How Niels Bohr created the quantum atom

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 204

  • @northhamptonshire
    @northhamptonshire 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +33

    I cannot say how much I am thrilled by this series which goes behind the scenes and sets the stage for all the wonderful physics we now take for granted.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      I am glad you like the series, I am having a great time producing it. The cool kids (and books) just want to get Heisenberg and Dirac, but I find the early developments so fascinating that I have no rush to get there. Honestly, it is the physics of early quantum mechanics that made me fall in love with physics research as a kid (at least the little things that I could understand back then).

  • @rainerausfranken3289
    @rainerausfranken3289 4 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    I am just a simple engineer, but I have been interested in the history of quantum mechanics since my youth. Thank you very much for the precise and highly understandable presentation!

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  4 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thanks, I am glad you liked the video. In case you haven't, make sure to check the currently running series on quantum physics th-cam.com/play/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH.html

  • @arjunsigdel8070
    @arjunsigdel8070 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +16

    I am looking forward for similar chronological series in development of General Relativity. From Maxwell theory, to Lorentz transformation, to Poincare works, to Einstein Miracle year, to Minskowski Spacetime to GR to black hole to Gravitational wave.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

      Wow, that's quite a list. I cannot guarantee to be able to fulfill all the requests but I always open to collecting suggestions, thanks.

    • @arjunsigdel8070
      @arjunsigdel8070 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@jkzero Don't disappoint us. :)

  • @alainpean1119
    @alainpean1119 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    It's not often that a precise and mathematical presentation of the history of quantum theory is made on TH-cam. It is a very clear account with some anecdotes (Bohr was at a time a professional football player). Thanks a lot !

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      I am glad you liked the video. Blending historical context and mathematical details are some of the features that identify this channel. In case you haven't, make sure to check the full playlist on quantum mechanics, the kick-off video has been on fire since day one, viewers really liked to see what Planck actually did and what textbooks don't show so check it out th-cam.com/play/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH.html

  • @blinkingmanchannel
    @blinkingmanchannel 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I was in dire need of an understanding of why we know what we know about electrons. Then TH-cam gave me your videos! Thank you!
    Now I have questions and requests for more content! 👀🙋‍♂️
    In one of your earlier videos, you answered my question of why we confidently talk about electrons as particles. 👍
    I’ve also been wondering why I have not found a nice tidy explanation of electron behavior in molecules.
    But first, huge thanks for this neat story: You get from Einstein’s “specific heat in solids…“ all the way to Bohr’s angular momentum, and you bring me to Rydberg at 17:05. Holy cow!!! NOW I see why Bohr is a god in QM! Wow!
    Okay…please do the same thing for how proteins behave…? I am not finding succinct models for electron behavior in molecules. 👀
    I can understand that a protein is not merely an extension of hydrogen. But I do hope that we should have a MUCH better explanation of, say, H2O…? Or maybe we need less energy, such as CO2? I really want physics to have a tight discussion for how these two greenhouse molecules behave when bombarded with a lot of UV photons???
    Do we know how a photon gets turned into an electron? Feynman did great drawings but what is going on there, in terms of quarks and gluons and whatever? (Please feel free to correct my questions, of necessary. I’m not a physicist, as you can see…)
    And in case I’m asking trivial leading questions… ultimately, I’m trying to get an understanding of why our explanations of ATP synthase don’t allow us to build this enzyme in a lab? (Same question for RuBisCo?)
    And if molecules are not your jam, could you please do a similar review of the Strong Force? I feel like QCD is too speculative. I realize there’s evidence. But I’m prolly like the doubters of photons as particles…but way less qualified to have an opinion. 😂 So why is the Strong Force the one and only force that works backwards from all the others???😮 How do gluons just magically pop in if you pull too far? …why is this okay?
    Okay man. Please be brilliant some more!
    Thanks for your channel! Awesome!
    -Russell H

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thanks so much for your generous support. More content is coming for sure, Bohr will be back in the next video. Proteins and molecules in general is way beyond my expertise. I hope to get to the fundamental interactions, in this video series we are still in 1913 :)

    • @blinkingmanchannel
      @blinkingmanchannel 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@jkzeroYou are too modest bro!
      Your ability to explain is what I find most unusual. Feynman always said you can’t explain until you understand. Therefore, I say, you have the right kind of mind to tackle molecular orbitals.
      Alternatively, here’s my next area of “…but how?” I want to find a clean equation for heat transfer using ammonia as the coolant, since that’s the most efficient (as I understand things, so far) and it doesn’t eat the ozone layer…
      I figure the model should have a unit of measure for “air” at sea level… 1000 cubic meters maybe? And then I want to find a reasonable way to express how much evaporation is needed to chill that unit of air to minus 100 Celsius… starting at, say, +35 C at sea level and 50% humidity…

  • @thedestroyer4458
    @thedestroyer4458 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    4:35 How did they calculated the approximate radius of hydrogen atom, and how did they thought half of the full radius will be appropriately equal to the radius of 1 st orbit , can you please explain

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      There are several methods to estimate the size of atoms, from Brownian motion to kinetic theory of gases. I do not recall the details but there was a quick and dirty estimate by using the molar density and Avogadro's number to calculate the volume of an atom, and from there you get an order-of-magnitude for its size.

  • @davidmitchell3881
    @davidmitchell3881 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +42

    Rutherford was less than impressed with the Nobel for chemistry. He thought of himself as a physicist not a chemist. Chemistry after all was just stamp collecting 😂

    • @berdigylychrejepbayev7503
      @berdigylychrejepbayev7503 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      just like other sciences (except physics ofc) :-)

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +32

      There is a famous quote attributed to Rutherford “all science is either physics or stamp collecting” which presents him as the typical arrogant physicist looking down on all other fields. I don't know if he ever really said that, but reading his papers and about his way of caring for his students I doubt that Rutherford was such an ah. I would expect something like this from Millikan but not from Rutherford. If Rutherford really thought like that, then giving him the Nobel Prize in Chemistry instead of Physics would be a top-level way of trolling.

