Hi friends, thank you very much for watching! Big thanks also to Wren for sponsoring this video. Offset your carbon footprint on Wren: www.wren.co/start/parthg The first 100 people who sign up will have 10 extra trees planted in their name! EDIT: Quick correction - thank you to those of you who pointed this out! I had a silly moment and didn't spot that the displacement current is actually the dE/dt term in the final equation, and hence this is the term that Maxwell added to the equation to make it complete. As always, let me know what other topics you'd like me to cover in future videos :)
Do magnetic fields really exist? They appear to be an antiquated quaint notion that are no more real than gravitational fields. That is not to say that the concept of either does not sometimes have a certain utility.
@@amishajoshi6111 imagine you have two identical pennies. If I mix them you won’t be able to tell which is which. But if you had a penny and a nickel and mix them up you can still tell them apart. Same applies to particles… particles with the same quantum numbers can’t be told apart whereas particles with different quantum numbers can be. It’s like having coins of different values.
Review the following reference to Maxwell's Original Equations - of 20 equations with 20 unknowns, at **two minutes and thirty seconds** into the following video: YT Channel name: Steven Greer YT Playlist name: Witness Testimony YT Video name: Pulling Energy from the Vacuum (Lt. Col. Thomas Bearden)
Nice video, but one correction: the term Maxwell added, the displacement current, was the dE/dt term, not the J term (that was already in Ampere’s Law)
I remember when I study math and engineering at the university. I was trying to understand the true meaning of these equations and operators. I managed to get through them only partly... Now... I wish the internet was like now, then.
This was the PERFECT video about Maxwell's equations! Not too simplified, not too technical. I came into this video not understanding even the terms used. I came away knowing not only the terms, but why and how they are used. Thank you!!
Hey, I like your videos a lot, they're much appreciated :) just one thing to not confuse any viewers: J is simply current (density), not the displacement current - that one is associated with the dE/dt term (the time derivative term is also what Maxwell added to Ampère's law, J was already there)
Hi Parth, you have great channel and I applaud your good work. In this case, however, I think you have Maxwell's addition wrongly assigned. Ampere's law already involves current - which is represented in vector calculus by the J (Current Density) term. Maxwell's addition (the Displacement Current) is special for two key reasons. First dE/dt does NOT require a conductor whereas J does. Hence this current, can apply to the changing field in free space. Secondly, the dE/dt term, means that when combining Equations 3 and 4 that a d²E/dt² term or d²B/dt² term results in an equation of the form E = k * d²E/dt² (or similarly for B). Whence k is related to μ*ε and a classic wave equation results - not only predicting the possibility of cyclic E=>B=>E and the possibility of waves in free space but also the relationship between μ * ε and c (speed of light). This was Maxwell's contribution ... the dE/dt term.
It's really satisfying to see many people point out the mistake, instead of just taking it for granted. Besides that, I think it will be preferred to have Maxwell's equations written in Gaussian units. Another fun fact: the added term(displacement current density) can actually be derived from the first equation and some vector calculus. Otherwise, Maxwell's equations cannot describe time-dependent charge distribution.
I've been watching a lot of videos and I really think that your explanations avoiding the math really make the topics you cover intuitive. Do you think you could make a video about Noether's theorem?
I think you have misunderstood the meaning of "displacement current". It is not the movement of charge -- movement of charge is the conduction current, and is represented by the J current density term. The displacement current relates to the rate of change of electric field, like what you get between the two places of a capacitor that is charging or discharging. Maxwell added in this displacement current concept of "changing electric field behaves like a current" to generalise Ampere's law which previously only considered the conduction current.
Good video, except (at 11:49) J is the current density and the displacement current is the term with the time variation of the electric field times the permittivity of free space. Also (at 2:36) the divergence = 0 means the strength of the field entering normal to the surfaces of a closed volume must equal the strength of the field exiting normal to the surfaces of the closed volume - normal to the surface is a distinction that is important when the field lines curve through the volume.
"Carbon Footprint" is a term coined by BP (yes, the oil company) in the early 2000s to deflect attention away from the biggest polluting corporations. 70% of all worldwide emissions come from just 100 companies. While consumer choices are important, for sure, real change will only come when the largest companies change their energy profiles to renewables.
Hmm these 4 equations are the work of Maxwellians and Maxwell's understudy Heaviside... Very much simplified from the original complex 20 equations Maxwell did to explain of not only electro magnetics but to explain electro Gravidics. In EM theory the Gravity bit is the head scratcher. Half of Maxwell's work is ignored because the Boffs couldn't do the maths.
I don't know what it is about this teacher that is different, but, I managed to understand these 4 equations much easier listening to him explain them. Also, I noticed how he stressed the word "our" when he was talking about how these equations operate in our universe. Has he been having tea with Dr. Strange? Regardless, thank you Parth G. A wonderful video and a new subscriber. And of course a thumbs up. Sadly I have no friends smart enought to share this with. I'm only interested because I have taken an interest in laser optics. All the best sir.
Del dot B = 0 essentially eliminates the possibility of magnetic monopoles. What are the problems with our understanding of electro-magnetism that cause some folks to search for magnetic monopoles? Is it only wishful thinking?
