*I've remade this video* and I've given the topic the time it deserves: th-cam.com/video/Ii7rgIQawko/w-d-xo.html (How Special Relativity Fixed Electromagnetism)
Electricity and magnetism are the two aspects of a single phenomenon, electromagnetism. Electricity does not cause magnetism and magnetism does not cause electricity, but rather special relativity joins them together, just as it joins space and time into spacetime.
Absolutely correct. While special relativity forced us to change much of our views of physics, Maxwell's equations needed no change whatsoever. They were already relativisticly correct. What I tell my students is that magnetism is merely the relativistic correction of the electric force.
As a plasma physicist I was ready to rage on here, but as it turns out you're dead on the money - electric and magnetic forces are coupled. Hence what appears to be an electric force in one frame of reference may manifest as a magnetic force in another frame of reference.
as you are a plasma physicist just sharing what am experiencing today this november 18th 2019 this speed hum sound frequency vibration fields which am experiencing started 19 years earlier has reached a level of waves and force and force of acceleration waves (just posting the level this has reached for information and knowledge) (posted this 6 days earlier on LinkedIn)
@KLJF dielectric expresses itself as force thru pressure mediation. The energy was always there but it is 2 dimensional (imperceptible) that pours out tangible 3 dimensional energy, matter, force, etc. Very similar to sound, or light. Do you think that there is a solid stick of light in flashlight. No; a circuit & battery trigger a specific wavelength frequency that is light. There is other than the physical.
This channel takes the difficult and makes it "fun and easy' to understand. Nick is a genius and makes science easier to understand. Don't get me wrong, I only understand a portion of this stuff, but it's a lot more than I get from audiobooks on the same subject. He takes what I thought I knew and presents it in such a way where the loopholes of misunderstanding are plugged up. I'm glad there is so much I don't know, now I have a reason to learn it in a new light. Nick makes it fun. He's funny, entertaining, and an excellent professor. I must assume he has a Phd in physics. Yes? No?
I still don't really get magnetism. Everywhere I look for an explanation seems to define magnetism in terms of itself. And why do they say that electric and magnetic waves are perpendicular to each other if they're actually one in the same? I'm sorry for not getting this well, but I have such a hard time visualizing what's responsible for what, and how.
Working with and thinking about a "magnetic field" is just easier than reality. We do the same thing with the Coriolis effect and the Centrifugal force. Neither of those things are real, but they're easier to work with. Reality can be down-right impossible to deal with sometimes. When it comes to light waves (electric and magnetic waves), those are waves in the values of the "fields" ...and "fields" are /completely/ made up, so don't try to read into that too much. A deep understanding of light requires quantum physics, but a deep understanding usually unnecessary to make predictions about what light will do... so we use forces and fields instead because they're easier.
When I sit on a train ny speed relative to the train is 0, but you at the station see me moving fast. Using this argument speed does not exists as it is zero relative to the train.
The main problem is, that most of you confuse static fields with electromagnetic induction. Electromagnet is NOT a pernament magnet - and they have slightly different properties. In the case of static fields, magnetic and electric forces are NOT just different aspects of a single force - they are 2 completely different forces, produced in different ways and affecting different materials. If you don't believe me, then check, if a compass needle will be affected by static electric charge - I've checked it by myself and it didn't. But static charge will affect a needle, which is made of tin foil (which won't be affected by magnetic fields). Both electrostatic and magnetostatic fields have such properties, as dimensional size and magnitude, so both fields are physically real. Magnetic domains can be observed under microscope, while electrons have mass - both are absolutely objective...
as a chemist working on molecular magnets, i can assure you no one really "gets" magnetism at the fundamental level. no theory actually explains the fundamental root of magnetism, all of quantum mechanics and quantum field theory is pure mathematics and some conventions. Like the direction of magnetic moment, or angular momentum, totally arbitrarily chosen. Spin itself is also not fundamentally known, all we know is that electrons carry instrinsic angular momentum, how is this actually happening? No one knows. Some cannot be known.
I totally love how -- whether it was deliberately or inadvertently -- you managed to insert the Wilhelm Scream (TWICE -- 0:30 & 3:00)!! You're one of my absolute favorites!
Quantum field theorist here. Here's a pretty fun fact: if you try to write down a sensible quantum theory that conserves electric charge and works with special relativity, you automatically recover all of the equations for electromagnetism! You don't have to mention electrons or Faraday's Law or anything, but the Maxwell's equations still magically pop out! Thought I'd share that.
I never thought of the impact of length contraction on the observation of charge neutrality of a live wire. Interestingly, the length contraction argument applies in the wire rest frame as well. It must be that the electrons in the current naturally space space themselves out in a way that exactly compensates for the length contraction an observer in the wire's rest frame would measure in order to preserve charge neutrality in the wire rest frame. Thus, only in the rest frame of the wire (or in an inertial frame moving perpendicularly to the wire) does the wire appear to be charge neutral. In any other inertial frame, the length contractions of the wire and the electron current would be different. This would result in observations of non-neutral linear charge densities... Cool stuff! Thanks for sharing!
Great video! Didn't know about special relativity until now but I don't think I am at that level of physics so this is a good reference video for my future physics studies. Keep rolling!
my science class watched one of your videos a few weeks ago. (sorry, I kind of forgot which video. bad memory), and it made me decide to look you up. I kept on forgetting, then today it just popped up in my head. when I looked you up on TH-cam, I was surprised by how many subscribers you have. I think you deserve more, because your videos are interesting. anyway, sorry for randomly commenting about this, I'm kind of insane, so I felt I had to.
+The Science Asylum no problem! they're really interesting. I would have never even thought that magnetic force doesn't exist, but you made it clear and had evidence.
Awesome video, as always your videos are. I still don't get how you are so little popular on youtube, i think your standard of videomaking should get at least 100 times the subscribers you have. Anyway, i'd like if you could clarify why there's no electric force in the point of view of the wire-rest observer. I mean, the observer sees the electron density higher than the proton one, therefore "sees" electric field lines that should attract the moving proton, if F = q(E + v x B) (vectors implied) holds in the relativistic frame.
+giro9414 Technically, electrons are always moving (very fast) it's just a matter of how much. It's easier to think of them as having a normal charge density when looking from the wire's point of view and that they're stretched out from the proton's point of view (because they're moving *less*). From the proton's point of view, they actually help the wire's nuclei push away the proton.
I love this fact. "Electromagnets only work because of Special Relativity" is something I discovered a couple of years back (can't remember where, it may have been Veritasium?) and it's my favourite thing to blow people's minds with :)
Quantum field theorist here. Here's a pretty fun fact: if you try to write down a sensible quantum theory that conserves electric charge and works with special relativity, you automatically recover all of the equations for electromagnetism! You don't have to mention electrons or Faraday's Law or anything, but the Maxwell's equations still magically pop out! Thought I'd share that.