    • @davidmitchell3881
      @davidmitchell3881 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@jkzero it doesnt really matter. It makes for a good story. No atoms were injured in the making of this dtory and 😀

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +13

      @@davidmitchell3881 I can now say "No atoms were injured in the making of this story," which is not the case in my early videos

    • @terrycole472
      @terrycole472 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ​@@jkzero : Rutherford probably did think like that. Blackett in 1958 mentioned hearing him say it, though around 1925 so a generation earlier. I wouldn't be too hard on Rutherford, regardless. At the time, enthroning Physics was not a completely unreasonable proposition. It's a jokey variant on an old idea, not purely English - Auguste Compte also ranked the sciences with physics at the top, a century earlier. Rutherford was surely just poking fun at the cultural pretensions of some who looked down on him as an uncultured if useful colonial.
      Even as late as the early twentieth century one could argue other branches of scientific thought were less well developed. Only physical chemistry was approaching a similar standard. In particular, by Rutherford's time physicists had systematically brought mathematical rigor to bear on their stamp collections for three centuries, ie. roughly since the time of (say) Newton, or Hobbes.
      In fact I'm reminded of Hobbes' remarks in Leviathan, that geometry "is the only science that it hath pleased God hitherto to bestow on mankind". Shortly thereafter Newton et al. had elevated Physics to a science also. Hobbes added that scientific thought starts with "settling the significations of their words"; not a bad analogy with stamp collecting. Traces of that attitude persist, cf. Luis Alvarez vs the geologists.

  • @cewkins721
    @cewkins721 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +15

    Great video once again! The derivation of laws seems fairly simple yet very meaningful, the implications of electron orbits and how they behave was surely a very impactful discovery for the field

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      this is one of the reason I really like this derivation, it is quite simple but very significant in the early days of quantum physics

  • @primenumberbuster404
    @primenumberbuster404 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +18

    Oh, time to brush some basics of QM now! 🙂

  • @Sep-n7w
    @Sep-n7w 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +16

    How about a detailed video on Larmor's formula? I have always wondered how the emission process of accelerated electrons can be described mathematically starting from Maxwell's equations.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

      I cannot guarantee to be able to fulfill all the requests but I always open to collecting suggestions, thanks.

    • @chalkchalkson5639
      @chalkchalkson5639 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      So the standard calculation from SR Maxwell's laws is very cumbersome since you need to be quite careful around the accelerated objects. You can do it reasonably well by doing it in Rindler coordinates using the GR versions, but that assumes you know some GR...
      There is a version of the special relativistic derviation of it on wikipedia, see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li%C3%A9nard%E2%80%93Wiechert_potential
      From A (or E and B) you can find the pointing vector and thus the emitted radiation. Beware the derivation is long and a little ugly

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      in the meantime, here is a step-by-step derivation that appear quite easy to follow pulsar.sternwarte.uni-erlangen.de/wilms/teach/astrospace/spacechap5.pdf

    • @terrycole472
      @terrycole472 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@jkzero : Ta. I hadn't realized J. J. Thompson was responsible for this derivation.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@terrycole472 JJ Thomson was one of those who did most of the key results in the early 1900s, its contributions beyond the classic ones in textbooks are not widely known even for physicists

  • @gregorykafanelis5093
    @gregorykafanelis5093 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    One very minor detail, is that Einstein managed to quantize the vibrational modes of a solid, by considering that each one of them was like a 3-d quantum oscillator, that has energy e = h \omega(r+1/2) , with r = 0,1,2 etc. The thing is to get this you need to solve the Schrodinger equation, that would not be invented for another 19 years. It turns out he did not need it, as the mad lad just used the results from the blackbody equation that already deals with oscillators and derived an excellent expression for the final heat capacity of solids. It failed at lower temperatures and the only thing Debye added was a cutoff frequency. That's it, their genius produced a formula 1-2 decades earlier than it should have. Truly ahead of their time, especially Einstein

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      I know that I might sound like an Einstein fanboy but despite of the popular media attention, Einstein is so underrated

    • @gregorykafanelis5093
      @gregorykafanelis5093 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@jkzero It is honestly insane that with very simple mathematics he was able to give us some of the most accurate physics results. Photoelectric, Einstein coefficients, Brownian motion, Special relativity, General Relativity, Quantum mechanics. He is like an anime protagonist fr fr.

    • @backwashjoe7864
      @backwashjoe7864 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@gregorykafanelis5093 "with very simple mathematics..." LOL! I've never heard the math of General Relativity described like that. :)

  • @JakeSeeber
    @JakeSeeber 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Awesome videos, so elegant and well put together. Thank you.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Thank you very much! I am glad you enjoy the content.

  • @trevormugalu3797
    @trevormugalu3797 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    i wish i had a teacher like you while i was an undergrad.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      That's very kind, thanks. I am glad you liked the video. In case you haven't, make sure to check the rest of the series on quantum physics th-cam.com/play/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH.html

  • @semidemiurge
    @semidemiurge 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    Exceptionally well done. Thank you

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Glad you enjoyed it!

  • @timothygolden5321
    @timothygolden5321 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Very nicely done. Great details that put this piece beyond the usual regurgitation. Yet you buried nothing in the process. In the moment I feel more convinced than ever. Thank you for being so straight forward and for digging deeper too. Perhaps there is also an openness in your position that helps this content, for myself anyways. It is presented more as a discovery than a dictate.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thanks for the feedback, I am glad you like the video and my style of presenting the content. In case you haven't, make sure to check the rest of the series on quantum physics th-cam.com/play/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH.html

  • @PedroFerrr
    @PedroFerrr 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Absolutely wonderful video as always, Jorge, thanks! One detail: I thought that Bohr's papers already mentioned the application of his theory to He+ spectra as well (with data from solar observations, I think)? Congrats again!

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thanks, I am glad you liked the video. Yes, you are right, on the second paper of the Trilogy Bohr describes "hydrogenic" atoms, meaning highly ionized Helium, Lithium, and Beryllium so there is a single electron. I wanted to talk about this but the video got too long, there is a great story about astrophysical and lab measurements of lines that could not fit a Rydberg-like formula because semi-integers were needed. Bohr easily solved this with his model. I plan to add this in a future video.

    • @PedroFerrr
      @PedroFerrr 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@jkzero Thanks for the reply, Jorge!! By the way, did we by any chance cross paths at Karlsruhe, or a conference? I do work on 2HDMs and visited KIT a few times to work with Maggy. Congrats on the awesome videos!

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@PedroFerrr I am not sure of we crossed paths in Karlsruhe but maybe, I was a postdoc at the ITP during 2014-2016.

  • @sphakamisozondi
    @sphakamisozondi 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

    This channel deserves more subs and viewer count

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      They will come, for now I appreciate sharing, liking, and commenting as that helps the mighty algorithm to show the content to new viewers.

