How Electricity Actually Works

  • Am Vor 3 Monate

    VeritasiumVeritasium

    This video is sponsored by Brilliant. The first 200 people to sign up via brilliant.org/veritasium get 20% off a yearly subscription.

    Special thanks to:
    Bruce Sherwood, Ruth Chabay, Aaron Titus, and Steve Spicklemore
    matterandinteractions.org
    VPython simulation: tinyurl.com/SurfaceCharge

    Thanks to Ansys for help with the simulations: www.ansys.com/products/electr...

    Huge thanks to Richard Abbott from Caltech for all his modeling

    Electrical Engineering DE-filmrs:
    Electroboom: de-film.com/us/Electroboom
    Alpha Phoenix: de-film.com/us/AlphaPhoeni...
    eevblog: de-film.com/us/EevblogDave
    Ben Watson: de-film.com/ch-UCgZU...
    Big Clive: de-film.com/us/Bigclive
    Z Y: de-film.com/us/ZongyiYang
    NYU Quantum Technology Lab
    de-film.com/ch-UCk7i...
    Dr. Ben Miles
    de-film.com/ch-UCUeZ...
    Further analysis of the large circuit is available here: ve42.co/bigcircuit

    Special thanks to Dr Geraint Lewis for bringing up this question in the first place and discussing it with us. Check out his and Dr Chris Ferrie’s new book here: ve42.co/Universe2021

    ▀▀▀
    References:
    A great video about the Poynting vector by the Science Asylum: de-film.com/v-video-C7tQJ42nGno.html

    Sefton, I. M. (2002). Understanding electricity and circuits: What the text books don’t tell you. In Science Teachers’ Workshop. -- ve42.co/Sefton

    Feynman, R. P., Leighton, R. B., & Sands, M. (1965). The feynman lectures on physics; vol. Ii, chapter 27. American Journal of Physics, 33(9), 750-752. -- ve42.co/Feynman27

    Hunt, B. J. (2005). The Maxwellians. Cornell University Press.

    Müller, R. (2012). A semiquantitative treatment of surface charges in DC circuits. American Journal of Physics, 80(9), 782-788. -- ve42.co/Muller2012

    Galili, I., & Goihbarg, E. (2005). Energy transfer in electrical circuits: A qualitative account. American journal of physics, 73(2), 141-144. -- ve42.co/Galili2004

    Deno, D. W. (1976). Transmission line fields. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, 95(5), 1600-1611. -- ve42.co/Deno76

    ▀▀▀
    Special thanks to Patreon supporters: Inconcision, Kelly Snook, TTST, Ross McCawley, Balkrishna Heroor, Chris LaClair, Avi Yashchin, John H. Austin, Jr., OnlineBookClub.org, Dmitry Kuzmichev, Matthew Gonzalez, Eric Sexton, john kiehl, Anton Ragin, Diffbot, Micah Mangione, MJP, Gnare, Dave Kircher, Burt Humburg, Blake Byers, Dumky, Evgeny Skvortsov, Meekay, Bill Linder, Paul Peijzel, Josh Hibschman, Mac Malkawi, Michael Schneider, jim buckmaster, Juan Benet, Ruslan Khroma, Robert Blum, Richard Sundvall, Lee Redden, Vincent, Stephen Wilcox, Marinus Kuivenhoven, Clayton Greenwell, Michael Krugman, Cy 'kkm' K'Nelson, Sam Lutfi, Ron Neal

    ▀▀▀
    Written by Derek Muller
    Edited by Derek Muller
    Filmed by Trenton Oliver and Petr Lebedev
    Animation by Mike Radjabov and Ivy Tello
    Additional video/photos supplied by Getty Images
    Music from Epidemic Sound and Jonny Hyman
    Produced by Derek Muller, Petr Lebedev, and Emily Zhang

ElectroBOOM
ElectroBOOM

This was a greatly detailed video and I think we are pretty much on the same page! Thanks for the shoutout and going through the trouble of clarification. P.S. by the way, the resistor in your experiment didn't quite match the lien impedance, other you would get half your supply voltage right away. But I mean with such small capacitance and inductances, the probing itself could d have added some parasitic components to the lines. PPS: Like I said above "pretty much on the same page"! It is a complex subject, and I think some nuances could have been addressed better. Maybe Derek and I could sit together and react to nuances to clarify things!

Vor 3 Monate
STP_13
STP_13

@GünniBusch

Vor 2 Tage
Patrik6920
Patrik6920

@Cyba IT who said it wasent?... and be greatfull it does or we woudnt had Radio or smartphones...

Vor 3 Tage
Nemo U
Nemo U

Also, you don't even need Maxwell's equations and all that: This controversy can be solved by high school chemistry. Yes you read that right. The big elephant in the room "veritasium" is deliberately omitting is what happens inside the battery, because that would absolutely demolish his perspective. The battery is a chemical storage of electricity and that release depends on the MOVEMENT OF ELECTRONS amongst atoms and molecules. So really it is electron flow that starts the whole thing.

Vor 4 Tage
Nemo U
Nemo U

The stuff with the electrons moving and the magnetic field is a bit of a chicken and egg situation. But the magnetic field coils around the surface of the wire and travels directionally that way anyways. Anyhow it is the electrons moving that generates a magnetic field in the first place.

Vor 4 Tage
Nemo U
Nemo U

Don't encourage him, the first video was dead wrong in many things, specially in the communication part. The big implication about the light bulb "thought experiment" was that *the whole* amount of electricity would jump from the magnetic field. And this is heavily implied by the whole preceding video. And it is completely false. What this experiment "Proves" is just a flicker of electromagnetism from turning the system on. On DC this would only, even if it was poweful enough, power the bulb for a fraction of a second. That was NOT what was being said before. Instead of retracting the bad science this bvideo is a big "ackshually I am right" where the other video also said electrons DON'T actually move through the wire. It's pure sophistry.

Vor 4 Tage
Philip Blank
Philip Blank

My brain gained mass from watching this. Incredible work!

Vor 2 Monate
Scraz
Scraz

Fantastic to see experts, engineers, and scientists calling each other out in the interest of providing good science and accurate information. Then we see competitive and collaborative discussion that results in getting to the heart of the matter and getting as close as we can (for now) to the truth of it. Without vitriol or maliciousness.

Vor 2 Monate
Nemo U
Nemo U

No maliciousness? the first video was dead wrong in many things, specially in the communication part. The big implication about the light bulb "thought experiment" was that the whole amount of electricity would jump from the magnetic field. And this is heavily implied by the whole preceding video. And it is completely false. What this experiment "Proves" is just a flicker of electromagnetism from turning the system on. On DC this would only, even if it was poweful enough, power the bulb for a fraction of a second. That was NOT what was being said before. Instead of retracting the bad science this bvideo is a big "ackshually I am right" where the other video also said electrons DON'T actually move through the wire. It's pure sophistry.

Vor 4 Tage
Zach Falbe
Zach Falbe

@sstillwell Scientusst had been propagandized to forego the scientific method, in favor of peer-reviewed papers.

Vor 4 Tage
Blue Radium
Blue Radium

I'm learning way more about electricity than I ever thought I would and I'm here for it - please keep nitpicking each other's videos have been loving it

Vor 12 Tage
Widodo Akrom
Widodo Akrom

True

Vor 13 Tage
Senior Manager at PragerU
Senior Manager at PragerU

It's illustrative of the lesson that science is also a process, not just a body of knowledge.