Nice video. Love it. By the way J is charge, and only charge, displayed into the ancient space from a charge carrier. That particle is unnecessary. All light need is e0 and bipolar oscillating emf. Where charged particle implies electrons migrating through vacuum driven by electric field. Such as electrons in a cathode ray tube apparatus. Space plasma. Aren’t what Maxwell advocate. electromagnetic wave propagation.
How does down quark convert into up quark in beta minus decay? In wiki it says that down quark enters into superposition of up quarks while converting into up quark what causes this superposition?
Uhm, I've learned it differently. The displacement current you are talking is just a normal or actual current, but the rate of change of an electric field is the displacement current. And that's what maxwell discovered.
I tend not to agree with the B/E wave diagram shown at 12:15. As was said, the wave is TRANSLATING and NOT ROTATING along the say z axis in this case, Again there is no rotation. So the rate of change is purely due to the translation along z axis as shown by the running indicator of the wave. As far as I can conclude the rate of change of the two functions are the same occuring at the same value of z, As far as I know E= dB/dt and B= k dE/dt where the peaks should be at the maximum rate of change of the other! Better still the maximum curl of one wave should agree with he maximum amplitude of the other! The maximum curl should coincide with the zero value when the sign changes over, Can anyone explain my difficulty please? Again note, this wave is not rotating but only translating and the rate of changes should be included in that translation and not in rotating. Should there be a pi/2 along the z axis? As shown, the power component is not constant and oscillates, but in an E/M wave the power component being exchanged between the E and B wave should be constant in the direction of propagation. This is not depicted by the diagram shown in many books.
Great video! I have one doubt though. You said that a magnetic field can be produced by a current alone. My doubt is, even when this current is constant and not changing? Because a changing electric field that produces a magnetic field also produces a changing electric current...
Yes, even when the current is constant. For example, near the centre of a long wire carrying a constant current, the magnetic field lines are concentric circles centred on the wire. You can see this by putting two such current-carrying wires close to each other - if the currents flow in the same direction, they attract, if not, they repel. A simpler and more common demonstration involves connecting a battery to a coil of wire and seeing how it works like a magnet.
Sir pls can you recommend some books on this topic? These videos are extremely helpful for me , these are diamonds, Upload more videos on the topic ❤❤❤
Statt Nabla (gilt nur im kartesischen Koordinatensystem) sind die allgemeingültigen Begriffe rot und div zu verwenden, da diese unabhängig vom Koordinatensystem sind.
I fail to understand how current geometries have an application to the Scientific Method. Gauss pointed this out. The problem he spent a lifetime on is this problem. He did not publish the geometries he discovered because : Gauss to Bessel Goettingen 9 April 1830 … The ease with which you delved into my views on geometry gives me real joy, given that so few have an open mind for such. My innermost conviction is that the study of space is a priori completely different than the study of magnitudes; our knowledge of the former (space) is missing that complete conviction of necessity (thus of absolute truth) that is characteristic of the latter; We must in humility admit that if number is merely a product of our mind. It is clear in Bessel's response he did not understand Gauss's point that space does not meet any necessity requirement. Bessel to Gauss Koenigsberg 10 February 1829 {… I would protest loudly if you were to allow "the cry of the Bocetians" to thwart the working out of your geometry views. From what Lambert has said, and what Schweikart told me, it has become clear that our geometry is incomplete and needs a correction which is hypothetical and which disappears if the sum of the angles of a triangle = 180o. The latter would be the real geometry, the Euclidean one, which practically, at least for figures on the earth …..} The real geometry observed everywhere is E=hv with Dopplers Effect. Since the v=1/Tp, the h is just the delusional constant generated by the delusion of irrational, misguided mathematics: The acceleration observed everywhere in the geometry consistent with Planck's observation is the second derivative of Tp with respect to the time rotation in the observer's frame. it is, as Galileo stated -1/(Tp)(Tp)
Hey can u explain how to get admission in department of physics at Cambridge. I just completed my 12. I am really interested in physics and want to join Cambridge. Can u guide?
I think that it may perhaps be time to transition from the cube to the cubeoctahedron as a symbol representing space/all-space. I enjoyed this video as neither a newb nor noob but just looking in from outside - clearly set-forth. Makes me wonder what experimental phenomena Maxwell was dealing with to clear things up with this concision. Fun possible-fact (I.e quoted from a letter to the London Times mid-1970s) Maxwell arrived at this formulation E = 3/4mc^ 25 years before Einstein’s more accurate statement of relations - lacking certain experimental data available to the latter. Also - Maxwell made the first colour photo by superposing the results of shooting a single subject through a series of different colour filters.