    • @jasonl_
      @jasonl_ 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@jkzero There are right now 25,000 physics nerds who are loving your videos 😍

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@jasonl_ quite excited with the results almost one year after launching the channel

  • @digguscience
    @digguscience 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Bohr's explanation of the atom is indeed very impressive.

  • @jamesfullwood7788
    @jamesfullwood7788 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Thank you Dr. Diaz these videos are quite remarkable!!!

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thanks for your kind comment, I am glad you liked the video series. I am always curious to know what brings viewers to the channel, were you searching for something in particular or did the 'mighty algorithm' find you? Also, In case you haven't, make sure to check the running series on quantum physics th-cam.com/play/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH.html

    • @jamesfullwood7788
      @jamesfullwood7788 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@jkzero I've been subscribed for a while but I haven't watched in a long time as your videos haven't been showing up in my feed. In any case, the detail you went into in this video showing the way in which Bohr came up with his model I found particularly interesting. I've read several books on the history of quantum meachnics but none of them went into such detail, I guess since publishers don't allow equations these days smh.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@jamesfullwood7788 Thanks for sharing. Yeah, I suppose that publishers limit the math level in popular books, and academic textbooks leave aside the historical context and the many secondary characters of the story. This is the gap that I intend to fill, there are plenty of channel covering entertaining but superficial stories, I bet that there was an audience for a more elevated level when it comes to the physics and the math, but without making video lectures, that can quickly get boring for an audience of physics enthusiasts. Glad to have you back in the channel.

  • @pedronobre3898
    @pedronobre3898 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Phenomenal work, as always. Please continue this series, your videos on QM are fantastic, and i can't wait to see you cover Heisenberg and Schrodinger.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thanks, glad you liked it. Heisenberg and Schrödinger are coming but I have no rush, I really enjoy this old-quantum physics and how everything was so motivated by experimental observations, not like most of fundamental physics in the past 50 years (looking at you strings and supersymmetry)

  • @terrycole472
    @terrycole472 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    This was wonderful. It's funny how I often think I know the subject of your videos, then the math animations point out something I missed. Thank you.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Glad it was helpful! Interestingly, the other day another viewers made a similar comment, he said: "the video starts and I think 'yeah, I know where this is going, I know this stuff' and then bam, something I never heard before suddenly happens"

  • @stauffap
    @stauffap 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    There wasn't actually anything new in here for me. Yet, the way you put it together made me understand with much greater clarity why Bohrs Model was so influential. So, thank you for that! I enjoyed watching it!

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Glad it was helpful!

  • @t850
    @t850 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    ...almost forgot to wach this video and boy it was an interesting "scientific thriller".
    The part that really cought my intention was the "what if" moment (10:15). It was a powerful assumption that led to the wonderful theory. It reminded me of Einstein's assumtion "what if speed of light was constant constant and independent of the relative motion of the source"...and thus a theory of relativity was born. Since speed of light is constant there is a point in spacetime where curvature is so great that light just can't escape it (Schwarzschild's radius)...:D

  • @kilogods
    @kilogods 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Truly magnificent video. I love how you include the math as well as go over some of the history as well. Bravo! 👏

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thanks for watching, I am glad you liked the video. The blend of historical context, calculations from the original papers, and the physical concepts in the the trademark of this channel. Make sure to check the rest of the series on quantum physics th-cam.com/play/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH.html

  • @Marbslab
    @Marbslab 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Nice channel. Sub'd. May I ask what software you're using to display the formulas?

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thanks, I am glad you like the content, make sure to check the other videos.
      I use Manim, the Mathematical Animation software created by @3b1b docs.manim.community/en/stable/examples.html

    • @Marbslab
      @Marbslab 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@jkzero Thank you for the link.

  • @michaelchapman5548
    @michaelchapman5548 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Wonderful series. Thank you for producing these videos.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Glad you like them! Don't miss the follow up to Bohr's atom published yesterday

  • @kushagra64
    @kushagra64 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    The 2pi in the Bohr’s postulate always seemed really arbitrary, like how did he managed to get that? But now I finally got an answer…(except I haven’t really studied Hamiltonian mechanics just yet soo it will still take sometime for me to truly understand it…)
    Coincidentally, today I also gave an exam of atomic structure!

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      You are absolutely right, that factor 2π looks like out of a hat until you learn that the quantization was at the generalized momentum level; however, this only got clear to me after studying Hamiltonian mechanics. There are many other details that become clear in quantum mechanics after you study Hamiltonian mechanics. This is in fact how Dirac created the recipe to go from classical theories to quantum theories. Becoming familiar with Poisson brackets, Dirac brackets, and Hamilton-Jacobi theory is crucial for understanding quantum mechanics.
      All the best in your exam!

  • @TimRobertsen
    @TimRobertsen 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Your videos are fantastic! Easily one of the absoluty top channels for QM and physics! Keep up the excellent work:)

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      thanks for that, it means a lot when viewers appreciate the effort and find the content of value

  • @luudest
    @luudest 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    12:45 What is here meant by total energy of the electron? Does the total energy consists of potential and kinetic energy?

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      yes, total energy = kinetic energy + potential energy

    • @lepidoptera9337
      @lepidoptera9337 27 วันที่ผ่านมา

      An electron IS an amount of energy. It is not an object that HAS an amount of energy. The latter is just a classical way of thinking and it does not work at the level of quantum mechanics.

  • @Merilix2
    @Merilix2 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    One side question: is this photo at 9:33 real? I don't wonder much about colorization but the very high resolution.
    Looks really good by the way, so many science power on one single image ;)

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      It is a real photo but colored and enhanced, here is the original commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Solvay_conference_1927_Version2.jpg

  • @LukeGeaney
    @LukeGeaney หลายเดือนก่อน

    This is the channel I have been looking for! Been searching for a chronology of quantum mechanics, have always wondered how this all happened.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thanks, I am glad you like the content and the style.