Vor 19 Tage
ESC YouTube
ESC YouTube

Just finished watching the initial video. This video, above all else, proves to me that you have named your channel quite accurately! The disambiguation of misleading falsehoods the general population believe and the establishment of truths is a truly honourable goal that I admire. Keep up the great work :)

Vor 2 Tage
Ravi Sundaram
Ravi Sundaram

When we explain or understand AM/FM radio stations, we imagine a giant coil oscillating in the radio station. It emits waves. The electrons in the antenna vibrate in synch. And we pick up the signal. We never think about return current, completion of circuit etc. So we had the basics to understand this. But because we were given a short hand simplistic model of circuits and currents flowing through wires, it is difficult to unlearn that short hand and understand the wave propagation.

Vor 2 Monate
Andre D
Andre D

@bhjgblhll isn’t special relativity theory giving an approach of explaining the phenomena of E creating B and vice versa? And the EMW ripping off due to the B not able to adapt fast enough is given by a lot of sources. At low frequencies the B balloons and contracts without an EMW ripping off. At high enough frequency the balloon (=B) cannot contract as fast. I know it’s probably a explanation based on a simplification but it gives an intuition behind a lot of things happening and especially explains why higher frequencies are needed to efficiently create EMWs. If you have a more true to life explanation, I am happy to listen

Vor 5 Tage
bhjgblhll
bhjgblhll

@Andre D hi. So there is no explanation for why changing E generates B or why changing B generates E. It’s consider first principles which means it’s the one thing that can’t be explained like why does mass generate gravity on other masses Additionally, there isn’t any limit on how fast E or B can change. I mean they are limited to c but aren’t we all lol

Vor 9 Tage
Chris Idema
Chris Idema

@David Carlsson Not inductance. It's the electric field that does most the work here, not the magnetic field. It's stray capacitance basically.

Vor 10 Tage
David Carlsson
David Carlsson

Am I wrong to understand this video to simply explain the most basic of inductance? (Also surface charges)

Vor 13 Tage
Dark Matter
Dark Matter

@Andre D For the single wire antenna, there is the ground plane. I'm not an antenna expert. Feyman Lectures on Physics is a terrific resource to build concepts on Electromagnetism.

Vor 23 Tage
Michael Permana
Michael Permana

This… this is what science is all about. Thought experiment, theory, peer review, experiment. Well done everyone.

Vor 3 Monate
Hiker John
Hiker John

@永恒的中国 Watch it again to just what the battery provides.

Vor 10 Tage
Hiker John
Hiker John

@Leroy Dubois As soon as you think something that does not support their narrative. Or as soon as they think this knowledge is a threat to their control.

Vor 10 Tage
celery
celery

@Doctor Fate the third reply

Vor 14 Tage
Doctor Fate
Doctor Fate

@Gary for now bro wtf does that have to do with this guys comment... no one asked you to explain batteries wtf???

Vor 18 Tage
Gary for now
Gary for now

Basically any battery will simply sit with no ion or electron movement but indeed as batteries get used they do breakdown and a tiny bit of exchange between the anode and cathode. About that simple.

Vor 18 Tage
Rock Your Pain
Rock Your Pain

Hey, would you consider delving into how electric fields would drive electrons in our body, more specifically in the axons and dendrites of neurons? I would especially be curious about how the myelin sheath around the axons would “speed up” signal transmissions after an action potential has been elicited?

Vor 17 Stunden
Matthew Crites
Matthew Crites

I just love the fact that scientists and engineers, use the scientific process on each other in order to produce better information

Vor 8 Tage
Calcifer
Calcifer

Amazing animations, this visuals really help into understanding the fields gradients moving through space. Thank you very much for this !

Vor 2 Monate
UnMomento
UnMomento

You know what Derek I always struggled to accept the regular model because It was really weird to me that electrons move inside the cable just like a they do in a battery. I always thought to myself that it is a oversimplification because of the difference between the two mediums. Concept of electricity really clicked inside my mind after I saw your video.

Vor 2 Monate
Kiptoo Evans
Kiptoo Evans

Congratulations to my fellow electrical engineers

Vor 2 Monate
David Carlsson
David Carlsson

This was the most amazing video I've seen in years, 2 years after graduating from computer engineering (10% was theoretical electrical engineering) I always promised myself that I would find a better visual understanding of the theoretical thesis and names that was used, that I barely understood the use for and barely scraped by. Thank you, I will carry on this visual understanding to my nephews and nieces.

Vor 13 Tage
NorthernDruid
NorthernDruid

I really enjoyed both the original video and this deeper dive. And I think they worked quite well as standalone videos. I wouldn't mind more coupled videos with a more in-depth explanation follow-up exploring the topic further.

Vor 10 Tage
Kitty
Kitty

3:12 the average velocity of the electrons ( their overall movement over time) is many times greater than this, and the 100,000 m/s speed is the speed of the flow of charge, not the individual electrons' speed

Vor 8 Stunden
Sir Pemberton S. Crevalius
Sir Pemberton S. Crevalius

Respect for admiting to some mistakes. It's refreshing to see someone both rationally defend their side and also admit to some mistakes and fix said mistakes.

Vor 3 Monate
Graeme Abernethy
Graeme Abernethy

I didn't see any mistakes but alot of people misunderstanding

Vor 5 Tage
Right Hand
Right Hand

Nikola Tesla

Vor 20 Tage
Stefan Hoffmann
Stefan Hoffmann

@max luthor sorry but at least one rocket exploded because of this kind of error

Vor 20 Tage
Amazonian Custodian
Amazonian Custodian

Wait, you mean actually doing science proper?

Vor Monat
Andrew Troye
Andrew Troye

better watch out the reality is vanguard and black rock run the world lol

Vor Monat
Gilder von Schattenkreuz
Gilder von Schattenkreuz

As Electricians we actually Learned this Differently. We effectively Learned that Electricity effectively means a Charged Status in terms of Seperated Charges. In this case this is Provided by the Battery. The Battery consists of two Electrically Seperated Components. One where we got an Overabundance of Electrons thus the Electrons Outnumbering the Protons and creating a Negative Charge. And One where we got a Lack of Electrons thus the Protons Outnumbering the Electrons. Once we connect a Circuit. This Charge will be Released and the two Sides will start working towards Equalizing their Charges. The Energy therefore comes from the Battery being Charges. Thus Energy being Expended to Seperate Protons and Electrons in the Battery to Create an Inbalance. The Electrical Field is actually considered Wasted Energy. its effectively Energy Lost to the Process as the Magnetic Field from this Inbalance Extends and if its impeded by anything the Energy given away to whatever Impedes it being lost to us. Albeit that Principle can of course be used to Heat things via Induction or to Transfer Energy in a Transformer. Energy is properly Expended at whatever User is Linked into the Curcuit. And once the Energy the Battery is Charged with has been used up and the whole Circuit is Equalized in Charge. The Battery is Empty and we need to Insert a New one. Of course depending on the Resistances inside the Circuit and depending on the Charges added. The whole Circuit might still have a Charge towards the Earth or other Objects. Which in General we Avoid by Grounding the Circuit. To make sure that the Circuit will not have any Voltage towards Parts where we dont want it to have that. (Its Dangerous otherwise as a Human or Animal might Touch it and Close a Circuit with the other side and therefore Fry himself on it) If the Circuit is Cut before the Energy is Emptied. And we still have Electrical Fields up. (Veeeeeery Long Lines or Electrical Parts that create an Electrical Field for their Purpose) these actually turn into Ghost Energy because they are effectively now a Charge Stored in the Circuit itself which is Charged Opposed to the Direction we actually led Energy through. Thats why we usually have Diodes in there to Allow that Charge to Dissipate backwards to the Ground and Equalize the Circuit down to a safe Voltage again. Albeit that is not to say that this is Scientifically accurate. Simplification is often used for such Education. As its more Importand to Relay the way it works than to accurately Relay the Physics behind it. Just an Interesting Difference.