Hello , question : If someone that is a mathematician does a master in mathematical and theoretical physics , is that person also a theoretical physicist ?
sir i have a request. I am studying in class 12th in india and from your name i suppose you are indian.... it may be that i am totally wrong, so forgive me if i am. i want you to consider making videos on the topics like calculus, fields and potentials etcetra in a way that scales from intermediate to advanced considering your viewers are already acquainted with the topics and with deep analysis of the formulae and concepts.... i sure appreciate these as well but our course go a bit far and knowing more than the syllabus covers helps in deep understanding of the concepts. in india competitive exam studies has almost become similar to rote learning as much as i have seen atleast.... memorise a list of formulae, apply them in exams and frget afterwards which is almost like an endless cycle...the teachers also tend to avoid in depth explanation. among all these your videos are preetty amazing and tend to cover all doubts without fail so i request you to either launch a course or a playlist of videos discussing physics in details in a step by step manner. its totally possible you dont even have the time to breathe but pls conc=sider my request... thank you
I have been investigating propagating Electromagnetic fields for many years. My investigations revealed that these fields and the information in these fields propagate nearly instantaneously when they are created and reduce to the speed of light as they propagate into the farfield. According to Albert Einstein, if the speed of light is not a constant, then his theories of Special and General Relativity are wrong. This can be seen in Einstein's time dilation result due to a moving observer: t=r t' and the length contraction result: L=L'/r, where t and L are reference to the stationary frame, and t' and L ' are reference to the moving frame, and r is the Relativistic gamma factor: r =1/Sqrt(1-(v/c)^2). These results are easily derived using Einstein's light clock thought experiment using simple algebra. But if propagating EM fields with infinite speed near the source are used in the derivation, then c = Infinity, and r=1. If propagating EM fields far from the source are used, then c = the speed of light, and r= the standard Relativistic gamma factor. What comes out of this is that the effects on time and space are completely different depending on whether one uses propagating fields near or far away from the source, which can't be true since time and space are real. So the conclusion must be that Einstein's Relativity is wrong and time and space do not change with respect to moving reference frames, Galilean Relativity is correct, and that Einstein's equations just enable us to back calculate to the correct answer, givin the time delays observed by the propagating EM fields used in measuring the effects. But these results do not account for the time dilation observed by moving atomic clocks in airplane experiments, but can be accounted for using variable light speed theory (VLS), origionally proposed by Einstein, and later improved by Robert Dicky in 1957. In this theory, spacetime is not curved by gravity as suggested by General Relativity, instead Newtons theory of gravity is correct and the many other known effects of gravity are due to the affect of gravity on the of light speed. For instance the observed bending of light by mass, which caused General Relativity to be accepted, can be explained, by the gravity generated by the mass, changing the speed of light, causing the light to bend around the mass. This effect is analogous to the bending of light in glass. Since lasers are used in atomic clocks to measure time, then the observed time dilation in atomic clocks in moving airplanes can be explained as due to the effects of light speed changes in the clocks due to changes in gravitation as the plane goes up and down. It should also be noted that several researchers have shown the relation E=mc^2 can be derived without Relativity using Newtonian mechanics, and the Michelson Morley experiment can be explained using the Doppler effect, ref Nathan Rapport 2021 In summary, this research shows that Einstein's theories are wrong and that time and space do not change with respect to moving observers, Galilean Relativity is correct, Newtons theory of gravity is correct, and many of the other effects of gravity can be explained as gravity simply changing the speed of light. The importance of this research is that it completely changes our understanding of time and space and gravity, and simplifies our theories. Perhaps this new understanding will finally enable researchers to finally unite Gravitational theory with quantum mechanics which have been incompatible since scientists accepted Einstein's theories for Special and General Relativity. For instance, Relativity is incompatible with quantum entanglement, which requires communication faster than light, but can perhaps can be explained by superluminal propagating fields between entangled particles. It should be mentioned that this superluminal effect is also observed in the propagating gravitational fields generated by an oscillating mass using Newtonian gravitational theory, and is nearly infinite near the source and reduces to speed of light far from the source. This matches very well with observations of the stability of the planets, which would not be possible if gravity propagates at light speed, and was origionally proposed by Simone Laplace in his famous book: Mécanique Céleste in the late 1700's, where he estimated the speed of gravity to be 7x10^6 times greater than the speed of light.
Galileo disproved mass as a force. Newton proved that force comes from acceleration. The earth rotating on its axis is accelerating its mass outward and forward creating curved space. Newton's gravitational attraction is flat earth physics. On a stationary, flat plane, gravity is the force that makes objects fall to the ground rather than float off into space like smoke does. Hafele-Keating disproved Einstein’s relativity nonsense. There is no time-dilation. Space and Time are separate frames of reference. The reason clocks in motion run slow is because light travels in its own frame of reference, independent of the source. The source's frame has been accelerated but not the photon's frame. Ergo. Time-dilation. Thus does not apply to the observer because they are in a separate time frame. Spacetime? That is one mistake. Speed of light constant? Yes. Frequency of light, no. Property identifying frames of reference. Two for the clock and two for the observer. One each of space and time. Relativity is just a compounding of errors by flat earthers. It gets the right answer, mass decreases as radius increases. But for the wrong reason. The earth is rotating on its axis accelerating its mass outward and forward. How can it be both pushing and pulling at the same time. One is valid one is not. Galileo proved that mass does not attract mass so Newton and Einstein are wrong. Still being influenced by flat earth science Relativity? Mathematical nonsense as Nicholas Tesla described it. Mass is not an actionable force. By decreeing it so, the universe it creates is 180 degrees from reality. Making people blind to its errors.
"They're transverse to each other." Stares at the equations. Stares at the equations. Stares at the equations. "I don't see it." Stares at equation. "Duh. Multiply by i. Transverse."
