As soon as someone uses the pissing contest argument of "I have a higher degree than you and thus I must be right", I immediately lose all respect for them. Even if he is right (and I'm not saying he is), that doesn't excuse his ego and hubris. If he wanted to remain strictly professional he could just state his counter-arguments to the points you brought up in your video and be done with it. That being said, I really do appreciate how open, even and professionally you hold yourself Mehdi.
My thoughts exactly. When I first saw his response videos I was disgusted that someone with his level of education was resorting to that argument. It's really shameful, and no matter how brilliant he might be, he shows a closemindedness that's inappropriate for a scientist of his caliber.
I think the "I have more experience in a field" argument isn't always bad (to use an extreme, you wouldn't want some random uneducated person arguing with a surgeon about surgery). And at some point, it might be justified to categorically ignore those people. But ElectroBOOM clearly isn't a bad faith actor, so comparing him to a flat-Earther was a bit uncalled for IMO. That said, Dr. Lewin seems to have a long history of being anti-KVL, so maybe he *does* think of KVL as a bit like flat-Earth theory. Which, using his definition of KVL, isn't really wrong.
sjm4306, please don't be disgusted with Dr. Lewin, I bet that it is not an easy task to expose yourself at the internet and have to almost daily receive disparaging comments. Tho Mehdi is more used to this I really don't know how a man at Dr. Lewin's age would react. Another point to be considered is, although most people think scientists as purely rational and polite people, the academic world is filled with hubris and disrespect. For better or worse, those who live in this world end u getting used to this type of behavior and end up reproducing it at times. Much love for both Mehdi and Dr. Lewin!
You made Engineers around the world proud. Not just with your logical reasoning. But also with your infinite amount of patience and respect for dr Lewin. I'll ensure my kids watch these videos to learn internet etiquettes (Whenever I have them). High five from India!
I have a Ph.D. in Physics. I listened very intently to Medhi, mainly because he was so serious and did not shock himself even once throughout the video. I commend him on his pursuit of the truth, even if it pitted him against a well-known scientist. Mehdi has clarified something quite subtle here, and it has spurred me think more deeply about the subject matter. Thank you, Sir.
Huge respect Mr. Mehdi. You have displayed the true basis of science: seeking to understand and explain the principles of a system. This does not require a PhD, it requires careful thought and analyses.
BTW, a PhD just means one has (at some time - likely expired decades later) specific knowledge on some unique (likely partly esoteric -philosophical-and/or irrelevant in the real world) field, it does not imply that one has any better a grasp of the fundamentals than one holding a masters Degree, or dare i say, a Bachelor's Degree in the given field. Claiming that just as one is a DrDrDr, or whatever automatically puts one above the debating floor is academic arrogance, likely to impress the ignorant but for those who have some level of expertise, it just raises a quizzical eyebrow, how quaint! Any professor can be called out (Respectfully in most cases) for making mathematical errors or inaccurate claims - if the case is so, in areas of Philosophy the error may be debated/defended of course. and in areas of consensus, just canvass and then ask for a show of hands - no proofs needed.
You are right, it would require careful thought and analyses which are entirely missing from the video of Mehdi, but presented in the lession of Lewin. Mehdi (among many other mistakes) ignored his own recommended source: www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_22.html Section 22-2: " _Again we must make several simplifying assumptions. The assumptions we will make are all the ones that we described for the case of the inductance. In particular, we assume that the varying magnetic field is restricted to a definite region in the vicinity of the coil and does not appear outside the generator in the space between the terminals._ " This assumption can not be made in the arrangement shown by Lewin, since the changing magnetic field penetrates everywhere inside the circuit. Since the assumption reqiured for defining voltage are not correct, the incorrect usage of term voltage (as KLV dictated) leads to contradiction. This was predicted correctly by Lewin, and then demonstrated experimentally, and confirmed even by Mehdi. But Mehdi instead of accepting the results, and admitting KVL is wrong, chosen to religiously believe in KVL, contradicting himself, later maliciously edited the response of Lewin, made wrong predictions, and made many other mistakes, like his overwriting the definition of voltage here: th-cam.com/video/Q9LuVBfwvzA/w-d-xo.html which has no any base.
@@PafiTheOne wait a sec... I have been reading your comments, but I have to ask: Whose side are you on? A. Lewin B. Mehdi C. On the fence Because you seem to agree with the OP's (seem to be on Mehdi's side) comment, but the rest of your paragraph seemed to be against Mehdi.... Btw, short answer please, I don't like too much words
@@PafiTheOne BTW, I don't get what you mean by the last paragraph where you said "overwriting the definition of voltage" can you please elaborate? You can use more words here, but still, keep it short and to the point.
@@huangjunwei7211 I'm a fan and patreon of Mehdi, and I've seen every videos of him, while I've seen only a few videos of Lewin. But Lewin is definitely right here, and Mehdi is wrong many ways. This is a question of physics and logic, not being funny and nice, which contest could be won by Mehdi. I'm on the side of an important knowledge in electrical engineering, which knowledge I use on almost daily basis. And on the side of rational reasoning.
Just wanted to say thank you for your approach to this. It awesome to see the true respect you have for your peers. Rare to find someone I can show as an example to my children. Love your videos! Hilarious respectful entertaining!
As a side note, I don't think it's rare among actual scientists. So if your kids go into the sciences they will likely be fine. Unfortunately you may be correct about TH-cam. Hard to find good examples.
When I was in graduate school I met several people like Dr. Lewin who instead of actually looking at your question and trying to see why you don't agree immediately attack your intelligence or education. I really don't like people with that attitude. I find it ironic that Dr. Lewin belittles your intelligence and your education level while heaping praise, well deserved, on Michael Faraday who had very little formal education. Education and intelligence are not related and just because a person is educated doesn't mean that they are not ignorant. I respect they way you went about this scientific discussion and I am deeply disappointed by the way Dr. Lewin responded.
I am an electrician, and I took a electrical engineering course, but I could get little from it because the The professor, who was highly respected, couldn't explain in real life electrical examples, the concepts he was trying to convey. Even something like, what is a node. He said there was no examples that could be used in the electrical service field. I later found out there was, but he was steeped in the mathematical side of it. And the students that looked up to him, were having orgasms for every mathematical theory he gave them. That is why I like this channel, he can obviously get into the mathematical side, but also explain it in real world terms.
Keep in mind. Medhi contacted this man before even making this video series and he outright refused to help or comment based on the fact he was tired of talking about the subject. Only after medhi makes his series does the man pump out 3 videos just attacking medhi who praised and agreed and told people to watch the channel and series lewin made. Then lewin turns around and acts like the internet trolls just because medhi’s videos got views. He had his chance to help and contribute and teach medhi and outright refused.
@@freshrockpapa-e7799 I don't even understand the professors perspective. Mehdi was so polite and respectful to Lewin in his first issue and just had one disagreement regarding an academic topic. Mehdi kept it professional by only focussing on the subject matter in hand. It was Mr. Lewin who came down to personal insults, I know he is old and may not have same patience as he had once before but academic critique/disagreement and discussion are the very basis of being a professional in academia.
@@freshrockpapa-e7799 Do you care to share what you think is the professors perspective that would lead him to personal insults in scientific setting? You do not need to be a professional to see that ElectroBOOM was polite the whole way while the politeness from professors side was occasional if even present.
1:15 "ElectroBOOM's long video is dedicated to discrediting my lectures. *It is very insulting.*" And right there is the problem. A disagreement about science should not be considered a personal insult.
@@damon22441 He just took the comment about "bad probing" as an insult, because it implies that he doesn't know what he's doing. That coupled with the fact that Mehdi is completely wrong and has a degree sort of popped a fuse in Lewin.
@@jeanclaudewellness8274 Do you mean a correct, logical explanation and its experimental proof earns its punisment by ignorant people? Yes, this is historic.
@@jznfamu6938 "Are against..." I can not decode your syntactically wrong sentence. Try to recompose! All of the videos of Mehdi has some educational value, except for these and the one with the water saver. These has negative value, since contain too much important false information.
@Dr. M. H. Frankly people will find way to belittle you in their own defense no matter what. Even if someone has a PhD they'll just comment about how you don't have publications in your name, or blah blah blah, the list goes on.
@@cowteeth7950I think people get irrationally self-conscious when they feel like they are "attacked". He's probably perfectly reasonable to them until they start questioning KVL or whatever.
Midnight Commander _though attacking someone for “only having a master degree.” Is pretty petty_ Has this actually happen? (No. You completely misunderstood something.)
@@PafiTheOne you're right! Dr. Lewin says that he cannot understand why someone with a master's degree couldn't see that KVL does not hold if there are magnetic fields involved! He is not attacking him
Wikipedia has the answer to this problem, and it's kind of funny. In a practical sense, Lewin is right. When there are unconstrained magnetic fields in a circuit, KVL becomes unusable, and Faraday's Law should be used instead. The voltages need to be discreet and measurable for KVL to be calculated. But Mehdi is correct in a literal sense. KVL is ALWAYS true, but in a system with unconstrained magnetic fields you cannot measure every voltage involved in the system. This is an information problem, not a case where KVL is only true in certain situations. It's only USEFUL in certain situations, but it's always true. What I find ironic here is that the academic is the one who is correct in a practical sense, while the engineer is correct in a literal, almost pedantic sense.
Exactly. The problem is in the wording of academic, he says: "KVL doesn't hold" and what he should say is: "you can't use KVL for this purpose because you can't measure every voltage involved in the system". When you say "KVL doesn't hold" it trips some neural circuits in engineers heads, it's like math teachers teaching first grade children: "you can't do 5 - 8!"...:D
I don't think your reasoning makes KVL always true? Not sure what you mean by voltage needing to be 'discrete and measurable'. Or a magnetic field being 'unconstrained'. In short, I just see it as that KVL says *all* closed loops have a zero net potential difference. But when you have a time changing magnetic field, that's not true i.e. not *every* closed loop has a zero net (ill-defined) potential difference. (to be fair, there's a bit of maths I haven't included here that supports these statements; you can probably find that on the Faraday's Law Wikipedia page though). Not sure what you mean by 'every voltage involved in the system'? I've probably just repeated whatever Prof. Lewin said but really, Lewin is fundamentally correct (even if he was rude about it). If Mehdi is still saying that KVL is always true, then he's wrong; it's just a special case of Faraday's law.
@@zlac "You can't do 5 - 8!" Not without negative numbers. Numbers are on a plane, by the way, and that's not some weed induced "whoa" statement- the imaginary line number actually intersects the real number line at 0 and perpendicular to it, thus every complex number falls on a number plane. It's geometrically sound too- you can rotate a number 90 degrees by multiplying by i or -i.
amperage and voltage for 5 year olds the conclusion, they are the same. DC and AC to experts, the conclusion they ct work together. This channel is trash.
It is nice to know that, despite all the crap that people give you, you can remain respectful and professional. The scientific community should take notes.
@@skaruts that's where you are wrong It does matter We do have positive bias on journals Positive bias on a research We have a way to do science varying on the field we studied to We must prepare the experiment to avoid Bias, but can we ever do that
some academics really can not handle being proven wrong by their "inferiors." I've seen it first hand, and it was a MASSIVE uphill battle involving a handful of other people to finally convince a professor they were flat wrong about something. And the professor in question held a grudge for a month or so, and STILL brings it up in a pissy way
So you decided to not do something special at 2 million subscribes? In case you havent even noticed that you reached 2 Million and you are about to prepare something realy special just be more careful this time. We all remember the Jacob's Ladder incident.
Electroboom , please explain your conclusion more clearly. When you derived the equasion at 6.24 you even showed that as integral (e.dl) = sum of voltages as Vab. with is equal to -dO/dt and so KVL is integral (e.dl) =0. As saying sum of voltages =o is integral (e.dl) =o. And so Professor Lewin was right. I have not yet read the papers in the description. However what you have said about them I do agree. Yes sum of voltages =o if you do not take the closed path with in the inductor. But at 13:47 you said that integral (e.dl) =o for inside the inductor with there is a change in magnetic flux. This is wrong. Yes in a DC circuit that is correct but not in an AC. Remember yes V=L Di/Dt but integral (e.dl)=emf. remember that self inductance is v=Ndo/dt where n is the number of loops. so v is the sum of the voltages around those loops as N= number of loops and do/dt is the emf in that loop and so sum of the voltages is V (total voltage induced). If you try to take the loop around the inductor it will not equal zero. Nor have you shown why Dr lewinns demonstrations are wrong. If you agree with faraday's law then you will know that sum of voltages around any closed loop is equal to do/dt. Let's go back to you GPE analogy. Yes its zero when you lift the transformer up you gain GPE and let go it gains KE and loses GPE and so the energy ignoring air resistance is zero. Now if you then attached the transformer to a machine that could give the transformer a constant acceleration and it forced the transformer up and then down. Then GPE+KE doe not equal zero but equals to the work done. I still do not see why you think KVL still always holds. Please explain you opposing view in more detail as to why you disagree. As this video you jumped to sum conclusions with no proof (are thes conclusions from the paper you read?).
Im glad that you have done this video as it shows your interest in this and you want facts. However, I have read the bit of inductance on www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_22.html and they are in a agreement with DR Lwin. "line integral of E all the way around any closed path is equal to the negative of the rate of change of the flux of B through the loop." at 13.47 you day that integral of E.dl=0 Did you read this? Or are you confusing DC circuits, please explain.
The most funny part of this saga is the fact that Lewin mocks him for having only masters degree implying education is "must have" to be great at something while debating about laws by Faraday who barely finished primary school lol
@@descarteshomunculus7313 Actually I kinda see quite some intelligence in that guy. I watched a short sample of that video, like 20 seconds worth and then thumbed down, then watched like 2 minutes more and gave un thumbs down the video. Hes just vulgar, thats all
I'm far from any PH degree but in your previous video I spotted the probing error immediately. I've been working in telecom in VHF, UHF and SHF. These errors are well known in these fields. A professor can be genius in tbeory but don't necessary have the field experiences. Use fully shielded wires.. and you will mesure tbe Kirchoff law... And yes, some can't accept their own errors .. I do support your conclusions 100%..
Dr. Lewin may or may not be right, but his attitude is certainly wrong. I guess the higher your status, the higher your ego? Even if he is right, he has made a very bad impression of himself.
@Big LIttle Wha You are right, Lewin was wrong. He falsely assumed a person with masters degree in EE must be able to understand his lecture, but he was wrong. (If we accept the statement that Mehdi has a master's degree.)
I think he was probably just being rude because he was upset about all the unwarranted hate he was receiving. If thousands of people started harassing you and saying you're an idiot who doesn't know anything about your profession, you probably wouldn't respond very politely either.
@@danieljensen2626 That's the problem with having people who listen to you..... They may interperate the videos as attacking and attack other people in words
@@danieljensen2626 If somebody says that "most physics books have it wrong", he damn well should be REALLY factual. If then a sentence like "Kirchhoff's Law is for the birds" falls, this about closes the case. If that were true, Airplanes would start falling from the sky. EE Sadaghdar as well as Prof. Belcher just spent a great deal of real work into exactly pointing out why Lewin's statements were wrong in a key aspect and Feynman, Kirchhoff as well as Mr Sadaghdar were right, as were "most physics books" (albeit misleading). Lewin refused to address the points made by Mr Sadaghdar (for starters, to ADDRESS something, you have to do it AFTER the thing you are addressing); even if "most physics books" *were* wrong, his lectures he refers obviously are unclear. Commenters attacking Mr Sadaghdar or stating he was unable to "comprehend a lecture" or a mere entertainer are the icing on top after Prof Belcher came to exactly the same conclusions. Fact is, Prof Lewin was wrong, full stop. Not fundamentally, but still wrong. EE Sadaghdar and Prof Belcher gave proof, thereby both learning themselves (as stated in Prof Belcher's document) as well as clarifying and rectifying the topic for lots of viewers. Professors don't design technical appliances. Engineers and Masters do. *They* have to have a working toolbox of theoretical algorithms. Fact is, beyond his misleading lecture salted with "entertainment" ("Kirchhoff's Law is for the birds"), Prof Lewin did offer very little to clarify the matter, and what he offered was hard to endure because of his AdHoms. Fact is, by correcting wrong or unclear statements in a factual dispute, STEM (or science as a whole - including what's sometimes considered "humanities") advances. If "most physics books get it wrong", this is empirical proof that there's something unclear. I really, REALLY will try to find other authors than Prof Lewin when researching any topic now, as he's got faults (at least this one) in his lectures and has proven to be unwilling to address them. (Furthermore, outside of an ornithological context I can REALLY do without statements something tried and proven was "for the birds".) To discover how productive dispute goes, even with a "mere Master", check the Thorvalds-Tanenbaum-disputes popping up regularly. And Prof Tanenbaum had REAL reason to be upset sometimes. He acknowledges, however, that it helps many professionals to address Thorvalds' faults factually and by addressing and rectifying them by showing where Thorvalds got it wrong.
@@enysuntra1347 The thing is, neither of them are actually wrong, they are just disagreeing about what "Kirchoff's voltage law" actually means. Lewin thinks it is only the E dot dl part, so he is correct in saying you can't use that, you have to use all of Faraday's law. This is probably historically accurate. But Mehdi thinks Kirchoff's law and Faraday's law are the same, which in my experience is the common modern usage. That is probably why Lewin thinks textbooks are wrong, because textbooks will imply that KVL and Faraday's law are the same, even though that isn't the way Kirchoff actually intended it. I agree it would be better if Lewin was more professional about it, but I still think it is because he has thin skin from not really being a full time TH-camr/public figure.