Still can't find a straight answer for example of how a N pole repels, through empty space, another N pole. Does it bend space like gravity? How can it just push the like pole away?
As a carpenter who is trying to learn about electronics and forces, I have to say, I think that you nailed it. We need these types of videos for everyone to think on. Thanks buddy....
I like your approach to the unification of forces... then defining forces... then defining the entities that define forces (and the forces we are based upon, where we can call something 'alive' or 'evolving' in a defined forward time).
The length contraction for electrons is negligible because of their shorter lengths so the change in length is not so prominent however in case of protons the same is not true hence wire becomes positively charged.
Oh for Pete's sakes. I Can't believe it has taken so many years for someone to finally explain how electromagnetism works. I've been confused for so long. This video has made a sub out of me.
And could you give me the explanation (why is the wire trully neutral and the electrons not denser thanks to length contraction) or point me somewhere where I can get more info? Thx
[Property 1] Charge is conserved (doesn't change in a closed system). [Property 2] Charge is invariant (the same in all frames of reference). Let's say our system is a wire and a battery. At first, they're not connected, so no current is flowing. At this time, both the wire and the battery are neutral (no net charge). After we connect the wire to the battery, the current begins to flow quickly reaching a steady drift speed. The wire-battery system was neutral before and, by conservation of charge, must be neutral after. Even though the electrons are now moving, they will redistribute themselves to maintain zero net charge. If we shift to the reference frame where the electrons are sitting still and the nuclei are moving, a similar thing happens. Originally, both look like they're moving, so they're both Lorentz contracted (and still no net charge because charge is invariant). When you connect the battery, the electrons are brought to rest creating a charge density in that section of wire. That's a problem since charge is conserved. The net charge for the whole circuit must remain zero, so the other side of the circuit must have the opposite charge density to balance it out. The reason the diagram is misleading when you ask question like this is because the diagram doesn't show the entire system. That little section of wire has a charge density, but the entire circuit's charge density is not uniform.
Thx. I have already realized the other half - if electrons are stationary in the "upper" wire, they have to move at almost the double speed of the protons/atoms int he "lower" wire. That makes negative charge there, because those electrons in "lower" wire are shrinked (closer than protons/atoms are). I was wondering about the wire's frame. I will try to reword your explanation: "The wire-battery system was neutral before and, by conservation of charge, must be neutral after." So, electrons cannot pop into existence from nowhere, so they will maintain their distance even if accelerated by the battery. The battery creates a pressure in one direction, like a water pump. Some "energy" of that pump have to fight the length contraction produced by relativistic effect - can we say that? It produces "lower pressure", but that gets equalized eventually (making the wire neutral again, same "pressure" everywhere). P.S.: Lower pressure on one side of the battery and higher pressure on the other side. That travels through the wire to eventually cancel out.... correct?
3:16 Tensors are love. But I can see why Maxwell used quaternions originally. The algebra is just so natural to emag. But using Geometric algebra is when it really turns pretty.
In the Centrifugal vs Centripetal Force video, you said that from one reference frame it's centripetal and from another it's centrifugal. In this video, you said from one reference frame it's an electric force and from another it's a magnetic force. It's always one or the other; never neither. Yet we treat the combined EM force as a real force but we don't combine the centripetal force with the centrifugal force, like a CC force, and call it real. We regard both centripetal and centrifugal forces as fictitious. Why the difference when the EM force and the "CC force" seem so analogous?
_"In the Centrifugal vs Centripetal Force video, you said that from one reference frame it's centripetal and from another it's centrifugal."_ Incorrect. In those situations, there is always a centripetal force. It's the centrifugal force that sometimes exists and sometimes doesn't.
The Science Asylum Wait, sorry, if the centripetal force is there in both frames, then why don’t we consider it a fundamental force with its own field equations? Or do we?
"Centripetal Force" is just the name we give to whatever the net force is pointed toward the center. Maybe it's gravity, or a tension, or just a part of the tension, or a normal force plus a friction (like for banked circular ramps). It's not it's own force. It's just a category.
Nice! I was actually musing recently if relativistic principles might play a role in elastic collisions. Einstein says that the stuff that makes things hard to move and the stuff that makes things fall are the same thing and he introduces spacetime curvature to make this idea mathematically viable. Thing is: one can read this identity in reverse. What if the reason why stuff is hard to move is simply spacetime curvature? What I did arrive at is that you can explain an elastic collision between a heavy and a light ball by time moving slower for the heavy ball according to the mass ratio. However, there are a bunch of problems. For instance, if you attach clocks to the heavy or the light object, they will move at about the same pace (depending on precision of measurement). Heck, this „clock ticking slowly“ thing appears to only explain something when there’s a collision and we wanna know why the heavy object moves slower! I‘m quite mystified by this actually the longer I think about it.
Hey i got a doubt.You made me clear that special theory of relativity creates magnetic force in current carrying wire.But what about permanent magnets.?where do they get magnetic force from..?That little part in beginning of video is not sufficient explaination for me.Can anyone help.?
Yes you are right, spontaneous magnetism in metals wasn't addressed. It comes from something completely different and I do feel like the video is misleading in this sense.
This is completely wrong. This implies that the electric field converts into a magnetic field just by changing the reference frame , and this is wrong. Both fields exist simultaneously in both frames, only one is stronger than the other depending on the reference frame. One field can have an intensity of 0 in some of the reference frames, but it still exists. It is not that when you look at a electric field in another reference frame it looks like magnetic field!
Nick why permanent magnet which is electrically neutral gets attracted to electromagnet (in which magnetism is caused by length contraction thereby altering charge density)
Hmm... that's interesting! So, a beam of electrons moving in a vacuum won't produce a magnetic field, and so that would mean that electrical current is not just defined as moving charges but relative motion between charges! If the protons in the wire are hypothetically turned into anti-protons, the magnetic field would be reversed. Thanks, Nick!
That's not exactly what I said. One charge moving in a vacuum is not an electric current... but a bunch of them in a stream do. It's just that ALL motion is relative to SOMETHING. If you had an empty universe with just a stream of electrons in it, saying "they're moving" would have no meaning. For "motion" to have meaning, there must be something else around... and for electric current, that's usually positive nuclei.
So what you mean is that it actually should be only "electric force", not "magnetic force" as electric charges and movement are fundamental to it's existence and the magnetic force is only a point of view of the electric force.
I'm going for a yes on this one. My reckoning is that if we could stop everything from moving everywhere and we had a stationary electric charge, then it would have a stationary electric field surrounding it? There would be nothing magnetic going on because nothing is moving? As an analogy to this I say that I can point my finger into the air and hold it there and people can see my stationary finger pointing ; If I make a rotation motion with my finger then I immediately can define clockwise to an observer and similarly I must thereby define anticlockwise too this is a kin to there being no such thing as a magnetic monopole. I'm trying to avoid relativity if I can too as I don't think it should be needed to resolve any of this?