Ah, someone else familiar with ∇F=J. Given that charge density is charge per unit volume ie: C/m^3 and current is charge per unit area times time ie: C/sm^2, it's almost begging for some connection to the trivectors γ₁₂₃ and (γ₀₁₂, γ₀₁₃, γ₀₂₃) respectively, which would be their dual.
Now I'm curious...If a bar magnet were moving at a constant velocity through space and eventually encountered a magnetic field, it would rotate to align with that field. That is an acceleration. So where did the energy come from to cause that acceleration?
Common misconception, but B is not generated by dE/dt - there is an equivalence, but not causation. The B field is ultimately generated by the charges moving that give rise to the dE/dt. This misconception is almost universally taught, so not surprised to see it here.
The two terms in the fourth law look suspiciously similar. Like, electric charges generate the electric field, and so moving charges and changing electric fields feel intimately related, no? I bet there's a perspective where they're unified into one term, I wonder if anyone's discovered it yet
@@loganstokols5478 ok well then this is going to blow your mind. Imagine a proton riding on a train. To someone on the train the proton is stationary and therfore there is zero current and no magnetic field. But to someone standing outside the train the proton is moving and there is a current, so there is a magnetic field. So one persons electric field is another man's magnetic field. It's all about your frame of reference. The only more general way I know of writing it is in tensor form but that's just hiding the equations.
I thought the displacement current was the partial E term associated with the current associated with a changing electric field. J is the normal current density. Nice vid otherwise.
I like your clear explanations, but must disagree with you on Maxwell's 4th equation. Now I can tell that you care about the subject, so I am interested in having a dialog with you. Remember, light is a TEM wave and any and all TEM signals are by definition the fundamental energy essence of the Universe. Within a TEM signal you cannot separate out the E from the H field. db/dt does not cause E, they are inextricably linked. dH/dt is related to dE/dt by Z Characteristic Impedance of the medium. Remember that any signal travels at speed c for the medium. It cannot travel at any other speed, as defined by Mu and Epsilon. Changing Electric field cannot cause changing Magnetic field causing chaning E and so on. Think of a binary pulse on a USB cable how does it propagate from a laptop port to a printer?
In the Film, Shoreshank Redemption, the main character was proven innocent of the murder he was incarcerated for, but the Prison Governor refused to allow him release, a common tale but true we're told. The situation defined the meaning of the word "obtuse", in reference to the Governor's inaction, which sums up much of actual government inaction generally. "Climate Change" is the obtuse face of Government indifference to take responsibility for actual Regulation of legal system practices. Just sayin
Hi friends, thank you very much for watching! Big thanks also to Wren for sponsoring this video. Offset your carbon footprint on Wren: www.wren.co/start/parthg
The first 100 people who sign up will have 10 extra trees planted in their name!
EDIT: Quick correction - thank you to those of you who pointed this out! I had a silly moment and didn't spot that the displacement current is actually the dE/dt term in the final equation, and hence this is the term that Maxwell added to the equation to make it complete.
As always, let me know what other topics you'd like me to cover in future videos :)
Do magnetic fields really exist? They appear to be an antiquated quaint notion that are no more real than gravitational fields. That is not to say that the concept of either does not sometimes have a certain utility.
Please make video on distinguishable and indistinguishable particles. It is quite confusing.
@parthG it would be amazing if you could make a video explaining the superconductor equations (London equations).
@@amishajoshi6111 imagine you have two identical pennies. If I mix them you won’t be able to tell which is which. But if you had a penny and a nickel and mix them up you can still tell them apart. Same applies to particles… particles with the same quantum numbers can’t be told apart whereas particles with different quantum numbers can be. It’s like having coins of different values.
Review the following reference to Maxwell's Original Equations - of 20 equations with 20 unknowns, at **two minutes and thirty seconds** into the following video:
YT Channel name: Steven Greer
YT Playlist name: Witness Testimony
YT Video name: Pulling Energy from the Vacuum (Lt. Col. Thomas Bearden)
Nice video, but one correction: the term Maxwell added, the displacement current, was the dE/dt term, not the J term (that was already in Ampere’s Law)
You're right, thank you for pointing it out! I had a silly moment :D
@@ParthGChannel Can you edit the video?
Kindly change this video, as this information can be dangerous for new s.
I too think about it
Please change the thumbnail
I remember when I study math and engineering at the university. I was trying to understand the true meaning of these equations and operators. I managed to get through them only partly... Now... I wish the internet was like now, then.
Well, if you want to UNDERSTAND stuff, then engineering is not the way to go.
This was the PERFECT video about Maxwell's equations! Not too simplified, not too technical. I came into this video not understanding even the terms used. I came away knowing not only the terms, but why and how they are used. Thank you!!
Hey, I like your videos a lot, they're much appreciated :) just one thing to not confuse any viewers: J is simply current (density), not the displacement current - that one is associated with the dE/dt term (the time derivative term is also what Maxwell added to Ampère's law, J was already there)
Superb, the way you clear the basic mathematical term is incredible. Like it.
Thank you!
Hi Parth, you have great channel and I applaud your good work.