@@francisbacon4363 Flat earther popped up around the time of Trump because the term Conspiracy Theorist no longer holds the same weight of dismissal as it used to due to so many of the conspiracy theories turning out to be actual conspiracies.
Even though I respect all scientists, I am a firm believer in solving disagreements with facts, not insults. The fact that Dr. Lewin insulted you - even though you may not see it as an insult - disturbs me. This is not how an intelligent person should communicate, no matter if it's a reply to something they feel is insulting or not.
I can't blame him for being annoyed at a sudden wave of rando internet fanboy commenters saying he doesn't know what he's talking about. I'm glad the discussion became civilised once he found out what was going on. Certain commenters on both sides are to blame for treating everything like team sports.
Sorry, but academia is not a safe space. Being patient with cranks is not, nor has it ever been, a written or unwritten rule in science. The very opposite in fact. Science is entirely based on being mercilessly critical of everything and everyone until you find something that does not buckle under it. A tenured professor should most definitely be able to say he's embarrassed that an alleged master of engineering is spreading misinformation about basic science to thousands if not millions of people. It would be embarrassing if he didn't. To be clear, Mehdi is not correct. He has been throwing convenient assumptions against facts, and now to "conclude" he simply explains away the actual physics by making up things that simply do not hold, and he would know that if he bothered opening an undergraduate electrodynamics textbook. If this was a private argument it would be different, but he is spreading pseudoscience to people who don't know better in an as public way as possible(just look around the comment section and you will immediately spot at least a few dozen people who are now apparently qualified to insult and criticize Lewin because of the frankly incorrect things Mehdi has said), and he's doing it with seemingly no effort to listen to what the other side is saying or even checking his own facts before uploading a video. There is certainly a limit to what the scientific community in general should be patient with, and this crosses it.
@Jonathan Pearce Neither can I, but as a scientist, one should know not to jump to conclusions. If people are commenting and telling you you don't know what you're talking about, that's between you and the commenter. You can't reply to someone if you haven't even seen what you're replying to, so the first order of business is always to figure out what has been said, and by whom. @RedTriangle53 I have never claimed for anything to be a safe space, nor have I said that one has to be patient with cranks. I am fully aware with the fact that science is based on being critical of everything and everyone. However, there is a MASSIVE difference between being critical, and being insulting. It's very easy to be extremely critical without even being slightly insulting. The last few lines of your first paragraph, frankly, are complete BS. A real scientist would have respectfully disproved all claims made by facts and experiments, not by attacking somebody personally. If you think a claim is idiotic, you simply ignore it, or (in case you have thousands of people commenting for you to reply) reply respectfully. If you don't understand this, I don't think you belong in science. To be clear: I don't care if Mehdi is correct or not. I don't have the EE knowledge to decide who's right or wrong, or to even form an opinion on it. What I do care about, is the fact that a Doctor can't disprove a claim - made in a respectful manner, with proof provided - in a respectful manner. Being annoyed and irritated by TH-cam commenters is perfectly understandable, but this has nothing to do with Medhi's claims. I personally have been in many scientific discussions, of which many never ended in agreement. However, none of these discussions have ever been personal or insulting.
Until they do something that makes me no longer respect them, yes. This goes for everybody, until they give me a reason not to, I will respect them. I don't know why I need to explain this, it seems like this would be the normal way of treating other people in civilized nations... To explain: I specified scientists here, because the discussion involves scientists.
Whom ever is correct, it's a real shame that Dr Lewin doesn't seem to show you the same respect as you show him. Having watched his response videos I'm certain he hasn't even bothered watching your videos before declaring you wrong and himself correct.
Maybe he is this kind of elitist feeling his ego beeing attacked and goes back to human roots, the wild animal who wanna defend its territory and position in society.
What respect should you have for a person that accuses you of things that you never did and then proceeds to make an attack video on you? Mehdi did not put any bit of effort into his first video. He did not know what the purpose of the experiment was, therefore he assumed the outcome is wrong, and when the Professor told him to educate himself, he decided to make an attack video where he showed the Professor’s comments to his audience of 2 million subscribers. He did the same in this video. His ego is very fragile. There is no disagreement between the Professor and Mehdi in terms of physics concepts. It’s just Mehdi completely missing the point of the experiment and what the Professor was trying to show, and instead of asking the Professor about the details of the experiment, he just made his own assumptions and proceeded to make that first video which contained comets and video snippets intended to make the Professor look bad.
I respect him but I really didn't like the way he responded. Thanks for being a sensible fellow and making us learn stuff. I think you just earned a doctorate.
It's bizarre when, in 2021, anyone who questions what is colloquially known as science is considered a heretic, when the entire point of science is questioning things. Yet, here we are.
It looks like you are poorly educated in the matters of science. This is how people are in science community. Read history of science it has always been just like this.
@@traditionalsunni629 Unnecessarily condescending my guy. Science is about the pursuit of truth and knowledge, not prestige and recognition. If someone is fragile about learning their ideas are wrong they won't have a good time in science.
Hi Mehdi. Wow! That is simply awesome! I just want to thank you for your time and effort of explaining complicated concepts in a simple and entertaining manner. It certainly enhanced my knowledge about electromagnetics. Your videos are highly appreciated and I'm looking forward for more being an avid follower of your awesome channel. Cheers!
I'm on electroBoom's side. Not because I know enough EE science to have a meaningful opinion, but because it is clear that he can admit being wrong, and has consulted others in the field to verify his findings, while Lewin seems to consider himself an infallible Yoda, and won't entertain the possibility of himself being incorrect. ElectroBoom is no stranger to owning failure. (If deliberately induced for our education most of the time.) Thus, if Lewin is right, electroBoom will eventually become right, but if electroBoom is right Lewin will most likely stay wrong. I'm sure Lewin has many other videos full of accurate knowledge of the kind I love to watch... But with his attitude here it would take an impressive about face to change my first impressions about him. I'd rather learn from a humble man who makes mistakes than an arrogant genius.
Medhi simply is right - that is the only valid reason to be on his side. It baffled me when i first saw Lewins video that he would make such a plunder but his follow ups are just a disgrace.
Totally agree. Regardless of who is right and who is wrong, if Lewin wants to play the 'I am the doctor here' card, he should at least act as one, show some class and not arrogance, and educate Mehdi and prove his points, not just counter attack by pointing out who has higher educational degree or assuming Medhi wants to discredit him. Everyone has the right to voice their opinion/theory even if it's wrong, as no one is perfect and 'to err is human', so if Lewin thinks that Medhi is incorrect, he should respectfully straighten Medhi out on the topic.
I believe Lewin simply trusts science to root out anomalies before allowing theory to become law. Since Medhi is an engineer and not a scientist, Lewin is simply ignoring Medhi's conclusion, believing Medhi came to the wrong conclusion. And I can understand. You need credibility to convince a scientist to reconsider something that has been well-tested and accepted as fact for decades. Medhi does not have credibility in Lewin's eyes. You heard how he likened Medhi's suggestion to Flat Earth! This doesn't mean he's being mean or ignorant. A scientist can't just spend all his time listening to everyone's suggestions about science, he must assume the majority of them are not educated enough. What Medhi needs to do is get himself some credibility in the eyes of Lewin. How many times in history have we heard the story of a young, unseasoned person challenging a veteran scientist and getting laughed at, only to be proven right later on?
7:42 That's the same thing I thought. Dr. Lewin believes KVL is ∮E᛫dl = 0 for some reason. Mehdi, you beautifully concluded, and I totally agree with you, that KVL and Faraday's Law, when properly defined, are basically the same thing. However, I fear Dr. Lewin will refuse to accept that. I've seen comments of his in which he states that saying KVL and Faraday's Law are the same is a "joke".
He may be highly accomplished in one area, but is sorely lacking in another (civility, acting like an adult, humbleness, etc). I cant stand getting into arguments with people like this who are so stubborn and resort to insinuating personal insults and think themselves clever for it.
A decade later and almost 6 million more subs, and Mehdi is still the same awesome dude he was in the beginning. A class act and insatiable curiosity. You, sir, are an inspiration.
Yeah, millions of additional subscribers who are lead astray from the correct science by someone who did not understand Faraday's law and basic physics.
There is a nice anecdote in one of Dawkins books about a distinguished professor of cellular biology being disproven about the existence of the golgi apparatus in a guest lecture. After the lecture they shook hands and he thanked him very much saying that he was wrong for 20 Years. That's the spirit of science right there.
This is how it should be and if that were the case all the time, we would be way farther in scientific discovery than we are now. However sadly history shows that what happened here happens often: Someone with a high degree dismisses the claims of someone with a lower degree just by assuming to have a higher "rank" in science. Instead he should've respectfu replied and they could've worked together and explain whatever they find in the end to the world. I am very interested in how Lewin will answer to this video and the proof it delivers.
@dothemathright 1111 sorry, wrong thread. I'm not discussing that. This is only about manners. Also the guest was also a PhD. Just not a professor, I think
@dothemathright 1111 Yep, and Feynman even gives the correct definition of the KVL as ∮E · dl = 0, which Mehdi rejects in this video, only to later cite Feynman and prance about triumphant.
i respect you for having the balls to disagree with someone like professor lewin. whether you're correct or not, i value your effort to keep the discussion civilized on both sides.
Effort to keep it civilized by acting like the only reason why the opponent doesn't hit him was that he can't? Good job! Just like emphasizing the role of authority/degree (which is an argumentation error, but not used by Lewin). What Mehdi did: keep smiling, be funny and seam to be polite, this way your fans without sufficient knowledge in physics and logic will not deal with your tons of argumentation mistakes! He is clearly wrong, he is direcly falsified in Feynmans book, but also in the metacommunication he broke the rules of fair and relevant communication many times.
He spelled "seem" incorrectly in his little rant as well. Unfortunately when someone can't make their point without spelling/grammar mistakes, I don't have time to read their response.
Dr. Lewin has acted irresponsibly and unprofessionally for this entire debate as far as I've seen. He was dismissive, rude, and the only one discrediting his lectures is himself through his actions.
Absolutely agree. If you're so confident that you are right then you take the higher moral ground and explain politely where the other person's misunderstanding is (just as Mehdi has done). As soon as you start attacking people it's clear that you have no valid arguments left.
Not to mention, he looks and sounds utterly ridiculous, like many crackpot conspiracy theorists on TH-cam. I get that he's well-respected, etc etc., but he comes across as a loon. If I wasn't aware of his background, didn't know who he was, there's no way I'd take him seriously just by the way he talks, and looks.
And yet he is right. No matter how you might like him or not. Science is not democratic, nor it is based on niceness. It is appalling how many comments go along the lines of "oh, he's been mean, hence everything he says must be wrong". No. He's just frustrated by people "who believe they know, but in reality do not know".
@@Peltio That's quite the bold statement. it's not at all like history is littered with discredited scientific theories, most of which uttered by somebody convinced they are right, and are bothered by people, ""who (in their own opinion) believe they know, but in reality do not know".
Enough people here have commented on Prof. Luwin's behavior, so I'll leave it at that. On the other hand, I loved hearing that another full professor at MIT, in this case Professor Belcher, willingly spent so much time to personally teach Medhi and even write that document!!! That is very commendable on Dr. Belcher's part and benefits the viewers of this channel!
Glad to see how polite people here in this comment section are. I didn't really understand any of this but nevertheless this was interesting to follow.
@SappFire well. if you found it interesting - go through it slowly - When you get stuck on something, google it and learn it and then come back and continue I'm guessing you got lost in the formulae right A LITTLE TIP sometimes the letter are just the first letter of what is being referred to , like E for Energy or R for resistance, then at other times (because it's up to the person to decide) they might put X for energy and z for resistance so the point here is , you need to know what he's making reference to, however, most engineers and mathematicians' will use the standard that everyone uses also, i'm guessing you got lost wtih the triangle "DELTA" hehe just google WHAT DOES DELTA MEAN IN MATHEMATICS AND ENGINEERING TO SIMPLIFY THIS in science it is necessary to define things very specifically, which is why we do stuff like this.... ok, we have something, let's call it A and we have another thing, let's call it B so when we A+B = C and we have a value for C then we can take C and do this and that and then something else to it and a shit load of complex things and ALL OF THESE THINGS PRODUCE A RESULT AND SO WE DON'T HAVE TO RETYPE THE WHOLE THING AGAIN EVERY TIME let's call that result D does that make sense so then when someone says , and Now we Add D to A A is one thing D is a shit load of calculation , which the result of those calcuations is then added to A to produce, let's say E that's how we define thing YOU BASICALLY HAVE TO HAVE AN ONGOING TRAIN OF THOUGHT so we someone says , Let's take D you have to be like...... "Oh, ok,i get what that means" it's like when someone says let's consider KIRCHHOF'S LAW OF VOLTAGE, KVL and i'll say "yep, got it" it takes a long time in the beginning to explain these things , but when you put the effort in to understand them, we then know what we all talking about and things go faster WHICH THEN BRINGS ME TO THIS POINT hehe so... clearly there is a massive headfuck through this process , and after all of this........ SOMEONE WHO HAS LITTLE TO NO SCIENTIFIC UNDERSTANDING COMES UP TO ME AND SAYS - DISAGREE WITH WHAT YOU SAID (ok, fine) - THEN THEY SAY............. hehe (wait for it ).... GO ON THEN, EXPLAIN IT TO ME, PROVE IT TO ME AND CONVINCE ME THAT YOU'RE RIGHT hehe well. it's kinda hard when the person doesn't understand fundamentals so.. yeah.. Talking to a random non scientific person (not you in this case) is sometimes funny as hell because they think they are right AND NOW YOU UNDERSTAND hehe That ONE FUCKING LETTER can leave you studying shit for 3 hours ............... ONE LETTER or ONE SHAPE like a Triangle Delta. and then the next one you'll get stuck on it THETA hehe (but, that's a story for another time) and.. there you go WELCOME TO MY WORLD MATE be cool
Dr Lewin was not very nice to you, which I think was wrong. So I want to apologize for him. Still, he is right. Why? I give you two scenarios to think about: 1. A secondary winding of a transformer at no load, primary connected to mains. Do you measure a voltage at the terminals? Good. According to Kirchhoff this voltage is also found across the well conducting (!) copper winding within the transformer, thus shortening the secondary winding, even at no load. Why is this voltage not shortened? Because induced voltages dfi/dt appear only once _within a loop_, while all other voltages appear *twice*: first, as voltage source and second, as voltage drop. Okay? 2. Now imagine the following: You disconnect your transformer from the mains and insert an alternating voltage source in series to the secondary winding. Do you measure a voltage at the terminals? Good. But now you have "*two voltages*"! One in series to the secondary winding as source and the second is the one you measure at the no load terminals as voltage drop. THAT is Kirchhoff. In case of an induced voltage you will not find a “second instance” of the induced voltage *within the loop that created this induced voltage*. And Mehdi, please stop claiming that Kirchhoff and Faraday are the same thing. They are not. CLInt E*dl = 0 is Kirchhoff. The name KVL is taken. End of story. Sorry. One last remark: The output voltage of a transformer is a “normal” source voltage in *any* outer loop. Of course this secondary voltage will appear “twice“ in a loop fed with it as mentioned above and will make Kirchhoff shine as always … And thanks for pointing out that Kirchhoff is pronounced Kir"X"hoff ... He was German. ;-)
@@quellstrom I'm sorry but stuff you said were incorrect. In #1, the voltage is not across the well conducting wire, but is an AC voltage across a large inductor. It would only be a short circuit if the voltage was DC. and for your #2 what are you talking about? You know, they are changing the definition of kilogram and voltage as we speak. So why should we be stuck on KVL being the integral of E.dl?
@ElectroBOOM I'm sorry but #1 if it were a voltage across an inductor, where is the current??? Do you see the point? If you connected an AC-voltage source across an inductor you would see a current! #2 The experiment is simple: connect an AC voltage source and an inductor in a loop with a switch in series. Open the switch and measure the voltage across the opened switch. You will find your voltage source there. Same thing as an transformer at no load? Apparently not. > You know, they are changing the definition of kilogram and voltage as we speak. So why should we be stuck on KVL being the integral of E.dl? No: CLInt E*dl=0 is KVL. The induction law, as we call Faraday's law in Germany ends the reign of KVL. That happens as soon as a loop is exposed to a changing magnetic field.
This is an outstanding video. Beneath your bumbling facade lies an earnest, honest, objective and thoughtful and principled thinker. Kudos Electroboom. Respect.
What is ironic that Dr. Lewin is criticising @ElectroBOOM education, while using law discovered by a scientist (Faraday) with no formal degree in physics.
@@isodoubIet at 1:10 the snippet of the comment from Dr. Lewin: "I set the record straight and I called spade a spade; he has masters degree in EE. His video is therefore an embarrassment." Dr. Lewin indirectly calls Mehdi a flatearther next second in the clip.
@@TheSergeiFranco "I set the record straight and I called spade a spade; he has masters degree in EE. His video is therefore an embarrassment." You _do_ understand that he called it an embarrassment because a masters in EE _should know better_ than to make this elementary mistake, right? It is an embarrassment. And calling him a flat earther is too kind; he's more like someone who claims 2 + 2 = 13.