  • @philoso377
    @philoso377 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Page 2.38 there are two but one kind of electric energy state that a moving point charge may produce, either inductive and radiative energies.
    Conditions that govern a moving charge is radiative or inductive are:
    (A) a (monopole) point charge displacement in 1 or 2D (linear circular or orbit) do not produce radiation, it only INDUCE electrostatic B field cannot radiate.
    (B) (dipole) two, opposite poles point charge displace / vibrates in 2D produces radiation. Such as a dipole antenna serving mobile phone found on tower top.
    (C) a (monopole) point charge displacement in (2+1)D such as helix trajectory around a B field core. Such as cyclotron radiation found in astronomy.
    Orbiting electron around a nucleus is under (A) above, 1, 2D displacement do not radiate.
    However when the atom vibrate being or under stimulated, it drag its electron along into the vibration, and the vibrating vector is summed into the electron’s orbit. The orbit changes from 2D into 1+2D, containing axial component, and that radiates.
    Fortunately the radiated energy is derived from the excitation source and not from electron orbit decay.
    It is not necessary to invent new physics on this example.

  • @hedgehog3180
    @hedgehog3180 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    The derivation for Bohr's hydrogen atom is one of my favourites and his model is on my student cap :)

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      nice, I hope you enjoyed the video then

  • @awkonradi
    @awkonradi 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Thank you for publishing this video.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      My pleasure, I am glad you like the content.

  • @nicholasogden7187
    @nicholasogden7187 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    I look forward to every one of your videos :)

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      thanks for that, it means a lot when viewers appreciate the effort and find the content of value

  • @DavidMFChapman
    @DavidMFChapman 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Thank you for this. It must have been an exciting time to be a physicist.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      I am glad you liked it. Textbooks just want to get Dirac and mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics, but I find the early developments so fascinating that I have no rush to get there. Honestly, it is the physics of early quantum mechanics that made me fall in love with physics research as a kid (at least the little things that I could understand back then)

    • @DavidMFChapman
      @DavidMFChapman 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@jkzero I studied all this in university 50 years ago! It is fascinating to go back and learn about it all over again with fresh eyes.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Happy to bring back good memories. I remember going through this content way too fast in my QM classes in just one or two lectures because everyone just wants to get to the postulates and the Schrödinger's equation.

  • @abhijithcpreej
    @abhijithcpreej 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Absolutely spectacular video!

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thanks, I am glad you liked the video. In case you haven't, make sure to check the rest of the series on quantum physics th-cam.com/play/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH.html

  • @luudest
    @luudest 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    18:80 What happens here when the electron oribits just in the opposite direction of the incoming photon?
    (I know this question might be silly due to modern understanding of an electron not being point like but rather cloud like)

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      the relative orientation between the motion of the electron and the photon is irrelevant because, according to Bohr, all what matters here is whether the energy of the photon matches the energy difference between orbitals. There is no formal treatment of the collision and energy-momentum transfer.

    • @lepidoptera9337
      @lepidoptera9337 27 วันที่ผ่านมา

      An electron is not a classical object. It does not have a trajectory and it does not have direction of motion. The question simply doesn't make any sense. One can discuss how quantum mechanics creates the emergent property of "objects", but it does not happen at this level.

  • @LiquidusEvilus
    @LiquidusEvilus 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    How to calculate the injection pressure of plastic screw injection?

  • @ratman4200
    @ratman4200 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Another banger, thanks Dr :3

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      thanks, glad you liked it.

  • @GeoffryGifari
    @GeoffryGifari 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    the social sphere of physics seems so much.... smaller at that time

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      true, the physics community was way smaller; the most important conference (Solvay) had less than 30 people; today, very specialized conferences have thousands of attendees.

  • @keithlewis9106
    @keithlewis9106 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Question, age of nuclear mass, there degrade over time , so a nuclear weapon will degrade in time ? As mass is loss would this degrade of power ?

    • @hedgehog3180
      @hedgehog3180 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      It depends a lot on the nuclear weapon in question, many use explosives with very long half lives so other components tend to degrade first but those that use plutonium do need to semi regularly be replaced.

  • @EbrahimDabiri
    @EbrahimDabiri 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Thanks for your works. Please if possible increase your video production frequency by at least n=2.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      I am glad you like the content. I would be happy to increase the frequency but I have day-job and I can only create content in my free time.

  • @5eurosenelsuelo
    @5eurosenelsuelo 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    A great video once again

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Glad you enjoyed it

  • @ralffig3297
    @ralffig3297 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I just love how these videos bring along step by step how modern physics came about. One giant standing on top of another giant. From this quantized stairs of giants came our most incredible knowledge about nature. Today's 99.9999% of so called 'scientists" are nothing but termites in comparison.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      I am glad you appreciate the building-up way I have been presenting the material. When it comes to quantum mechanics, most textbooks and popular stories move from Planck quickly to Schrödinger and Heisenberg; however, most of the very exciting physics that led to the building up of modern quantum mechanics happened before 1925. I believe that most of the confusion about the conceptual ideas of modern quantum mechanics arise due to the neglect of old-quantum physics, all the key ideas arose there.

    • @ralffig3297
      @ralffig3297 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@jkzero Mybe I missed something, but it would be really cool to see how Bohrs model was then inferred from Schrödinger's work. Just a suggestion if you didnt cover it yet.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yes, this can be done after the Schrödinger equation is in place.

    • @lepidoptera9337
      @lepidoptera9337 27 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Today's scientists are dealing with way more complex questions. You wouldn't know that because you are not interested in learning about them, though.

    • @ralffig3297
      @ralffig3297 27 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @lepidoptera9337 I d be interested to know what kind of genetic disorder happened somewhere in our past so a retarded like you was born.

  • @niroshandesilva1281
    @niroshandesilva1281 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    That's great to know physics theories with the historical development.

    • @lepidoptera9337
      @lepidoptera9337 27 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Yes, but the actual theory is nothing like these historical steps towards it.

  • @abdou.b3259
    @abdou.b3259 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    how they build a cathode ray tube and can i make one at home?

    • @lepidoptera9337
      @lepidoptera9337 27 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Yes, you could make one at home, but it requires an excellent vacuum pump and a non-trivial amount of glass blowing skills. It certainly falls in the category of "unusual and costly hobbies". One can do a lot of very nice gas discharge experiments with a mediocre vacuum pump that nowadays can be had for a hundred to a couple hundred dollars from Amazon, though. If you find that a fun thing to do, then you could certainly work your way up to making vacuum tubes and even cathode ray tubes with phosphor coating that requires vacuum equipment for thousands of dollars.

  • @philoso377
    @philoso377 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Photo on page 5:10 is more natural to me as they all pay attention at the camera. However Bohr’s head image is too small to be real even accounting for his second roll location .

  • @abrikos1100
    @abrikos1100 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thank you for video!