So, magnetic force isn't a thing and electric force isn't a thing but electromagnetic force is a thing because when you combine them then one form or the other shows up in all frames. Yes, No, Maybe?
sir in the first scenario the electrons are moving, and according to the special theory of relativity there is a chance for the electrons flow also to shrink making the wire negatively charged, and therefore, attracting the proton
You totally got me! I was thinking, since I’m all about perspectives, that you had found a new way of looking at things. Little did I know you were speaking about semantics! Love it! Most people don’t differentiate between, or don’t understand there is a difference in term, between magnetic and electromagnetic force, but you described it succinctly! Great video!
"difference between magnetic and electromagnetic force".... these are one in the same, you cant have moving charges or electricity without magnetism, they go together, thus the term electromagnetism. See how both are combined into one word/thing? Thats for a reason, like space-time as being one entity. Research underlying subjects before you blindly fall into flawed ideas as cold facts. Meant as advice not an insult im just trying to help bro
@@ckimsey77 It’s similar to calling all small space objects ‘debris’. While the field differentiates between ‘debris’ and ‘micro meteorites’. They are both technically “debris”, but they are separated by term so there’s no confusion. Like the James Webb telescope: They have said it will definitely be hit with “debris” (an article said this), it was misleading because there isn’t any man made debris at the L2 point. They were referring to the micrometeorites that would hit it.
From my understanding, an electron and proton fired from parallel cannons will still converge, but at a slower rate compared to not being fired. That's because the magnetic field interaction on the moving pair pushes them apart, but it's not as strong as the electric field causing them to converge. Therefore, they still converge, but more slowly. Where relativity come in is at the reference point of the electron/proton, since at their reference they aren't moving and will converge at a normal speed. How can they be converging slowly from our reference point, yet normally from theirs? The answer is that for the moving pair, time slows down and they appear to converge at a slower rate from our reference point.
Okay... so magnetic forces aren't real... what about magnetic fields?? I tried watching the other video that is linked at around 1:39 but I just don't get it. There are magnetic fields? How do they work then? What do they even do?! :p
Fields (like magnetic fields) aren't a real thing. They're just a thing we use on paper to make calculations easier to understand. You can make the same predictions with real things like energy and what we call "potential," but the calculations are harder to do.
Caledelith Well, the point I was trying to make in the video was that electric force and magnetic force don't exist as separate things. There's just an electromagnetic force... and that's real :-)
I don't want to scare you but what if fields were real? Think about it: when you read my words, you catch the idea I want to express to you. Then this idea is an information I transfered to you. Is there something that can be identified as an idea? Not the letters, not the screen, something that *is* the idea? No, nothing. Does the idea exists? Of course it is, but what it is, we don't know. What about fields? Couldn't they be informations, ideas, too? As you see, information doesn't need any physical things to be. But it needs something to catch it and to make it become real (like our brain)...And it needs something to create it at first. Now, you have these questions: who create these informations which create our universe? where are these informations? Are they located? And how does something (what?) access it? Abstraction is a beautiful tool, but it can lose you because nothing is real in an abstract world. Is our whole universe just an abstraction? So many questions... but interesting ones, isn't it? (Please excuse my english)
A force is not real, because it does not exist in each reference frame? Only because somebody once created a label "fictional" to convey a concept does not imply that these forces do not exist. The two magnets will move toward each other until they will eventually connect, independent of your chosen frame of reference. Hence either one will see an acceleration (actually both, if you aren't choosing a reference frame that is connected to one magnet, which is not an inertial system). And acceleration equals a force. (A real force, if your frame of reference is an inertial system, a fictional otherwise - you are mixing up fictional and inertial forces) You are demonstrating the equally of electrical and magnetic forces, which will be 'converted' into each other, depending on your frame of reference. I think this relationship is far more magical than the message 'everybody has lied to you - it's not real!' The first message expresses what physics is about. A fascination of the world and an urge for a deeper understanding, what you might not know now. Your massage is implying a general distrust to presumptuous state, that you tell a secret truth. I know, it's only a clickbait, but it is doing more harm to science communication than educate people. This distrust has evolved to a point where people believe the earth is flat, just because education and scientists tell you otherwise.
thanks. very useful & informative. could you please tell me why does a piece of gold under ground create magnetic field around itself? as we know gold is diamagnetic
2:14 From the proton's perspective, the wire does move away because the electrons are a little spread out and the protons are a little closer due to special relativity. The wire is now positively charged and it goes away because of the positively charged wire.
You are right! In a freely falling reference frame there is no gravity! Unfortunately, there is this problem with solid state physics at the bottom of the cliff...
I had tried to read Purcell Chapter 5 about this but until the animation of the protons inertial reference frame showing the conductor protons moving and thus length contracting increasing their perceived net charge this was still unclear to me! Thank you very much this is a superb animation. I finally feel like I understand where magnetism comes from, and why the tensor unification is the more fundamental and therefore electromagnetism is the only real force you observe.
This theory was confirmed by my WalMart Sales Associate Professional when I tried to return some VeryExtraGood brand Chinese fridge magnets that fell off. He explained they were fine but my kitchen was using an incorrect frame of reference. I think that violates slightly their "absolutely no questions asked" returns policy.
What is magnetic force ? It is force manifested 1 - between 2 permanent magnets or 2 - between one permanent magnet and a wire crossed by electric current or 3 - between 2 wire crossed by electric current. So, how can you say it is not exist ? Be careful, you have a misconception here.
@@ScienceAsylum Thanks for the reply! Also, I am curious to hear your opinion on this video about special relativity: th-cam.com/video/-NN_m2yKAAk/w-d-xo.html It talks about time dilation and length contraction, but also about distance dilation and duration contraction. What are your thoughts on these concepts?
"A moving electric charge create magnetism" - and the moving magnetic poles create electricity. The upper single moving proton create magnetism, and the moving wire protons create magnetism. The moving wire electrons is Lorentz-shortness, and is in a charge creating magnetism. And motion can't be relative (or absolute)... hm.