Vor 6 Tage
Shaun Steven
Shaun Steven

Derek, can you do a video using the same tools and simulations to illustrate how the electric field would look in this situation with an alternating current instead of a direct current? I am very interested to see this aspect of the more detailed explanation of circuits.

Vor 2 Monate
Kavi Tiko
Kavi Tiko

The field propogates at the speed of light, and we can only alternate current orders of magnitude of Hz slower than that. So, using the propogation models he showed in the video, you would see that wave fill out the circuit, then watch that for several years, then it would invert. T'would be a very boring video.

Vor 15 Stunden
Eren Arslan
Eren Arslan

+

Vor 19 Tage
Francesco Belmonte
Francesco Belmonte

ANOTHER AWESOME VIDEO! THANK YOU FOR EXPANDING ON IT, Hydro in Canada charges a "delivery fee", so if this misconception, along with the fact that electricity DOES NOT actually flow to ANY home can be proven in a court of law AND if enough people speak up about, then Hydro will be facing their downfall and many would be celebrating the crumbling of such empires. If we think about how our Sun gives us FREE energy in the form of Light, Heat, etc.. everyday throughout our lives and without discrimination or judgement then it justifies that NO ONE should be paying for electricity in any part of the world. Tesla knew it was possible and created Wireless Electricity but was stopped and shutdown by those in power, that's another story altogether but realizing these are the things which connect us all gives "power" back to the people.

Vor 8 Tage
GLAZZ INFO
GLAZZ INFO

This video have much better explanation than the previous one. I am impressed by this explanation. It shows us facts and figures.

Vor Monat
AlphaPhoenix
AlphaPhoenix

Fantastic revisit! The animations and the simulations were spot-on, and great at showing the difference between the transient “first-second” effect, and the steady-state “rest of time” behavior. The whole “expanding loop of current” thing is a great way to phrase it, because after that poynting loop expands to match the actual physical loop of wire, then stuff starts to behave normally and all of the power is transmitted around the loop very close to the wire. I still hold that for this simple circuit, turning on a lightbulb with wires much smaller around than they are long, the effect of surface charge vs internal charge is negligible, so you can ignore any skin-effect stuff and say that “mobile” electrons are indeed pushing on other “mobile” electrons using their fields, but I totally agree that that’s a simplification, just a simplification that makes the intuition a lot easier. I also need to do some math about how far the average “electron” is displaced in order to build the initial charge distribution around some typical circuit elements - axial flow is the only way I understand those charge distributions getting built, and this whole endeavor has made me think hard about what that means. Someday when I think I understand it better I’ll edit up my pt.2 response video - thanks for the shoutout! I’ve got a great experiment in the works to show the “expanding poynting loop” 😁

Vor 3 Monate
simon6071
simon6071

​@مجاحد You being a student of biology instead of electrical engineering can certainly explain why you think Derek's explanation is amazing when it is amazingly wrong. He cannot even tell the difference between the function of a battery and a capacitor and don't know that a circuit carrying a steady direct current does not produce an electric field OUTSIDE the circuit. Electricity does not work as Derek wrongly explains when a circuit is carrying a steady direct current. You should stick to studying biology instead of being misled by him in physics.

Vor 2 Monate
مجاحد
مجاحد

Despite being in class 12th and being a student of biology instead of engineering student , the explanation and simulations are so amazing that I understood each and every thing. I have never thought that electricity works in such a way.

Vor 2 Monate
simon6071
simon6071

@sangamo Who did you reply to with the word "No"? Did you reply to the original poster AlphaPhoenix or to me? If you are not able to put your disagreement to words because you just disagree without any sensible reason, you are not making contribution to the discussion at all.

Vor 2 Monate
Alexander Quilty
Alexander Quilty

Also I like the better explanation, and this is a small detail but, at ~17:00 you flipped the battery terminals, but the charge distribution was still shown the same way. Thank you for the video Veritasium 😁

Vor 15 Tage
J Wesley Mays
J Wesley Mays

In my view, the way this video describes the effect of your original video and embraces how important all of those effects were to our general understanding — that all illustrates why politics are so hard to discuss AND why when we work together, even when we have disagreements, we can better learn things about our world. Humanity is, among everything else that it is, a collection of perspectives; and when we try and illustrate our perspective one way, other people with different perspectives become focused on different parts of that illustration than we intended. The short sight then has humans yelling at each other for antagonizing and perceived ... disingenuity... (if you'll allow me to coin that conjugation; there's probably a previously established English word that I'm failing to think of or don't know). My evidence of this is the retelling of stories of fiction. Even when not wholly rewritten, different elements of the same story can be emphasized or downplayed to alter the take, giving an insight into the new person telling it. Each giving the listener/viewer something new to consider. You came back with a new version of the experiment and faced the miscommunications and your faults, in a way that the way people in political conversations fail (or refuse) to do. Someone else may come back at you with how you've skewed your original video to try and back flip your way into having been right when you were wrong - and who might still seek to prove you wrong along an unintended avenue. You attempted to address such potentials, but among the billions of us, someone will think of one you missed. (That's the distribution curve at work, I think. The more of us there are, the bigger and further the fringes get. We need them.) I've been unfairly picking on political discussions, but the way I see these collaborations of mind through discussion, the same sort of miscommunication exists in all things. The Telephone Game comes to mind and doesn't even require an Agent of Chaos who might deliberately warp the message. In pockets, we develop cultures around enough similar thoughts, but even in those pockets, the differences persist. The same but different; or the same but smaller. Be good to each other, and to yourself when your emotions do that human thing.

Vor 27 Tage
Cade Perkins
Cade Perkins

First thing, Veritasium's videos are great! They inspire deep learning and fun experimentation! However, just like the video about gravity and force, sometimes the messages tend to dismiss "old" concepts as incorrect just because something new is learned which seems more profound. But It is unnecessary to dismiss the "old" view of electrons and currents in a circuit just because we also discover that radiation and fields play an important role. And I don't mean this merely due to the practical use, I mean as part of the fundamental explanation. The flow of electrons is still key to explaining and understanding a circuit. I could go on and on about various details, but instead I'll cut to chase. The radiated field apparently plays an important role in the circuit, although one must then ask the most crucial follow-up question: What generates the necessary electric field which the video claims is the "more fundamental" element here? The direct answer is the charged particles, the electrons. Although the video does indeed point out that the electrons arrange themselves to establish the necessary fields in the wire, the treatment of the electrons thereafter is set aside for a preference of "the field". However, as the electrons begin to drift, the only way for the field to maintain its necessary configuration is for the electrons to also continuously shift and move to maintain that field. Guess what? That also requires energy! Energy can also be stored in the charged particle configuration! In other words, if the "energy is in the field", that energy would quickly dissipate and the field alone could not power the circuit unless the charges continuously rearranged themselves to maintain that field throughout the circuit. The field would not exist, or at least the necessary field to do continuous work would not be maintained without the flow of electronics, the current. Thus the current remains just as fundamental a part of the circuit as the field. Like so many other concepts in physics that are first explained in isolated, pure environments--think about frictionless surfaces and "no air resistance"--when teaching basics of kinematics, as we add more detail and learn how to contemplate more complex examples, we don't necessarily need to drop the old while we grasp the new concepts as "more fundamental". What if we wrapped the wires in radiation absorbing/attenuating shields... how would that affect the outcome? Would making such an equivalent "no radiative field" scenario contradict the classic concept of current in the wire? No. It could however prevent the lightbulb from behaving as it did in the experiment. Rather the new knowledge needs to be incorporated into a more complete and mature understanding. It is incorrect to say that "all the energy is in the field" when the configuration of the entire circuit system is necessary for the light to continue working as part of the circuit. Just like when dealing with gravity where both potential and kinetic energy must be included in the same equation, in a circuit we need to include both the energy in the fields and the potential energy of the charged particle configuration.