Subscriped after seeing this video. I have much respect for Dr. Lewin. His lectures are an excellent source of knowledge and a gift for humanity by having them publicly available. But I think he purpessfuly missed the point and took the "bad probing" personally. Glad that you were respectful even though he called you a flat earther =)
I have a laboratory with RF measurements capability and I did the experiment many times with a transformer (220/220 Volt), a one closed loop around the core,with the same resistors value and the same geometry used by Prof,Lewin. The transformer was excited with a function generator at a frequency between 50 up to 200 Hz creating a positive pulse simulating the open/close of a switch (or negative pulse,or exponential rise and fall ) and the probes were two Tektronix connected to an oscilloscope.So the the experiment was done in a repetitive way. Probing with a single channel on both side of the circuit or with two channels or with two different oscilloscopes, in all cases the two voltages were opposite in polarity and with the right ratio. Tryng different methods and different setup the result was always the same and the picture in the oscilloscope screen was the exact picture of what Prof. Lewin showed in his experiment.
I gotta say, as a fluid dynamicist, sometimes I wish some factions in the turbulence community would disagree with the same professionalism and respect demonstrated in these videos. this argument was really impressive and made me proud to be a physicist/engineer (that distinction gets messy for fluid dynamicists). well done!
1:16 that thing was really repeated by prof. No Matter how good he is, or how much I respect him, I really didn't like the way he responded :) No one is discrediting his lectures, IDK why he feels like that. No one can take away what he is, he is a genius, we all know, but it doesn't mean he can't try to listen to someone else without being so biased.He was getting kind of triggered, specially cuz mehdi don't have equal degrees, there is a knowledge outside of degrees too! Anyways, mehdi you made a really good video, beautiful saying all your points and respectfully.
Since I don't understand the science very well, I tend to believe the person who is more reasonable and doesn't resort to name-calling to discredit someone. In this case, Dr. Lewin didn't really act with integrity and seems to protect his ego first and seek truth second, so I'm more inclined to believe in Medhi's reasoning. Naturally none of my uninformed opinion matters, scientific consensus matters, which I also think falls on Medhi's side.
Blame a minority of channel fanboys for creating and perpetuating drama. It's quite a common problem. Science content creators don't want their fans launching personal attacks every time they disagree with someone's conclusions, but there are people who treat everything like competitive team sports and love to troll.
I hate that people are the way they are sometimes. This is (as you said) about the science... why people would divert the attention to bs attacks and bring faith into the mix is baffling to me. Keep doing what you do Mehdi, sincerely a long time viewer.
The funny thing is if these people picked up a history book, they would realize that while much of the west was in the dark ages, much of the middle east and Baltic states were advancing science and medicine in a big way. This includes the Islamic people and other "Brown People" (to put it nicer than the commenters Medhi read out). How they seem to think that science is only a white people thing is beyond me.
Damn can't believe I just saw these even tho I've always been an electroboom fan. Honestly the respect you show in this argument is crazy. I'm kind of sad Dr. Lewin didn't show the same level of respect for you though
"Allways assume the person you are talking with knows something you don't." Not living by this saying destroys knowledge, no matter how smart you think you are. Thanks Mehdi, amazing how respect and simple reasoning/logic can go a long way, even against "the smartest" among us.
@@isodoubIet I do, obviously he does know something (a lot) that I don't know, but he did not assume Mehdi knew something he didn't, and did not treat him with the respect he deserved. And respect outweighs "smartness" in most situations.
3 years ago I didn’t know what is happening but I knew this was something epic. I am now an electrical engineer student and I just now have appreciated this topic.
Exact same story here. Came back to this video after doing a electromagnetics course at uni, now I actually get it. When I watched it at first I just skipped trough the maths.
@Goku Vegeta As an outsider what is your opinion about intelligence? 1: You've failed to make any fact-check, you are uncapable to discover reality. Lewin doesn't live in Budapest, and he is not a fan of Anna and the Barbies as me. 2: By bringing up and blaming by such dishonest behaviour you've just prooved that how dishonest and disrespectful you are. Is denying the existence of your opponent what Mehdi taught to you? You are a shame even for Mehdi. 3: You have failed to make any relevant reaction. You are only trolling.
@Goku Vegeta You've ignored every single relevant piece of information. Judging if somebody was a fake account is impossible from his interest, and if you really wanted to know, then you should have checked my videos made long time ago in Budapest, falsifying I could have been Lewin. This intentionally ignorant behaviour prooves you can not be intelligent. If you were able to understand or even willing to read my reasonings, then you could realize my deep insight to the topic I talk about, and my work experience in this field is the reason why I am "obsessed" with this topic (together with my affection for correct information, and hate for malicious manipulation). A really intelligent person doesn't call himself intelligent. An intelligent person knows there is a measure for intelligence, and if he wanted to convince others, without actually showing intelligent reasoning, then he would tell what IQ score he has reached on certified tests. I have not told anything that would support I was a fan of Lewin. I never argued by he was smart or nice, or reputable, or anything else. He was simply right, judged by logic, and physics book, and my own professional EE experience. I got my knowledge regarding physics from my teachers in Budapest. I don't insult people. I offend stupid beliefs. You insult people. You've made the most serious insult can be made by denying my existence.
How sad that when presented with an educated opinion that contradicts his own, Dr. Lewin elects to resort to insults and criticism rather than consideration for a peer's opinion or openness to review the new theory. I think Mehdi would make a great scientist, always willing to consider criticism and other perspectives to make his argument stronger... or to admit an error.
The problem is that Dr Lewin doesn't consider Mehdi a peer. It's perfectly possible to not react dismissively toward others despite a difference in perceived status or experience, but unfortunately this type of toxic elitism is rife in academia.
@@moonasha I would say that is hyperbolic, it is more likely they seem that way from having to deal with idiots throughout there career that make them seem brisk and rude.
He says he was unable to find your video. He states he has his students (and presumably hundreds of TH-camrs) telling him there is this video on TH-cam but none of them thought to send him a link or even tell him the TH-camrs name, neither did he think to ask any of them - lol
He has the hours to waste debunking any chance of being wrong.. But doesnt have 5 minutes of time to watch a video. Sounds like he's protecting his profits off his lectures and books like a vulture. "I was wrong" = refunds = - profit = waaaaaa i am god and masters degree stfu
He is a dinosaur with a weak character... I knew from the get go and all his repetitive answers that he gets much more respect than he really deserves from EB. Calling others "flat earthers" and down talking his education made me quickly realize that he is a low shot character. And I will never respect weak characters no matter what they "achieved" in life. There are thousands of people that are just as smart but without the bad character. Here you go
@@eazen In many cases, the type of degree you hold says less about your intelligence and more about the amount of time/money/connections you have. There are plenty of self taught individuals that can access the same textbooks, lectures, worksheets and calculators that people with PhD's have and produce the same results and innovations. Tesla himself was a university dropout for gods sake and no one can dispute his genius and contribution to the field. Not to mention that, at one point, the flat earth was the accepted explanation and the globe people had to argue their point. It was only because the flat earth crew engaged the globe crew in honest debate and discussion that the globe was proven. I think that the flat earth crew of today should be given the same respect to argue their point and have it tested. Trying to paint them as martyrs and idiots does nothing but add to their following. You are right, character is the only thing about a person worth respect.
Damn, hats off to you sir. You act all crazy during all your videos, but now you get serious and show not only good content and an interesting discussion, but also great features of professionalism and a correct way of handling this kind of situations. Mad respect to you
Yeah he was on his last legs with MIT, but they dropped his course for something other than those two reasons. Seems he has a predatory side as well. Search for "why Lewin was dropped by MIT" in Google (first 2 results), just awful.
The final straw was him sexually harassing minors online. Needless to say Dr. Walter Lewin was never a good person, a role model, or a person worthy of the title professor at all.
Just as many other commenters, I am also very dissapointed with Lewin´s reaction. It didn´t feel like he was being satiric about it, and despite his career and title, comparing you to flat-earth believers was low and arogant. I fear Dr. Lewin failed to understand one of the core principles of science, and that is open discussion. Instead of accepting dogmatic truth of a one man, we should openly discuss, compare and search for the truth. If anything, your video brought new viewers and attention to his channel, which he should be thankful for, in the first place. I studied law, yet your channel sparked interest in electricity and sciene in me, after which I even created my own workshop and started making little experiments and even my own wiring on the workshop. You may have been wrong on the science side, which still takes guts and honesty, but you´ve still came out as a better person, and you have my deepest respect for that. Race, nationalities, religions, all aside. As a normal, human being.
Flat-earthers think like you. They ignore facts, reject logical reasonings, decide based on sympathy, and nurture long time ago falsified theories. They never calculate anything correctly, and their mathematical model doesn't exist (or changing all the time). I think the diagnosys of Lewin was quite accurate, however he is not a medical doctor.
@@MaximC I haven't told anything about meaning of life. Mehdi was the one who emotionally rejected the comparison to a flat-earther, like it was much worse than being an idiot. What you said is much more accurate for him. Stop being a functional analphabet!
@@PafiTheOne Your "flat-earthers think like you" is completely unrelated to the original comment, it seems you didn't even bother to read it. I would like to see your reaction when you're trying to discuss a scientific theory and you are compared with "flat-earthers" because of that...😄
@@MaximC Your "I would like to see your reaction" is completely unrelated to any of the comments, it seems you didn't even bother to read them. Also it is totally unrealistic. If you really think "flat-earthers think like you" was completely unrelated to "comparing you to flat-earth believers was low and arogant", then you are hopeless.
I’m drunk but I understood every letter you said. You would be a great university teacher imo. Especially since you are humble towards your misunderstanding, dare to prove it, learn from it, and move on. Please never stop making videos! Thank you and good luck!
I'm not drunk and I agree. He went through his reasoning quite quickly, so it was difficult to catch everything without pausing and backing up a couple times, but imagine how much more clearly he could explain things if he had an hour or more for a lecture. I feel like he would have everyone on his side.
Should I get drunk to understand? Should I be drunk to understand why he ignored the requirement for fields being separated? Should I be drunk to understand why his real probing mistake is not important? Should I be drunk to understand why he mixed 2 completely different experiments in his "explanation"? Should I be drunk to forget about Lenze's and Ampere's law as he did?
@@Samu-eq9iq I did this, and the more I listen and think the more errors (self-contradictions, denial of facts and irrelevances) I find. His "theory" (better said: bunch of denials) is just completely wrong on every level. Not quatifiable, no predictive force, no valid logic, no intention to learn, full of ad hominem, no EE practice is presented... He completely ignored the logic structure of Lewin's reasoning, and replaced to bullshit. I (and others) explained in my comments many of the errors of him mentioned above. If a drunken listener feels if this presentation is logical then I must suspect being drunk can be a requirement for "understanding". ;-)
I really appreciate how you addressed these issues that keep boiling up on the Internet, when fans start to attack their idol's "oppenent(s)". It really is refreshing that you made it civil again. Those heated and personalized debates really have nothing to do with science, and it's nice to see people bringing it back to a rational conversation level. Thank you!
I watched doc.Lewins videos, he has good lecturing videos, we all can learn a lot from him, but sincerly I like your videos more because your explanations covering electro engineering is far better than his.
@E And yet there are lectures that are TH-cam videos... so those are magically entertainment now? They're not any more entertaining just because they're on TH-cam.
Dr Lewin seems to have lost all idea about scientific work. He acts like the church in the mid age by discrediting other scientist who disagree with him. Actually it is an important part of science that people question theories as long as it is justified. If you look at the experiments about the neutrino speed, where the scientists disagreed with Einstein, nobody flamed them angrily, but helped them to find a reason why this was found. And in the end they found a measurement error. So they were wrong, but their work was still important, because without this work we wouldnt progress. So Lewin actually seems to be an enemy of science, as he wants to flame anybody who finds contradicitions in theories, with the argument that he has a higher degree. Science is not a competition of status but a competition of results and proofs. A serious scientist would take a neutral look at the topic and not act like a 15 year old kid. Sorry, but I being an mechanical engineer myself hate those persons who block every neutral discussion about scientific topics by flaming the other.
mb he acts bad but he is correct and the difference is that he can prove he is correct. mehdi just proved that KVL works for contained eletric elements, which is not the general case. forget about all that just have 1 source 1 drain in a changing magnetic field that KVL is undefined. QED
@@Peltio What do you mean he doesnt understand faraday's law?? He literally explained it in damn good details in the video. Are you even watching the video?? Or you yourself dont undetstand faraday's law?
@@luqmanidlan3564 I can't say whether Peltio understands Faraday's law, but I am in agreement with their assessment that Mehdi doesn't understand it. If he did, he wouldn't have made any of these videos.
The mechanism of the differing voltmeter readings has been well explained in various forums since the 1960s when physics teachers began to challenge their students with the apparent paradox. The classic explanatory example is Robert Romer's paper cited in this video. Dr John Belcher's technical summary linked in the video notes is another example. Nobody denies Kirchhoff's loop Rule works just fine in lumped parameter circuit models. Kirchhoff's circuit laws are axiomatic to lumped parameter circuit models. In typical measurements on circuits KVL "proves" to appear correct. It proves correct because we normally only probe the gap across circuit element terminals and have no way of knowing what electrical field conditions apply along the physical path "inside" any particular circuit element. This is the point of Lewin's argument - that KVL won't always apply when we follow a closed path which includes the internal structure of a circuit element, such as an inductive element. This would include the physical paths along transformer and inductor windings rather than the gap between their terminals. The Lewin experiment clearly reveals the difference in the two approaches. It's also worth pointing out that engineers and physicists often have a different definition of Kirchhoff's loop Rule. Dr Lewin challenges the engineer's definition but would probably have no argument with the alternative physicist's definition. Is this misdirection on his part? I can't answer that question and he wouldn't respond even if I asked him.
The little understanding i get is that Dr. Lewin is mixing apples and oranges concluding that oranges are "wrong" because you can't make a good apple pie from them. (Arbitrarily assuming that making pies is the only way you want to use fruit) (ok maybe I'm taking the metaphor too far) in addition he seems wanting to do so in order to portrait himself as some anti-conformist thinker
I'm no electrical engineer (yet) but I know from experience and from my professors that they get little details wrong all the time, and what do they do? They double check, do some homework and get back to us. They don't double down on explanations and just say "no it's right" without giving it a second thought, but rather test it. Mehdi 1. explains clearly as possible his view, 2. gets a second opinion (or in other words peer review) 3. does his homework and 4. tests it because that's the definition of science. Even if the other guy might be right the fact he resorts to callous instantly makes him not as credible because he would rather have his pride then theoretically advancing civilization. To be clear I'm not saying he's not allowed to defend his argument, all I am saying is the proof is in the pudding. It's like trying to replicate a software bug without instructions, it just doesn't hold.
Lewin is right. Don't compare with your average prof. There is already literature out there which discusses the same thing. Evidently the master's degree person didn't come across it. Lewin did the retort because Mehdi was passively one-upping him in his first video (bro he PhD + published, me puny masters, but look me is right).
@@curious_banda That's literally the opposite from one-upping. Is your definition of one upping having lower qualifications but giving an argument?? So by your standards he is not allowed to question anything or ask for an explanation because it is offensive. Chill out
@@curious_banda I'm curious. Do you really believe that? So according to your logic we should take all information from our superiors without question? Sorry, you can live in that world (but I won't). The professor I pay to educate me... Will have to answer my questions or he will no longer be my professor.
This so called engineer understands nothing, and he demonstrated this very well. Wrong predictions, self-contradictions, ignorance, and many kinds of irrelevances he shown. On the other hand Lewin tried to warn real engineers to the practical consequences of the Faraday's Law. But many of them seems to fail.
@@PafiTheOne You are part of the problem. Lewin and this guy are agreeing on all of the physics, they only disagree on whether KVL is "\oint E dot dl=0" or if it is "\oint E dot dl - d\Phi_B/dt=0". It is a purely pedantic argument, with no bearing on physics. Anyone who knows what they are doing will either use Faraday's law, or use the version of KVL that is equivalent to faradays law in a case where there are varying magnetic fields.
I love how respectful you are, I wish Lewin would be just as respectful towards you, unfortunately he comes across as quite condescending, it’s not like you’re trying to intentionally discredit him
Holding your cool like that after someone who's wrong shoves their PhD into your face over your Master's to cover their tracks.... well done... I have something to learn from you for sure (on top of all other awesome things you already have taught me through this channel).
well, lewin is not wrong (hes just rude), but he just uses a different interpretation of what KVL means. Everything Lewin writes down in his videos is correct (as far as i can tell xD), but Mehdi disagrees on the "KVL does not Hold" part, because they define it differently.
@@Maric18 And thats where the misunderstanding took place. It is the law that is in question. When can law never holds true? and When a law can be impractical for use?
Walter Lewin is NOT wrong. They disagree only on the meaning of KVL, but Walter is ultimately right because the lumped circuit approximation is what the name says, an approximation. There are no lumped circuits in real life.
I'm a 2nd year Electronics engineering student, and I find this explanation beautiful. I often forget that you know what you're doing in your normal videos.
