Thanks for watching guys! Couple of typos: Note: Typo at 33:41, the neutron should have a proton number of 0 and at 24:00 rearranging the equation should be Wavelength = (hc)/energy Also if you are doing AQA, what option does your college do? Here is a playlist of all my revision videos: th-cam.com/play/PLSygKZqfTjPC3hJ7nRSnnXTw3tI_o67dR.html
@@zhelyo_physics Hi , im doing aqa with astrophysics as my option and was wondering if you do any videos on astrophysics as well as mechanical questions on tension problems? Thank you , your vids are so helpful !!
Well done for self studying and thanks for the comment! Self studying can't be easy. Drop me a comment if you need any help. I have a playlist across many topics here if it's of any use: th-cam.com/play/PLSygKZqfTjPC3hJ7nRSnnXTw3tI_o67dR.html
im self teaching alevel physics and ive been using this video as a katchup from what ive learned from the books. im wanting to go into engineering so ive been also doing some pure maths but its been reall hard.
I recommend the CGP textbook, if you check out my website you'll also find a tab with random book recommendations. Maximum wavelength depends on the context - generally maximum wavelength corresponds to minimum energy (E=hc/lambda) Hope this helps!
Anytime! I've actually got a video summarising the maths for A Level Physics here: th-cam.com/video/neBotgd2PKA/w-d-xo.htmlsi=TWW6LLssYgVqVo4O Hope it's useful!
i was struggling with physics till now tried all other channels but sir you have explained this topic really well that I can actually understand the topic finally. if you don't mind could you make more aqa specific videos on such topic because you have the best lectures.
wow thank you so much! This is so much appreciated! So actually there is a huge overlap between any exam boards. My revision videos here are applicable to all exam boards, at the end you will also find all the AQA specific options. Enjoy! th-cam.com/play/PLSygKZqfTjPC3hJ7nRSnnXTw3tI_o67dR.html
Dr. Roger Penrose has suggested instead of trying to create a particle called the "graviton" to explain gravity, why not try to describe subatomic particles in terms of spatial curvature, as in the twist in a piece of real thread. What if we add one extra spatial dimension to the "Twistor Theory" of Sir Roger Penrose? It can be "chiral" by having either Right-hand or Left-hand twist. It can be "Quantized", based on the number of twist cycles. If Physicists describe electrons as point particles with no volume, where is the mass of the particle? Can one extra spatial dimension produce a geometric explanation of the 1/2 spin of electrons? The following is an extension of the old Kaluza-Klein theory. Can a twisted 3D 4D soliton containing one extra spatial dimension help solve some of the current problems in Particle Physics? What do the Twistors of Roger Penrose and the Geometric Unity of Eric Weinstein and the exploration of one extra spatial dimension by Lisa Randall and the "Belt Trick" of Paul Dirac have in common? Is the following idea a “Quantized” model related to the “Vortex Theory” proposed by Maxwell and others during the 19th century? Is the best explanation of the current data a form of “Twistor Theory” first proposed by Dr. Roger Penrose during 1967? During recent years Dr. Peter Woit has explored Twistor Theory as a possible solution to help explain the current Standard Model. Has the concept of the “Aether” been resurrected from the dead and relabeled as the “Higgs Field”? In Spinors it takes two complete turns to get down the "rabbit hole" (Alpha Funnel 3D--->4D) to produce one twist cycle (1 Quantum unit). Can both Matter and Energy be described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature? (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Mass= 1/Length, with each twist cycle of the 4D Hypertube proportional to Planck’s Constant. In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) If quarks have not been isolated and gluons have not been isolated, how do we know they are not parts of the same thing? The tentacles of an octopus and the body of an octopus are parts of the same creature. Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. Are these the “Flux Tubes” being described by many Physicists today? When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. The "Color Force" is a consequence of the XYZ orientation entanglement of the twisted tubules. The two twisted tubule entanglement of Mesons is not stable and unwinds. It takes the entanglement of three twisted tubules to produce the stable proton. The term “entanglement” in this case is analogous to three twisted ropes being wrapped around each other in a way which causes all of the ropes to move if someone pulls one of the ropes. Does the phenomenon of “Asymptotic Freedom” provide evidence that this concept is the correct interpretation of the experimental data now available? Can the phenomenon of "Supercoiling" help explain the "Multiple Generations" of particles in the Standard Model? The conversion of twist to writhe cycles is well understood in the structure of DNA molecules. Can the conversion of twist to writhe cycles and vice-versa help explain "neutrino oscillations"? Within this model neutrinos are a small, twisted torus produced when a tube becomes overtwisted and breaks producing the small, closed loop of twisted tube (neutrino), and a twisted tube open on each end, which is shorter than the original. (Beta Decay) Within this subatomic model gravity is produced by a very small higher dimensional curvature imbalance within atoms, which causes all atoms to be attracted to all other atoms. This extremely weak attraction reveals the very small scale of the curvature imbalance. This produces the curvature of spacetime on a larger scale like the solar system which is required to counterbalance this small imbalance in the individual atoms.
