t thank you enough for these videos, they’ve truly helped a ton! I have a couple questions and your response would be highly appreciated as my edexcel ial exam is in about a week. When im asked to find the direction of the emf is it the same as the direction of the conventional current? Because the mark scheme tends to use “from P to Q” for example, P and Q being the two ends of the wire, insted of saying p is positive and q is negative. Also, Im unsure of the difference between the left and right hand rules, from your videos I understood that you believe the left hand rule is enough, does that mean i can always use it? My teacher told me that right hand rule always works except for a generator Thank you so much for your time, and happy new year

Best explanation

I have cleared a very long Doubt ...thanks man foe this awesome video

Nobody listens. i keep posting black holes are black because photons never get in. photons can't be compressed. they are rejected.

@narfwhals7843 TH-cam seems to have lost a long careful comment. Aaarghh. [Twice, but the second time I was more careful, so I'll try posting this as a separate comment instead of as a reply.] We can choose different test function spaces. (1) functions that are infinitely often differentiable, for which the function and all its derivatives decrease faster than any power as x moves to infinity in any direction. sin(x) doesn't satisfy that constraint. (2) functions that are square integrable, so they have a Fourier transform that is also square integrable (this is quite natural from a Hilbert space point of view, but (1) is more commonly used by mathematical physicists.) sin(x) also doesn't satisfy this second constraint. [(2) does not constrain the derivatives of the function at all, but (1) constrains all its derivatives, so we can have intermediate choices that constrain only some derivatives.] There is a mathematical structure called a "Rigged Hilbert space" that allows us to use objects like sin(x), but that needs rules that can be delicate. Elementary presentations of QM effectively channel that mathematics, but there should be a proviso at some point that says something like "this doesn't always work." IMO, it's best not to use that kind of structure for QFT because it matters that 'line widths', the frequency range of a laser, say, are never zero in experimental physics. If we have a measurement device, its spec sheet will say something about how much we should think of its results as averaged over a small region. It might say that it averages the EM field over a few nanoseconds, for example, at ~GHz rates, or, much more expensive, it might say that it averages over a few picoseconds, but no amount of money will buy us a measurement device that can tell us the EM field at a point, with no averaging at all. A test function is part of what tells us how that averaging of the EM field is done. The EM field in QFT, with 'quantum noise' added, is discontinuous, so it's mathematically even more badly behaved than Brownian motion, for which trajectories are continuous but not differentiable. 'Smoothing' the EM field by averaging over a small region gives us back mathematical control, but it still needs care. Not so long, not so careful, but most of the bare bones of the earlier comment included. Hopefully not too incomprehensible and not too elementary. tl;dr is just "yeah, that's physicists playing fast and loose with the delta function."

My reply to a comment by @dbz5808 doesn't appear to show up always, so posting it here: Comment: Van der waals forces (aka London forces) are not the same as the Casimir effect, rather they are a competing explanation for certain observed phenomena. Van der waals forces are described as arising in net neutral non-ionic bodies due to electron repulsion, causing slight charge separation (polarity) and thus a small attractive force. It is described classically, while the description for the Casimir effect is quantum in nature. Reply: Thanks for your comment. I didn't mention (or even imply) that Van der Waals (VdW) forces are the same as the Casimir force. Classical microscopic attempts to derive the VdW force run into problems. As I hinted, field theory does the job though - see Sec. 3.11 of 'The Quantum Vacuum' by P.W. Milonni (link in the description).

@ForestLearn Nice video. What are the different classes of light? Please name them explicitly

The technology pursuit may hinder personal evolution of the pursuit of entropy or joy. The currency of the universe is violet fields of energy to be shared.

Van der waals forces (aka London forces) are not the same as the Casimir effect, rather they are a competing explanation for certain observed phenomena. Van der waals forces are described as arising in net neutral non-ionic bodies due to electron repulsion, causing slight charge separation (polarity) and thus a small attractive force. It is described classically, while the description for the Casimir effect is quantum in nature.

I like being illuminated

What do you mean that classical light has no photons? This is just nonsense internet physics. As you wrote out yourself, classical light is represented as an indefinite number of photons. When you perform a measurement it will collapse to a definite number of photons. Any quantum state can be written as an indefinite or definite number of photons. All this anti-photon nonsense just leads to confusion. Also why does an uncertain number of photons mean no photons but an uncertain value for the electric field means the field is real?