oh and by the way really cool magnetic fact materials such as Carbon graphite are diamagnets which means a Normal magnet will repel it whether u use the north side or the south side
so if I understand it correctly, magnetic force is only an illusion if the eletric force it not and vice versa which basically means electromagnetic force is not an illusion and calling it "magnetic force" is just a different way of looking at it
Hello ! The only thing I agree with in this show is that the claim that magnetic force does NOT exist - is brave! When you already want to explain the existence or non-existence of any force, it would be a good idea to first explain to us what force is in its essence - in the elemental physical sense! Science, whatever it is and whatever you call it, has no idea - a fundamental explanation - of many physical phenomena, such as: time, matter, gravity, force, ... How all these phenomena become, what is their beginning ... ? What creates these phenomena ...? Today we only know the relations between these phenomena - most often we express them by mathematical formulations ... It should not be confused that a magnetic force on Earth exists, that it is everywhere present for the simple reason that our planet Earth is magnetically polarized. Only the magnetic force (in the magnetic field) does not register our imperfect senses directly, but only if we have a compass at hand ... Of course, there is now the question of the strength of that force. Let's go back to electricity and its "connection" to magnetism ... Just a few facts to think about: - electrons, as carriers of negative charge, move at light velocity around the nucleus of atoms, in closed trajectories - according to the law of physics, "charge flow" creates its own magnetic field; this means that there is a magnetic field in the atom! (where there is a magnetic field, there is a magnetic force ...) - just as light has a dual nature (in certain circumstances it acts as a wave and in some as a particle), similarly we can say about electricity and magnetism - these are just different manifestations of the same phenomenon .... - Joe McD. "says: ... magnetism is merely the relativistic correction of the electric force." I don't think there is any relativism. And I'd rather use a manifestation (occurrence) instead of "correction" ... You see, in the nature (among others) the dominant law is law of balance - harmony. And the law of equilibrium is most easily established if there are only two factors in a process. This is why the binary matrix is dominant in the nature ... This opens up a broader topic and that's where I would end my consideration ... Your contribution is provocative, not just with a "bold statement" ... You provoked my comment! Bye !
Hey guys. I could use your help. If I understand it correctly, the way this works, is that the moving electrons create an electromagnetic wave, meaning light, as a force carrying Particle/Wave. This propagates through Space/Time until it reaches another Particle it can interact with. There it interacts and “pushes” it in a new direction. Is this correct? Is this what an electromagnetic field does/is?
Man, I really wish there was an official set of rules for physics. If only there was a way to unify all perspectives...but each person can witness the same thing a totally different way. Length contraction is like an odd end
@@ScienceAsylum THANKS!!! Please keep posting these videos. As a lover of science, I enjoy them. But I have read quite a few others' comments that imply that science isn't necessarily their cup of tea, but none-the-less they are craving your videos for the knowledge & understanding! So thanks again, & PLEASE keep posting them!!! 🤓
Particle accelerators smash protons together. The faster they make those protons go before they hit each other, the more energy they have. With more energy available, higher energy particles can be made (most of which are combinations of unstable quarks, so they don't last very long).
I have a serious question. Do the unseen forces of gyroscopes and indeed any spinning object differ from the forces of magnetism. and can magnetism be explained in terms of gyroscopic procession?
@@ScienceAsylum by "charged" do you mean aligned at the molecular level? if every iron atom has a direction of magnetism due to the direction of spin of un paired electrons, the key word there is spin. a spin that would result a gyroscopic force perhaps?
I thought electrons don't move, rather, they basically push each other like a domino, and that's how charge moves. Just like how sound is a wave travels through air, an electric charge is a wave that travels through electrons
Whatever may be the type of force, effect is to accelerate mass. For any accelerated mass , we can find a reference frame , where acceleration is zero, thus zero force. Does it mean that all forces are not real ?
*I've remade this video* and I've given the topic the time it deserves: th-cam.com/video/Ii7rgIQawko/w-d-xo.html (How Special Relativity Fixed Electromagnetism)
"given the topic the time it deserves"?
Maybe one shouldn't make
@@smort123 Agreed. That's a lesson I had to learn the hard way.
When the charge is stationery
Current is moving in wire apply density contraction to electrons
Then it should attract it
:)
Electricity and magnetism are the two aspects of a single phenomenon, electromagnetism. Electricity does not cause magnetism and magnetism does not cause electricity, but rather special relativity joins them together, just as it joins space and time into spacetime.
Actually there is a barber shop in Austin called Shear Madness.
I found one in Michigan too. Apparently, it’s a very common business name 🤷♂️
Barber shop for sheep.
@@ScienceAsylum Sheariously?
my favorite are hair salons named Curl Up and Dye
@@marcusanderson9042 madlessly?
Absolutely correct. While special relativity forced us to change much of our views of physics, Maxwell's equations needed no change whatsoever. They were already relativisticly correct. What I tell my students is that magnetism is merely the relativistic correction of the electric force.
Now I understand why Maxwell's equations are in contradiction with Newton's physic.
You're a teacher and you spelled relativistically incorrectly?
@@alext9067Guilty as charged. My only defense is that the extra syllable is rarely pronounced even by native speakers.
How did Maxwell know about relativity before 1900?
@@99bits46 He didn't! But he realised electric and magnetic forces were manifestations of the same phenomenon.
As a plasma physicist I was ready to rage on here, but as it turns out you're dead on the money - electric and magnetic forces are coupled. Hence what appears to be an electric force in one frame of reference may manifest as a magnetic force in another frame of reference.
HAHA yeah, the title is definitely click-bait.
as you are a plasma physicist just sharing what am experiencing
today this november 18th 2019 this speed hum sound frequency vibration fields which am experiencing started 19 years earlier has reached a level of waves and force and force of acceleration waves
(just posting the level this has reached for information and knowledge)
(posted this 6 days earlier on LinkedIn)
Bwahahaha I crack myself up man wow
@KLJF dielectric expresses itself as force thru pressure mediation. The energy was always there but it is 2 dimensional (imperceptible) that pours out tangible 3 dimensional energy, matter, force, etc. Very similar to sound, or light. Do you think that there is a solid stick of light in flashlight. No; a circuit & battery trigger a specific wavelength frequency that is light. There is other than the physical.
we got a clown over here ☝️
This channel takes the difficult and makes it "fun and easy' to understand. Nick is a genius and makes science easier to understand. Don't get me wrong, I only understand a portion of this stuff, but it's a lot more than I get from audiobooks on the same subject. He takes what I thought I knew and presents it in such a way where the loopholes of misunderstanding are plugged up. I'm glad there is so much I don't know, now I have a reason to learn it in a new light. Nick makes it fun. He's funny, entertaining, and an excellent professor. I must assume he has a Phd in physics. Yes? No?
I still don't really get magnetism. Everywhere I look for an explanation seems to define magnetism in terms of itself. And why do they say that electric and magnetic waves are perpendicular to each other if they're actually one in the same? I'm sorry for not getting this well, but I have such a hard time visualizing what's responsible for what, and how.
Working with and thinking about a "magnetic field" is just easier than reality. We do the same thing with the Coriolis effect and the Centrifugal force. Neither of those things are real, but they're easier to work with. Reality can be down-right impossible to deal with sometimes. When it comes to light waves (electric and magnetic waves), those are waves in the values of the "fields" ...and "fields" are /completely/ made up, so don't try to read into that too much. A deep understanding of light requires quantum physics, but a deep understanding usually unnecessary to make predictions about what light will do... so we use forces and fields instead because they're easier.
When I sit on a train ny speed relative to the train is 0, but you at the station see me moving fast. Using this argument speed does not exists as it is zero relative to the train.
He uses the same example to show that kinetic energy does not exist in all frames in another video. Anyway, speed is not a force.