If your EE course includes further studies in electromagnetic theory, it might be wise to reserve some of your judgments about the correctness of ElectroBOOM's various claims until then. At the very least, one should carefully read Dr John Belcher's summary of ElectroBOOM's experiments. Vis-a-vis ElectroBOOM's approach, there is significant divergence in Dr Belcher's approach in his analysis. Dr Belcher was a professorial colleague of Walter Lewin at MIT. The message coming out of the MIT Physics department about the Lewin demonstration was pretty consistent. Watch "Chapter 10.0.1: Non Uniqueness of Voltage in a Magnetoquasistatic System" on TH-cam th-cam.com/video/u6ud7JD0fV4/w-d-xo.html Despite ElectroBOOM's inferences to the contrary, it is highly unlikely that Dr Belcher would actually endorse all of ElectroBOOM's claims. There is certainly a tacit agreement from Dr Belcher that there are circumstances where KVL appears to hold in the presence of time-varying fields - provided certain criteria are met. Those criteria are well elaborated in Richard Feynman's Lecture on AC CIRCUITS - Chapter 22 of Volume 2 of the Feynman Lectures.
I know I'm almost 2 years late, but I wanted to tell you that I admire the way you handled this conflict. I've always liked your videos, but after seeing you being this respectful after recieving this kind of video answers, I’m liking you even more! Thanks for being the better man.
Hearing him read a comment calling him a "sh*tskin with one unibrow" and he didn't even seem upset made me spit my energy drink everywhere. Oh my god that was funny. Subscribed
Yeah but back then everyone was almost dumb af, this doesn’t stand anymore... Education level matters for certification. If you bring up Steve Jobs or any e commerce champion, what they simply did was is tapping into untapped market... Also some of these fuckers can make an OS can anyone else nowadays(without education)?
As a Ph.D. in Electrical engineering, I confirm every word he says! The effect of induced voltage (mutual-inductance), which can also happen due to the coupling with the external field in the probe loops, was not considered in Dr. Lwein's analysis. Thanks, Mehdi. I appreciate your careful reasoning.
Every word? Including "Please don't hit me! Haha, you can't hit me!" ? Obviously you don't tell the truth. Careful reasoning? Where can you find such thing? Please quote only 1, relevant, logical, and factually correct statement from Mehdi! I couldn't find one, except for the parts where he reconstructs real physics, that he wants to religiously deny. Your only "relevant" statement is false. Dr. Lewin considered mutual induction by Faraday's Law. Because it is *the* law that determines induced EMF. But also your statement is actually irrelevant, because there is no requirement for considering induction in an indirect reasoning (a reasoning that is constructed to falsify its own premise) that is built on the (false) assumption of EMF(induced, etc...)=0 This is what KVL states. What makes considering induction impossible is only and exactly KVL.
@@PafiTheOne dude you’re constantly commenting. I’ve gone through most comments and in nearly every single one you have 10+ comments. So pressed just calm down it’s an intellectual disagreement not a political debate. Yikes
@@MoodyGooseCow Not constantly, but occasionally. So you are factually wrong. And irrelevant. I disagreed, by falsifying your ignorant dogmas, I have every right for it. Deal with it!
@@PafiTheOne sure didn’t take you long to reply to this! You’ve been commenting on and off for 2 years, I’m sure you’ve got other things you can do in your life. I’m currently doing a PHD and just reading through these comments was enough of a time waster.
The earlier comment by "The Crude Lab" (immediately preceding this one) supposes that Lewin and ElectroBOOM have different definitions of voltage and this is then the crux of their differing conclusions. It's an interesting suggestion. The likelihood for confusion arising with respect to the meaning of terms like e.m.f., voltage and potential difference is considerable. Each has a specific definition which distinguishes it from the others. The issue is further compounded by the fact that all of these terms share the same unit - the Volt. The term e.m.f. has fallen out of favour with purists for a couple of reasons not the least being the lack of a rigorous and consistent definition. A battery is presumed to possess the property of having an e.m.f. but being electrochemical in origin this motive "force" is beyond the scope of Maxwell's equations. The opposite is true in the case of electromagnetic induction as we have in the Lewin experiment, where Maxwell's equations are readily applicable. Little wonder then that opinions vary as to which of the two "protagonists" is correct - or should we assert along with The Crude Lab that they are both right from their point of view. If one searches carefully it is possible to find clear definitions for both voltage (electric stress) and (electric) potential difference - see for instance the IEC Glossary. The term e.m.f. is rather more difficult to pin down and the IEC unsurprisingly describes it as a deprecated term. Notwithstanding such a rigorous view held by an important authority, the non-purists continue to pay little regard to the purists and the use of the term e.m.f. will no doubt persist in perpetuity. The distinction between voltage and potential difference is pivotal to our understanding of the Lewin experiment. This significance is no more evident in the discussion starting about time 15:50 onwards. ElectroBOOM is considering the case of the electrical conditions between two points on a homogeneous conducting loop immersed in a uniform time-varying magnetic field. The voltage between those two points will correspond to the Ohmic voltage drop along each of the two possible paths between those points - the long way or the short way. However a seeming paradox exists with the revelation that the potential difference between the two points will be zero irrespective of the path between those points.
This is why I love seeing youtuber of science. The important thing is not egos but scientific knowledge. I also studied electronic engineering and always thought that to make Kirchoff's law effective it was necessary to include all elements of the circuit, including parasitic capacitors and coils. The discussion is purely about how KVL is defined, that is, etymological rather than conceptual. I agree with you (and obvious with Feynmann) :D You are definitely my favorite youtuber and I hope to continue watching your videos. Now I'm doing a Master in Robotics and I feel like I'm beginning to forget the basic concepts of electronics that I learned in my bachelor's degree. So with your videos I review them. I even remember that when I was in college I was very prankster and hyperactive, the polarity was reversed by the capacitors of the circuits of others and I laughed when they exploded in the delivery of work. I also used to electrocute a lot by mistake. Greetings and probably Patreon (although I am a student and it is difficult for me) but I also want to participate in team draws. Greetings from a Colombian who lives in Germany.
Sorry Mehdi, but I can't respect anyone who tries to say that you can't be right because you ONLY have a master's degree. It's such a childish move and shows what he really is like. A man who believes that he knows everything about a topic and that no one else can be right if they contradict him.
He did not say that. In fact he said that someone with a master degree should understand that what he is talking is nonsense and that is of the same magnitude of regular people saying that the earth is flat.
And for the record what medhi is doing is painfully obvious, he is creating artificial argument with a more famous person and that brings his channel attention and views... I would not be surprised if medhi actually agree with the professor. Btw i am someone who despise education for sake of education :)
@@delanmorstik7619 That's BS excuse. You know exactly what Lewin implied there. He said Mehdi is an embarassment for someone who holds Master in EE. Heck. Lewin even called Mehdi a flatearther. _"This is too basic. I do not argue either with people who believe that the Earth is flat."_ That is downright arrogant prick move. Just argue your point. ---
@@delanmorstik7619 Artificial argument for views? Again, what a *BS nonsense excuse.* Mehdi already had million subscribers. He didn't need a clickbait video. Infact, his rebuttal video doesn't have nowhere near as view as to many of his popular video.
Love a good academic argument, challenging the accepted norm is good for everything. More "sparks" flowing between you and Dr. Lewin than between you and your Van Der Graaff generator.
"In December 2014, MIT revoked Lewin's Professor Emeritus title after an MIT investigation determined that Lewin had violated university policy by sexually harassing an online student in an online MITx course he taught in fall 2013." *O o f*
4 ปีที่แล้ว +31
WHAT, this comment should be the first of the comment section
Its actually insulting to professors to continue referring to Lewin as a professor. He was terminated in disgrace...a Professorship is not granted for life!
This illustrates how pure science and applied science sometimes tell a very different story. Applied science treats instruments (e.g. oscilloscope, voltmeter) as something that measures but does not interact with the experiment. This is clearly what Dr. Lewin was attempting to describe in his experiment. He did not include the probe and the scope as a "part of the experiment". Ironically, he's a physicist and not an engineer, so he should have been more careful in understanding the limitation of the instrument. I'll sight another example where science and engineering are at odds with each other. Chemical engineering will teach you that the mass of the products does not change after a chemical reaction (conservation of mass). Physics will teach that chemical reaction does change the mass equivalent to the energy produced in the reaction, albeit very very small. I think physics tries to tell a more accurate explanation of how the world works. Applied science is often about "it's good enough".
You misunderstood. Lewin was proved to be correct both in theory and in practice. Then Mehdi ignored his detailed explanation and assumed (but never actually shown) a modell that must be corrected KVL (according to him), but never tried to calculate anything in that (continuously changing) model. Now he applied (only by words, without numbers) a method described by Feynmann that is not applicable here, since field separation is impossible in this case. Finally he demonstrated a brutally strong probing error caused by his lack of understanding, and instead of correctiong the error he first changed the circuit completely, then tried to explain the measurement error in a completely wrong way. Meanwhile he earned money by spreading disinformation, but this can be considered irrelevant.
PafiTheOne I’m not asking you to prove anything, I’m just saying if you think his examples were that bad give proper ones to illustrate your point; and video is the best way to do it because you get twice the info ie visual and audio explanation.
@@swalker157 "Best"? Well, it's questionable. For a viewer it can be convenient, for a maker it is a hard work. And if (almost) nobody watches it, then it is still useless. You get twice the info, I work 30 times as much. For Mehdi it is a profession, making money. For me a waste of time.
@@another90daystochangethis34 but it had everything to do with what they thought about Mehdi's religious beliefs. and also they assumed his beliefs based on where he's from which is generalizing millions of people. all of that for a scientific disagreement.
TLDR: Some smart people disagree about how your light turns on. But either way it still turns on. In summary ElectroBOOM wants to give ME an oscilloscope. :)
It's so depressing to see how quickly this disagreement devolved into person attacks. Really vicious personal attacks in some cases. And it had nothing to do with politics even. I'll never understand. At least now I know what a decent human being and a class act Mehdi truly is.
As soon as someone uses the pissing contest argument of "I have a higher degree than you and thus I must be right", I immediately lose all respect for them. Even if he is right (and I'm not saying he is), that doesn't excuse his ego and hubris. If he wanted to remain strictly professional he could just state his counter-arguments to the points you brought up in your video and be done with it. That being said, I really do appreciate how open, even and professionally you hold yourself Mehdi.
My thoughts exactly. When I first saw his response videos I was disgusted that someone with his level of education was resorting to that argument. It's really shameful, and no matter how brilliant he might be, he shows a closemindedness that's inappropriate for a scientist of his caliber.
He is very old. He is not in his proper mind I would say.
FalconEagle
I don't want to be disrespectful with him, but I think the same, maybe he's not in his prime anymore.
I think the "I have more experience in a field" argument isn't always bad (to use an extreme, you wouldn't want some random uneducated person arguing with a surgeon about surgery). And at some point, it might be justified to categorically ignore those people. But ElectroBOOM clearly isn't a bad faith actor, so comparing him to a flat-Earther was a bit uncalled for IMO. That said, Dr. Lewin seems to have a long history of being anti-KVL, so maybe he *does* think of KVL as a bit like flat-Earth theory. Which, using his definition of KVL, isn't really wrong.
sjm4306, please don't be disgusted with Dr. Lewin, I bet that it is not an easy task to expose yourself at the internet and have to almost daily receive disparaging comments. Tho Mehdi is more used to this I really don't know how a man at Dr. Lewin's age would react. Another point to be considered is, although most people think scientists as purely rational and polite people, the academic world is filled with hubris and disrespect. For better or worse, those who live in this world end u getting used to this type of behavior and end up reproducing it at times. Much love for both Mehdi and Dr. Lewin!
You made Engineers around the world proud. Not just with your logical reasoning. But also with your infinite amount of patience and respect for dr Lewin. I'll ensure my kids watch these videos to learn internet etiquettes (Whenever I have them). High five from India!
Yep, I agree. (soon to be a Electronics Engineer myself, from india)
Thats good
Please unsubscribe from T-series, and subscribe to pewdiepie
imo medi has been *way* too kind in his exchange with lewin.
@@jon2431 you couldn't be more right.
Kids: T Series vs PewDiePie
Legends: ElectroBoom vs Dr. Lewin
Lol correct kids to 9 year olds.
SUBSCRIBE TO PEWDIEPIE!!
SMASH SUBSCRIBE
Actual legends - both
So I am legendary adult kid.
I have a Ph.D. in Physics. I listened very intently to Medhi, mainly because he was so serious and did not shock himself even once throughout the video. I commend him on his pursuit of the truth, even if it pitted him against a well-known scientist. Mehdi has clarified something quite subtle here, and it has spurred me think more deeply about the subject matter. Thank you, Sir.
How can you type a mans name differently in 1 paragraph.
@@LargeBanana big geefus
Yeah...also mehdi was quite humble throughout his argument ....well can't say the same about Dr. Lewin
@@LargeBanana It's called a typo if you don't know. That stuff happens.
@@LargeBanana his PhD is in physics, not english
Huge respect Mr. Mehdi. You have displayed the true basis of science: seeking to understand and explain the principles of a system. This does not require a PhD, it requires careful thought and analyses.
BTW, a PhD just means one has (at some time - likely expired decades later) specific knowledge on some unique (likely partly esoteric -philosophical-and/or irrelevant in the real world) field, it does not imply that one has any better a grasp of the fundamentals than one holding a masters Degree, or dare i say, a Bachelor's Degree in the given field.
Claiming that just as one is a DrDrDr, or whatever automatically puts one above the debating floor is academic arrogance, likely to impress the ignorant but for those who have some level of expertise, it just raises a quizzical eyebrow, how quaint!
Any professor can be called out (Respectfully in most cases) for making mathematical errors or inaccurate claims - if the case is so, in areas of Philosophy the error may be debated/defended of course. and in areas of consensus, just canvass and then ask for a show of hands - no proofs needed.
You are right, it would require careful thought and analyses which are entirely missing from the video of Mehdi, but presented in the lession of Lewin. Mehdi (among many other mistakes) ignored his own recommended source: www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_22.html
Section 22-2:
" _Again we must make several simplifying assumptions. The assumptions we will make are all the ones that we described for the case of the inductance. In particular, we assume that the varying magnetic field is restricted to a definite region in the vicinity of the coil and does not appear outside the generator in the space between the terminals._ "
This assumption can not be made in the arrangement shown by Lewin, since the changing magnetic field penetrates everywhere inside the circuit. Since the assumption reqiured for defining voltage are not correct, the incorrect usage of term voltage (as KLV dictated) leads to contradiction. This was predicted correctly by Lewin, and then demonstrated experimentally, and confirmed even by Mehdi.
But Mehdi instead of accepting the results, and admitting KVL is wrong, chosen to religiously believe in KVL, contradicting himself, later maliciously edited the response of Lewin, made wrong predictions, and made many other mistakes, like his overwriting the definition of voltage here: th-cam.com/video/Q9LuVBfwvzA/w-d-xo.html which has no any base.
@@PafiTheOne wait a sec... I have been reading your comments, but I have to ask:
Whose side are you on?
A. Lewin
B. Mehdi
C. On the fence
Because you seem to agree with the OP's (seem to be on Mehdi's side) comment, but the rest of your paragraph seemed to be against Mehdi....
Btw, short answer please, I don't like too much words
@@PafiTheOne BTW, I don't get what you mean by the last paragraph where you said "overwriting the definition of voltage" can you please elaborate?
You can use more words here, but still, keep it short and to the point.
@@huangjunwei7211 I'm a fan and patreon of Mehdi, and I've seen every videos of him, while I've seen only a few videos of Lewin. But Lewin is definitely right here, and Mehdi is wrong many ways. This is a question of physics and logic, not being funny and nice, which contest could be won by Mehdi.
I'm on the side of an important knowledge in electrical engineering, which knowledge I use on almost daily basis. And on the side of rational reasoning.
Just wanted to say thank you for your approach to this. It awesome to see the true respect you have for your peers. Rare to find someone I can show as an example to my children. Love your videos! Hilarious respectful entertaining!
Here, here!
As a side note, I don't think it's rare among actual scientists. So if your kids go into the sciences they will likely be fine. Unfortunately you may be correct about TH-cam. Hard to find good examples.
When I was in graduate school I met several people like Dr. Lewin who instead of actually looking at your question and trying to see why you don't agree immediately attack your intelligence or education. I really don't like people with that attitude. I find it ironic that Dr. Lewin belittles your intelligence and your education level while heaping praise, well deserved, on Michael Faraday who had very little formal education. Education and intelligence are not related and just because a person is educated doesn't mean that they are not ignorant. I respect they way you went about this scientific discussion and I am deeply disappointed by the way Dr. Lewin responded.
Me too bro
There is difference between educated and literate
I am an electrician, and I took a electrical engineering course, but I could get little from it because the The professor, who was highly respected, couldn't explain in real life electrical examples, the concepts he was trying to convey. Even something like, what is a node. He said there was no examples that could be used in the electrical service field. I later found out there was, but he was steeped in the mathematical side of it. And the students that looked up to him, were having orgasms for every mathematical theory he gave them. That is why I like this channel, he can obviously get into the mathematical side, but also explain it in real world terms.
@@neaituppi7306 Exactly so. Worked similar for me with algebra because I hated it. As a software application programmer I had a use for it.
There might be a connection.......?
Keep in mind. Medhi contacted this man before even making this video series and he outright refused to help or comment based on the fact he was tired of talking about the subject. Only after medhi makes his series does the man pump out 3 videos just attacking medhi who praised and agreed and told people to watch the channel and series lewin made. Then lewin turns around and acts like the internet trolls just because medhi’s videos got views. He had his chance to help and contribute and teach medhi and outright refused.
Medhi? You called him Medhi?! You know what happens now?!!
MEDhi will be MADhi! (DOOM music plays)
Yeah that's not a very accurate description of the events. Look at it from the professor's perspective.