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      make sure to check the follow-up, just published today

  • @supreetsahu1964
    @supreetsahu1964 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    How long till you get to dirac equation? 😅😅

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      yeah, the cool kids (and books) just want to get Dirac and Feynman diagrams, but I find the early developments so fascinating that I have no rush to get there. Honestly, it is the physics of early quantum mechanics that made me fall in love with physics research as a kid (at least the little things that I could understand back then). But I will get to Dirac, promise.

    • @supreetsahu1964
      @supreetsahu1964 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@jkzero that's all i wanted to hear 😅

  • @razercp9322
    @razercp9322 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Awesome 👏

  • @swainscheps
    @swainscheps 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I still don’t quite understand why - given the plum pudding model - it was so unexpected that alpha particles would scatter in all directions - including backwards…
    Thomson knew there were electrons and he knew atoms were neutral, so isn’t it possible that whatever the ‘pudding’ part with the positive charge was - would be deflecting the helium nuclei…?
    Maybe if I knew what they *were* expecting from that experiment it would help draw the picture. Inferring lots, I guess they thought the alphas would pass *mostly* through with some very slight deflections(?)

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      In the plum-pudding model, electrons are in a spherical region of positive charge; given their low mass, there was no way that electron could affect the trajectories of the α particles. The positive region was symmetric for the α particles so any net repulsive force would be zero and the α particles were expected to go through mostly undisturbed. In a more technical level, you can calculate the distribution of scattered particles in all directions for a blob of positive matter (Thomson's model) and for a point central positive nucleus. The experimental result (the distribution of scattered α particles) agrees with Rutherford's model.

  • @Skellborn
    @Skellborn 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Haha, i just wondered today when the next video is coming! Love it :)

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      yeah, this came with a delay because sometimes life gets in the way

    • @Skellborn
      @Skellborn 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@jkzero Oh this wasn't meant as a complaint in any way! Take your time, as you need it :)

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      @@Skellborn got it, but yeah, I wish I could dedicate more time to making videos, I really enjoy the whole process from reading the original papers and crafting a fun story to share

  • @gpjedy7379
    @gpjedy7379 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I want for this great channel to transcend English language barrier. How can I help adding subtitles to videos, now that TH-cam only allows authors of the videos to do it?
    All of the videos make excellent hooks of internets for children in dull classrooms trying to learn physics

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thanks for your positive feedback and I appreciate the desire to make the content available in other languages. TH-cam offers automatic subtitles in dozens of languages, simply go to Settings > Subtitles/CC > Auto-translate, and then select the desired language. Translations are not perfect but quite good. Unfortunately, actual subtitles in other languages would require that I check everything, word by word, and I cannot afford the time for that. I am quite perfectionist and don't feel comfortable delegating this kind of tasks.

  • @leonhardtkristensen4093
    @leonhardtkristensen4093 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Is it really proven that light (EME) is a particle? The energy of a so called photon it given in Joules which is an amount of energy for one second and I would not think that a photon lasts for one second. I would propose that it is an EME of a set frequency so a wave. We know that two frequencies can mix and create a third one. It just needs some thing non linear to help the mixing. In my mind that could fulfil the jumping of electrons (that also are waves) between the different locations in the atom.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Could you please clarify what you mean by "EME"?

    • @leonhardtkristensen4093
      @leonhardtkristensen4093 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@jkzero Electro Magnetic Emission = EME. it is Radio transmissions, radiated heat, light and x rays etc.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@leonhardtkristensen4093 thanks for clarifying, I always prefer to ask when people use abbreviations. To your question, it is not totally correct to say "light is a wave" or "light is a particle," because light is a quantum object with properties of what we classically associate with waves as well as properties of what we classically associate with particles. It is not one or the other, but something different. Just like a platypus is an animal with properties of what we normally associate with ducks as well as properties of what we normally associate beavers, but it is not one or the other, but something different.

    • @leonhardtkristensen4093
      @leonhardtkristensen4093 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@jkzero I guess you could say that. Although I have learned about physics then I am not a physician but an Electronic Design Engineer with many years experience in electronics. I probably use some words a little different to what physicians might but I am learning. I have since my retirement watched a number of lectures by known Physicians online. As they are the original it cant be much different to actually attending them live.
      My main interest is actually Energy which I believe in it's simplest form is what I call an EME. There is a lot of things from my electronics knowledge that can be explained with the physics knowledge and visa versa. I am learning all the time and I am on occasions changing my mind when I am being convinced that I am wrong. I have too much experience from electronics to say that although I am convinced to be right then I might still be wrong or there might be different explanations to what I believed. Also I see physicians disagree about things. The other thing is that the more you have learned the more difficult it is to question what you have learned.
      It is currently my idea that there are really no particles at all. I believe it is more like waves. So called particles are then some thing like Standing waves.
      I am very interested in knowing more about your "Platypus" idea of wave, matter or energy that you mention. I can visualize in my mind that there is like a fog around an electron or in other words that the whole electron fog stretches out for some distance. The outer of this fog would then be what we normally call the electric field I would think.
      I don't like attraction at all. I would much better like pushing forces. A vacuum cleaner doesn't work well in vacuum. It works much better with a lot of air pressure around it to push all the dust up the pipe. Water pumps are the same. I have seen other peoples explanation of magnetism as a pushing force and also to some degree electric attraction as pushing forces and that does make some sense to me.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@leonhardtkristensen4093 I will definitely get to the wave-particle duality of light soon on my series on quantum mechanics

  • @carly09et
    @carly09et 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This gives rise to the question of orthogonal deconstruction across the 3sub1 X M. Is space and time rationally irreducible?

  • @moritzalshuth7239
    @moritzalshuth7239 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Classical electrodynamics is completely at odds with atomic stabilty as accelerated charges must lose all energy by radiation, and will do so fast. Now, Bohr imposed a quantized angular momentum on this system. With great success. Ok.. but what did Bohr have to say on the initial problem of radiation losses? What mechanism did he suggest were to - in effect - nullify electrodynamics?

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Bohr turned the problem around: he imposed that any orbit outside the quantized orbits is not possible; therefore, the electron cannot spiral down into the nucleus because any point of that trajectory is not allowed. From this, no radiation can be emitted. The only way an atom can emit radiation is by electron jumps between allowed orbits.

  • @Zookeeper.
    @Zookeeper. 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Sometimes magic condenses into reality..
    Complex numbers + Fractal Universe + A Butterfly Somewhere...
    Absolute Units... . ....