Vor 28 Tage
bhjgblhll
bhjgblhll

@Cade Perkins sorry. I had no idea you’d be so interested. I would have spent more time writing a better comment. So, I know two things. The first I learned formally the second via wiki armed w knowledge of the first. The electrodynamics consideration of current. Which predates any understanding of electrons starts with ohms law. This is what I am referring to w the E external part, but Honestly, I don’t remember this model as well as I should. I was thinking of the differential form of ohms law, and mixed up E ext w Potential difference (like standard ohms) which can be solved for w E. This Information comes from intro electrodynamics by that asshole Griffith’s (class is just hard. He’s fine author). The course and text are standard and taken all us physics majors in junior or senior year. It’s chapter 8. You can find book on lib gen. This model is the purely EM model for current. It is one step above second semester physics and the model pioneered by Drude (see below). Griffith’s good place to look if you really wanna work through it. Drude model which which allows formulation equivalent differential of ohms law equivalent ohms historically follows ohms. This is the model that Griffith’s touches on to motivate his model. Not too much depth in Griffith’s into background assumption abt drift velocity and such in the text though. At this time Ppl didn’t understand atoms or e-. Following this, you get summerfield-drude model which arrives 1930 so post the most fundamental QM work like schro eq, Heisenberg, and Dirac formalisms. I believe/hope post bloc theorem and qm solution to infinite crystal lattice using Kroniger and Penny model/potential. I don’t understand either drude model or summerfield-drude that well abd certainly don’t pretend to be an expert. Therefore, I can’t provide much further guidance. It is likely that the models have been further refined since.

Vor 8 Tage
Cade Perkins
Cade Perkins

@bhjgblhll Hmmm, but the models you mentions are only models for the transport (i.e. flow, current) of electrons in a metal. Those models do not explain all aspects of a real circuit. They don't explain (even attempt to explain) radiative fields or the operation of a chemical battery (which are not made of only metals). It's confusing that you consider the external electric field ("E external" as you call it) as an "older way of understanding" when the electric field is inserted into all of these models. In other words, the electric field is an external parameter to these models also. These models offer a refined understanding of how quantum mechanical electrons are a "free gas or liquid of electrons" scattered by a metal lattice, etc. Along with the basic models of resistivity and Ohm's law, they can explain nuanced effects within the metal conductors, but they do not satisfy questions about the overall details of the electric fields in the circuit, the flow of energy in the entire circuit system, etc., etc. Take the battery out of the circuit and close the circuit. Any reasonable, predictive model of electron flow still applies to this rather useless circuit. Without the battery, there are still electrons in the metals that interact (i.e. are scattered) by stray fields and other environmental perturbations, but there is nothing which will maintain the flow of energy, nothing that will generate an electric field sufficient to direct an ongoing current of electrons which in turn provides energy to another part of the circuit. The chemical battery is what drives the circuit. If you still differ in this opinion, try posting more than names of models. This is a public forum for those learning about these concepts, so give us more than abstract references.

Vor 8 Tage
bhjgblhll
bhjgblhll

I’m w you but uhhhh E external driving I is by far the older way of understanding circuits. It’s derived from Lorentz law. I believe fully in 1901 microscopic ohms law. See drude model. This utilized drift current which was not understood because no one understood e-. Summerfield-Drude model follows.

Vor 9 Tage
Bai Su Zhen
Bai Su Zhen

@Cade Perkins Thank you Cade, I've read your entire effort post and it was worth it.

Vor 11 Tage
Cade Perkins
Cade Perkins

@Morning Lift It's NOT wrong to say that. The chemical potential energy inside the battery is what drives the circuit. Like any system where useful work is done, energy is continually converted and transferred to different forms of energy. Chemical potential energy of the ions in the battery (in other words, the potential energy of the electrons bound to each atom) is transferred to the free electrons which move out one side of the battery and into the other (the current), and these "free" electrons in the metal wires configure themselves to establish fields which then push along other electrons. Without the continual chemical reactions going on inside the battery, the electric field would quickly come to an equilibrium and there would be no more movement of electrons and no more radiated energy by fields outside the wires. The battery is certainly the source of energy to keep this happening.

Vor 15 Tage
Savage Gaming
Savage Gaming

I can imagine how this could be problematic in small sensitive circuits

Vor Monat
Adrian Kraft
Adrian Kraft

which is why i assume we shield everything

Vor 18 Tage
Lucas Wilian
Lucas Wilian

What a great time to be alive. Hundreds of years ago this discussion would be hold in books or university talks that were unavailable to the vast majority of society. Now, it is being done publically, everyone with access to internet can live this experience. It is amazing and it makes me feel like one 17th century student watching a heated physics debate.

Vor 3 Monate
Deep Bits
Deep Bits

What baffles and scares me is that despite of all the access to the global information and ability for high level education a war like the one in Ukraine is still a possibility.

Vor 2 Monate
Hyperlapse Videos of Cebu
Hyperlapse Videos of Cebu

Youtube University, right

Vor 3 Monate
Vittorio Zamparella
Vittorio Zamparella

@ToyKeeper >>he answered "how long does it take to see non-zero current when two antennas are placed near each other with one connected to a power source". You nailed it!

Vor 3 Monate
Jeremias H
Jeremias H

Debates in universities are history now, so thank god they are still allowed in the internet.

Vor 3 Monate
Thomas Burley
Thomas Burley

@NoLocker Hi NL, thanks for the suggestion. , subscribed.

Vor 3 Monate
Brad Curtis
Brad Curtis

after 50 years I learned something never taught in my electronics class. what else did they miss back then?

Vor 3 Tage
Tom Tom
Tom Tom

One of the greatest teaching videos of all times. I have been asking these questions for over 50 years with no satisfactory answer. The video was on my bucket list.

Vor 2 Tage
Murray Thom
Murray Thom

Great video! This presented almost all of the analysis I was curious to see after having watched your first video. There is only one further correction I'm hoping you'll detail in another follow-up (or maybe you have already). Which is a quantum wave explanation for the transfer of energy from the electrons to the lattice in the bulb, to photons leaving the bulb. This can all be field-based at large scales but if you reduce it down to single-electron emission, you run into the wave/particle duality associated with "measurement" or the transfer of energy at the quantum level that people find so mysterious about quantum mechanics. I'm curious to see how you could help explain and visualize this in a video. Great work!