@@freshrockpapa-e7799 I don't even understand the professors perspective. Mehdi was so polite and respectful to Lewin in his first issue and just had one disagreement regarding an academic topic. Mehdi kept it professional by only focussing on the subject matter in hand. It was Mr. Lewin who came down to personal insults, I know he is old and may not have same patience as he had once before but academic critique/disagreement and discussion are the very basis of being a professional in academia.
@@neerajnongmaithem392 Why don't you try to think it through from the professor's perspective then?
@@freshrockpapa-e7799 Do you care to share what you think is the professors perspective that would lead him to personal insults in scientific setting? You do not need to be a professional to see that ElectroBOOM was polite the whole way while the politeness from professors side was occasional if even present.
1:15 "ElectroBOOM's long video is dedicated to discrediting my lectures. *It is very insulting.*"
And right there is the problem. A disagreement about science should not be considered a personal insult.
also, he wasnt discrediting his "lectures", just his argument that KVL doesnt always hold
@@FluorescentGreen5
Yeah, he certainly saw something that wasn't there: a personal attack.
What a sad, fragile ego
@@damon22441 He just took the comment about "bad probing" as an insult, because it implies that he doesn't know what he's doing. That coupled with the fact that Mehdi is completely wrong and has a degree sort of popped a fuse in Lewin.
@@Kalumbatsch lewin has a history of popped fuses, it's hereditary frankly.
Forget learning about electricity, this video has great lessons on being a good Internet citizen.
You are right, from this video learning from electricity is a bad idea, but he set a good example for manipulating people and earning money.
This was really an historic moment: logic and seek of truth always win proud and self entitlement.
@@jeanclaudewellness8274 Do you mean a correct, logical explanation and its experimental proof earns its punisment by ignorant people? Yes, this is historic.
@@PafiTheOne yep, words out of my mouth!
@@jznfamu6938 "Are against..." I can not decode your syntactically wrong sentence. Try to recompose! All of the videos of Mehdi has some educational value, except for these and the one with the water saver. These has negative value, since contain too much important false information.
Honestly though attacking someone for “only having a master degree.” Is pretty petty.
@Dr. M. H. Frankly people will find way to belittle you in their own defense no matter what. Even if someone has a PhD they'll just comment about how you don't have publications in your name, or blah blah blah, the list goes on.
@@cowteeth7950I think people get irrationally self-conscious when they feel like they are "attacked". He's probably perfectly reasonable to them until they start questioning KVL or whatever.
Midnight Commander _though attacking someone for “only having a master degree.” Is pretty petty_ Has this actually happen? (No. You completely misunderstood something.)
@@PafiTheOne Lol, are we watching the same video?
@@PafiTheOne you're right! Dr. Lewin says that he cannot understand why someone with a master's degree couldn't see that KVL does not hold if there are magnetic fields involved! He is not attacking him
watching this again after a year while taking my computer engineering degree, im actually in tears that i understand what's happening now
😂
I hope you understand that Lewin is right and Mehdi is wrong. Otherwise, you have a good reason to cry.
@@copernicofelinis cry in peace, lewin got rekt, that's all.
@@onemoment5850 I do not need to cry, nor to rejoice. I know the physics and I know who's right.
@@copernicofelinis doesn’t me the man had to be an ass about it. It was clearly an inquiry not a full on contestation of his credibility
Man, you got far from the electric guitar. :D
yeah, maybe too far... Hold my bear, I'm going back
@@ElectroBOOM What is it with bears in your language?! BEER
@@ElectroBOOM Well, wear a grounding strap. You scare me.
@@@iwtommo how many languages do you speak and write? If more than one: you never make mistakes? Fucking idiot.
Legalább abban jó volt.
Wikipedia has the answer to this problem, and it's kind of funny. In a practical sense, Lewin is right. When there are unconstrained magnetic fields in a circuit, KVL becomes unusable, and Faraday's Law should be used instead. The voltages need to be discreet and measurable for KVL to be calculated.
But Mehdi is correct in a literal sense. KVL is ALWAYS true, but in a system with unconstrained magnetic fields you cannot measure every voltage involved in the system.
This is an information problem, not a case where KVL is only true in certain situations. It's only USEFUL in certain situations, but it's always true.
What I find ironic here is that the academic is the one who is correct in a practical sense, while the engineer is correct in a literal, almost pedantic sense.
Exactly. The problem is in the wording of academic, he says: "KVL doesn't hold" and what he should say is: "you can't use KVL for this purpose because you can't measure every voltage involved in the system".
When you say "KVL doesn't hold" it trips some neural circuits in engineers heads, it's like math teachers teaching first grade children: "you can't do 5 - 8!"...:D
This. This should be much higher imo.
I don't think your reasoning makes KVL always true? Not sure what you mean by voltage needing to be 'discrete and measurable'. Or a magnetic field being 'unconstrained'.
In short, I just see it as that KVL says *all* closed loops have a zero net potential difference. But when you have a time changing magnetic field, that's not true i.e. not *every* closed loop has a zero net (ill-defined) potential difference. (to be fair, there's a bit of maths I haven't included here that supports these statements; you can probably find that on the Faraday's Law Wikipedia page though). Not sure what you mean by 'every voltage involved in the system'?
I've probably just repeated whatever Prof. Lewin said but really, Lewin is fundamentally correct (even if he was rude about it). If Mehdi is still saying that KVL is always true, then he's wrong; it's just a special case of Faraday's law.
@@zlac "You can't do 5 - 8!" Not without negative numbers. Numbers are on a plane, by the way, and that's not some weed induced "whoa" statement- the imaginary line number actually intersects the real number line at 0 and perpendicular to it, thus every complex number falls on a number plane. It's geometrically sound too- you can rotate a number 90 degrees by multiplying by i or -i.
amperage and voltage for 5 year olds the conclusion, they are the same. DC and AC to experts, the conclusion they ct work together. This channel is trash.
It is nice to know that, despite all the crap that people give you, you can remain respectful and professional. The scientific community should take notes.
Well the scientific method doesn't really care about respect or whatever, but it's nice if people can disagree politely enough.
@@skaruts the scientific method is put in place by humans
@@0Arcoverde Of course it was, but that doesn't matter. It was evolved over the centuries precisely to make sure that doesn't matter.
Blueprint um... an EE is part of the scientific community....
@@skaruts that's where you are wrong
It does matter
We do have positive bias on journals
Positive bias on a research
We have a way to do science varying on the field we studied to
We must prepare the experiment to avoid Bias, but can we ever do that
some academics really can not handle being proven wrong by their "inferiors." I've seen it first hand, and it was a MASSIVE uphill battle involving a handful of other people to finally convince a professor they were flat wrong about something. And the professor in question held a grudge for a month or so, and STILL brings it up in a pissy way
right, imagine gatekeeping information
Unfortunately, most PhD and MD programs cause the graduates to emerge with a "God-complex"
Classic Sheldon vs Howard
I'm sorry, when did this 'professor' admit they were wrong?
Just beta nerds trying to hold onto one thing that makes them feel important..
Happy Monday 😊! Thanks for the nice comments and support.
So you decided to not do something special at 2 million subscribes? In case you havent even noticed that you reached 2 Million and you are about to prepare something realy special just be more careful this time. We all remember the Jacob's Ladder incident.
Electroboom , please explain your conclusion more clearly. When you derived the equasion at 6.24 you even showed that as integral (e.dl) = sum of voltages as Vab. with is equal to -dO/dt and so KVL is integral (e.dl) =0. As saying sum of voltages =o is integral (e.dl) =o. And so Professor Lewin was right. I have not yet read the papers in the description. However what you have said about them I do agree. Yes sum of voltages =o if you do not take the closed path with in the inductor. But at 13:47 you said that integral (e.dl) =o for inside the inductor with there is a change in magnetic flux. This is wrong. Yes in a DC circuit that is correct but not in an AC. Remember yes V=L Di/Dt but integral (e.dl)=emf. remember that self inductance is v=Ndo/dt where n is the number of loops. so v is the sum of the voltages around those loops as N= number of loops and do/dt is the emf in that loop and so sum of the voltages is V (total voltage induced). If you try to take the loop around the inductor it will not equal zero. Nor have you shown why Dr lewinns demonstrations are wrong. If you agree with faraday's law then you will know that sum of voltages around any closed loop is equal to do/dt. Let's go back to you GPE analogy. Yes its zero when you lift the transformer up you gain GPE and let go it gains KE and loses GPE and so the energy ignoring air resistance is zero. Now if you then attached the transformer to a machine that could give the transformer a constant acceleration and it forced the transformer up and then down. Then GPE+KE doe not equal zero but equals to the work done. I still do not see why you think KVL still always holds. Please explain you opposing view in more detail as to why you disagree. As this video you jumped to sum conclusions with no proof (are thes conclusions from the paper you read?).
Im glad that you have done this video as it shows your interest in this and you want facts. However,
I have read the bit of inductance on www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_22.html and they are in a agreement with DR Lwin.
"line integral of E all the way around any closed path is equal to the negative of the rate of change of the flux of B through the loop." at 13.47 you day that integral of E.dl=0 Did you read this? Or are you confusing DC circuits, please explain.
Stand strong Mehdi, you are the guy! Greetings from an engineering student.
Dear mehdi you said in a (older) video that you are trying to make an induction cooker without security features
The most funny part of this saga is the fact that Lewin mocks him for having only masters degree implying education is "must have" to be great at something while debating about laws by Faraday who barely finished primary school lol
It's good old projection by lewin, mental not linear algebra.
Wait so what happened in the end?
@@Sohil876 lewin made an ass of himself, our indian friend probably misunderstood path considerations.
@@senselessnothing indian who? someone else got involved too? Mehdi is from iran afaik.
@@Sohil876 are you just trolling me? he's very indian looking.
Man I feel dumb!
The feeling is mutual, I feel dumb watching your videos!
I can relate
I feel dumb watching both of your videos!
At least you're not this guy: th-cam.com/video/OaNCGaoLFDY/w-d-xo.html
@@descarteshomunculus7313 Actually I kinda see quite some intelligence in that guy. I watched a short sample of that video, like 20 seconds worth and then thumbed down, then watched like 2 minutes more and gave un thumbs down the video. Hes just vulgar, thats all
I'm far from any PH degree but in your previous video I spotted the probing error immediately. I've been working in telecom in VHF, UHF and SHF. These errors are well known in these fields. A professor can be genius in tbeory but don't necessary have the field experiences. Use fully shielded wires.. and you will mesure tbe Kirchoff law... And yes, some can't accept their own errors .. I do support your conclusions 100%..
And you (and Mehdi) are wrong.
This is a quasistatic setting and there are no retardation effects.
@@copernicofelinis dumbass
So what causes the noise
theoreticians when the cow cant be assumed as a cylinder
@@frankcastle1862😂😂😂😂
Dr. Lewin may or may not be right, but his attitude is certainly wrong. I guess the higher your status, the higher your ego? Even if he is right, he has made a very bad impression of himself.
@Big LIttle Wha You are right, Lewin was wrong. He falsely assumed a person with masters degree in EE must be able to understand his lecture, but he was wrong. (If we accept the statement that Mehdi has a master's degree.)
I think he was probably just being rude because he was upset about all the unwarranted hate he was receiving. If thousands of people started harassing you and saying you're an idiot who doesn't know anything about your profession, you probably wouldn't respond very politely either.
@@danieljensen2626 That's the problem with having people who listen to you..... They may interperate the videos as attacking and attack other people in words
@@danieljensen2626 If somebody says that "most physics books have it wrong", he damn well should be REALLY factual.
If then a sentence like "Kirchhoff's Law is for the birds" falls, this about closes the case. If that were true, Airplanes would start falling from the sky.
EE Sadaghdar as well as Prof. Belcher just spent a great deal of real work into exactly pointing out why Lewin's statements were wrong in a key aspect and Feynman, Kirchhoff as well as Mr Sadaghdar were right, as were "most physics books" (albeit misleading).
Lewin refused to address the points made by Mr Sadaghdar (for starters, to ADDRESS something, you have to do it AFTER the thing you are addressing); even if "most physics books" *were* wrong, his lectures he refers obviously are unclear.
Commenters attacking Mr Sadaghdar or stating he was unable to "comprehend a lecture" or a mere entertainer are the icing on top after Prof Belcher came to exactly the same conclusions.
Fact is, Prof Lewin was wrong, full stop. Not fundamentally, but still wrong. EE Sadaghdar and Prof Belcher gave proof, thereby both learning themselves (as stated in Prof Belcher's document) as well as clarifying and rectifying the topic for lots of viewers. Professors don't design technical appliances. Engineers and Masters do. *They* have to have a working toolbox of theoretical algorithms.
Fact is, beyond his misleading lecture salted with "entertainment" ("Kirchhoff's Law is for the birds"), Prof Lewin did offer very little to clarify the matter, and what he offered was hard to endure because of his AdHoms.
Fact is, by correcting wrong or unclear statements in a factual dispute, STEM (or science as a whole - including what's sometimes considered "humanities") advances. If "most physics books get it wrong", this is empirical proof that there's something unclear.
I really, REALLY will try to find other authors than Prof Lewin when researching any topic now, as he's got faults (at least this one) in his lectures and has proven to be unwilling to address them. (Furthermore, outside of an ornithological context I can REALLY do without statements something tried and proven was "for the birds".)
To discover how productive dispute goes, even with a "mere Master", check the Thorvalds-Tanenbaum-disputes popping up regularly. And Prof Tanenbaum had REAL reason to be upset sometimes. He acknowledges, however, that it helps many professionals to address Thorvalds' faults factually and by addressing and rectifying them by showing where Thorvalds got it wrong.
@@enysuntra1347 The thing is, neither of them are actually wrong, they are just disagreeing about what "Kirchoff's voltage law" actually means. Lewin thinks it is only the E dot dl part, so he is correct in saying you can't use that, you have to use all of Faraday's law. This is probably historically accurate. But Mehdi thinks Kirchoff's law and Faraday's law are the same, which in my experience is the common modern usage. That is probably why Lewin thinks textbooks are wrong, because textbooks will imply that KVL and Faraday's law are the same, even though that isn't the way Kirchoff actually intended it.
I agree it would be better if Lewin was more professional about it, but I still think it is because he has thin skin from not really being a full time TH-camr/public figure.
"No, not a flat earther. Call me an idiot... BUT NOT A FLAT EARTHER"
-Mehdi
Flat eather is the new f-word and in all seriousness i'd rather be called anything but a flat earther
@@francisbacon4363 I agree Being idiot.can be change, but being a flat earther cannot be change.
I need this as a t-shirt bro
I know right? 😂😂😂
Anything but a flattard.
@@francisbacon4363 Flat earther popped up around the time of Trump because the term Conspiracy Theorist no longer holds the same weight of dismissal as it used to due to so many of the conspiracy theories turning out to be actual conspiracies.
You know he's being serious when he doesn't get himself electrocuted even once in a 20 minute video
Maybe he was in shock..
This comment is a legendary example of something that's both satire and somehow very easily true.
I was wondering when he would shock himself but it never came... I am has spook
True
How perfectly true. Although disappointing.
I can’t believe I wasn’t aware of this fight for over 2 years now!
Even though I respect all scientists, I am a firm believer in solving disagreements with facts, not insults. The fact that Dr. Lewin insulted you - even though you may not see it as an insult - disturbs me. This is not how an intelligent person should communicate, no matter if it's a reply to something they feel is insulting or not.
I can't blame him for being annoyed at a sudden wave of rando internet fanboy commenters saying he doesn't know what he's talking about. I'm glad the discussion became civilised once he found out what was going on. Certain commenters on both sides are to blame for treating everything like team sports.
Sorry, but academia is not a safe space. Being patient with cranks is not, nor has it ever been, a written or unwritten rule in science. The very opposite in fact. Science is entirely based on being mercilessly critical of everything and everyone until you find something that does not buckle under it. A tenured professor should most definitely be able to say he's embarrassed that an alleged master of engineering is spreading misinformation about basic science to thousands if not millions of people. It would be embarrassing if he didn't.
To be clear, Mehdi is not correct. He has been throwing convenient assumptions against facts, and now to "conclude" he simply explains away the actual physics by making up things that simply do not hold, and he would know that if he bothered opening an undergraduate electrodynamics textbook. If this was a private argument it would be different, but he is spreading pseudoscience to people who don't know better in an as public way as possible(just look around the comment section and you will immediately spot at least a few dozen people who are now apparently qualified to insult and criticize Lewin because of the frankly incorrect things Mehdi has said), and he's doing it with seemingly no effort to listen to what the other side is saying or even checking his own facts before uploading a video. There is certainly a limit to what the scientific community in general should be patient with, and this crosses it.
@@RedTriangle53
Sooo . . . . . didn't actually watch this video? Or just not paying attention?
@Jonathan Pearce
Neither can I, but as a scientist, one should know not to jump to conclusions. If people are commenting and telling you you don't know what you're talking about, that's between you and the commenter. You can't reply to someone if you haven't even seen what you're replying to, so the first order of business is always to figure out what has been said, and by whom.
@RedTriangle53
I have never claimed for anything to be a safe space, nor have I said that one has to be patient with cranks. I am fully aware with the fact that science is based on being critical of everything and everyone. However, there is a MASSIVE difference between being critical, and being insulting. It's very easy to be extremely critical without even being slightly insulting.