  • @shreyassmadane6020
    @shreyassmadane6020 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Love 💕 this video. Thank you for Amazing detailed information.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thanks, I am glad you liked the video. In case you haven't, make sure to check the rest of the series on quantum physics th-cam.com/play/PL_UV-wQj1lvVxch-RPQIUOHX88eeNGzVH.html

  • @luudest
    @luudest 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    15:41 Johann Balmer was not German, he was Swiss.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      thanks, many viewers have pointed this out; there is an erratum in the video description

  • @thedestroyer4458
    @thedestroyer4458 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Very good quality content

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thanks, glad you like it

  • @lanimulrepus
    @lanimulrepus 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Another gem...

  • @diegogaelvazquezreyes4921
    @diegogaelvazquezreyes4921 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Niceee can you make a video about the bragg experiment?

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      This is one topic that has been on my list for a while

  • @berdigylychrejepbayev7503
    @berdigylychrejepbayev7503 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    tbh your videos are great and very detailed in every aspect (historical, biographical, formulas and graphs/models) but I hate to say that your view and subscription number might not be as high as you deserve, for some time. so dont be upset about it.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thanks, I appreciate the good wishes. To be honest, I am more than happy with the current state of the channel, I started less that a year ago and the response from viewers has been overwhelmingly positive. Yes, I want the channel to keep growing but so far the community has been great and I am grateful for the support.

  • @alejandroromansanchez5368
    @alejandroromansanchez5368 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Mi novela acaba de empezar

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      espero que el episodio te haya gustado

  • @flavio-viana-gomide
    @flavio-viana-gomide 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    One question: Why does the calculations use mv²/2 for the electron speed?
    Doesn't this equation suitable for bigger objects?

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      The formula mv²/2 for the kinetic energy applies to any massive object that moves at low speed (low with respect to the speed of light in vacuum). There is nothing in this formula that requires the object to be macroscopic; therefore, if you have a slow electron or a slow car, the equation is valid.

  • @berdigylychrejepbayev7503
    @berdigylychrejepbayev7503 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    so bohr got lucky just by applying the popular trend in other areas into his

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      I would not put it like that. Bohr was highly influenced by experimental observations and theoretical insights. There is great merit on writing that quantization rule and the working out all its consequences. The quantization rule is arbitrary, yes, but not trivial from a physics standpoint. Just like Planck's and Einstein's quantization rules. They seem trivial for us now, but with the knowledge back then, their proposals were gigantic conceptual jumps.

    • @berdigylychrejepbayev7503
      @berdigylychrejepbayev7503 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@jkzero yeah I know so Im just joking

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@berdigylychrejepbayev7503 sorry, I am not the best at spotting sarcasm

  • @maconcamp472
    @maconcamp472 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    We can imagine each of us coming here as a moon or black hole!!🕳️
    The nucleus of an atom is the moon and like a ripple effect, we experience expansion!! 🍎 🐛 🦋
    Until you complete you work here in this dimension and like a star, collapse in onto itself, becoming a neutron star!! Betelgeuse becomes Rigel!! 🍊 🫐
    You’re one with the universe!!💫
    The universe is your best friend!! 🧶 🐈‍⬛ 🐶 🎾
    Spooky action at a distance is the connection to the universe!! Just like the internet!!🛜 👻
    Connect to your higher self and twin flames!! Heaven on earth is created here, through galaxy collisions !! Andromeda is like a drop of water!!💧 🌌
    The Earth now is like a bucket!!🪣
    Purrthquakes!! 😻

    • @peterfireflylund
      @peterfireflylund 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Zyprexa.