Vor 2 Monate
Laura Nicholson
Laura Nicholson

Thank you Derek, for all that you do. I was excited to watch this as I recently saw Electroboom's video response to your previous video. I think this gets close to a recent thought experiment/theoretical question of mine. Standard teaching is that electricity needs a circuit to flow. I describe a circuit as a "circle" when I teach about solar, but recently I was thinking about how, when you connect a battery up, you're not connecting it back to the "same" place, since there is some kind of separation between the positive and negative ends of the battery. The assumption: What I need for electricity to "flow" is a voltage difference between two places in space, and a suitable (conductive) medium to get a decent (measurable) current. The experiment: Can I hook up a circuit that starts on one battery and ends on another, i.e. connected to the positive terminal of one battery and the negative terminal of another? Pretty quickly, the voltage across the "circuit" would equalize, but what about before that? The internet tells me that the poles of any given battery aren't necessarily the same, so does it matter if instead I attach the positive to the positive end? Is the amount of electrical flow here going to be happening at the speed of light? Batteries have a chemical flow that maintains the voltage difference, so we also don't have that. I FEEL LIKE MY PREMISE IS RIGHT (with the caveat of not understanding what the voltage difference across two different batteries would be) HOW CAN THIS BE MEASURED. Also, is this what happens with lightning? Conceptually, does lightning count as a circuit, or is it more like a single wire from sky to ground?

Vor 2 Monate
Vee Soho
Vee Soho

I love the "peer review" reactions and the dialog. This is what we need. Everywhere, in science, politics etc. This is what the most powerful neurologic network looks like. Cheers ! Let's keep arguing ! Peacefully and intelligently if we can !

Vor 3 Monate
Uni Corn
Uni Corn

@George vvv also, think I may have responded to you more than once in the same vane/vein of thought... Apologies, chasing duplications.

Vor 3 Monate
Uni Corn
Uni Corn

@George vvv no, not clicks. I had Ve paid to instigate a social forum to pull out intentional gaps through scientific method and discussion. Awareness. 🤗 ..(edit addendum).. 'Drawing' people out into the discussion; because, there are many individuals who'd be qualified, by knowledge, to wear the branded institutions insignia on payroll.

Vor 3 Monate
Ralph Bell
Ralph Bell

Taking the internet back to its roots when it was a means for universities to exchange ideas without needing phones, snail mail, etc.

Vor 3 Monate
Uni Corn
Uni Corn

@George vvv it's a to get people like you to come out and engage the discussion further. Keep it up. 🤗

Vor 3 Monate
Uni Corn
Uni Corn

@lobsterbark 🤔rhetorical purposes = use of rhetorical tools; I believe these to be useful in 'skillful *hands' ... Hiding info etc... Oh, wow; I'm opening such a 'can of worms' ... So many biases in social stuff. Working on getting my agreements to your statements with refinements & additions. (How do I set a notification that brings me, here like some one interacted, only on a timer ... My mind isn't ready at the moment)

Vor 3 Monate
jeroeneijer
jeroeneijer

Thank you for this vivid experiment. You, and the team, simulated the energyflow in a non-connected wire. Could you show how to masure the Voltage and the Current in that non-connected wire of a alternating Voltage in the source curcuit... EG. 18mW could drive a LED on AC in a wire, with a LED in the middle of that wire?! Thank you in advence Yours Jeroen

Vor 2 Tage
Rick Rutledge
Rick Rutledge

I've seen and heard stray paths of lights coming from a high voltage power company during a morning dew. Some of that EMF was probably hitting me, though I didn't feel it.

Vor 2 Tage
Mark Lenet
Mark Lenet

When I joined campus, I took an introduction to electrical engineering course, I was so confident that I knew completely what electricity was...then I studied AC circuit analysis and electromagnetics and became even more confident...but now after studying the quantum nature of waves, electrons and entanglement, I am totally confused, I think am back to square one. What really is electricity?

Vor 8 Tage
Vern Crisler
Vern Crisler

Well, as the engineer said, if you get it wrong, you will be a very unhappy person.

Vor 5 Tage
Silvio Martinez
Silvio Martinez

Well, it's a little controversial, because in maxwell's equations, especifically the fourth, he introduce the concept of displacement current, refers a flow of energy due a variation in electric and magnetic field in a capacitor (this concept was introduced for completing the amper's law called amper-maxwell equation). It means, in a simple circuit like show in the video, if you introduce in series a capacitor, the flow of energy continuous but it depends on if the source is a direct o alternating current. What is that means? the flow of energy occurs if the magnetic and electric fields are variables, for that reason, there are not electrons moving around the circuit (that model tells you, the electrons don't jump from one plate to another). the same happens, in transformers, variables magnetic field induced variables electric fields and then a current appear (maxwell's third law). Let's talk about potential and kinetic energy (the misconception mentioned in the video), How do we can transfer energy over long distances? the trick is to increase the voltage and decrease the current, because with currents the losses are high, what is that means? that is, we must reduce the amount of electrons moving to the load, increasing the potential energy of the system (electric field). at the end of the transmissions lines (Low Voltage) we use transformers (step down) for increasing the kinetic energy and decrease the potential energy; so the energy reaches the load. Another concept that are not mentioned are the reactive energy, active and complex power. They are so important for understanding the principles of electricity... Then we conclude that the transfer of energy is carried out by the conductor

Vor 19 Tage
TroubleChute
TroubleChute

I'm glad this was clarified. This is super advanced, but incredibly interesting.

Vor 3 Monate
simon6071
simon6071

It is deplorable that Derek of Varitasium doubled down on his mistakes and misconceptions of how energy from a 12 V battery is transferred to a light bulb at full power when connected by wires instead of admitting them. Derek of Varitasium is behaving like a shock jock in science instead of a real scientist as far as this video is concerned.

Vor 2 Monate
simon6071
simon6071

@ibrahim kasim What is "this"?

Vor 2 Monate
ibrahim kasim
ibrahim kasim

@simon6071 this.

Vor 2 Monate
ibrahim kasim
ibrahim kasim

@sintered Man honestly thank you, these are exactly my thoughts too as a senior electrical engineering student. So many people seem trying to be constructive and use overly nice words but I believe in brutal honesty, which must be addressed here.

Vor 2 Monate
simon6071
simon6071

@whuzzzup Derek has still made a lot of misleading statements in his second video on electricity. For example, he still tries to give people the wrong idea that energy from a battery is transferred to a light bulb by electric field outside a circuit carrying a steady direct current when a wire carrying a steady direct current does not produce an electric field outside the wire.

Vor 3 Monate
Сергей Агибалов
Сергей Агибалов

Bravo. This is a really great explanation. Thank you very much for the great work, the best explanation I've ever heard. However, this is still inconclusive, because the electrons in the conductor are represented by moving balls. It confuses everyone. Well, it's really strange on the one hand to use Maxwell's equations to explain, and on the other - the classical theory of electrons as balls that crash into the nuclei of atoms. It would be great to watch the 3rd version of the video, in which the zone theory of a solid body will be used to explain the conductivity.

Vor 2 Tage
Perry G
Perry G

Thank you for these videos. While I don't understand all the concepts, it does help me understand why I can't run high and low voltage lines in parallel in residential construction because of the field interference

Vor 2 Monate
Ricardo Del Pino
Ricardo Del Pino

This is basic university physics, that’s why they teach us Maxwell’s equations even in Venezuelan universities. Most Youtubers spread a lot of misconceptions and errors in basic concepts of physics. Great video about fields interactions. And thanks to Maxwell’s work...He was the real GENIUS of electricity and magnetism!