What is the energy of the electron in hydrogen is it just potential energy + kinetic energy ? When it is further of the proton its kinetic energy is lower ?
The Schroedinger Equation Describes the total energy as the sum of the PE and KE. The further question is difficult as the position of the electron in reality is not very well defined. If you are studying the Bohr model of the atom, the lowest energy state is the closest one to the nucleus. As you go in higher energy states, the energy turns less negative and eventually reaching 0 when the electron escapes (assuming it is motionless then). Hope this helps! This basically deserves another video :)
@@zhelyo_physics ty ! so if i understand well in the Bohr model which is not really representative of the reality, the energy of an atom can be defined by PE + KE and it gets less negative further from the nucleus because PE is higher? And the sign comes from coulomb force ?
The sign if artificially added so that the PE = 0 at infinity. For instance as PE increases the negative number gets smaller smaller slowly approaching zero. E.g. -5 at the lowest state, -4,-3,-2,-1..... 0
07:45. I dont understand this part. Why is gravity not acting downwards? And why would it point towards the centre of mass, would gravity just completely cancel out if that were the case and hence not be acting on it at all?
this is their gravitational force due to the presence of mass, not the weight (we are ignoring the weight in this case), all masses would attract one another by Newton's Law of Gravitational attraction, F=GMm/r^2 Hope this helps!
When you introduce the Baryon number, you say that it is either 1 or 0, depending on whether a particles is a baryon or not. Later, in the quark table, you put fractional Baryon numbers in the table. Please explain.
excellent question. No, these are nuclear reactions between nuclei (usually at the energies involved, the electrons have been ionesed and we are dealing with just the nuclei). The overall charge of the nucleus is positive no matter what as it's always a mixture of protons and neutrons. Hope this helps!
excellent question! So the proton has never been seen to decay to a particle of a lower mass. Beta plus decay requires energy and cannot occur in isolated conditions. The proton has to be in the nucleus. Very interesting question!
for edexcel I'd recommend the video below and the following ones in the playlist: th-cam.com/video/8dfBUxRzWxU/w-d-xo.html Although all specs are pretty similar so a lot of this video will also be relevant. I recommend having the spec in hand and use it to tick things off : )
Thanks for watching guys! Couple of typos: Note: Typo at 33:41, the neutron should have a proton number of 0 and at 24:00 rearranging the equation should be Wavelength = (hc)/energy
Also if you are doing AQA, what option does your college do? Here is a playlist of all my revision videos: th-cam.com/play/PLSygKZqfTjPC3hJ7nRSnnXTw3tI_o67dR.html
I'm doing AQA with astrophysics, engineering and medical physics as the options we can pick. I'll be doing engineering
@@mikeywinstone8525 Perfect! I have already filmed the entire engineering option here: th-cam.com/video/Usf8_ggnHc0/w-d-xo.html
@@zhelyo_physics that's amazing. Thankyou for your contribution to help people like me with physics. I really appreciate it
My pleasure! Glad this is useful!
@@zhelyo_physics Hi , im doing aqa with astrophysics as my option and was wondering if you do any videos on astrophysics as well as mechanical questions on tension problems? Thank you , your vids are so helpful !!
There’s an error on the equation at 24:00, it should be the wavelength = hc/energy it was rearranged wrong just a heads up
Thanks! I've added those to the description of the video but I'll pin them in the top comment to make it more visible.
This is fantastic, thank you so much. I’m an adult self studying AQA A level physics
Well done for self studying and thanks for the comment! Self studying can't be easy. Drop me a comment if you need any help. I have a playlist across many topics here if it's of any use: th-cam.com/play/PLSygKZqfTjPC3hJ7nRSnnXTw3tI_o67dR.html
@@zhelyo_physics thank you! I will certainly be watching many more of your videos. Really appreciate the time you’ve put in here.
@TheUniverseEntertainer how's it going so far. I've just started self studying
@@Henry-xu5jgand me. Let’s connext
@@Henry-xu5jghow did it go
29:03 strong force's exchange particles are gluons and mesons, gravitational force affects all particles of mass**
Pions are also an exchange particle, I've seen both get used depending on the textbook.
im self teaching alevel physics and ive been using this video as a katchup from what ive learned from the books. im wanting to go into engineering so ive been also doing some pure maths but its been reall hard.
Amazing, you got this! Drop comments if there is anything that doesn't make sense! Good luck!
@@zhelyo_physics are there any books you recommend for studying physics also is there an equation for calculating the maximum wavelength
I recommend the CGP textbook, if you check out my website you'll also find a tab with random book recommendations. Maximum wavelength depends on the context - generally maximum wavelength corresponds to minimum energy (E=hc/lambda) Hope this helps!