In this case, however, I think you have Maxwell's addition wrongly assigned. Ampere's law already involves current - which is represented in vector calculus by the J (Current Density) term. Maxwell's addition (the Displacement Current) is special for two key reasons.
First dE/dt does NOT require a conductor whereas J does. Hence this current, can apply to the changing field in free space.
Secondly, the dE/dt term, means that when combining Equations 3 and 4 that a d²E/dt² term or d²B/dt² term results in an equation of the form E = k * d²E/dt² (or similarly for B). Whence k is related to μ*ε and a classic wave equation results - not only predicting the possibility of cyclic E=>B=>E and the possibility of waves in free space but also the relationship between μ * ε and c (speed of light). This was Maxwell's contribution ... the dE/dt term.
Excellent video. Clear and simple. Regarding Wren, I’ve observed that if you do fundraising and you claim to be working on climate change, then Div($)
It's really satisfying to see many people point out the mistake, instead of just taking it for granted. Besides that, I think it will be preferred to have Maxwell's equations written in Gaussian units. Another fun fact: the added term(displacement current density) can actually be derived from the first equation and some vector calculus. Otherwise, Maxwell's equations cannot describe time-dependent charge distribution.
I've been watching a lot of videos and I really think that your explanations avoiding the math really make the topics you cover intuitive. Do you think you could make a video about Noether's theorem?
I think you have misunderstood the meaning of "displacement current". It is not the movement of charge -- movement of charge is the conduction current, and is represented by the J current density term. The displacement current relates to the rate of change of electric field, like what you get between the two places of a capacitor that is charging or discharging. Maxwell added in this displacement current concept of "changing electric field behaves like a current" to generalise Ampere's law which previously only considered the conduction current.
Hey, bro.You are one of passionate guider to learn physics by heart. Very good work. Keep it up, bro👍
Thank you very much!
@@ParthGChannel Keep me on your prayers,bro.I will also pray for you.😀
Good video, except (at 11:49) J is the current density and the displacement current is the term with the time variation of the electric field times the permittivity of free space. Also (at 2:36) the divergence = 0 means the strength of the field entering normal to the surfaces of a closed volume must equal the strength of the field exiting normal to the surfaces of the closed volume - normal to the surface is a distinction that is important when the field lines curve through the volume.
thanks someone noted
Brilliant video! Quite elegant in its simplicity and clarity. 😃
Imagine how smart maxwell must be to make these equations in the first place that too in old times
Wrongly stated, Maxwell's term is displacement current which is proportional to dE/dt.
This is by far the best explanation of this topic for a lay viewer that I have encountered so far.
these are heaviside equations. maxwell equations include the scalar component. this a bigger deal than most people realize.
"Carbon Footprint" is a term coined by BP (yes, the oil company) in the early 2000s to deflect attention away from the biggest polluting corporations. 70% of all worldwide emissions come from just 100 companies. While consumer choices are important, for sure, real change will only come when the largest companies change their energy profiles to renewables.
Your intro snapshot was showing the wrong part of equation for "Maxwell's Contribution", but you fixed it!
The video is wonderful.....,please make a video on displacement current
Hmm these 4 equations are the work of Maxwellians and Maxwell's understudy Heaviside... Very much simplified from the original complex 20 equations Maxwell did to explain of not only electro magnetics but to explain electro Gravidics. In EM theory the Gravity bit is the head scratcher. Half of Maxwell's work is ignored because the Boffs couldn't do the maths.
I don't know what it is about this teacher that is different, but, I managed to understand these 4 equations much easier listening to him explain them. Also, I noticed how he stressed the word "our" when he was talking about how these equations operate in our universe. Has he been having tea with Dr. Strange? Regardless, thank you Parth G. A wonderful video and a new subscriber. And of course a thumbs up. Sadly I have no friends smart enought to share this with. I'm only interested because I have taken an interest in laser optics. All the best sir.
Del dot B = 0 essentially eliminates the possibility of magnetic monopoles. What are the problems with our understanding of electro-magnetism that cause some folks to search for magnetic monopoles? Is it only wishful thinking?
9.34 talks on nebala , is it the one representing partial differential w.r.t different Cartesian coordinate (x,y,z)
Nice explanation 🔥🔥
Hello 👋🏻 Which program you are using to make the video and the equation?
Nice video. Love it.
By the way J is charge, and only charge, displayed into the ancient space from a charge carrier. That particle is unnecessary. All light need is e0 and bipolar oscillating emf.
Where charged particle implies electrons migrating through vacuum driven by electric field. Such as electrons in a cathode ray tube apparatus. Space plasma. Aren’t what Maxwell advocate. electromagnetic wave propagation.
How does down quark convert into up quark in beta minus decay? In wiki it says that down quark enters into superposition of up quarks while converting into up quark what causes this superposition?
Uhm, I've learned it differently. The displacement current you are talking is just a normal or actual current, but the rate of change of an electric field is the displacement current. And that's what maxwell discovered.
You're right, thank you for pointing it out! I had a silly moment :D
great video, parth. thanks!