Vor Tag
Pete Nell
Pete Nell

Ya for sure. Maxwell got the short stick in modern education. People learn about Newton and Tesla, but not Maxwell until much later. Mostly because I suspect most teachers don't understand it either. An apple falling is easier to explain.

Vor Tag
VforVaLiAnT
VforVaLiAnT

One of my professors once said, "remember the concepts, not the answers." This idea clashed with my stubbornness many times while I was in school. You bring up a very significant point about using shortcuts even if that was not your intention. My teacher for a statistics course would become annoyed with my questions about "why" we used specific formulas for certain problems. His answer to me was, "don't bother yourself with why, just know it works." He was obviously more concerned with my passing his class. That answer never sat right with me. I did later, outside of my institution, find the answers to my questions. My point here is that shortcuts always seem to reduce our visibility on the importance of concepts, which can sometimes be it's relation to another process.

Vor 17 Tage
marsgizmo
marsgizmo

Impressive explanation Derek! Well done! 👏

Vor 3 Monate
Vegan_Semih_Cyprus_33
Vegan_Semih_Cyprus_33

Crucial 👉The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 💖

Vor 3 Monate
Taejun Chang
Taejun Chang

I love your 3d printing videos

Vor 3 Monate
UMANG CHAUHAN
UMANG CHAUHAN

As an electrical engineer ,this was eye opening. Just brilliant...

Vor 2 Monate
Frode Flem
Frode Flem

12:29 It is misleading to visualize the B-field magnitude here, because it has nothing to do with the generation of current in the top wire. If you visualized dB/dt instead of B, it would present a much sharper wave, and it would be much more apparent that the changing magnetic field induces current in the top wire. Also, it's difficult to tell how big dB/dt is from the simulation because of low sensitivity (B-field magnitude per color intensity) at the front of the wave. You're quite explicit in saying it's the electric field that causes current to flow in the load, but with electromagnetic waves, it's not just one or the other. In the near EM field in particular, you have electromagnetic and electrostatic induction. I'm no expert, but per my intuition at least, B-fields dominate energy transfer in an application like transformers, and E-fields dominate in a tesla coil. It's not clear cut. In the far EM field where the emitting particles are so far from the receiver that there are no feedback effects, the E and B field strengths are proportional, so I guess the dominant contributor depends on the shape and direction of the antenna (?)

Vor Monat
D I
D I

It is a very satisfactory explanation. This is a question I always had when I was studying as an undergrad and the answers I got were close to “it is just magic”

Vor Monat
P.J
P.J

I loved your previous videon on how actually electricity moves and power things. I found your explanation quite clear that it was the magnetic wave that was going from the start to the finish (being juxtaposed to each other) made it possible to transmit energy at what seems faster then light. All because the energy didn't really travel the whole 300000m long wire but "jump" from start to end that was a mere meter away. That was like a revelation to me and very exciting!

Vor 2 Monate
William
William

This was a good revisit. After watching the original I didn’t feel like it made enough sense. It wasn’t until Alpha Phoenix posted his experiment that I understood the point you were actually aiming for.

Vor 3 Monate
Yuval Talya Nehemia
Yuval Talya Nehemia

+

Vor 2 Monate
asktwice2
asktwice2

@ctwardy nobody challenges Maxwell equation, but he didn’t tell it works for VARIABLE field. What he register is a pulse erupting with the switching of the key or pulse from the oscilloscope. But he claimed a battery would let the bulb lit independently on the wholeness of the circuit. As I said - a bunch of correct statements giving a totally wrong cocktail. It is called “artifact” as I know - you take the known result (flash of the bulb light) and then made an artificial explanation mixing highlighting what you believe support the statement and hiding/bypassing the boundary conditions needed to make this statement true. The result is awful fooling of the common audience hypnotized by animations, names/titles, speeches that are cut off the contexts, etc. This is excellent example of manipulation of the audience, typical for mass media nowadays.

Vor 3 Monate
ctwardy
ctwardy

@asktwice2 The experiments match his prediction for both 10m arms and 1000m arms. Would 100km arms be more persuasive?  What about the bits showing that this also follows from fully solving Maxwell's equations?

Vor 3 Monate
William
William

@永恒的中国 That's because this video (and the related videos) aren't focused on the physical and chemical workings of a battery. A battery is only being used as an example of a DC electrical source. There are plenty of videos focus on how a battery works if that's what you want to know.

Vor 3 Monate
永恒的中国
永恒的中国

@William and video shows they dont

Vor 3 Monate
Jeff Grills
Jeff Grills

Love the videos and the awakening that came with it. I've been thinking about what would happen if you put a huge Faraday plate between the wires. There is a video at 13:30 in this video with an extra wire below the circuit - I would love to see that simulation done with the free wire in the space inside the circuit. I think it will act like a Faraday hyperplate (forgive the terminology) and prevent some/all of the propagation into the far wire.

Vor 2 Monate
Poul Thomsen
Poul Thomsen

Hi. I can't help feeling that you could benefit from studying basic transformer theory. A couple of sidenotes: 1. Air has capacitance too. 2. Most formulas are empirical and the theories have been made to fit what we measure using empirical formulas. Meaning nobody really understands what is going on, but we can still make it work.

Vor 2 Tage
Moocow P
Moocow P

Thanks for these videos, I watched the original, some response videos, and this video. I didn't understand everything everyone said (including in this video) but I understood some, and the videos have definitely changed my perspective of how electricity is transferred through circuits.

Vor Monat
michael D
michael D

It's cool to see these back and forth, sorta friendly science feud explanation videos. Like the wind sail one too. Makes these complex ideas more obtainable for the rest of us, even if this is over my head. Youtube actually helping to further scientific discussions with the public.

Vor Monat
Will Krause
Will Krause

Veritasium in the last year or two has really revived my hope that youtube science can be more than either crazy conspiracy videos or purely informational. He's doing the closest a pop-scientist has done to science since the mythbusters, and he's arguably added the important step of peer review into his process.

Vor 3 Monate
Saim Khan
Saim Khan

@Kyu Kyu wonderful list . THANKS ALOT🙏🏻

Vor 3 Monate
Cryinmonkey
Cryinmonkey

@Will Krause I think you misread my comment, I said Kursgesagt in a Nutshell is a good source of highly informative and entertaining educational animations about all aspects of Science and reality. Never said they "Do science" or anything lol, although they do raise many hypothesis in their videos and provide LOTS of supporting info on their conclusions There's just not any self-made experiments because it's a channel made from a conglomerate of many researchers and animators. Your replies I've read seem quite pretentious. I'm sure you're a bright individual but your unpleasantness is outshining your intelligence.

Vor 3 Monate
Will Krause
Will Krause

Dude, you listed GM hikaru and Gotham Chess as science channels, your definition might be a little too broad, haha. And experiments don't have to be on a university, like his wind car thing wasn't, but they still have to be purposeful and repeatable, that is a required part of anything that can be called science. Your hypothesis also needs to be falsifiable, it can't just be a question you ask with a guess for how it can happen. Finally, the peer review part is the most important thing that separates messing around with some chemicals, wires, doing some writing, etc. from doing science and research. Showing it to your peers is the most important part, because then they can ask all the questions you never thought of. We live in a time when science is increasingly not trusted, when anyone can go on YouTube and claim to be a "science" channel as they tell us why to not take vaccines or how their essential oil will heal us or start doing faulty math that proves the 2020 election was a fraud. Defending the rigor that is required for science, whether it's done in someone's backyard or at a university (tho admittedly, you really shouldn't do much biology at home, don't be an animal hoarder), it still has to follow the scientific method to be science, and that is a step few on this platform have really taken.