The main problem is, that most of you confuse static fields with electromagnetic induction. Electromagnet is NOT a pernament magnet - and they have slightly different properties. In the case of static fields, magnetic and electric forces are NOT just different aspects of a single force - they are 2 completely different forces, produced in different ways and affecting different materials. If you don't believe me, then check, if a compass needle will be affected by static electric charge - I've checked it by myself and it didn't. But static charge will affect a needle, which is made of tin foil (which won't be affected by magnetic fields).
Both electrostatic and magnetostatic fields have such properties, as dimensional size and magnitude, so both fields are physically real. Magnetic domains can be observed under microscope, while electrons have mass - both are absolutely objective...
as a chemist working on molecular magnets, i can assure you no one really "gets" magnetism at the fundamental level.
no theory actually explains the fundamental root of magnetism, all of quantum mechanics and quantum field theory is pure mathematics and some conventions. Like the direction of magnetic moment, or angular momentum, totally arbitrarily chosen.
Spin itself is also not fundamentally known, all we know is that electrons carry instrinsic angular momentum, how is this actually happening? No one knows.
Some cannot be known.
I totally love how -- whether it was deliberately or inadvertently -- you managed to insert the Wilhelm Scream (TWICE -- 0:30 & 3:00)!!
You're one of my absolute favorites!
A part of me misses this time in my YT history. I was able to just mess around and let loose.
I've been searching for a video like this for a couple years now. You nailed it! Thanks for presenting it in such an accessible format.
Glad you liked it!
Wow, I’m both confused and enlightened simultaneously. My brain hurts but I like it.
Man, you can take any subject on the planet and make it interesting. That's a gift.
Quantum field theorist here. Here's a pretty fun fact: if you try to write down a sensible quantum theory that conserves electric charge and works with special relativity, you automatically recover all of the equations for electromagnetism! You don't have to mention electrons or Faraday's Law or anything, but the Maxwell's equations still magically pop out! Thought I'd share that.
Accurate.
This might be the first channel I support via patreon just because the content is so good and yet the subsciber count seems low.
I never thought of the impact of length contraction on the observation of charge neutrality of a live wire. Interestingly, the length contraction argument applies in the wire rest frame as well. It must be that the electrons in the current naturally space space themselves out in a way that exactly compensates for the length contraction an observer in the wire's rest frame would measure in order to preserve charge neutrality in the wire rest frame. Thus, only in the rest frame of the wire (or in an inertial frame moving perpendicularly to the wire) does the wire appear to be charge neutral. In any other inertial frame, the length contractions of the wire and the electron current would be different. This would result in observations of non-neutral linear charge densities... Cool stuff! Thanks for sharing!
"it's okay to be a little crazy"
I liked that one
This channel ought to have millions of views!
+Biswanath Dutta
Thanks!
The electrons, in addition, decontract in the new dame of reference ! Brilliant and spot on explanation, congratulations
Frame * not dame
Great video! Didn't know about special relativity until now but I don't think I am at that level of physics so this is a good reference video for my future physics studies. Keep rolling!
I recently remade this video. You should show that one instead: th-cam.com/video/Ii7rgIQawko/w-d-xo.html
0:29 you're right. I'm gonna open up a hair salon and call it "AAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!"
This channel is gold. Keep it up.
Thanks!
This channel makes science great again.
Nice one!
my science class watched one of your videos a few weeks ago. (sorry, I kind of forgot which video. bad memory), and it made me decide to look you up. I kept on forgetting, then today it just popped up in my head. when I looked you up on TH-cam, I was surprised by how many subscribers you have. I think you deserve more, because your videos are interesting. anyway, sorry for randomly commenting about this, I'm kind of insane, so I felt I had to.
+Chandler Spackman
I'm glad you found the channel again :-) Welcome!
+The Science Asylum no problem! they're really interesting. I would have never even thought that magnetic force doesn't exist, but you made it clear and had evidence.
This channel is pure gold.
Maybe pletinum
@@3darkmount953 or even sepphire, or diemond!
Awesome video, as always your videos are. I still don't get how you are so little popular on youtube, i think your standard of videomaking should get at least 100 times the subscribers you have.
Anyway, i'd like if you could clarify why there's no electric force in the point of view of the wire-rest observer. I mean, the observer sees the electron density higher than the proton one, therefore "sees" electric field lines that should attract the moving proton, if F = q(E + v x B) (vectors implied) holds in the relativistic frame.
+giro9414
Technically, electrons are always moving (very fast) it's just a matter of how much. It's easier to think of them as having a normal charge density when looking from the wire's point of view and that they're stretched out from the proton's point of view (because they're moving *less*). From the proton's point of view, they actually help the wire's nuclei push away the proton.
I love this fact. "Electromagnets only work because of Special Relativity" is something I discovered a couple of years back (can't remember where, it may have been Veritasium?) and it's my favourite thing to blow people's minds with :)
Yes, Veritasium did a collaboration with MinutePhysics on it.
Quantum field theorist here. Here's a pretty fun fact: if you try to write down a sensible quantum theory that conserves electric charge and works with special relativity, you automatically recover all of the equations for electromagnetism! You don't have to mention electrons or Faraday's Law or anything, but the Maxwell's equations still magically pop out! Thought I'd share that.
Still can't find a straight answer for example of how a N pole repels, through empty space, another N pole. Does it bend space like gravity? How can it just push the like pole away?
This video might help:
*What the HECK are Magnets?* th-cam.com/video/XczMRsiq9mk/w-d-xo.html
As a carpenter who is trying to learn about electronics and forces, I have to say, I think that you nailed it. We need these types of videos for everyone to think on. Thanks buddy....
When i came in this video i thought this guy was gonna be all kinda crazy. But when he explained himself i knew where he was coming from, nice vid!
I like your approach to the unification of forces... then defining forces... then defining the entities that define forces (and the forces we are based upon, where we can call something 'alive' or 'evolving' in a defined forward time).
Excellent explanation - short but very slick.
you're insane. this is madness..MADNESS. *starts to laugh hysterically*
This is the best science channel of all time, hands down. Discovery's got nothin' on you.
Nice job on explaining about electromagnetism Nick.You deserve more recognition. Keep up the good work:-)
+Moses Thevaraj
Thanks!
Hey Nick,
Now I understand why Conductors behave like magnets but I'm not sure how changing magnetic field induces current in conductor
If the charge is stationary then electrons are moving with respect to the charge.
Why don't it attracts or repells the stationary charge ?
Same question here! :/
Do you have an answer?
The length contraction for electrons is negligible because of their shorter lengths so the change in length is not so prominent however in case of protons the same is not true hence wire becomes positively charged.
How could I live 3 years without your videos! Love from Portugal.
Keep going! You're top of tops. I'm a physics teacher.
Thanks!
Oh for Pete's sakes. I Can't believe it has taken so many years for someone to finally explain how electromagnetism works. I've been confused for so long. This video has made a sub out of me.
Welcome!