I tend not to agree with the B/E wave diagram shown at 12:15. As was said, the wave is TRANSLATING and NOT ROTATING along the say z axis in this case, Again there is no rotation. So the rate of change is purely due to the translation along z axis as shown by the running indicator of the wave. As far as I can conclude the rate of change of the two functions are the same occuring at the same value of z,
As far as I know E= dB/dt and B= k dE/dt where the peaks should be at the maximum rate of change of the other! Better still the maximum curl of one wave should agree with he maximum amplitude of the other! The maximum curl should coincide with the zero value when the sign changes over, Can anyone explain my difficulty please? Again note, this wave is not rotating but only translating and the rate of changes should be included in that translation and not in rotating. Should there be a pi/2 along the z axis?
As shown, the power component is not constant and oscillates, but in an E/M wave the power component being exchanged between the E and B wave should be constant in the direction of propagation. This is not depicted by the diagram shown in many books.
You have confused Maxwell's contribution with Ampere's contribution. Displacement current is the rate of change of the Displacement, D=epsilon E.
Very well presented! 😊
can't wait for the video about the final equation!
For the first time I've checked it. Thanks man!
I'm a teacher from Brazil and... Ow man! Muito share with my students. Amazing!
Wonderfully explained, thanks for that.
TH-cam's best explanations of Maxwell's Equations that even I can understand. Thanks
Go to 3blue1brown
You are very good explaining science
Hello sir.
Please make a video on 'Euler's identity.'
Can u make a video on tensors
What about Proca’s equations which differ a bit from Maxwell’s equations
And what about a video or series of videos on Proca’s equations
This is precisely what I was looking for. Thank you.
Great video! I have one doubt though. You said that a magnetic field can be produced by a current alone. My doubt is, even when this current is constant and not changing? Because a changing electric field that produces a magnetic field also produces a changing electric current...
Yes, even when the current is constant. For example, near the centre of a long wire carrying a constant current, the magnetic field lines are concentric circles centred on the wire. You can see this by putting two such current-carrying wires close to each other - if the currents flow in the same direction, they attract, if not, they repel.
A simpler and more common demonstration involves connecting a battery to a coil of wire and seeing how it works like a magnet.
Yes, DC can produce direct magnetic field, as in magnets. AC will produce alternating magnetic field (as in AC motors).
@@susmitislam1910 thank you!
@@urosmarjanovic663 thank you!
Sir pls can you recommend some books on this topic? These videos are extremely helpful for me , these are diamonds, Upload more videos on the topic ❤❤❤
Your topics are awesome your videos are awesome you are awesome 😎
Statt Nabla (gilt nur im kartesischen Koordinatensystem) sind die allgemeingültigen Begriffe rot und div zu verwenden, da diese unabhängig vom Koordinatensystem sind.
Thank you Most interesting ...I live here in Maxwell's region in South Scotland
is this guy ever gonna make a video on maxwell's 4th equation? he just straight up skipped it and made videos on the other three wtf.
I fail to understand how current geometries have an application to the Scientific Method.
Gauss pointed this out. The problem he spent a lifetime on is this problem. He did not publish the geometries he discovered because :
Gauss to Bessel Goettingen 9 April 1830 …
The ease with which you delved into my views on geometry gives me real joy, given that so few have an open mind for such.
My innermost conviction is that the study of space is a priori completely different than the study of magnitudes; our knowledge of the former (space) is missing that complete conviction of necessity (thus of absolute truth)
that is characteristic of the latter;
We must in humility admit that if number is merely a product of our mind.
It is clear in Bessel's response he did not understand Gauss's point that space does not meet any necessity requirement.
Bessel to Gauss Koenigsberg 10 February 1829
{… I would protest loudly if you were to allow "the cry of the Bocetians" to thwart the working out of your geometry views. From what Lambert has said, and what Schweikart told me, it has become clear that our geometry is incomplete and needs a correction which is hypothetical and which disappears if the sum of the angles of a triangle = 180o. The latter would be the real geometry, the Euclidean one, which practically, at least for figures on the earth …..}
The real geometry observed everywhere is E=hv with Dopplers Effect. Since the v=1/Tp, the h is just the delusional constant generated by the delusion of irrational, misguided mathematics:
The acceleration observed everywhere in the geometry consistent with Planck's observation is the second derivative of Tp with respect to the time rotation in the observer's frame. it is, as Galileo stated -1/(Tp)(Tp)
Thanks you, what a perfect explanation!, you are a special man, and i could not have such a course at univercity desk.
Fascinating, but please tell me Parth, how did Maxwell come up with all this?
In this case is the dielectric field the same as the electric field?
Thanks for this great video.
Maxwell was great player in the field of Science
These are so clear!
Feynman said if he were to be stranded on a deserted island he would at least want to have Maxwell's equations.
Hey can u explain how to get admission in department of physics at Cambridge. I just completed my 12. I am really interested in physics and want to join Cambridge. Can u guide?
I think that it may perhaps be time to transition from the cube to the cubeoctahedron as a symbol representing space/all-space. I enjoyed this video as neither a newb nor noob but just looking in from outside - clearly set-forth. Makes me wonder what experimental phenomena Maxwell was dealing with to clear things up with this concision. Fun possible-fact (I.e quoted from a letter to the London Times mid-1970s) Maxwell arrived at this formulation E = 3/4mc^ 25 years before Einstein’s more accurate statement of relations - lacking certain experimental data available to the latter. Also - Maxwell made the first colour photo by superposing the results of shooting a single subject through a series of different colour filters.