    • @maconcamp472
      @maconcamp472 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@peterfireflylund Pluto is the 9th dimension!! Cloud 9!! 🐶 🐾
      Andromeda is a drop of water!!💧
      The merger also represents two thoughts!!💭 💭
      Everyone is Andromedan!! 👽
      Mercury Rising!!! 🌡️💕💕💕💕🤒 It’s getting hot in here!! 👙Global warming is the planet warming up to each other!! 🐨🐨
      The Big Bang Theory!! Gravity is memory!!🐘 🐾 🥁
      We’re each a particle, photon or star; cosmic surfing!!!🏄‍♂️ 🏄‍♀️ When this wave collapses seems to depend on us. The physics!! 👩‍🔬 We’re all fizzicists!! 🥤 Mount Shasta is the root!! ⛰️ Root beer!! 🍺 🐻 Big bear!!! Big bear chase me!!! The Great Outdoors!!🐾 🌲 🐾🌲🐾🌲🐾🌲
      The 7 goddesses of the Pleiades!! 💎💎💎💎💎💎💎 After I personally tie the knot with them, we’ll create the figure 8 and become infinite!! Astronauts and cosmonauts!! Naughty!! 🪢 🧑‍🚀🎱😂 My Russian nesting dolls!! 🪺 My fine China!!! 🍽️
      Each thought represents a bang❗️Higher vibrational thoughts 🐝🐝🐝 will create bigger bangs‼️
      Pebbles And Bam Bam!! 🧊 🦕 🧊 🦖 🧊 🦣 🧊
      Each grain of sand or pebble, a building block for planets or dark matter!! 🪨 Dark energy aka consciousness, creates the bang!! Supernovae!! 💥
      Super Moons!! Flowery moons!! 🌹 Saturn a flowery moon!! Representing the 6th dimension!! More energy!!🪐 🛸
      We control it!! 🧞 We’re stars!!✨
      Hi, Hey, Hello!!🦜
      The more G’s, the better!! They’ll reflect our minds, technology and more!! G strings!! 👙 👙👙👙
      Our brains look like gum!! 🧠 Juicier the better!!!🍏🍋‍🟩🫐🍍🍎🍌🍈🥥🍐🍉🍒🥝🍊🍇🍑🍋🍓🥭
      Love everything until it loves you back!! Mosquitos too!!🦟 ❤ Love cancer!! The Crab Nebula!! 🎇 Don’t be crabby!!🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀
      Nothing transcends space and time more than love!! 💗 Love is a spaceship!! Taking us higher!!✈️ 🚀 🛸 The greatest attraction in the universe!! 🎪
      Each of us and each galaxy would represent a cell!! 🦠 We’re stars putting ourselves back together again!! Like Humpty Dumpty!! 🥚 🐓
      The sky is blue because we’re meant to imagine it as a diamond!! The auroras then create the rest of the spectrum!! 🌈 💎
      A purple sky would reflect the heart of the ocean!! An opened mind!! 🤯 The earth purring more!! Purrrrrple rain!!☔️ 🐈‍⬛ 🧶
      Each thought to me is a solar flare, which shifts us into parallel worlds!! It’s hard here!!! I’m a peaceful dude, yet my life here has been super difficult!!🥹
      Alpha Centauri represents a shift in consciousness!! Dog planet!! We’re riding the alpha waves!! Woof woof!!🐶 🐾 This is our world peace and enlightenment for the world and universe!! All is one!!😇🥳🥰🤩
      We’re each a mini universe!!🌌
      The 3 Body Problem represents our gut brain, 🍱 heart,❤️ and mind!! 🧠 Connecting mind, body, soul, and spirit!! The Holy Spirit becomes whole!! A glory hole!!! 🔆
      The moon is a black hole!! 🕳️ A neutrino!! The planet is a colonized moon!!😇🌍👽 The sun is a shapeshifter!! 🌞
      Are you and I sculpting together as a team or as individuals??? 🧑‍🎨 Using the moon as a tool!!! 🪨 The Sun is the eye!!👁️
      I love the tool/word grinder!!!😮 We’d be Bumping and Grinding!!😂
      The Earth is like a refrigerator and the atmospheric pressure is melting or defrosting the stars above, as if they’ve been in the freezer!! 🥶
      It would also reflect us krystalyzing and becoming diamonds in the sky!! 💎 💎💎 Lucy becomes Maisie!! 🐒 👽
      We could be stars from above aka heaven, melting everything from above, as well! Like a River Running Through It!!! 🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊 Gravitational waves or our thoughts raining down on us through higher dimensions!!! 🌧️
      Pass the doobie to the left hand side!!🇯🇲🍍
      Unlocking a Secret Garden within and outside of us!!🤫 An Oasis!!!🏝️ 🏝️🏝️🏝️🏝️
      Flowing!!! It helps a lot to flow!!!🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊 Letting go, so we can concentrate more and work on our project!! Heaven On Earth!!🌍 👼
      Flowers!! 🌺 🌸 💐 and Flow-Ers!!🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊
      I know energy is still impurrtant!! 😻
      And of course imagination!!! Love!!!💗 🐶 🎾 🧶 🐈‍⬛
      To create heaven On Earth, the galaxies collide!! 🌌 Twin flames connect!! 🔥 🔥 We’re creating quantum entanglement!! Ghost particles merging, becoming more like the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man!!👻👻👻👻👻👻👻👻
      The universe is still the Earth!!⭐️🌍⭐️ We’re seeing it from the insides!! 🕵️ Like we’re inside a volcano 🌋 or wishing well!! The stars and galaxies are like coins!!🪙 The Goonies vibes!! 💀 We’re treasure!! Antarctica is treasure island!! 🐧🇦🇶 Unlocking antimatter!! 🐜 Booby and booty traps exposed!! Planet X!! Hubba Hubba!!🥰
      Everything and everyone has been our teacher!!👩‍🏫
      3D is like the murky bottom of a bong or volcano!!🌋 The fourth dimension, representing Mars is like the stem of the bong or the volcanos vent!! 👽 Experiencing higher dimensions is like the smoke or magma reaching our mouths 😋 and then circulating through our bodies!! We are the Earth!!🌍 👼
      The road less traveled!!!🧳 🌹 Straight up!! 🎈 🎈🎈🎈🎈We’d be super condensed or extremely packed neutron stars!! Like Rigel!! Blueberries!! Antioxidants!! Betelgeuse has evolved into a neutron star!! 🍊🫐
      Our long winding road, exploring different dimensions, finally straightening out!! I’m getting Pee Wee vibes!! Large Marge sent me!!🚴😂
      We’re vaporized, as if we’ve been smoked or roasted!! 💨 The smoke representing again those compressed neutron stars climbing the higher dimensions of the universe like a chimney!! I’m Mary Poppins, y’all !! ☂️ 🧞‍♀️
      It would also represent us as a comet traveling through a wormhole!! 💫
      Who me, I’m just a worm!!🐛 🫖 Solving a labyrinth!! 🦉 Solving amaze!!! 🦋
      Different energies tell a different story!! 📚
      We’re storytellers!! Artists!!🧑‍🎨
      We’re energy first!! 🐝
      A 12 inch boner is like receiving a foot of snow!!⛄️ 😂 When powered by neutrons and a magnetar energy field, one is like the energizer bunny!!🐰 They’ll keep going and going and going!! 🐇 🐇🐇🐇🐇
      If you’re destined to have more than one twin flame, you’re like Frogger, playing leap frog!! Lucy is a sucker for Lillies!! 🐸 🍀 🐸 🍀 🐸🍀🐸🍀🐸
      G Force!!!🥳👙🥳👙🥳👙🥳👙🥳
      Dorothy’s Ruby red slippers!! ❤❤
      Something here in 3D land has to change, yes, mmmmm! Dark Crystal Series!!😍 🧚🏼
      We need to get this show rolling!! 🎥
      We need our second moon!! Two moons!!! Two Mercurys!! Two black holes!!🕳️ 🕳️ They’ll need some color!! 🌈
      Two blood moons!! 🩸 🩸
      Two Ruby red slippers!!🥿 🥿 We have to die and become reborn!! Dye!! Dye those slippers red!!😮❤❤😂
      Makes complete sense!! 🤯
      There’s no place like home!! Home is where the heart is!! Jupiter and the 5th dimension!! 🐸 🍀 Clover Field!!👽 🛸
      Time speeds up real fast once we’re there because seeing is definitely believing!! We get excited, hearts start pumping!! 💕 Minds start to open up!! 💜 Oxytocin pumping through our blood!! A love signature!! ✍️ Removing our writers block!! We’re storytellers!! 📚
      The two blood moons also like draculas fangs!! Or the fangs of a snake and spider!! A kundalini experience!!!🐍💜 An anti venom!! 🐜 A love bite!! I’m nibbling your ear!! Ringing your ears like church bells!! A liberty bell! 🔔 Heightening your spidey senses!!!🕷️😳🩸🩸
      My story just gets juicier!! 🍇 Sticky icky!! 🎄When is it juicy enough for you, I guess, is the question!! Strawberry Hill!! Cherry Blossoms!!🍒🍓We even got hills named after chocolate!!🍫
      Purrthquakes instead of Earthquakes!! 😻
      A Never Ending Story!! 🐺 ☁️ 🐌 ☁️ 📖
      “Still in love! Still in love with that dream!! 🏔️ 🏔️ 🦌 “
      Super Earth!! ⭐️ Superheroes!! ⭐️ Super pets!! ⭐️ Super foods!!⭐️ A place where everything is awesome!!🤩 A place where everyone is adorable!!🥰
      I’m a sighentist!!🙄 A souldier!!😇 A Glad I Ate Hers!!😋🥧 And most of all a Roarier for the universe!!🦁
      The Great Lakes represent the heart of the ocean coming together!! 🫀🌊 A huge manifestation!! 🐰 ⏰ 🍄 A microcosm of our oceans, which will someday become fresh!! 🔬 We’re sky people!! The planet our backyard!! An aquarium!! 🐠 An octopuses garden!!🪴 🐙
      Dinosaurs have played the role of our bacteria!! 🦠 They’re back!!! 🦕 🦟 Hold on to your butts!!! Everything is getting supersized!!🧑🏿‍🍳🍟🍔🥤
      When the Earth gets it two blood moons 🩸 🩸, it will represent us!!! Mostly centered around twin flames!!🥰🥰
      Like we’re children of the universe!! We’ll be cells too and it will be like we’re watching each other grow and evolve!!🦥🐾🦥🐾
      Our stars bursting here and there!! 💥 🎇 🎆
      My cosmic perspective!! 🐼 🧪 ⚛️