@@zhelyo_physics thanks for replying. ive bought year 1 and 2 cgp, is there any math topics that are used very often in alevel physics
Anytime! I've actually got a video summarising the maths for A Level Physics here: th-cam.com/video/neBotgd2PKA/w-d-xo.htmlsi=TWW6LLssYgVqVo4O Hope it's useful!
i was struggling with physics till now tried all other channels but sir you have explained this topic really well that I can actually understand the topic finally. if you don't mind could you make more aqa specific videos on such topic because you have the best lectures.
wow thank you so much! This is so much appreciated!
So actually there is a huge overlap between any exam boards. My revision videos here are applicable to all exam boards, at the end you will also find all the AQA specific options. Enjoy! th-cam.com/play/PLSygKZqfTjPC3hJ7nRSnnXTw3tI_o67dR.html
At 33:41 should the neutron have a proton number of 0 instead of 1?
deliberate mistake of course! Congrats you passed the test! : ) Thanks for pointing it out, I'll add that to the description.
Amazing video! I appreciate the enthusiasm throughout!
Thank you so much for the comment!
Dr. Roger Penrose has suggested instead of trying to create a particle called the "graviton" to explain gravity, why not try to describe subatomic particles in terms of spatial curvature, as in the twist in a piece of real thread.
What if we add one extra spatial dimension to the "Twistor Theory" of Sir Roger Penrose? It can be "chiral" by having either Right-hand or Left-hand twist. It can be "Quantized", based on the number of twist cycles.
If Physicists describe electrons as point particles with no volume, where is the mass of the particle?
Can one extra spatial dimension produce a geometric explanation of the 1/2 spin of electrons? The following is an extension of the old Kaluza-Klein theory. Can a twisted 3D 4D soliton containing one extra spatial dimension help solve some of the current problems in Particle Physics?
What do the Twistors of Roger Penrose and the Geometric Unity of Eric Weinstein and the exploration of one extra spatial dimension by Lisa Randall and the "Belt Trick" of Paul Dirac have in common? Is the following idea a “Quantized” model related to the “Vortex Theory” proposed by Maxwell and others during the 19th century? Is the best explanation of the current data a form of “Twistor Theory” first proposed by Dr. Roger Penrose during 1967? During recent years Dr. Peter Woit has explored Twistor Theory as a possible solution to help explain the current Standard Model.
Has the concept of the “Aether” been resurrected from the dead and relabeled as the “Higgs Field”?
In Spinors it takes two complete turns to get down the "rabbit hole" (Alpha Funnel 3D--->4D) to produce one twist cycle (1 Quantum unit).
Can both Matter and Energy be described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature? (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Mass= 1/Length, with each twist cycle of the 4D Hypertube proportional to Planck’s Constant.
In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137.
1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface
137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted.
The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.)
If quarks have not been isolated and gluons have not been isolated, how do we know they are not parts of the same thing? The tentacles of an octopus and the body of an octopus are parts of the same creature.
Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. Are these the “Flux Tubes” being described by many Physicists today? When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. The "Color Force" is a consequence of the XYZ orientation entanglement of the twisted tubules. The two twisted tubule entanglement of Mesons is not stable and unwinds. It takes the entanglement of three twisted tubules to produce the stable proton. The term “entanglement” in this case is analogous to three twisted ropes being wrapped around each other in a way which causes all of the ropes to move if someone pulls one of the ropes. Does the phenomenon of “Asymptotic Freedom” provide evidence that this concept is the correct interpretation of the experimental data now available? Can the phenomenon of "Supercoiling" help explain the "Multiple Generations" of particles in the Standard Model? The conversion of twist to writhe cycles is well understood in the structure of DNA molecules. Can the conversion of twist to writhe cycles and vice-versa help explain "neutrino oscillations"? Within this model neutrinos are a small, twisted torus produced when a tube becomes overtwisted and breaks producing the small, closed loop of twisted tube (neutrino), and a twisted tube open on each end, which is shorter than the original. (Beta Decay)
Within this subatomic model gravity is produced by a very small higher dimensional curvature imbalance within atoms, which causes all atoms to be attracted to all other atoms. This extremely weak attraction reveals the very small scale of the curvature imbalance. This produces the curvature of spacetime on a larger scale like the solar system which is required to counterbalance this small imbalance in the individual atoms.
amazing lecture as always !!
Thank you so much for the comment!
Thank you so much! This is a great video.
Anytime! Thanks for the comment!
thankyou for the video sir it was great and you seem like a great guy
thanks a lot for the comment! Much appreciated!
22:27 why did you multiply the rest energy of the electron and positron by 10^6?
I'll have a look at the video when I'm at home but on quick inspection of your comment, likely there is a Mega prefix, which is 10^6. Hope this helps.