I never understood that inverted triangle symbol, so I flunked my course years ago.
Well done mate
cant wait for the last episode of Maxwell equations
Hello , question : If someone that is a mathematician does a master in mathematical and theoretical physics , is that person also a theoretical physicist ?
Tnx man i have an exam of this within a month.
sir i have a request. I am studying in class 12th in india and from your name i suppose you are indian.... it may be that i am totally wrong, so forgive me if i am. i want you to consider making videos on the topics like calculus, fields and potentials etcetra in a way that scales from intermediate to advanced considering your viewers are already acquainted with the topics and with deep analysis of the formulae and concepts.... i sure appreciate these as well but our course go a bit far and knowing more than the syllabus covers helps in deep understanding of the concepts. in india competitive exam studies has almost become similar to rote learning as much as i have seen atleast.... memorise a list of formulae, apply them in exams and frget afterwards which is almost like an endless cycle...the teachers also tend to avoid in depth explanation. among all these your videos are preetty amazing and tend to cover all doubts without fail so i request you to either launch a course or a playlist of videos discussing physics in details in a step by step manner. its totally possible you dont even have the time to breathe but pls conc=sider my request... thank you
amazing job
The most beautiful set of equations to exist
Maybe you could derive the Planck length, time etc.?! And describe the concept of Neg-entropy?!
Can someone clarify the difference between inductor and solenoid?
This one is super amazing 😍
hey party i think the thumbnail is a little misleading didnt maxwell add displacement current not steady current
Thanks mate! 🖤
I have been investigating propagating Electromagnetic fields for many years. My investigations revealed that these fields and the information in these fields propagate nearly instantaneously when they are created and reduce to the speed of light as they propagate into the farfield.
According to Albert Einstein, if the speed of light is not a constant, then his theories of Special and General Relativity are wrong. This can be seen in Einstein's time dilation result due to a moving observer: t=r t' and the length contraction result: L=L'/r, where t and L are reference to the stationary frame, and t' and L ' are reference to the moving frame, and r is the Relativistic gamma factor: r =1/Sqrt(1-(v/c)^2). These results are easily derived using Einstein's light clock thought experiment using simple algebra. But if propagating EM fields with infinite speed near the source are used in the derivation, then c = Infinity, and r=1. If propagating EM fields far from the source are used, then c = the speed of light, and r= the standard Relativistic gamma factor. What comes out of this is that the effects on time and space are completely different depending on whether one uses propagating fields near or far away from the source, which can't be true since time and space are real. So the conclusion must be that Einstein's Relativity is wrong and time and space do not change with respect to moving reference frames, Galilean Relativity is correct, and that Einstein's equations just enable us to back calculate to the correct answer, givin the time delays observed by the propagating EM fields used in measuring the effects.
But these results do not account for the time dilation observed by moving atomic clocks in airplane experiments, but can be accounted for using variable light speed theory (VLS), origionally proposed by Einstein, and later improved by Robert Dicky in 1957. In this theory, spacetime is not curved by gravity as suggested by General Relativity, instead Newtons theory of gravity is correct and the many other known effects of gravity are due to the affect of gravity on the of light speed. For instance the observed bending of light by mass, which caused General Relativity to be accepted, can be explained, by the gravity generated by the mass, changing the speed of light, causing the light to bend around the mass. This effect is analogous to the bending of light in glass. Since lasers are used in atomic clocks to measure time, then the observed time dilation in atomic clocks in moving airplanes can be explained as due to the effects of light speed changes in the clocks due to changes in gravitation as the plane goes up and down. It should also be noted that several researchers have shown the relation E=mc^2 can be derived without Relativity using Newtonian mechanics, and the Michelson Morley experiment can be explained using the Doppler effect, ref Nathan Rapport 2021
In summary, this research shows that Einstein's theories are wrong and that time and space do not change with respect to moving observers, Galilean Relativity is correct, Newtons theory of gravity is correct, and many of the other effects of gravity can be explained as gravity simply changing the speed of light. The importance of this research is that it completely changes our understanding of time and space and gravity, and simplifies our theories. Perhaps this new understanding will finally enable researchers to finally unite Gravitational theory with quantum mechanics which have been incompatible since scientists accepted Einstein's theories for Special and General Relativity. For instance, Relativity is incompatible with quantum entanglement, which requires communication faster than light, but can perhaps can be explained by
superluminal propagating fields between entangled particles.
It should be mentioned that this superluminal effect is also observed in the propagating gravitational fields generated by an oscillating mass using Newtonian gravitational theory, and is nearly infinite near the source and reduces to speed of light far from the source. This matches very well with observations of the stability of the planets, which would not be possible if gravity propagates at light speed, and was origionally proposed by Simone Laplace in his famous book: Mécanique Céleste in the late 1700's, where he estimated the speed of gravity to be 7x10^6 times greater than the speed of light.
Galileo disproved mass as a force. Newton proved that force comes from acceleration. The earth rotating on its axis is accelerating its mass outward and forward creating curved space. Newton's gravitational attraction is flat earth physics. On a stationary, flat plane, gravity is the force that makes objects fall to the ground rather than float off into space like smoke does.