  • @OlivierMIEL
    @OlivierMIEL 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Yay, another episode of Solvay Bingo!

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      wait until I get to 1927, there will be a full Solvay Bingo

    • @OlivierMIEL
      @OlivierMIEL 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@jkzero I don't know if I can wait!

    • @OlivierMIEL
      @OlivierMIEL 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@jkzero More seriously, wonderful work. There are not a lot of videos on TH-cam with this level of quality. You make the world a better place.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@OlivierMIEL Thanks, that means a lot. To be honest, I have a blast making these videos. Many of the original papers that I have used I read them now for the first time. I don't get why I was not requested to read them during my undergrad or doctorate, they should be minimum reading material to any physicists. It has been an experience of discovery too, many of the stories in textbooks are just the regurgitation of someone else's version, which perpetuates so many wrong stories.

  • @vancetuber7305
    @vancetuber7305 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Hevesy's name is pronounced with an "sh", not an "s".

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thanks for the correction, I will keep it in mind. I attempt the correct pronunciation, but as with Gustav Kirchhoff I mess it up quite often.

  • @Bobby-fj8mk
    @Bobby-fj8mk 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I always wanted to be a Noble prize winning scientist
    so that everyone would respect me.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      I find this a tricky statement. Scientists earn respect of others in the scientific community by their work quality and integrity, the Nobel prize becomes just a recognition to a great career (or a lucky moment). It is mostly the general public who gets impressed by Nobel laureates.

  • @chalkchalkson5639
    @chalkchalkson5639 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I'm not sure I like calling bohrs model quantum. To me it's an intermediate step between classical models and the schrödinger model. Neither quantum nor classical. Some really important aspects of quantum theories are missing still. Maybe "the first model of a quantized atom", similar to how einsteins description of the photoelectric effect didn't give us a quantum theory of light, but rather a theory of quantized light.
    Btw my quantum theory prof told this story fairly similarly, but derived the quantised levels by treating the electron as a wave with wavelength obeying einsteins relation. Given that de boglie won't publish for another decade, I find that kind of hard to believe. Do you know if that has an ounce of truth in it, or was he just mixing up history a bit?

    • @DavidMFChapman
      @DavidMFChapman 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      The model is not fully developed quantum mechanics, but it is a quantum model owing to the discrete values of physical quantities, as opposed to continuous values.

    • @jkzero
      @jkzero  6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      I agree in not calling quantum mechanics, that is what came later. However, Bohr's model is quantum in the sense that his electrons are restricted to well defined discrete orbits in which they can only have discrete energy levels. You are right, Bohr did not proposed a quantum theory of the atom but rather a model, meaning a mathematical formulation that captures some of the key features of the physical system. A model is just an approximation of reality, not a full theory. What Bohr and many others at the time were doing is what today we call "phenomenology."

  • @davidrandell2224
    @davidrandell2224 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    QM classicalized in 2010. Forgotten Physics website uncovers the hidden variables and constants and the bad math of Wien, Schrodinger, Heisenberg, Einstein, Debroglie,Planck,BOHR,etc. So,no.

    • @peterfireflylund
      @peterfireflylund 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Zyprexa.

    • @davidrandell2224
      @davidrandell2224 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@peterfireflylund “He who will not read is no better than he who cannot read “, Mark Twain.Try it during your lucid moments - if any- and when you are released from constraints.

  • @no-one_no1406
    @no-one_no1406 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    The argument against the Rutherford model of the electron having a acceleration is laughable at best. If you have a particle remain at the same distance to the other particle whose existence cause the force, how can that "count" as a acceleration. No change is distance is clearly not a acceleration.
    Specific energy levels does require some more refinement though!

    • @DavidMFChapman
      @DavidMFChapman 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      This is basic physics: uniform circular motion requires continuous acceleration towards the centre. Otherwise the particle would travel away in a straight line.

    • @no-one_no1406
      @no-one_no1406 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@DavidMFChapman That is the classical explanation yes.
      That I don't agree with at all.
      It's simply a matter of perspective.
      Very much similar to rotating a ball attached to a string. It remains at the same distance to you. Yes there is a force involved. But is there really a "meaningful" acceleration? The kinetic energy doesn't change. The change in position over time -> 0.
      Seems to me like you could equally see this as a internal state of the system not affected by anything outside the system. A way to store kinetic energy maybe.
      Electron philosophy if I may.

    • @no-one_no1406
      @no-one_no1406 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      My view is that uniform circular motion can be seen as the same thing as traveling in a straight line. In certain cases.

    • @DavidMFChapman
      @DavidMFChapman 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      @@no-one_no1406An object in a circular orbit is moving in two dimensions. Yes, the speed is constant, but the velocity vector is continually rotating-that changing velocity is the acceleration.

    • @DavidMFChapman
      @DavidMFChapman 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@no-one_no1406 th-cam.com/video/wxkErwF2fOg/w-d-xo.htmlsi=vDcmP3z6V-Ljzkka