The last few lines of your first paragraph, frankly, are complete BS. A real scientist would have respectfully disproved all claims made by facts and experiments, not by attacking somebody personally. If you think a claim is idiotic, you simply ignore it, or (in case you have thousands of people commenting for you to reply) reply respectfully. If you don't understand this, I don't think you belong in science.
To be clear: I don't care if Mehdi is correct or not. I don't have the EE knowledge to decide who's right or wrong, or to even form an opinion on it. What I do care about, is the fact that a Doctor can't disprove a claim - made in a respectful manner, with proof provided - in a respectful manner. Being annoyed and irritated by TH-cam commenters is perfectly understandable, but this has nothing to do with Medhi's claims. I personally have been in many scientific discussions, of which many never ended in agreement. However, none of these discussions have ever been personal or insulting.
Until they do something that makes me no longer respect them, yes. This goes for everybody, until they give me a reason not to, I will respect them. I don't know why I need to explain this, it seems like this would be the normal way of treating other people in civilized nations...
To explain: I specified scientists here, because the discussion involves scientists.
Whom ever is correct, it's a real shame that Dr Lewin doesn't seem to show you the same respect as you show him. Having watched his response videos I'm certain he hasn't even bothered watching your videos before declaring you wrong and himself correct.
Age causes this to people.
Maybe he is this kind of elitist feeling his ego beeing attacked and goes back to human roots, the wild animal who wanna defend its territory and position in society.
It's age. My mom was like this.
What respect should you have for a person that accuses you of things that you never did and then proceeds to make an attack video on you? Mehdi did not put any bit of effort into his first video. He did not know what the purpose of the experiment was, therefore he assumed the outcome is wrong, and when the Professor told him to educate himself, he decided to make an attack video where he showed the Professor’s comments to his audience of 2 million subscribers. He did the same in this video. His ego is very fragile. There is no disagreement between the Professor and Mehdi in terms of physics concepts. It’s just Mehdi completely missing the point of the experiment and what the Professor was trying to show, and instead of asking the Professor about the details of the experiment, he just made his own assumptions and proceeded to make that first video which contained comets and video snippets intended to make the Professor look bad.
I respect him but I really didn't like the way he responded.
Thanks for being a sensible fellow and making us learn stuff. I think you just earned a doctorate.
That is a bachelor level material, it is not even close to a doctorate...
That brow has it's own doctorate.....
This is what you learn on year one of bachelor's degree on the basics of physics course, Mehdi's videos are great but come on, don't overreact.
It's also wrong, so it's like... he wouldn't even pass quals.
So.... what are you guys doing with your awesome and fantastic doctorate degrees?
Pls elaborate :)
Imagine being a scientist and feeling “attacked” when someone challenges, measures, and tests something.
It's bizarre when, in 2021, anyone who questions what is colloquially known as science is considered a heretic, when the entire point of science is questioning things. Yet, here we are.
Happens all the time in science, it is personal, as science is in a big part an effort in career-building
@@pseudolullus Much less than in other fields.
It looks like you are poorly educated in the matters of science. This is how people are in science community. Read history of science it has always been just like this.
@@traditionalsunni629 Unnecessarily condescending my guy. Science is about the pursuit of truth and knowledge, not prestige and recognition. If someone is fragile about learning their ideas are wrong they won't have a good time in science.
Hi Mehdi. Wow! That is simply awesome! I just want to thank you for your time and effort of explaining complicated concepts in a simple and entertaining manner. It certainly enhanced my knowledge about electromagnetics. Your videos are highly appreciated and I'm looking forward for more being an avid follower of your awesome channel. Cheers!
I'm on electroBoom's side. Not because I know enough EE science to have a meaningful opinion, but because it is clear that he can admit being wrong, and has consulted others in the field to verify his findings, while Lewin seems to consider himself an infallible Yoda, and won't entertain the possibility of himself being incorrect. ElectroBoom is no stranger to owning failure. (If deliberately induced for our education most of the time.)
Thus, if Lewin is right, electroBoom will eventually become right, but if electroBoom is right Lewin will most likely stay wrong.
I'm sure Lewin has many other videos full of accurate knowledge of the kind I love to watch... But with his attitude here it would take an impressive about face to change my first impressions about him. I'd rather learn from a humble man who makes mistakes than an arrogant genius.
Well said.
Love that last line
Medhi simply is right - that is the only valid reason to be on his side.
It baffled me when i first saw Lewins video that he would make such a plunder but his follow ups are just a disgrace.
Totally agree. Regardless of who is right and who is wrong, if Lewin wants to play the 'I am the doctor here' card, he should at least act as one, show some class and not arrogance, and educate Mehdi and prove his points, not just counter attack by pointing out who has higher educational degree or assuming Medhi wants to discredit him. Everyone has the right to voice their opinion/theory even if it's wrong, as no one is perfect and 'to err is human', so if Lewin thinks that Medhi is incorrect, he should respectfully straighten Medhi out on the topic.
I believe Lewin simply trusts science to root out anomalies before allowing theory to become law. Since Medhi is an engineer and not a scientist, Lewin is simply ignoring Medhi's conclusion, believing Medhi came to the wrong conclusion. And I can understand. You need credibility to convince a scientist to reconsider something that has been well-tested and accepted as fact for decades. Medhi does not have credibility in Lewin's eyes. You heard how he likened Medhi's suggestion to Flat Earth! This doesn't mean he's being mean or ignorant. A scientist can't just spend all his time listening to everyone's suggestions about science, he must assume the majority of them are not educated enough. What Medhi needs to do is get himself some credibility in the eyes of Lewin. How many times in history have we heard the story of a young, unseasoned person challenging a veteran scientist and getting laughed at, only to be proven right later on?
7:42 That's the same thing I thought. Dr. Lewin believes KVL is ∮E᛫dl = 0 for some reason.
Mehdi, you beautifully concluded, and I totally agree with you, that KVL and Faraday's Law, when properly defined, are basically the same thing. However, I fear Dr. Lewin will refuse to accept that. I've seen comments of his in which he states that saying KVL and Faraday's Law are the same is a "joke".
Lol all the people saying that they're first, when you commented like an hour ago
@@owenjackson2390 lol
He may be highly accomplished in one area, but is sorely lacking in another (civility, acting like an adult, humbleness, etc). I cant stand getting into arguments with people like this who are so stubborn and resort to insinuating personal insults and think themselves clever for it.
Mando mt cara
Fernando de Souza Vieira it IS a joke. It’s like saying pears are the same as apples, if you take into account their genetic differences.
A decade later and almost 6 million more subs, and Mehdi is still the same awesome dude he was in the beginning. A class act and insatiable curiosity. You, sir, are an inspiration.
Yeah, millions of additional subscribers who are lead astray from the correct science by someone who did not understand Faraday's law and basic physics.
There is a nice anecdote in one of Dawkins books about a distinguished professor of cellular biology being disproven about the existence of the golgi apparatus in a guest lecture. After the lecture they shook hands and he thanked him very much saying that he was wrong for 20 Years. That's the spirit of science right there.
This is how it should be and if that were the case all the time, we would be way farther in scientific discovery than we are now.
However sadly history shows that what happened here happens often: Someone with a high degree dismisses the claims of someone with a lower degree just by assuming to have a higher "rank" in science. Instead he should've respectfu replied and they could've worked together and explain whatever they find in the end to the world.
I am very interested in how Lewin will answer to this video and the proof it delivers.
That's how everyone should be. Not just scientists.
@dothemathright 1111 sorry, wrong thread. I'm not discussing that. This is only about manners. Also the guest was also a PhD. Just not a professor, I think
Wtf, why do I remember exactly where I heard that specific detail? Why is my brain filled with useless facts?!
@dothemathright 1111 Yep, and Feynman even gives the correct definition of the KVL as ∮E · dl = 0, which Mehdi rejects in this video, only to later cite Feynman and prance about triumphant.
i respect you for having the balls to disagree with someone like professor lewin. whether you're correct or not, i value your effort to keep the discussion civilized on both sides.
Effort to keep it civilized by acting like the only reason why the opponent doesn't hit him was that he can't? Good job! Just like emphasizing the role of authority/degree (which is an argumentation error, but not used by Lewin). What Mehdi did: keep smiling, be funny and seam to be polite, this way your fans without sufficient knowledge in physics and logic will not deal with your tons of argumentation mistakes!
He is clearly wrong, he is direcly falsified in Feynmans book, but also in the metacommunication he broke the rules of fair and relevant communication many times.
@@PafiTheOne Wow, you can't even spell directly.
@@debprasadbanerjee5005 Wow, you've found a mistyping. Congratulation to your relevant observation! You must be a very intelligent man!
@@PafiTheOne Thank you for the compliments.
He spelled "seem" incorrectly in his little rant as well. Unfortunately when someone can't make their point without spelling/grammar mistakes, I don't have time to read their response.
Dr. Lewin has acted irresponsibly and unprofessionally for this entire debate as far as I've seen. He was dismissive, rude, and the only one discrediting his lectures is himself through his actions.
Absolutely agree. If you're so confident that you are right then you take the higher moral ground and explain politely where the other person's misunderstanding is (just as Mehdi has done). As soon as you start attacking people it's clear that you have no valid arguments left.
Age has begun to affect his mind
Not to mention, he looks and sounds utterly ridiculous, like many crackpot conspiracy theorists on TH-cam. I get that he's well-respected, etc etc., but he comes across as a loon. If I wasn't aware of his background, didn't know who he was, there's no way I'd take him seriously just by the way he talks, and looks.
And yet he is right. No matter how you might like him or not. Science is not democratic, nor it is based on niceness. It is appalling how many comments go along the lines of "oh, he's been mean, hence everything he says must be wrong". No. He's just frustrated by people "who believe they know, but in reality do not know".
@@Peltio That's quite the bold statement. it's not at all like history is littered with discredited scientific theories, most of which uttered by somebody convinced they are right, and are bothered by people, ""who (in their own opinion) believe they know, but in reality do not know".
Mehdi, I watched these series when they first came out, but the guy is straight up disrespectful.
You’re too much of a gentleman and a scholar.
Your pronunciation of 'Kirchhoff' sounds correct to my german ears.
And to my Welsh ones.
And also looks good for my german eyes.
@@Stettafire Any my Swiss ones.
4:48 Spanish too
To Polish as well...
Enough people here have commented on Prof. Luwin's behavior, so I'll leave it at that. On the other hand, I loved hearing that another full professor at MIT, in this case Professor Belcher, willingly spent so much time to personally teach Medhi and even write that document!!! That is very commendable on Dr. Belcher's part and benefits the viewers of this channel!
Glad to see how polite people here in this comment section are.
I didn't really understand any of this but nevertheless this was interesting to follow.
@SappFire
well. if you found it interesting
- go through it slowly
- When you get stuck on something, google it and learn it and then come back and continue
I'm guessing you got lost in the formulae right
A LITTLE TIP
sometimes the letter are just the first letter of what is being referred to , like E for Energy or R for resistance,
then at other times (because it's up to the person to decide) they might put X for energy and z for resistance
so the point here is , you need to know what he's making reference to, however, most engineers and mathematicians' will use the standard that everyone uses
also, i'm guessing you got lost wtih the triangle "DELTA" hehe
just google WHAT DOES DELTA MEAN IN MATHEMATICS AND ENGINEERING
TO SIMPLIFY THIS
in science it is necessary to define things very specifically, which is why we do stuff like this....
ok, we have something, let's call it A
and we have another thing, let's call it B
so when we A+B = C and we have a value for C
then we can take C and do this and that and then something else to it and a shit load of complex things
and ALL OF THESE THINGS PRODUCE A RESULT
AND SO WE DON'T HAVE TO RETYPE THE WHOLE THING AGAIN EVERY TIME
let's call that result D
does that make sense
so then when someone says , and Now we Add D to A
A is one thing
D is a shit load of calculation , which the result of those calcuations is then added to A to produce, let's say E
that's how we define thing
YOU BASICALLY HAVE TO HAVE AN ONGOING TRAIN OF THOUGHT
so we someone says , Let's take D
you have to be like...... "Oh, ok,i get what that means"
it's like when someone says let's consider KIRCHHOF'S LAW OF VOLTAGE, KVL
and i'll say "yep, got it"
it takes a long time in the beginning to explain these things , but when you put the effort in to understand them, we then know what we all talking about and things go faster
WHICH THEN BRINGS ME TO THIS POINT hehe
so... clearly there is a massive headfuck through this process , and after all of this........
SOMEONE WHO HAS LITTLE TO NO SCIENTIFIC UNDERSTANDING COMES UP TO ME AND SAYS
- DISAGREE WITH WHAT YOU SAID (ok, fine)
- THEN THEY SAY............. hehe (wait for it ).... GO ON THEN, EXPLAIN IT TO ME, PROVE IT TO ME AND CONVINCE ME THAT YOU'RE RIGHT hehe
well. it's kinda hard when the person doesn't understand fundamentals
so.. yeah.. Talking to a random non scientific person (not you in this case) is sometimes funny as hell because they think they are right
AND NOW YOU UNDERSTAND hehe
That ONE FUCKING LETTER can leave you studying shit for 3 hours ............... ONE LETTER or ONE SHAPE like a Triangle Delta.
and then the next one you'll get stuck on it THETA hehe (but, that's a story for another time)
and.. there you go
WELCOME TO MY WORLD MATE
be cool
Dr Lewin was not very nice to you, which I think was wrong. So I want to apologize for him. Still, he is right. Why? I give you two scenarios to think about:
1. A secondary winding of a transformer at no load, primary connected to mains. Do you measure a voltage at the terminals? Good.
According to Kirchhoff this voltage is also found across the well conducting (!) copper winding within the transformer, thus shortening the secondary winding, even at no load. Why is this voltage not shortened? Because induced voltages dfi/dt appear only once _within a loop_, while all other voltages appear *twice*: first, as voltage source and second, as voltage drop. Okay?
2. Now imagine the following: You disconnect your transformer from the mains and insert an alternating voltage source in series to the secondary winding. Do you measure a voltage at the terminals? Good.
But now you have "*two voltages*"! One in series to the secondary winding as source and the second is the one you measure at the no load terminals as voltage drop. THAT is Kirchhoff.
In case of an induced voltage you will not find a “second instance” of the induced voltage *within the loop that created this induced voltage*.
And Mehdi, please stop claiming that Kirchhoff and Faraday are the same thing. They are not. CLInt E*dl = 0 is Kirchhoff. The name KVL is taken. End of story. Sorry.
One last remark: The output voltage of a transformer is a “normal” source voltage in *any* outer loop. Of course this secondary voltage will appear “twice“ in a loop fed with it as mentioned above and will make Kirchhoff shine as always …
And thanks for pointing out that Kirchhoff is pronounced Kir"X"hoff ... He was German. ;-)
My respect goes to ElectroBOOM, he was so busy removing all the off-side comments...
@@quellstrom I'm sorry but stuff you said were incorrect. In #1, the voltage is not across the well conducting wire, but is an AC voltage across a large inductor. It would only be a short circuit if the voltage was DC.
and for your #2 what are you talking about?
You know, they are changing the definition of kilogram and voltage as we speak. So why should we be stuck on KVL being the integral of E.dl?
@ElectroBOOM I'm sorry but #1 if it were a voltage across an inductor, where is the current??? Do you see the point? If you connected an AC-voltage source across an inductor you would see a current!
#2 The experiment is simple: connect an AC voltage source and an inductor in a loop with a switch in series. Open the switch and measure the voltage across the opened switch. You will find your voltage source there. Same thing as an transformer at no load? Apparently not.
> You know, they are changing the definition of kilogram and voltage as we speak. So why should we be stuck on KVL being the integral of E.dl?
No: CLInt E*dl=0 is KVL.
The induction law, as we call Faraday's law in Germany ends the reign of KVL. That happens as soon as a loop is exposed to a changing magnetic field.
This is an outstanding video. Beneath your bumbling facade lies an earnest, honest, objective and thoughtful and principled thinker.
Kudos Electroboom. Respect.
What is ironic that Dr. Lewin is criticising @ElectroBOOM education, while using law discovered by a scientist (Faraday) with no formal degree in physics.
"What is ironic that Dr. Lewin is criticising @ElectroBOOM education"
Oh yeah? Where? Stop accusing without evidence, shitdicks.
That's Faraday-Maxwell equation fool.
@@isodoubIet at 1:10 the snippet of the comment from Dr. Lewin: "I set the record straight and I called spade a spade; he has masters degree in EE. His video is therefore an embarrassment." Dr. Lewin indirectly calls Mehdi a flatearther next second in the clip.
@@alexluthorkos5252 so Dr Lewin is also a fool since he calls it Faraday Law (see 1:10)? Why don't pedants point out the bad probing in first place?
@@TheSergeiFranco "I set the record straight and I called spade a spade; he has masters degree in EE. His video is therefore an embarrassment."
You _do_ understand that he called it an embarrassment because a masters in EE _should know better_ than to make this elementary mistake, right? It is an embarrassment. And calling him a flat earther is too kind; he's more like someone who claims 2 + 2 = 13.
the most educational youtuber war ever.
About 400000 misleaded person... And probably 3 percent red Feynman's physics book. This is tragical.
@@PafiTheOne You really went on a warpath here, huh?
@@PafiTheOne ha???
@@VejmR Have you read the section about KVL in that book?
@@PafiTheOne STFU
Your efforts to promote a deeper understanding of the whys and how’s of this widely misunderstood topic are a credit to electrical engineering. Bravo.