Hafele-Keating disproved Einstein’s relativity nonsense. There is no time-dilation. Space and Time are separate frames of reference. The reason clocks in motion run slow is because light travels in its own frame of reference, independent of the source. The source's frame has been accelerated but not the photon's frame. Ergo. Time-dilation.
Thus does not apply to the observer because they are in a separate time frame.
Spacetime? That is one mistake.
Speed of light constant? Yes. Frequency of light, no.
Property identifying frames of reference. Two for the clock and two for the observer. One each of space and time.
Relativity is just a compounding of errors by flat earthers. It gets the right answer, mass decreases as radius increases. But for the wrong reason.
The earth is rotating on its axis accelerating its mass outward and forward. How can it be both pushing and pulling at the same time. One is valid one is not. Galileo proved that mass does not attract mass so Newton and Einstein are wrong. Still being influenced by flat earth science
Relativity? Mathematical nonsense as Nicholas Tesla described it. Mass is not an actionable force. By decreeing it so, the universe it creates is 180 degrees from reality. Making people blind to its errors.
How can i make animations in videos like this
Please
"They're transverse to each other."
Stares at the equations.
Stares at the equations.
Stares at the equations.
"I don't see it."
Stares at equation.
"Duh. Multiply by i. Transverse."
Ah, someone else familiar with ∇F=J.
Given that charge density is charge per unit volume ie: C/m^3 and current is charge per unit area times time ie: C/sm^2, it's almost begging for some connection to the trivectors γ₁₂₃ and (γ₀₁₂, γ₀₁₃, γ₀₂₃) respectively, which would be their dual.
Now I'm curious...If a bar magnet were moving at a constant velocity through space and eventually encountered a magnetic field, it would rotate to align with that field. That is an acceleration. So where did the energy come from to cause that acceleration?
Energy flows from a higher source to a lower source.
Gracias.🥺👍🏽
Huh, I remember using the same Maxwell picture you used for the thumbnail for a school thing ages ago
Loved it 🥰
Common misconception, but B is not generated by dE/dt - there is an equivalence, but not causation. The B field is ultimately generated by the charges moving that give rise to the dE/dt. This misconception is almost universally taught, so not surprised to see it here.
New insight♥️
Big thanks to you
I thought I understood this pretty well, when expressed in terms of surface integrals. This different form is a novel challenge.
Thank u sir
i think you are physics jesus because I've never managed to get my head around these!
The matter of the fact is: "If you can't explain something to a Layman, you don't understand it".
The special theory of relativity owes its origins to Maxwell's equations of the electromagnetic field.
Changing M-flux induces E-field. Why Changing E-flux alone does not induce M-flux & current is to be included in 4th equation.
Parth - you make great videos, but should we be calling these Maxwell's equations?
I think that we should be calling them the Heaviside equations
The two terms in the fourth law look suspiciously similar. Like, electric charges generate the electric field, and so moving charges and changing electric fields feel intimately related, no? I bet there's a perspective where they're unified into one term, I wonder if anyone's discovered it yet
Are you being serious? I can’t tell. They’re two sides of the same coin.
@@knucklesamidge I'm being totally serious. Is there a simpler way to write it so the two terms become one?
@@loganstokols5478 ok well then this is going to blow your mind. Imagine a proton riding on a train. To someone on the train the proton is stationary and therfore there is zero current and no magnetic field. But to someone standing outside the train the proton is moving and there is a current, so there is a magnetic field. So one persons electric field is another man's magnetic field. It's all about your frame of reference. The only more general way I know of writing it is in tensor form but that's just hiding the equations.
This is very enlightening, but i wonder if you can explain Maxwell’s Silver Hammer? 😂
I thought the displacement current was the partial E term associated with the current associated with a changing electric field. J is the normal current density. Nice vid otherwise.
Facepalm. Maxwell introduced dE/dt not J
Shout out to my homie Heaviside for reducing 20+ Maxwell equations to 4.
I like your clear explanations, but must disagree with you on Maxwell's 4th equation. Now I can tell that you care about the subject, so I am interested in having a dialog with you. Remember, light is a TEM wave and any and all TEM signals are by definition the fundamental energy essence of the Universe. Within a TEM signal you cannot separate out the E from the H field. db/dt does not cause E, they are inextricably linked. dH/dt is related to dE/dt by Z Characteristic Impedance of the medium. Remember that any signal travels at speed c for the medium. It cannot travel at any other speed, as defined by Mu and Epsilon. Changing Electric field cannot cause changing Magnetic field causing chaning E and so on. Think of a binary pulse on a USB cable how does it propagate from a laptop port to a printer?
Who discoverd the calculas first newton or libinez ?
In the Film, Shoreshank Redemption, the main character was proven innocent of the murder he was incarcerated for, but the Prison Governor refused to allow him release, a common tale but true we're told. The situation defined the meaning of the word "obtuse", in reference to the Governor's inaction, which sums up much of actual government inaction generally.
"Climate Change" is the obtuse face of Government indifference to take responsibility for actual Regulation of legal system practices.
Just sayin
My G knows exactly what he's talking about
Nice