And Richard Feynman explained it this way (in the Feynman Lectures) long before Veritasium :-)
And could you give me the explanation (why is the wire trully neutral and the electrons not denser thanks to length contraction) or point me somewhere where I can get more info? Thx
[Property 1] Charge is conserved (doesn't change in a closed system).
[Property 2] Charge is invariant (the same in all frames of reference).
Let's say our system is a wire and a battery. At first, they're not connected, so no current is flowing. At this time, both the wire and the battery are neutral (no net charge). After we connect the wire to the battery, the current begins to flow quickly reaching a steady drift speed. The wire-battery system was neutral before and, by conservation of charge, must be neutral after. Even though the electrons are now moving, they will redistribute themselves to maintain zero net charge.
If we shift to the reference frame where the electrons are sitting still and the nuclei are moving, a similar thing happens. Originally, both look like they're moving, so they're both Lorentz contracted (and still no net charge because charge is invariant). When you connect the battery, the electrons are brought to rest creating a charge density in that section of wire. That's a problem since charge is conserved. The net charge for the whole circuit must remain zero, so the other side of the circuit must have the opposite charge density to balance it out.
The reason the diagram is misleading when you ask question like this is because the diagram doesn't show the entire system. That little section of wire has a charge density, but the entire circuit's charge density is not uniform.
Thx. I have already realized the other half - if electrons are stationary in the "upper" wire, they have to move at almost the double speed of the protons/atoms int he "lower" wire. That makes negative charge there, because those electrons in "lower" wire are shrinked (closer than protons/atoms are).
I was wondering about the wire's frame. I will try to reword your explanation: "The wire-battery system was neutral before and, by conservation of charge, must be neutral after." So, electrons cannot pop into existence from nowhere, so they will maintain their distance even if accelerated by the battery. The battery creates a pressure in one direction, like a water pump. Some "energy" of that pump have to fight the length contraction produced by relativistic effect - can we say that? It produces "lower pressure", but that gets equalized eventually (making the wire neutral again, same "pressure" everywhere).
P.S.: Lower pressure on one side of the battery and higher pressure on the other side. That travels through the wire to eventually cancel out.... correct?
3:16 Tensors are love. But I can see why Maxwell used quaternions originally. The algebra is just so natural to emag. But using Geometric algebra is when it really turns pretty.
Please, please tell me how this explains the force exerted between two particles with spin
In the Centrifugal vs Centripetal Force video, you said that from one reference frame it's centripetal and from another it's centrifugal. In this video, you said from one reference frame it's an electric force and from another it's a magnetic force. It's always one or the other; never neither. Yet we treat the combined EM force as a real force but we don't combine the centripetal force with the centrifugal force, like a CC force, and call it real. We regard both centripetal and centrifugal forces as fictitious. Why the difference when the EM force and the "CC force" seem so analogous?
_"In the Centrifugal vs Centripetal Force video, you said that from one reference frame it's centripetal and from another it's centrifugal."_
Incorrect. In those situations, there is always a centripetal force. It's the centrifugal force that sometimes exists and sometimes doesn't.
The Science Asylum Understood. Thanks Nick!
The Science Asylum Wait, sorry, if the centripetal force is there in both frames, then why don’t we consider it a fundamental force with its own field equations? Or do we?
"Centripetal Force" is just the name we give to whatever the net force is pointed toward the center. Maybe it's gravity, or a tension, or just a part of the tension, or a normal force plus a friction (like for banked circular ramps). It's not it's own force. It's just a category.
me, writing my bachelor on magnetic effects, sees the title of this video: well, thats unfortunate
Nice!
I was actually musing recently if relativistic principles might play a role in elastic collisions.
Einstein says that the stuff that makes things hard to move and the stuff that makes things fall are the same thing and he introduces spacetime curvature to make this idea mathematically viable.
Thing is: one can read this identity in reverse. What if the reason why stuff is hard to move is simply spacetime curvature?
What I did arrive at is that you can explain an elastic collision between a heavy and a light ball by time moving slower for the heavy ball according to the mass ratio. However, there are a bunch of problems. For instance, if you attach clocks to the heavy or the light object, they will move at about the same pace (depending on precision of measurement). Heck, this „clock ticking slowly“ thing appears to only explain something when there’s a collision and we wanna know why the heavy object moves slower! I‘m quite mystified by this actually the longer I think about it.
Hey i got a doubt.You made me clear that special theory of relativity creates magnetic force in current carrying wire.But what about permanent magnets.?where do they get magnetic force from..?That little part in beginning of video is not sufficient explaination for me.Can anyone help.?
Yes you are right, spontaneous magnetism in metals wasn't addressed. It comes from something completely different and I do feel like the video is misleading in this sense.
The electrons in the atoms are moving, making each atom like a magnet.
@@garethb1961 This is true, but spin angular momentum is still being ignored, and that has a big contribution as well.
The spin of the unpaired electrons, which give magnetism in permanent magnets, is also an effect of special relativity.
This is completely wrong. This implies that the electric field converts into a magnetic field just by changing the reference frame , and this is wrong. Both fields exist simultaneously in both frames, only one is stronger than the other depending on the reference frame. One field can have an intensity of 0 in some of the reference frames, but it still exists. It is not that when you look at a electric field in another reference frame it looks like magnetic field!
What this video implies is that they're not separate things. They're really just one thing: The electromagnetic field.
I totally agree.
Maybe then the video should be called "Magnetic Force Does NOT Exist but Electromagnetic Force Do exist"
Did anybody Notice this Guy's Magnetic Personality, he's Encourageable . You don't see too many of those.
Amazing! Thanks. It explains why magnetic force is always at right angles to the relative motion of the charged particles.
So instead of calling it a force I'll call it an effect.
Nice thinking man...
if that effect produces a torque, it becomes a real force
@@frehleyukito so you say if I apply a force along a door ( θ=0 or π ) my force doesn't exist ? Because that doesn't produce a torque.
Nick why permanent magnet which is electrically neutral gets attracted to electromagnet (in which magnetism is caused by length contraction thereby altering charge density)
What the HECK are Magnets? th-cam.com/video/XczMRsiq9mk/w-d-xo.html
I'm off to Shear-Madness for a hair cut and I'm completely bald! Oh and science is brilliant!!
Hmm... that's interesting! So, a beam of electrons moving in a vacuum won't produce a magnetic field, and so that would mean that electrical current is not just defined as moving charges but relative motion between charges! If the protons in the wire are hypothetically turned into anti-protons, the magnetic field would be reversed. Thanks, Nick!
That's not exactly what I said. One charge moving in a vacuum is not an electric current... but a bunch of them in a stream do. It's just that ALL motion is relative to SOMETHING. If you had an empty universe with just a stream of electrons in it, saying "they're moving" would have no meaning. For "motion" to have meaning, there must be something else around... and for electric current, that's usually positive nuclei.
So what you mean is that it actually should be only "electric force", not "magnetic force" as electric charges and movement are fundamental to it's existence and the magnetic force is only a point of view of the electric force.