Vor 3 Monate
Kyu Kyu
Kyu Kyu

@Will Krause I don't think there is anything I can say to you if you cannot see how those channels I posted are doing science! No offense! You seem to have an extreme viewpoint on what "doing science" must look like or else it somehow isn't science anymore... To me, science is a matter of principles that guide sense making in an attempt to answer questions. You have done a good job describing some methods used to answer questions, but those methods are only a small handful of ways we can apply scientific principles to solving questions! You do not need peer review to do science, you do not need formal experiments, you don't even need repeatability. Or scientific language. Those things are only necessary if you want other people to believe in what you have discovered and also to perhaps convince yourself! Haha. But science as both of us can agree is a method of inquiry. Or is it not? Do you really believe that if you where to be asking questions about, let's say how do plants grow? That your question asking would only be considered science if you ran an physical experiment? Or if you had peer review? Or if you repeated your experiment? Surely you are familiar with pure mathematics? Many of those ideas cannot be tested in physical experiments. They exist purely as mental objects. But both of us can agree that the type of thinking it took to formulate those ideas was of a scientific method. If you are asking any question and guessing what the answer will be you are forming a hypothesis, regardless if you have written a formal report or just made a mental note. You don't even need to know what the word hypothesis is, you'll still be doing it! It makes no difference if you are a chemist in a lab, a biologist in the rainforest, or Joe in his garage. Same goes with experimentation. It makes no difference if your experiment takes place in a university, on an air force base, in a hospital, or in your living room. The quality of the experiment is the only thing that matters. And quality has nothing to do with formality and everything to do with the type of rigorous and thorough thinking that went into formulating and defining the experiment, it's protocols and it's goals. I hope you can see that even very simple and crude experiments, or even just spontaneous observable events can answer very complex problems and are as much science as any other more sophisticated experiments. The technical complexity of an experiment, or how nicely it's worded in scientific language, or even how well funded it is, says nothing to it's content or significance or impact. This isn't a dig at you or an attack on what this channel does! I love science! But I absolutely despise the way people try to control the narrative of what is science and what isn't! The great thinkers of our past where practicing and developing scientific principles long before we had an agreed upon language to share those ideas! But it was still science! And it still is! Believe it or not all those channels I posted will inform people of how to perform rigorous scientific method. How to formulate questions, how to think deeply, how to experiment, even how to ask for critique! (Though perhaps not in a way you understand!) Which I think is cool! You might respond to completely different styles of communication and learning! Maybe you have other channels you can share with me!!!!!! I'm always searching for new cool stuff!!!! Peace! Sorry for the long ass reply!

Vor 3 Monate
Will Krause
Will Krause

@Kyu Kyu "Doing science" and "being educational" aren't the same thing. Gotham Chess does great chess teaching, Numberphile does great math teaching, and Ants Canada is a super interesting hobby channel. But they don't follow the scientific method to form a hypothesis, test it, get feedback, and repeat. Cody's lab, sometimes Smarty every Day, and certainly Journey to the Microcosmos do at least the hypothesis and testing, but the addition that Veritasium has brought to the youtube science-adjacent channelverse is properly responding to peer review by other science channels and adjusting experiments accordingly.

Vor 3 Monate
plwpahi
plwpahi

This brought a tear to my eye. I loved this. Thanks, learning is fun.

Vor 26 Tage
Eddie de Beer
Eddie de Beer

The other aspect i also found interesting was the war between the what was at times referred to as the Vectorians versus the Quaternions. The Scientists siding with the Vectorians won. Including the Maxwell Quaternion calculations was just to difficult to understan and do it was totally left out in the University text books. Much like the "War of Currents" referring to Tesla vs Edison or AC vs DC. It would be smashingly awesome to see the level of explanation and detail you gave to show the resultant design of our present circuits that left out the Scalar Potential which includes (G) gravity versus the Vector designed circuits.

Vor 21 Tag
Happy Me
Happy Me

I like watching your channel because of the interesting stuff you come up with. I am not a very smart guy but I’m very very curious about science and cosmology. Keep producing great content, stop worrying about “clickability” rates.

Vor 9 Tage
Account Deel tussen ma
Account Deel tussen ma

Thank you for taking your time and making awesome videos for us. I appreciated the video and it opened my mind of how electricity really works.😀

Vor Monat
John Thompson
John Thompson

Electricity drama continues.

Vor 3 Monate
xstraightxedgexdadx
xstraightxedgexdadx

@Tama Without using Bible quotes, what can you tell me about this world? How would you describe it? Short version please. 😆

Vor Tag
xstraightxedgexdadx
xstraightxedgexdadx

@Fredrik S It IS easy to explain. It's also easy to understand. 😆

Vor Tag
Modredastal
Modredastal

Can't blame anyone, it's a charged topic.

Vor 3 Tage
Scott
Scott

Lol

Vor 11 Tage
cupid ok
cupid ok

Wow school lied to me.... YouTube better

Vor 12 Tage
ben benazzi
ben benazzi

This is why I love YouTube. Thank you all who have contributed and responded. I am an engineer who up until now thought electrons moved the “current”…even though I spent two years studying Maxwell’s equations. I feel dumb but relived ❤️

Vor Monat
Michael Black
Michael Black

I would love to see this same experiment (and simulations) done with a 50-Ohm coax cable and RF energy (i.e. radio transmission) and show the effect of a BALUN on the field strength.

Vor 2 Monate
Jeff Grills
Jeff Grills

That would interest me as well. I had the idea to do the experiment with a faraday plate between the wires. I suspect it's quite similar.

Vor 2 Monate
Denis Stoychev
Denis Stoychev

After watching these 2 videos I feel like I have a better understanding of this subject than my university professors .

Vor 20 Tage
4Shot Pastas
4Shot Pastas

Damn, electricity is way more complicated than I thought. But at the same time, great explanation.

Vor 19 Tage
4Shot Pastas
4Shot Pastas

@Dull AF yeah for the most part

Vor 13 Tage
Dull AF
Dull AF

But did you understand the explanation?

Vor 13 Tage
Roman St. Croix
Roman St. Croix

Quick college engineering physics 2 class refresh, but entertaining! Never thought you could flip the learning process this way, great video.

Vor Monat
Rainbows&Hulacorns
Rainbows&Hulacorns

I so applaud these videos and clarification Ms… mobile electrons never made sense to me and this makes so much more sense and matches more the ideas that I learned when learning power generation

Vor 2 Monate
Ankit Meena
Ankit Meena

It's interesting to note that although the bulb would turn on in almost 1/c sec, the farthest point of wire in this setup (c/2 light seconds away) would develop local electric field only after 0.5 seconds [since information can't travel faster than speed of light]. Hence, the bulb would have turned on even before electrons in most part of the wire have even started drifting.