Subscriped after seeing this video. I have much respect for Dr. Lewin. His lectures are an excellent source of knowledge and a gift for humanity by having them publicly available. But I think he purpessfuly missed the point and took the "bad probing" personally. Glad that you were respectful even though he called you a flat earther =)
I have a laboratory with RF measurements capability and I did the experiment many times with a transformer (220/220 Volt), a one closed loop around the core,with the same resistors value and the same geometry used by Prof,Lewin.
The transformer was excited with a function generator at a frequency between 50 up to 200 Hz creating a positive pulse simulating the open/close of a switch (or negative pulse,or exponential rise and fall ) and the probes were two Tektronix connected to an oscilloscope.So the the experiment was done in a repetitive way.
Probing with a single channel on both side of the circuit or with two channels or with two different oscilloscopes,
in all cases the two voltages were opposite in polarity and with the right ratio.
Tryng different methods and different setup the result was always the same and the picture in the oscilloscope screen was the exact picture of what Prof. Lewin showed in his experiment.
What's wrong with being a flat earther?
everything@@internationalgolfconstruction
@@pauldaino3282 So what is your conclusion? I'm kind of confused which side of argument you proved.
@@internationalgolfconstructionbasically means you’re an idiot
I gotta say, as a fluid dynamicist, sometimes I wish some factions in the turbulence community would disagree with the same professionalism and respect demonstrated in these videos. this argument was really impressive and made me proud to be a physicist/engineer (that distinction gets messy for fluid dynamicists). well done!
So you are saying that the fluid dynamicist community has turbulence?
I'll see myself out.
1:16 that thing was really repeated by prof. No Matter how good he is, or how much I respect him, I really didn't like the way he responded :)
No one is discrediting his lectures, IDK why he feels like that. No one can take away what he is, he is a genius, we all know, but it doesn't mean he can't try to listen to someone else without being so biased.He was getting kind of triggered, specially cuz mehdi don't have equal degrees, there is a knowledge outside of degrees too!
Anyways, mehdi you made a really good video, beautiful saying all your points and respectfully.
I hate u THANOS
Since I don't understand the science very well, I tend to believe the person who is more reasonable and doesn't resort to name-calling to discredit someone. In this case, Dr. Lewin didn't really act with integrity and seems to protect his ego first and seek truth second, so I'm more inclined to believe in Medhi's reasoning. Naturally none of my uninformed opinion matters, scientific consensus matters, which I also think falls on Medhi's side.
@@MattsAwesomeStuff can't agree more
Blame a minority of channel fanboys for creating and perpetuating drama. It's quite a common problem. Science content creators don't want their fans launching personal attacks every time they disagree with someone's conclusions, but there are people who treat everything like competitive team sports and love to troll.
Lewin was probably too lazy to actually watch the original video and was just going off of the troll comments.
I hate that people are the way they are sometimes. This is (as you said) about the science... why people would divert the attention to bs attacks and bring faith into the mix is baffling to me. Keep doing what you do Mehdi, sincerely a long time viewer.
There are some RWNJs who are convinced the world is about to end because of Islam and people with brown skin. It must be a stressful life for them.
The funny thing is if these people picked up a history book, they would realize that while much of the west was in the dark ages, much of the middle east and Baltic states were advancing science and medicine in a big way. This includes the Islamic people and other "Brown People" (to put it nicer than the commenters Medhi read out). How they seem to think that science is only a white people thing is beyond me.
@@tylerh629 illiterates man , can't take those fools seriously
We recently learned all Maxwell's equations in my E&M class and your explanations of the topics were so clear and easy to follow, thank you!
Your pronounciation of Kirchhoff sounds good to my german ears.
Damn can't believe I just saw these even tho I've always been an electroboom fan. Honestly the respect you show in this argument is crazy. I'm kind of sad Dr. Lewin didn't show the same level of respect for you though
"Allways assume the person you are talking with knows something you don't." Not living by this saying destroys knowledge, no matter how smart you think you are. Thanks Mehdi, amazing how respect and simple reasoning/logic can go a long way, even against "the smartest" among us.
Then why don't you assume Lewin knows something you don't?
@@isodoubIet I do, obviously he does know something (a lot) that I don't know, but he did not assume Mehdi knew something he didn't, and did not treat him with the respect he deserved. And respect outweighs "smartness" in most situations.
3 years ago I didn’t know what is happening but I knew this was something epic. I am now an electrical engineer student and I just now have appreciated this topic.
Exact same story here. Came back to this video after doing a electromagnetics course at uni, now I actually get it. When I watched it at first I just skipped trough the maths.
Sheesh, Lewin lost all respect points the moment he pulled the degree bullshit...
How can one trust a man with so little integrity?
@Goku Vegeta As an outsider what is your opinion about intelligence?
1: You've failed to make any fact-check, you are uncapable to discover reality.
Lewin doesn't live in Budapest, and he is not a fan of Anna and the Barbies as me.
2: By bringing up and blaming by such dishonest behaviour you've just prooved that how dishonest and disrespectful you are. Is denying the existence of your opponent what Mehdi taught to you? You are a shame even for Mehdi.
3: You have failed to make any relevant reaction. You are only trolling.
@Goku Vegeta You've ignored every single relevant piece of information. Judging if somebody was a fake account is impossible from his interest, and if you really wanted to know, then you should have checked my videos made long time ago in Budapest, falsifying I could have been Lewin. This intentionally ignorant behaviour prooves you can not be intelligent.
If you were able to understand or even willing to read my reasonings, then you could realize my deep insight to the topic I talk about, and my work experience in this field is the reason why I am "obsessed" with this topic (together with my affection for correct information, and hate for malicious manipulation).
A really intelligent person doesn't call himself intelligent. An intelligent person knows there is a measure for intelligence, and if he wanted to convince others, without actually showing intelligent reasoning, then he would tell what IQ score he has reached on certified tests.
I have not told anything that would support I was a fan of Lewin. I never argued by he was smart or nice, or reputable, or anything else. He was simply right, judged by logic, and physics book, and my own professional EE experience. I got my knowledge regarding physics from my teachers in Budapest.
I don't insult people. I offend stupid beliefs. You insult people. You've made the most serious insult can be made by denying my existence.
@Floofy shibe Hi Mark Sargent, when are you going to learn capital letters? :-)
@@PafiTheOne "...he is not a fan of Anna and the Barbies as me."
And how do you know that? Nice try Walter
@@PafiTheOne i just faked my degree honestly
How sad that when presented with an educated opinion that contradicts his own, Dr. Lewin elects to resort to insults and criticism rather than consideration for a peer's opinion or openness to review the new theory. I think Mehdi would make a great scientist, always willing to consider criticism and other perspectives to make his argument stronger... or to admit an error.
The problem is that Dr Lewin doesn't consider Mehdi a peer. It's perfectly possible to not react dismissively toward others despite a difference in perceived status or experience, but unfortunately this type of toxic elitism is rife in academia.
welcome to science where people like the smell of their own farts an awful lot. The more credentials a person has, the more the douche they are.
@@moonasha I would say that is hyperbolic, it is more likely they seem that way from having to deal with idiots throughout there career that make them seem brisk and rude.
@@verkanon4176 you're wrong a little... He doesn't 'seem' brisk or rude.. he is brisk and rude, just a straight up asshat!
@@BadAssDownUnder101 asshat! I like that.
He says he was unable to find your video. He states he has his students (and presumably hundreds of TH-camrs) telling him there is this video on TH-cam but none of them thought to send him a link or even tell him the TH-camrs name, neither did he think to ask any of them - lol
He has the hours to waste debunking any chance of being wrong..
But doesnt have 5 minutes of time to watch a video.
Sounds like he's protecting his profits off his lectures and books like a vulture. "I was wrong" = refunds = - profit = waaaaaa i am god and masters degree stfu
It was very clear that he was insulting Mehdi. Mehdi has 2 million subs. All that guy has to do is type in his own name and he would find the video.
dude is old as dirt, I would be surprised if he did not need his grandkids to help him figure out his email and TH-cam.
He is a dinosaur with a weak character... I knew from the get go and all his repetitive answers that he gets much more respect than he really deserves from EB. Calling others "flat earthers" and down talking his education made me quickly realize that he is a low shot character. And I will never respect weak characters no matter what they "achieved" in life. There are thousands of people that are just as smart but without the bad character. Here you go
@@eazen In many cases, the type of degree you hold says less about your intelligence and more about the amount of time/money/connections you have. There are plenty of self taught individuals that can access the same textbooks, lectures, worksheets and calculators that people with PhD's have and produce the same results and innovations. Tesla himself was a university dropout for gods sake and no one can dispute his genius and contribution to the field.
Not to mention that, at one point, the flat earth was the accepted explanation and the globe people had to argue their point. It was only because the flat earth crew engaged the globe crew in honest debate and discussion that the globe was proven. I think that the flat earth crew of today should be given the same respect to argue their point and have it tested. Trying to paint them as martyrs and idiots does nothing but add to their following.
You are right, character is the only thing about a person worth respect.
Damn, hats off to you sir. You act all crazy during all your videos, but now you get serious and show not only good content and an interesting discussion, but also great features of professionalism and a correct way of handling this kind of situations. Mad respect to you
Lewin is well known for being stubborn and making it personal. There is a reason MIT distanced itself from him.
Yeah he was on his last legs with MIT, but they dropped his course for something other than those two reasons. Seems he has a predatory side as well. Search for "why Lewin was dropped by MIT" in Google (first 2 results), just awful.
@@deceitive3338 Correct. He didn't drop MIT, the MIT dropped him. And for a good reason as we know.
The final straw was him sexually harassing minors online. Needless to say Dr. Walter Lewin was never a good person, a role model, or a person worthy of the title professor at all.
@@sethadkins546 HE WHAT?!
@@Lexi_Sharp Yeah someone posted an article about it somewhere in the comments section. He also lost all of his titles.
just so you know my linear circuits class showed your argument to our professor and he agreed with your conclusion that KVL holds.
Kirchhoffs looprule is for the birds.
Change professors.
@@SpaceTimeBeing_ Why? I'm right. His professor is an idiot and is possibly misleading a whole class.
MIT means
Mehdi
Institute of
Technology
Surely Mehdi Institute of Touchinglivewires
@@bluelightningnz LMAOOO XDDD
bluelightningnz made my day with this comment XDDDDDD
Nice
Medhi Is Thicc
2:15 and his reply was "thanks!"
Just as many other commenters, I am also very dissapointed with Lewin´s reaction. It didn´t feel like he was being satiric about it, and despite his career and title, comparing you to flat-earth believers was low and arogant.
I fear Dr. Lewin failed to understand one of the core principles of science, and that is open discussion. Instead of accepting dogmatic truth of a one man, we should openly discuss, compare and search for the truth. If anything, your video brought new viewers and attention to his channel, which he should be thankful for, in the first place.
I studied law, yet your channel sparked interest in electricity and sciene in me, after which I even created my own workshop and started making little experiments and even my own wiring on the workshop.
You may have been wrong on the science side, which still takes guts and honesty, but you´ve still came out as a better person, and you have my deepest respect for that. Race, nationalities, religions, all aside. As a normal, human being.
Flat-earthers think like you. They ignore facts, reject logical reasonings, decide based on sympathy, and nurture long time ago falsified theories. They never calculate anything correctly, and their mathematical model doesn't exist (or changing all the time). I think the diagnosys of Lewin was quite accurate, however he is not a medical doctor.
@@PafiTheOne
You sound like your meaning in life is "not to be flat-earther". 😄 Stop being silly.😊
@@MaximC I haven't told anything about meaning of life. Mehdi was the one who emotionally rejected the comparison to a flat-earther, like it was much worse than being an idiot. What you said is much more accurate for him.
Stop being a functional analphabet!
@@PafiTheOne
Your "flat-earthers think like you" is completely unrelated to the original comment, it seems you didn't even bother to read it.
I would like to see your reaction when you're trying to discuss a scientific theory and you are compared with "flat-earthers" because of that...😄
@@MaximC Your "I would like to see your reaction" is completely unrelated to any of the comments, it seems you didn't even bother to read them. Also it is totally unrealistic.
If you really think "flat-earthers think like you" was completely unrelated to "comparing you to flat-earth believers was low and arogant", then you are hopeless.
Funny how LEwin talks about education while in fact the guy who's law he is using (Faraday) barely finished PRIMARY school lol
Lab assistant
He got fired from MIT for a reason...
@Nitin Aditya I know
When Faraday was young, science as we know it barely existed, let alone schools to teach it, so not really a fair comparison.
now i understand why he felt self insulted
I’m drunk but I understood every letter you said. You would be a great university teacher imo. Especially since you are humble towards your misunderstanding, dare to prove it, learn from it, and move on. Please never stop making videos! Thank you and good luck!
I'm not drunk and I agree. He went through his reasoning quite quickly, so it was difficult to catch everything without pausing and backing up a couple times, but imagine how much more clearly he could explain things if he had an hour or more for a lecture. I feel like he would have everyone on his side.
Should I get drunk to understand? Should I be drunk to understand why he ignored the requirement for fields being separated? Should I be drunk to understand why his real probing mistake is not important? Should I be drunk to understand why he mixed 2 completely different experiments in his "explanation"? Should I be drunk to forget about Lenze's and Ampere's law as he did?
@@PafiTheOne No, you should only listen to what he says and think
@@Samu-eq9iq I did this, and the more I listen and think the more errors (self-contradictions, denial of facts and irrelevances) I find. His "theory" (better said: bunch of denials) is just completely wrong on every level. Not quatifiable, no predictive force, no valid logic, no intention to learn, full of ad hominem, no EE practice is presented... He completely ignored the logic structure of Lewin's reasoning, and replaced to bullshit. I (and others) explained in my comments many of the errors of him mentioned above. If a drunken listener feels if this presentation is logical then I must suspect being drunk can be a requirement for "understanding". ;-)
@@PafiTheOne yeah you're just trolling now, i dont have time to waste
I really appreciate how you addressed these issues that keep boiling up on the Internet, when fans start to attack their idol's "oppenent(s)". It really is refreshing that you made it civil again.
Those heated and personalized debates really have nothing to do with science, and it's nice to see people bringing it back to a rational conversation level.
Thank you!
I watched doc.Lewins videos, he has good lecturing videos, we all can learn a lot from him, but sincerly I like your videos more because your explanations covering electro engineering is far better than his.
@E And yet there are lectures that are TH-cam videos... so those are magically entertainment now? They're not any more entertaining just because they're on TH-cam.
Dr Lewin seems to have lost all idea about scientific work. He acts like the church in the mid age by discrediting other scientist who disagree with him. Actually it is an important part of science that people question theories as long as it is justified. If you look at the experiments about the neutrino speed, where the scientists disagreed with Einstein, nobody flamed them angrily, but helped them to find a reason why this was found. And in the end they found a measurement error. So they were wrong, but their work was still important, because without this work we wouldnt progress.
So Lewin actually seems to be an enemy of science, as he wants to flame anybody who finds contradicitions in theories, with the argument that he has a higher degree. Science is not a competition of status but a competition of results and proofs. A serious scientist would take a neutral look at the topic and not act like a 15 year old kid. Sorry, but I being an mechanical engineer myself hate those persons who block every neutral discussion about scientific topics by flaming the other.
mb he acts bad but he is correct and the difference is that he can prove he is correct. mehdi just proved that KVL works for contained eletric elements, which is not the general case. forget about all that just have 1 source 1 drain in a changing magnetic field that KVL is undefined. QED
Yes, he's confirming he still does not understand Faraday's law, and the limitation of KVL (even 'extended KVL').
@@Peltio What do you mean he doesnt understand faraday's law?? He literally explained it in damn good details in the video. Are you even watching the video?? Or you yourself dont undetstand faraday's law?
@@luqmanidlan3564 I can't say whether Peltio understands Faraday's law, but I am in agreement with their assessment that Mehdi doesn't understand it. If he did, he wouldn't have made any of these videos.
@@isodoubIet lol you are funny😁😁
You should send your Electric Guitar to Dr. Lewin. Then we'll know if he has gained any practical knowledge from his degree.
Vishnu Prasanth why am i dying from this comment 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
😂😂😂😂🤣🤣
Make strings powered by induction and then he'll think that there is no voltage.
😂good one
as a Canadian engineer, I'm very proud of what you have done
4:52 Some people call him Kirchhoff, I call him K-Dawg.
I learnt more about Kirchoffs second law from this video than my whole textbook
The mechanism of the differing voltmeter readings has been well explained in various forums since the 1960s when physics teachers began to challenge their students with the apparent paradox. The classic explanatory example is Robert Romer's paper cited in this video. Dr John Belcher's technical summary linked in the video notes is another example.
Nobody denies Kirchhoff's loop Rule works just fine in lumped parameter circuit models. Kirchhoff's circuit laws are axiomatic to lumped parameter circuit models. In typical measurements on circuits KVL "proves" to appear correct. It proves correct because we normally only probe the gap across circuit element terminals and have no way of knowing what electrical field conditions apply along the physical path "inside" any particular circuit element. This is the point of Lewin's argument - that KVL won't always apply when we follow a closed path which includes the internal structure of a circuit element, such as an inductive element. This would include the physical paths along transformer and inductor windings rather than the gap between their terminals. The Lewin experiment clearly reveals the difference in the two approaches.