Yes... or better yet, it should just be called the "electromagnetic force." Sometimes that looks electric. Sometimes that looks magnetic.
No! Only an electromagnetic force exists. Whether you see an electric or magnetic force only, depends on your frame of reference.
I'm going for a yes on this one. My reckoning is that if we could stop everything from moving everywhere and we had a stationary electric charge, then it would have a stationary electric field surrounding it? There would be nothing magnetic going on because nothing is moving? As an analogy to this I say that I can point my finger into the air and hold it there and people can see my stationary finger pointing ; If I make a rotation motion with my finger then I immediately can define clockwise to an observer and similarly I must thereby define anticlockwise too this is a kin to there being no such thing as a magnetic monopole. I'm trying to avoid relativity if I can too as I don't think it should be needed to resolve any of this?
So it wont come like a flood of pain?
I love the screaming mind blown clone
So, magnetic force isn't a thing and electric force isn't a thing but electromagnetic force is a thing because when you combine them then one form or the other shows up in all frames. Yes, No, Maybe?
Exactly! 🤓
3:20 you re welcome
I think I partly understood this, it both hurt & felt good. The pain is simply exquisite. Great videos.
"Magnetic force depends on motion and motion is relative" wow that's the simplest way to put it,congrats!
sir in the first scenario the electrons are moving, and according to the special theory of relativity there is a chance for the electrons flow also to shrink making the wire negatively charged, and therefore, attracting the proton
You totally got me! I was thinking, since I’m all about perspectives, that you had found a new way of looking at things. Little did I know you were speaking about semantics! Love it! Most people don’t differentiate between, or don’t understand there is a difference in term, between magnetic and electromagnetic force, but you described it succinctly! Great video!
"difference between magnetic and electromagnetic force".... these are one in the same, you cant have moving charges or electricity without magnetism, they go together, thus the term electromagnetism. See how both are combined into one word/thing? Thats for a reason, like space-time as being one entity. Research underlying subjects before you blindly fall into flawed ideas as cold facts. Meant as advice not an insult im just trying to help bro
@@ckimsey77 Appreciate it! But That’s pretty much exactly what he, and I in my comment, said. A matter of semantics. 😁
@@ckimsey77 It’s similar to calling all small space objects ‘debris’. While the field differentiates between ‘debris’ and ‘micro meteorites’. They are both technically “debris”, but they are separated by term so there’s no confusion. Like the James Webb telescope: They have said it will definitely be hit with “debris” (an article said this), it was misleading because there isn’t any man made debris at the L2 point. They were referring to the micrometeorites that would hit it.
Nice job! Enjoyed the "perspective" and genuine truth presented.
is this same for electric force
Yes. You have to combine them to make it a real force.
@@ScienceAsylum combine what?
Congratulations. Not that it was ever much to begin with, but with the now non-existence of magnetism I have been officially de-intilligenceified.
Unacceptable nick! You didn't sound crazy in the last seconds of the video. UNSUBSCRIBED!!!
+Daniel Skiba It's the ones that don't sound crazy you really have to worry about!
+KnowBuddies LP
You took the words right out of my mouth ;-)
+The Science Asylum Got your back buddy! I think.. maybe that was an insult, either way ;)
I love how he thanks me for liking the video before even asking for it, and I love that he was absolutely correct.
That's it youve crossed the line !!
From my understanding, an electron and proton fired from parallel cannons will still converge, but at a slower rate compared to not being fired. That's because the magnetic field interaction on the moving pair pushes them apart, but it's not as strong as the electric field causing them to converge. Therefore, they still converge, but more slowly. Where relativity come in is at the reference point of the electron/proton, since at their reference they aren't moving and will converge at a normal speed. How can they be converging slowly from our reference point, yet normally from theirs? The answer is that for the moving pair, time slows down and they appear to converge at a slower rate from our reference point.
Its Wednesday my dudes, 2:59!!!!!
That's what the thing with special relativity , Electric and magnetic fields are different only when viewed from different frames of reference...
Okay... so magnetic forces aren't real... what about magnetic fields?? I tried watching the other video that is linked at around 1:39 but I just don't get it. There are magnetic fields? How do they work then? What do they even do?! :p
Fields (like magnetic fields) aren't a real thing. They're just a thing we use on paper to make calculations easier to understand. You can make the same predictions with real things like energy and what we call "potential," but the calculations are harder to do.
Right... so people who say that animals hunt based on magnetic fields/force (e.g. foxes who dive for mice) are completely wrong??
Caledelith Well, the point I was trying to make in the video was that electric force and magnetic force don't exist as separate things. There's just an electromagnetic force... and that's real :-)
+The Science Asylum Ohh alright hahaha. Thank you!!
I don't want to scare you but what if fields were real?
Think about it: when you read my words, you catch the idea I want to express to you. Then this idea is an information I transfered to you. Is there something that can be identified as an idea? Not the letters, not the screen, something that *is* the idea? No, nothing. Does the idea exists? Of course it is, but what it is, we don't know.
What about fields? Couldn't they be informations, ideas, too?
As you see, information doesn't need any physical things to be. But it needs something to catch it and to make it become real (like our brain)...And it needs something to create it at first.
Now, you have these questions: who create these informations which create our universe? where are these informations? Are they located? And how does something (what?) access it?
Abstraction is a beautiful tool, but it can lose you because nothing is real in an abstract world.
Is our whole universe just an abstraction?
So many questions... but interesting ones, isn't it?
(Please excuse my english)
A force is not real, because it does not exist in each reference frame? Only because somebody once created a label "fictional" to convey a concept does not imply that these forces do not exist.
The two magnets will move toward each other until they will eventually connect, independent of your chosen frame of reference. Hence either one will see an acceleration (actually both, if you aren't choosing a reference frame that is connected to one magnet, which is not an inertial system).
And acceleration equals a force. (A real force, if your frame of reference is an inertial system, a fictional otherwise - you are mixing up fictional and inertial forces)
You are demonstrating the equally of electrical and magnetic forces, which will be 'converted' into each other, depending on your frame of reference.
I think this relationship is far more magical than the message 'everybody has lied to you - it's not real!'
The first message expresses what physics is about. A fascination of the world and an urge for a deeper understanding, what you might not know now. Your massage is implying a general distrust to presumptuous state, that you tell a secret truth.
I know, it's only a clickbait, but it is doing more harm to science communication than educate people. This distrust has evolved to a point where people believe the earth is flat, just because education and scientists tell you otherwise.
What was my patreon password again...
thanks. very useful & informative. could you please tell me why does a piece of gold under ground create magnetic field around itself? as we know gold is diamagnetic
I really like your persona and your pretending craziness. You are pretending very well... or are you?
2:14 From the proton's perspective, the wire does move away because the electrons are a little spread out and the protons are a little closer due to special relativity. The wire is now positively charged and it goes away because of the positively charged wire.