I'm a 9th grader from india and man this video just made by basics wow

One of the best "photons are not particles" videos I've seen on TH-cam. Congratulations. There's a technical issue that I think you could get into even at the level you're aiming at. We have to consider the 'smeared' QEM field because the electric field measured at-a-point in the vacuum state has zero average, 〈Eᵢ(x)〉=0, but ∞ variance, 〈Eᵢ(x)²〉=∞, which we avoid by averaging over a small region using a smearing function uⁱ(x), Eᵤ=∫Eᵢ(x)uⁱ(x)d⁴x. [We could call the 'smearing function' uⁱ(x) the 'weighted average function' and it's similar to an idea in signal analysis that is called a 'window function'.] We can't talk about the field at-a-point for QEM, but we can talk about smeared measurements like Eᵤ because〈Eᵤ²〉is finite. We can also use Eᵤ to construct non-vacuum states such as Eᵤ|0〉or Eᵤ²|0〉, which are different from the vacuum state everywhere, but they are somewhat localized in a way that you suggest is not possible when you say at about 11'00" that "depicting photons as local wave packets is misleading and only perpetuates confusion". That is, QEM has tools that let us construct almost-localized wave packets. This is a tricky detail, but I suggest it would be better not to say something quite as categorical as what I've just quoted. In an academic context, I have been developing an approach to QFT that I mostly illustrate using QEM because it's the simplest example of a quantum field. If you have time, see on my TH-cam channel the video of the talk I gave to the Oxford Philosophy of Physics Seminar on October 24th, titled "A Dataset & Signal Analysis Interpretation of Quantum Field Theory". Best wishes!

Thank you soo much for the wonderful explanation, you've explained it better than any teacher, book or website and even better than Chat GPT got to say!!! Just one clarification: In the graph labelled in 5:54 , would the magnet enter and exit at terminal velocity (meaning that forces of repulsion and attracting would balance out respectively with the weight of the magnet). Then once the magnet is inside the coil, it accelerates again due to gravity (its own weight). Would that mean the sequence of motion from time=0s to time=0.4s (ignoring air resistance) would be: Acceleration>Deceleration>terminal velocity>acceleration>deceleration>terminal velocity> acceleration (once it completely leaves the coil)

Heya nice video! Might have to introduce number states a bit better, the phase space and the hamiltonian is super important to understand before jumping to observables, coherent state and so on. But awesome explanation!

I CANT THANK YOU ENOUGH !!!!!!

Красота спасёт ☮️, или с красивой популярностью ложь сгубить мир. Изобретение детектора 🆘 для визуального обнаружения, ложной информации в теоретической физике. Для избежания экологических потерь на 13 миллиард $, в защите природы на планете. Для реализации изобретения нужна помощь, надеюсь на Ваш ум и смелость. В Китае, Индии, Японии в плане строительства детекторов Гравитационных Волн. Также есть запуск тяжёлых ракет Европы и Китая с межпланетными спутниками, типа LISA и так далее, не считая других ресурсов в ВУЗах. Нужны физики, понимающий разницу, между прямым физическим опытом и косвенным. В прошлом у *Теории светового эфира* было очень много косвенных подтверждений и ещё больше признаний от учёных из элиты физиков, ну как в наше время модно СТО Эйнштейна. И стоило проделать прямой опыт Майкельсону, как популярность физики изменилась. Теперь к Вам вопрос: Вы можете сослаться на прямой опыт по определению константы скорости света? Технология с полым ❤️ом оптического волокна позволяют на *прямом опыте* проделывать это даже школьникам. С помощью устройства «Гибрид гироскоп Майкельсона Морли»… Мы увидим что "Свет - это упорядоченная вибрация гравитационных квантов и доминантные гравитационные поля корректируют скорость света в вакууме" у устройство в невесомости и в покое относительно Доминантного Гравитационного Поля, разница в проходе пути светом - ноль. При регистрации гравитационных волн на шумы приходится 99,99% а на полезный сигнал 0,01% - поправьте. Крупным корпорациям выгодны такие устройства. При регистрации квантов гравитации возможность получать полезный сигнал 75% на шумы будет приходится 25% - нуждается в специалистах для улучшения устройства о котором мечтал А. Эйнштейн.

Isn't the vacuum full of stable neutrons though? In this version of reality light is a longitudinal wave of magnetically inducting neutrons. Nobody will listen though.

You clearly have no clue. Just jargon.