It's also worth pointing out that engineers and physicists often have a different definition of Kirchhoff's loop Rule. Dr Lewin challenges the engineer's definition but would probably have no argument with the alternative physicist's definition. Is this misdirection on his part? I can't answer that question and he wouldn't respond even if I asked him.
The little understanding i get is that Dr. Lewin is mixing apples and oranges concluding that oranges are "wrong" because you can't make a good apple pie from them. (Arbitrarily assuming that making pies is the only way you want to use fruit) (ok maybe I'm taking the metaphor too far) in addition he seems wanting to do so in order to portrait himself as some anti-conformist thinker
I'm no electrical engineer (yet) but I know from experience and from my professors that they get little details wrong all the time, and what do they do? They double check, do some homework and get back to us. They don't double down on explanations and just say "no it's right" without giving it a second thought, but rather test it.
Mehdi 1. explains clearly as possible his view, 2. gets a second opinion (or in other words peer review) 3. does his homework and 4. tests it because that's the definition of science.
Even if the other guy might be right the fact he resorts to callous instantly makes him not as credible because he would rather have his pride then theoretically advancing civilization.
To be clear I'm not saying he's not allowed to defend his argument, all I am saying is the proof is in the pudding. It's like trying to replicate a software bug without instructions, it just doesn't hold.
Lewin is right. Don't compare with your average prof. There is already literature out there which discusses the same thing. Evidently the master's degree person didn't come across it. Lewin did the retort because Mehdi was passively one-upping him in his first video (bro he PhD + published, me puny masters, but look me is right).
@@curious_banda That's literally the opposite from one-upping. Is your definition of one upping having lower qualifications but giving an argument?? So by your standards he is not allowed to question anything or ask for an explanation because it is offensive. Chill out
@@curious_bandalewin is also accused of sexual harassment so Mehdi is at least not a scumbag, on top of a good advocate of science.
@@curious_banda I'm curious. Do you really believe that? So according to your logic we should take all information from our superiors without question? Sorry, you can live in that world (but I won't). The professor I pay to educate me... Will have to answer my questions or he will no longer be my professor.
Always lovely seeing people with big titles feeling threatened when someone with not a big title questions them.
I-it's a problem that I read "titties" instead of "titles"?
@@cenowador I did as well
@@cenowador Same lmao
Nothing to do with title. Mehdi is just speaking nonsense. Not that complicated to understand.
@@isodoubIet You should explain to him why, then.
So the engineer understands the true law, and the physicist understands the practical uses rule. Irony?
Ask kirchhoff
Your profile pic is awesome. 👍
This so called engineer understands nothing, and he demonstrated this very well. Wrong predictions, self-contradictions, ignorance, and many kinds of irrelevances he shown. On the other hand Lewin tried to warn real engineers to the practical consequences of the Faraday's Law. But many of them seems to fail.
@@PafiTheOne You are part of the problem. Lewin and this guy are agreeing on all of the physics, they only disagree on whether KVL is "\oint E dot dl=0" or if it is "\oint E dot dl - d\Phi_B/dt=0". It is a purely pedantic argument, with no bearing on physics. Anyone who knows what they are doing will either use Faraday's law, or use the version of KVL that is equivalent to faradays law in a case where there are varying magnetic fields.
@@PafiTheOne You are the one who understand nothing in your own sense.
i used to be a fan, now i'm an *air conditioner*
thats more cool
... and I'm getting ... the vapors .. Ha!
扁桃体，还没轮到你发炎
@@andrewchuang7941 独秀是你吗，我是大钊
Your profile pic is satanic - I kept rubbing it thinking a hair was stuck to my screen
This is the kind of thing we need more of. Constructive discussion on things that matter. Thanks man for opening up the discussion and clarifying it.
I love how respectful you are, I wish Lewin would be just as respectful towards you, unfortunately he comes across as quite condescending, it’s not like you’re trying to intentionally discredit him
It is no Mr.Lewin's fault physics is a really difficult subject and requires dead seriousness and no funny jokes and this changes people a lot
Apparently you're only allowed to disagree with him if you keep it to yourself. His Majesty, Lewin, will not be questioned!
Lewin discredits himself in the way Lewin himself responds to possibly being wrong about a thing.
Holding your cool like that after someone who's wrong shoves their PhD into your face over your Master's to cover their tracks.... well done... I have something to learn from you for sure (on top of all other awesome things you already have taught me through this channel).
Simply, there's no reason to "lose your cool"... It's not his problem, but his "opponents' problem", he just wants to discuss about science.
well, lewin is not wrong (hes just rude), but he just uses a different interpretation of what KVL means. Everything Lewin writes down in his videos is correct (as far as i can tell xD), but Mehdi disagrees on the "KVL does not Hold" part, because they define it differently.
@@Maric18 And thats where the misunderstanding took place. It is the law that is in question. When can law never holds true? and When a law can be impractical for use?
Walter Lewin is NOT wrong. They disagree only on the meaning of KVL, but Walter is ultimately right because the lumped circuit approximation is what the name says, an approximation. There are no lumped circuits in real life.
I'm a 2nd year Electronics engineering student, and I find this explanation beautiful. I often forget that you know what you're doing in your normal videos.
If your EE course includes further studies in electromagnetic theory, it might be wise to reserve some of your judgments about the correctness of ElectroBOOM's various claims until then.
At the very least, one should carefully read Dr John Belcher's summary of ElectroBOOM's experiments. Vis-a-vis ElectroBOOM's approach, there is significant divergence in Dr Belcher's approach in his analysis. Dr Belcher was a professorial colleague of Walter Lewin at MIT. The message coming out of the MIT Physics department about the Lewin demonstration was pretty consistent.
Watch "Chapter 10.0.1: Non Uniqueness of Voltage in a Magnetoquasistatic System" on TH-cam
th-cam.com/video/u6ud7JD0fV4/w-d-xo.html
Despite ElectroBOOM's inferences to the contrary, it is highly unlikely that Dr Belcher would actually endorse all of ElectroBOOM's claims. There is certainly a tacit agreement from Dr Belcher that there are circumstances where KVL appears to hold in the presence of time-varying fields - provided certain criteria are met. Those criteria are well elaborated in Richard Feynman's Lecture on AC CIRCUITS - Chapter 22 of Volume 2 of the Feynman Lectures.
I know I'm almost 2 years late, but I wanted to tell you that I admire the way you handled this conflict. I've always liked your videos, but after seeing you being this respectful after recieving this kind of video answers, I’m liking you even more! Thanks for being the better man.
Too bad Mehdi is wrong about the physics...
Hearing him read a comment calling him a "sh*tskin with one unibrow" and he didn't even seem upset made me spit my energy drink everywhere. Oh my god that was funny. Subscribed
It was good to see that. Such examples can help other people. I really think that was the most valueable part.
The unibrow adds to the hilarity, he has mastered his art.
Yeah but back then everyone was almost dumb af, this doesn’t stand anymore...
Education level matters for certification.
If you bring up Steve Jobs or any e commerce champion, what they simply did was is tapping into untapped market...
Also some of these fuckers can make an OS can anyone else nowadays(without education)?
Don't forget Florida's Law: If you stand on a ground, and encounter a resistance, a component thereof may be shot.
There is a direct correlation between resistance and kinetic energy imparted when the circuit closes.
I'm quite sure Mehdi has killed quite a few resistors, as has anyone capable to deliver some amps.
813 gang reporting in
Unless you get killed in the next hurricane next month.
Sounds more like Chicago.
As a Ph.D. in Electrical engineering, I confirm every word he says!
The effect of induced voltage (mutual-inductance), which can also happen due to the coupling with the external field in the probe loops, was not considered in Dr. Lwein's analysis.
Thanks, Mehdi. I appreciate your careful reasoning.
Every word? Including "Please don't hit me! Haha, you can't hit me!" ?
Obviously you don't tell the truth.
Careful reasoning? Where can you find such thing? Please quote only 1, relevant, logical, and factually correct statement from Mehdi! I couldn't find one, except for the parts where he reconstructs real physics, that he wants to religiously deny.
Your only "relevant" statement is false. Dr. Lewin considered mutual induction by Faraday's Law. Because it is *the* law that determines induced EMF. But also your statement is actually irrelevant, because there is no requirement for considering induction in an indirect reasoning (a reasoning that is constructed to falsify its own premise) that is built on the (false) assumption of EMF(induced, etc...)=0 This is what KVL states. What makes considering induction impossible is only and exactly KVL.
@@PafiTheOne dude you’re constantly commenting. I’ve gone through most comments and in nearly every single one you have 10+ comments. So pressed just calm down it’s an intellectual disagreement not a political debate. Yikes
@@MoodyGooseCow Not constantly, but occasionally. So you are factually wrong. And irrelevant. I disagreed, by falsifying your ignorant dogmas, I have every right for it. Deal with it!
@@PafiTheOne sure didn’t take you long to reply to this! You’ve been commenting on and off for 2 years, I’m sure you’ve got other things you can do in your life. I’m currently doing a PHD and just reading through these comments was enough of a time waster.
@@MoodyGooseCow I'm sorry that your Phd is soo boring that you keep commenting something that is not even interesting for you.
The earlier comment by "The Crude Lab" (immediately preceding this one) supposes that Lewin and ElectroBOOM have different definitions of voltage and this is then the crux of their differing conclusions. It's an interesting suggestion. The likelihood for confusion arising with respect to the meaning of terms like e.m.f., voltage and potential difference is considerable. Each has a specific definition which distinguishes it from the others. The issue is further compounded by the fact that all of these terms share the same unit - the Volt. The term e.m.f. has fallen out of favour with purists for a couple of reasons not the least being the lack of a rigorous and consistent definition. A battery is presumed to possess the property of having an e.m.f. but being electrochemical in origin this motive "force" is beyond the scope of Maxwell's equations. The opposite is true in the case of electromagnetic induction as we have in the Lewin experiment, where Maxwell's equations are readily applicable. Little wonder then that opinions vary as to which of the two "protagonists" is correct - or should we assert along with The Crude Lab that they are both right from their point of view.
If one searches carefully it is possible to find clear definitions for both voltage (electric stress) and (electric) potential difference - see for instance the IEC Glossary. The term e.m.f. is rather more difficult to pin down and the IEC unsurprisingly describes it as a deprecated term. Notwithstanding such a rigorous view held by an important authority, the non-purists continue to pay little regard to the purists and the use of the term e.m.f. will no doubt persist in perpetuity.
The distinction between voltage and potential difference is pivotal to our understanding of the Lewin experiment. This significance is no more evident in the discussion starting about time 15:50 onwards. ElectroBOOM is considering the case of the electrical conditions between two points on a homogeneous conducting loop immersed in a uniform time-varying magnetic field. The voltage between those two points will correspond to the Ohmic voltage drop along each of the two possible paths between those points - the long way or the short way. However a seeming paradox exists with the revelation that the potential difference between the two points will be zero irrespective of the path between those points.
This is why I love seeing youtuber of science. The important thing is not egos but scientific knowledge. I also studied electronic engineering and always thought that to make Kirchoff's law effective it was necessary to include all elements of the circuit, including parasitic capacitors and coils. The discussion is purely about how KVL is defined, that is, etymological rather than conceptual. I agree with you (and obvious with Feynmann) :D
You are definitely my favorite youtuber and I hope to continue watching your videos. Now I'm doing a Master in Robotics and I feel like I'm beginning to forget the basic concepts of electronics that I learned in my bachelor's degree. So with your videos I review them. I even remember that when I was in college I was very prankster and hyperactive, the polarity was reversed by the capacitors of the circuits of others and I laughed when they exploded in the delivery of work. I also used to electrocute a lot by mistake.
Greetings and probably Patreon (although I am a student and it is difficult for me) but I also want to participate in team draws. Greetings from a Colombian who lives in Germany.
Where is the movember special moustache? I want it back
Anonymous User its december
He replied to someone in the last movember video that he would stop doing them. Something about it getting too dangerous.
@@ChaosPlayerTF it was no nut november not moustache november.
Above his eyes?
It has been said: "“Science is the Belief in the Ignorance of Experts” - Richard Feynman
Sorry Mehdi, but I can't respect anyone who tries to say that you can't be right because you ONLY have a master's degree. It's such a childish move and shows what he really is like. A man who believes that he knows everything about a topic and that no one else can be right if they contradict him.
He did not say that. In fact he said that someone with a master degree should understand that what he is talking is nonsense and that is of the same magnitude of regular people saying that the earth is flat.
And for the record what medhi is doing is painfully obvious, he is creating artificial argument with a more famous person and that brings his channel attention and views... I would not be surprised if medhi actually agree with the professor. Btw i am someone who despise education for sake of education :)
@@delanmorstik7619 That's BS excuse. You know exactly what Lewin implied there. He said Mehdi is an embarassment for someone who holds Master in EE.
Heck. Lewin even called Mehdi a flatearther.
_"This is too basic. I do not argue either with people who believe that the Earth is flat."_
That is downright arrogant prick move.
Just argue your point.
---
@@delanmorstik7619 Artificial argument for views? Again, what a *BS nonsense excuse.*
Mehdi already had million subscribers. He didn't need a clickbait video.
Infact, his rebuttal video doesn't have nowhere near as view as to many of his popular video.
Love a good academic argument, challenging the accepted norm is good for everything. More "sparks" flowing between you and Dr. Lewin than between you and your Van Der Graaff generator.
Humility and respect while arguing in a hostile environment. I take off my hat and raise my beer to you!
I agree, hats off to Lewin!
As an EE student, I have learned so much from your videos that have helped me in my own studies. Thank you so much!
"In December 2014, MIT revoked Lewin's Professor Emeritus title after an MIT investigation determined that Lewin had violated university policy by sexually harassing an online student in an online MITx course he taught in fall 2013."
*O o f*
WHAT, this comment should be the first of the comment section
Vision_Slayer_525 agreed, should definitely be pinned. I may respect him 100% as an educator, but -59% as a person. That’s just unconscionable.
Its actually insulting to professors to continue referring to Lewin as a professor. He was terminated in disgrace...a Professorship is not granted for life!
You pulled his past huh? Nice
@@selofeals947 I figured a guy with his attitude surely couldn't be clean.
I very much enjoyed your final analysis, very professional and educational. Mehdi, you would make a wonderful and fun university professor!
This illustrates how pure science and applied science sometimes tell a very different story. Applied science treats instruments (e.g. oscilloscope, voltmeter) as something that measures but does not interact with the experiment. This is clearly what Dr. Lewin was attempting to describe in his experiment. He did not include the probe and the scope as a "part of the experiment". Ironically, he's a physicist and not an engineer, so he should have been more careful in understanding the limitation of the instrument.
I'll sight another example where science and engineering are at odds with each other. Chemical engineering will teach you that the mass of the products does not change after a chemical reaction (conservation of mass). Physics will teach that chemical reaction does change the mass equivalent to the energy produced in the reaction, albeit very very small.
I think physics tries to tell a more accurate explanation of how the world works. Applied science is often about "it's good enough".
You misunderstood. Lewin was proved to be correct both in theory and in practice. Then Mehdi ignored his detailed explanation and assumed (but never actually shown) a modell that must be corrected KVL (according to him), but never tried to calculate anything in that (continuously changing) model. Now he applied (only by words, without numbers) a method described by Feynmann that is not applicable here, since field separation is impossible in this case. Finally he demonstrated a brutally strong probing error caused by his lack of understanding, and instead of correctiong the error he first changed the circuit completely, then tried to explain the measurement error in a completely wrong way.
Meanwhile he earned money by spreading disinformation, but this can be considered irrelevant.
PafiTheOne looking forward to your video with numbers and proper examples
@@swalker157 I'm not a youtuber, I'm an engineer. And there is no need to prove something that is already proven many times by masters (eg. Lewin).
PafiTheOne I’m not asking you to prove anything, I’m just saying if you think his examples were that bad give proper ones to illustrate your point; and video is the best way to do it because you get twice the info ie visual and audio explanation.
@@swalker157 "Best"? Well, it's questionable. For a viewer it can be convenient, for a maker it is a hard work. And if (almost) nobody watches it, then it is still useless. You get twice the info, I work 30 times as much. For Mehdi it is a profession, making money. For me a waste of time.
I dont understand a word but i still watched it whole.
Same!
Must admit most was past my understanding , still watched all of it 🤔
Yep. I'm the one who clapped following others.
Taking electrical courses in college to learn: I SLEEP
Taking electrical courses in college to understand electroboom's content: REAL SHIT?
I hate how these fools mix religion with science. I feel sorry for that one guy. Stay strong Mehdi
Is Mehdi Muslim? I know it's a stupid question but I'm legit confused because he had a Christmas tree in a previous video.
+RAIDEXED That comment was supposed to be a derogatory one intended for Mehdi. Had nothing to do with its poster's religious beliefs.
@@another90daystochangethis34 but it had everything to do with what they thought about Mehdi's religious beliefs. and also they assumed his beliefs based on where he's from which is generalizing millions of people. all of that for a scientific disagreement.
@@jammo6645 He is an atheist!
+Azilvl That's basically what I meant.
I acknowledge Lewin knows about the topic, but I feel he thinks he is law and untouchable, so primitive.
TLDR: Some smart people disagree about how your light turns on. But either way it still turns on. In summary ElectroBOOM wants to give ME an oscilloscope. :)
It's so depressing to see how quickly this disagreement devolved into person attacks. Really vicious personal attacks in some cases. And it had nothing to do with politics even. I'll never understand. At least now I know what a decent human being and a class act Mehdi truly is.