What is the energy of the electron in hydrogen is it just potential energy + kinetic energy ? When it is further of the proton its kinetic energy is lower ?
The Schroedinger Equation Describes the total energy as the sum of the PE and KE. The further question is difficult as the position of the electron in reality is not very well defined. If you are studying the Bohr model of the atom, the lowest energy state is the closest one to the nucleus. As you go in higher energy states, the energy turns less negative and eventually reaching 0 when the electron escapes (assuming it is motionless then). Hope this helps! This basically deserves another video :)
@@zhelyo_physics ty ! so if i understand well in the Bohr model which is not really representative of the reality, the energy of an atom can be defined by PE + KE and it gets less negative further from the nucleus because PE is higher? And the sign comes from coulomb force ?
The sign if artificially added so that the PE = 0 at infinity. For instance as PE increases the negative number gets smaller smaller slowly approaching zero. E.g. -5 at the lowest state, -4,-3,-2,-1..... 0
@@zhelyo_physics thank you :)
07:45. I dont understand this part. Why is gravity not acting downwards? And why would it point towards the centre of mass, would gravity just completely cancel out if that were the case and hence not be acting on it at all?
this is their gravitational force due to the presence of mass, not the weight (we are ignoring the weight in this case), all masses would attract one another by Newton's Law of Gravitational attraction, F=GMm/r^2 Hope this helps!
thank you such a nice recap for paper 1!!!
anytime! thanks a lot for the comment! : )
When you introduce the Baryon number, you say that it is either 1 or 0, depending on whether a particles is a baryon or not. Later, in the quark table, you put fractional Baryon numbers in the table. Please explain.
A good way to properly define it: Baryon number=1/3(number of quarks-number of antiquarks). Hope this helps!
100th well-deserved like 👍🏼
thanks a lot! Much appreciated!
23:24 ; you wrote 2 x E x Q = 2hf.
Why did you add Q into the equation; I thought that 2mc² = 2hf, where mc² is E.
Thank you
great question! on the left we have electrical energy which is voltage multiplied by charge, eV is a unit of energy. I hope this helps!
@@zhelyo_physics Also, 22:25 I keep getting 0.512 MeV for the electron when working it out, not 0.511, any idea what I may be doing wrong?
does beta decay create a ion? as the change in charge seems to be +1.
excellent question. No, these are nuclear reactions between nuclei (usually at the energies involved, the electrons have been ionesed and we are dealing with just the nuclei). The overall charge of the nucleus is positive no matter what as it's always a mixture of protons and neutrons. Hope this helps!
@@zhelyo_physics thank you! that helped a lot.
23:37 another typo bro - you have "λ = ...." but you inverted your numerator and denominator.
thanks a lot I'll add that to the description
If protons are considered the only stable baryon, how come they can undergo beta plus decay?
excellent question! So the proton has never been seen to decay to a particle of a lower mass. Beta plus decay requires energy and cannot occur in isolated conditions. The proton has to be in the nucleus. Very interesting question!
does this vid applies for edexcel?
Isnt the mass of proton is 1.67*10^-27?
for edexcel I'd recommend the video below and the following ones in the playlist:
th-cam.com/video/8dfBUxRzWxU/w-d-xo.html
Although all specs are pretty similar so a lot of this video will also be relevant. I recommend having the spec in hand and use it to tick things off : )
thank you! (aqa, turning points)
Anytime! thanks for the comment. I have a turning points video coming up too : )
Sir, Is this video good for learning or just revision?
Definitely both: )
@@zhelyo_physics thank you
Sir for AQA do we need to memorise the quark structures of xi, lambda, sigma particles etc.?
Hi those would typically be given or there would be a way to work them out via conservation laws.
@@zhelyo_physics THANK YOU SIR!, saved mi life :).
For beta decays can you use e instead of b for the beta particle?
for beta minus decay you can use e for the electron. Hope this helps!
As a CIE student can I follow this video ?
For CIE I’d follow this one: th-cam.com/video/8dfBUxRzWxU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=3k0LWnrQSDnS88-R Good luck in your preparation!
@zhelyo_physics Thanks Sir !!
Crazy, I did AQA physics a couple years ago and we didn't use feynman diagrams at all as far as I can remember, maybe I'm just forgetting it though
They have definitely been on the AQA spec but most courses teach them right at the start so probably easy to forget.
@@zhelyo_physics I remember doing particle physics, but I guess I could have forgotten the diagrams.
Sir what's the difference between beta plus decay and proton decay
the differance is that, beta plus decay converts neutron into a proton and beta plus decay converts the proton into a neutron
the muon is also a lepton
Yep!
whats the rest energy of a neutrino and an anti neutrino ?
tiny! < 0.120 eV according to wikipedia which equates to less than 10^(-37) kg
goat
thank you!