Woaaaaaaah, why didn't my electrical engineering teacher tell me this :@ THANK YOU
You're welcome!
You are right! In a freely falling reference frame there is no gravity!
Unfortunately, there is this problem with solid state physics at the bottom of the cliff...
WHo; elsE is awtching in twenthy ninteen ??? >.> XD LMAO
I had tried to read Purcell Chapter 5 about this but until the animation of the protons inertial reference frame showing the conductor protons moving and thus length contracting increasing their perceived net charge this was still unclear to me! Thank you very much this is a superb animation. I finally feel like I understand where magnetism comes from, and why the tensor unification is the more fundamental and therefore electromagnetism is the only real force you observe.
You're welcome! I'm glad it helped :-)
I love this guy!!
Are you a girl that you love that guy?
This theory was confirmed by my WalMart Sales Associate Professional when I tried to return some VeryExtraGood brand Chinese fridge magnets that fell off. He explained they were fine but my kitchen was using an incorrect frame of reference. I think that violates slightly their "absolutely no questions asked" returns policy.
I am really-really in love with the moment, when music started playing. It's been _so long,_ since I heard some motion in science explanations!
What is magnetic force ? It is force manifested 1 - between 2 permanent magnets or 2 - between one permanent magnet and a wire crossed by electric current or 3 - between 2 wire crossed by electric current. So, how can you say it is not exist ? Be careful, you have a misconception here.
Hmm...Does this mean that from different points of reference, light is polarized in different directions?
Sure, that sounds like a reasonable thought.
@@ScienceAsylum Thanks for the reply! Also, I am curious to hear your opinion on this video about special relativity: th-cam.com/video/-NN_m2yKAAk/w-d-xo.html
It talks about time dilation and length contraction, but also about distance dilation and duration contraction. What are your thoughts on these concepts?
This length contraction trick is nice. Really makes me want to dive deeper into tensors.
Every student would be proud to have such a professor.
"A moving electric charge create magnetism" - and the moving magnetic poles create electricity.
The upper single moving proton create magnetism, and the moving wire protons create magnetism.
The moving wire electrons is Lorentz-shortness, and is in a charge creating magnetism.
And motion can't be relative (or absolute)... hm.
Great. Although I don’t like the term ‘length contraction’ which is rather a bevel cut through a body’s ‘world sausage’.
oh and by the way really cool magnetic fact materials such as Carbon graphite are diamagnets which means a Normal magnet will repel it whether u use the north side or the south side
This is a great video and it brings up profound facts about the world that are in no way obvious.
so if I understand it correctly, magnetic force is only an illusion if the eletric force it not and vice versa which basically means electromagnetic force is not an illusion and calling it "magnetic force" is just a different way of looking at it
Hello !
The only thing I agree with in this show is that the claim that magnetic force does NOT exist - is brave!
When you already want to explain the existence or non-existence of any force, it would be a good idea to first explain to us what force is in its essence - in the elemental physical sense!
Science, whatever it is and whatever you call it, has no idea - a fundamental explanation - of many physical phenomena, such as: time, matter, gravity, force, ... How all these phenomena become, what is their beginning ... ? What creates these phenomena ...?
Today we only know the relations between these phenomena - most often we express them by mathematical formulations ...
It should not be confused that a magnetic force on Earth exists, that it is everywhere present for the simple reason that our planet Earth is magnetically polarized. Only the magnetic force (in the magnetic field) does not register our imperfect senses directly, but only if we have a compass at hand ... Of course, there is now the question of the strength of that force.
Let's go back to electricity and its "connection" to magnetism ...
Just a few facts to think about:
- electrons, as carriers of negative charge, move at light velocity around the nucleus of atoms, in closed trajectories - according to the law of physics, "charge flow" creates its own magnetic field; this means that there is a magnetic field in the atom! (where there is a magnetic field, there is a magnetic force ...)
- just as light has a dual nature (in certain circumstances it acts as a wave and in some as a particle), similarly we can say about electricity and magnetism - these are just different manifestations of the same phenomenon ....
-
Joe McD. "says: ... magnetism is merely the relativistic correction of the electric force."
I don't think there is any relativism. And I'd rather use a manifestation (occurrence) instead of "correction" ...
You see, in the nature (among others) the dominant law is law of balance - harmony. And the law of equilibrium is most easily established if there are only two factors in a process. This is why the binary matrix is dominant in the nature ...
This opens up a broader topic and that's where I would end my consideration ...
Your contribution is provocative, not just with a "bold statement" ...
You provoked my comment!
Bye !
Huge fan of yours.... Never thought rewatching can be so much fun and nostalgic.
Hey guys. I could use your help.
If I understand it correctly, the way this works, is that the moving electrons create an electromagnetic wave, meaning light, as a force carrying Particle/Wave. This propagates through Space/Time until it reaches another Particle it can interact with. There it interacts and “pushes” it in a new direction.
Is this correct? Is this what an electromagnetic field does/is?
Man, I really wish there was an official set of rules for physics. If only there was a way to unify all perspectives...but each person can witness the same thing a totally different way. Length contraction is like an odd end
I was understanding that there are no "forces"....but rather "interactions".
On a quantum level, "interactions" is definitely a much better word choice.
@@ScienceAsylum THANKS!!!
Please keep posting these videos. As a lover of science, I enjoy them.
But I have read quite a few others' comments that imply that science isn't necessarily their cup of tea, but none-the-less they are craving your videos for the knowledge & understanding!
So thanks again, & PLEASE keep posting them!!!
🤓
Monsoon: and i took that personally
That's why videos are great .
So much knowledge in too little time
Why do we see the magnetic force if you sprinkle iron shavings around a magnet?
You are very good at explaining things! Plus 1 sub....
Thanks!
Where do ultrahigh energy particles come from? I've been wondering this for a while.
Particle accelerators smash protons together. The faster they make those protons go before they hit each other, the more energy they have. With more energy available, higher energy particles can be made (most of which are combinations of unstable quarks, so they don't last very long).
I have a serious question. Do the unseen forces of gyroscopes and indeed any spinning object differ from the forces of magnetism. and can magnetism be explained in terms of gyroscopic procession?
Yes, they are different. Magnetism only happens with _charged_ things. Gyroscopic forces can happen with anything.
@@ScienceAsylum by "charged" do you mean aligned at the molecular level? if every iron atom has a direction of magnetism due to the direction of spin of un paired electrons, the key word there is spin. a spin that would result a gyroscopic force perhaps?
"Charged" as in having electric charge: th-cam.com/video/gvX29HPmBEI/w-d-xo.html
I thought electrons don't move, rather, they basically push each other like a domino,
and that's how charge moves.
Just like how sound is a wave travels through air,
an electric charge is a wave that travels through electrons
Whatever may be the type of force, effect is to accelerate mass. For any accelerated mass , we can find a reference frame , where acceleration is zero, thus zero force. Does it mean that all forces are not real ?