Light is death of Matter. - Shiban Lal Pandita Black holes don't emit Light because they are the Birth of Matter. (Current theories are wrong about them being the death of stars.... they are the birth of them.) Photoemissions > Photons Phantoemissions > Phonies

VacUUm or voID... atom 1st is a whirLing , screw as Tesla said. MOta means coil. Or meta as selfaware hole. Keterle said same, just put in perspective things...In so called S BEC DrUMB BEL LIP SOID s ... atom + atom = 4 atoms ..so yes 1+1 = 4 Mixing is STr8 line move...MIXing MM I CS unlike Archimedes screw..going up or down... spinors they call it...opposing vortices There is vortex or field (PhiVe) and there is O we call STate taSTe. ST is from r-nose-ance. 29 TN DN 2J ST In OXO \ and / are... / β 13 \ 2 & 8 In a square 1232132 diagonals are 11 and 33, and RhomBUS MOrhSUB is 2222. Flat or planar or tabular 4 YO and tubular( bell, music of the spheres) as 7..colors theorem torus. OO 4²=16~ 7²=49~4... Interesting is 0 4 8 16 enigma of glass... upandatom on bubbles.

Light 89 is sound in aether...true nature of light is darkness...Nikola Tesla quote. Wave do not exist. DiSTurbAnce is time wave or vibration. Or STationary or ST-andi-ng STiLL wave. RainBow is not a real object. Yes, we see it. Actually magnetization and brain mind interpretation ... each of us see personalized version. Angled, inclined,..etc. cohe = echo r-ence... 'ance ence' is from anda or ellipse, helice ++. light + light = darkness or shadow..Shu as god of rising EMPtY.( CHArge for instance) Photomolecular, photoelectric effect... phOtOn trapped among knots of electrical bubbles we call matter. Retarded form. That is cork-screwed ENergy. EN or e9 is hole. Cenote. Gap, like charge giving colors... Water 88 and light 89 have same soliton letters HYX. Word play or something more... OO as OXO tensors... phOtOn cOlOr dOnOr mOtOr rOtOr cObOrdiSM...

Nice video, clearing up an important distinction. But it leaves so many open questions! Are there no photons in sunlight? How do we connect this back to Maxwell's Equations? Is a two photon state the same as a state with one photon of twice the energy? How do lasers actually work? What are the tied down ends of the EM field? Why does it have modes? Quantum optics deep dive when?

Colours is frequency in any state. Because Colours are sanse of humans. Photons are different frequency in different state when we observed its menifest from opaque

Quantum means Quantity

If you cannot easily explain light, then you do not know what light is.

this is awesome. thank you for making this

You're INSANELYYYYYY underrated what the heck

Underrated

great stuff, you deserve more views

this saved me, thanks so much!!!

thank yoou

Saved me from a lot of stress. thank you so much

test on this in about 2 hours thanks lol

So then why does the copper disc still generate current when the magnet is not stationary, but is attached to it and rotates at the same speed as it does?

Can this help calculating the resonance peaks in for example - In Ear Earphones? As the ear canal is a form of a tube, can I predict the interactions of waves frequency-wise?

Thank you so much! these are definitely my top mistakes!

when u raise a magnet weighing 100 grams upto a hieght of 100 meters, u put 100 joules of energy into it, when u drop that 100 grams magnet through the coil, the magnet fall takes 2 seconds and the coil generates 50 joules of energy. is there a way to generate more energy from the falling magnet of same weight from same hieght? yes, just increase the winding on the coil, now the coil has 4 times winding than it was before, now raising the magnet to same hieght takes the same amount of energy (=100 joules), but dropping the same magnet through the coil of bigger winding now generates more energy, and the fall of magnet takes more time (let's say 8 seconds) because of more back emf because of more current in coil. can you make and show graph and calculations of this situation please?

thanks bro

Extremely helpful! Thank you very much for this video.

The magnetic force on the sector that is resisting the change in direction , is this where and why there is back emf on motors ?

wrong. forget the magnetic lines as they dont exist. it's all about dynamic induction. so you can get currrent from this even if both disc and magnet stationary and outside contact stays at same distance from center. th-cam.com/video/gduYoT9sMaE/w-d-xo.htmlsi=0WdL6ZkCtSz2XE2X

This is absolutely incredible simplification of physics. Thanks

i am really grateful..been trying to understand this since 4 days but couldnt get it..this made me understand within minutes. thank you so much!!the visual representation really helped!

Sir, I really appreciate your video. It rescued me from the deep struggle of not understanding what physics is talking about. I wish you to have a wonderful day!

is there a current density distribution considering that the speed of the charge from inside to outside radius increases?

I'm going to university of Leeds on this September as an undergrad in theoretical physics.

What would happen if you use a YBCO disc at 65°K ?