Vor Monat
Jeremy Hall
Jeremy Hall

Food for thought..... you mentioned two terms Induction and EMF . Those two act differently in Alternating current (AC) than they do In a static or Direct current (DC) circuit. Try using the scope on a circuit supplied by AC voltage...... show the results. I think youll find a big difference.

Vor 27 Tage
The Action Lab
The Action Lab

Very good video. Remember there is a difference between what’s true, and what matters. Derek does a great job showing the whole truth of how circuits really work. The other videos that critique it do a great job at showing what matters. For most situations the small increase in voltage at 1/c seconds is negligible compared to the overall voltage needed to light the light bulb.

Vor 3 Monate
bla bla bla
bla bla bla

@agafaba Derek is coming from a place where he is umm actuallying his entire audience. He got called out because the answer he gave doesn’t follow from the question. This video is him sweeping under the rug the criticisms of the setup of the question then proceeding anyway to present the answer he wanted to present as if that was the correct one all along. There’s so many video responses of very smart people telling Derek he’s missing the plot. They wouldn’t be getting this if Derek wasn’t ambiguous with the setup.

Vor 3 Monate
bla bla bla
bla bla bla

@agafaba I’m not being pedantic. The layman definition is the one I’m using. Which is the societal norm. Derek isn’t concerned with just presenting the thought experiment. He’s proposing that the average engineer isn’t getting it right. That’s a pretty hard stance.

Vor 3 Monate
agafaba
agafaba

@bla bla bla I am arguing that you are being overly pedantic on purpose to dispute a thought experiment. This comment only helps support my stance considering you want to discuss the definition of "on".

Vor 3 Monate
bla bla bla
bla bla bla

@agafaba that’s absolutely not true. In fact, the definition of “fully on” lightbulb that I and other people who responded to Derek’s video are in-line with the layman’s definition of on. It is the niche hyper technical crowd that cares about _any_ and _all_ transient response that would accept Derek’s definition. Derek is the one proposing the _umm actually_ definition.

Vor 3 Monate
agafaba
agafaba

@bla bla bla If veritasium was a youtube channel targeted towards the top experts of each field I would say your arguments hold weight, but considering that its targeted towards people who often have no training in the field I think that should be taken into consideration. If we held teachers to the same standards as you hold veritasium then we would be saying "well actually" after every sentence the teacher says and the students would learn nothing.

Vor 3 Monate
Valen Tino
Valen Tino

I'm very pleased that you made an apologetic video and left the boulevard back into science. We have really known about transients, fluctuations in saturation, inductions, transmission line capacities and much more for more than 100 years. Respect for courage.

Vor 2 Monate
ConquestOfEnergy
ConquestOfEnergy

Ah yes the lumped model. We covered that in transmission line design during my EE degree. Never thought I'd see it come up in this context lol.

Vor 2 Monate
Rick Watkins
Rick Watkins

Our world is extraordinarily complex. Thank you for making the initial proposition and the explanation. I applaud you for responding to all of those who disagreed. Your response has added greater clarity: it's all in the fields.

Vor Monat
Daniel Slomovits
Daniel Slomovits

Very nice, this nails down all of the questions I had after the first video...but it does introduce two more: 1. Surely, in the case of a break in the wire 150,000km away, the bulb doesn't _stay_ on. I assume it would light dimly for 0.5s, then _go out_ instead of getting brighter? Using the transmission line analogy, it would be lit while the capacitors charge, then go out when they're done and no direct current path is available. 2. What happens if the switch interrupts _both_ lines immediately as they exit the battery terminals, not just one, so that when the switch is off the entire loop is electrically isolated from the battery? This reduces I think to two questions: a. Does the surface-charge effect spread at c _along the wire_ , or does that also propagate at c along the shortest path through open space? My guess is it's constrained to the wire, and as such when the _first_ terminal of the battery is connected to the loop in the original scenario, it takes nearly _two_ full seconds for the surface charge to settle. Is this correct? b. If I'm right about (a), does this prevent the electric field from inducing a current across the 1m gap and thus mean it takes the full second for the bulb to come on? I'm going to much more tentatively say it does _not_ , that the absolute values of the electric field will differ in this case but the _relative_ values, and thus the potential difference across the bulb, will be the same, and so the bulb will still light almost immediately. Or, using the transmission line analogy, if those capacitors were physically present, certainly the bulb would light immediately even with the switch interrupting both wires...

Vor 9 Tage
Geralt of Rivia
Geralt of Rivia

Anybody critical or skeptical of science should watch and learn how this conversation has progressed. Props to Derek and the other Youtube creators for a beautiful demonstration of the scientific method.

Vor 3 Monate
Rehoboth Farm
Rehoboth Farm

@Uni Corn I see a little silhouetto of a man Scaramouche, Scaramouche, will you do the Fandango? Thunderbolt and lightning very, very frightening me (Galileo) Galileo (Galileo) Galileo Galileo Figaro Magnifico-o-o-o-o

Vor 3 Monate
Uni Corn
Uni Corn

@Create Belief looking for the thread on compartmentalized social scapes and lies...

Vor 3 Monate
Uni Corn
Uni Corn

@永恒的中国 yes; there is the next video to be made with electron 💍's ...

Vor 3 Monate
Rehoboth Farm
Rehoboth Farm

​@Uni Corn I think that Galileo would probably be amazed at what we have accomplished and disappointed at how little we have learned. Is that a good answer?... 3 the answer is 3.

Vor 3 Monate
Lars Lundholm
Lars Lundholm

This was really interesting! Can you make a video explaining why we need different sizes of wires depending on load? 😊

Vor 2 Monate
Christopher Bourn
Christopher Bourn

What causes the surface charge gradient? I know it's because a battery is hooked up to a wire with a load, but can it be explained on a quantum level?

Vor 2 Monate
Barbara Lachance
Barbara Lachance

Great video. I did a degree in Electrical engineering a long while ago that I never really used. It's nice to be reminded of all this mind bending stuff 😅😅

Vor 19 Tage
futureboy
futureboy

This was amazing. Not only for the scientific discovery value, which is splendid. But for me, the biggest impact is the commentary it can promote about how we go about understanding & explaining phenomena. It shows us that sometimes, useful explanations which result in abstracted equations that may be incredibly useful in driving progress, can utterly block us from making deeper discoveries of ultimate truth. This is important science.

Vor 2 Monate
Nicholas Garcia
Nicholas Garcia

It honestly feels like a brand new genre of YouTube Science. Idk how many other science videos are out there like this, but many of the best math and science YouTubers were referenced in this epic meta-analysis of YouTube science thought. This felt bigger, like vlog peer review. Think of the potential!!! Thanks Veritasium!

Vor 3 Monate
himan12345678
himan12345678

@永恒的中国 I'm sorry if it came across that way, but I wasn't saying it works like that. I was trying to say that can be a helpful way to visualize the workings as I understand them. Another way would be each ion is like the switch but the electric field is what closes to switch and changes the states to then equalize. Neither of these is what is happening, but my attempts at a way to better understand/visualize it.

Vor 3 Monate
Vegan_Semih_Cyprus_33
Vegan_Semih_Cyprus_33

Crucial 👉The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 💖

Vor 3 Monate
永恒的中国
永恒的中国

@himan12345678 you missed important concept of Neil boht. Classical physics don't apply there

Vor 3 Monate
himan12345678
himan12345678

@永恒的中国 I could be wrong since I'm not properly educated on this, but I would say newton's equal and opposite reaction explains it well. The difference in charge potential is what initially sets off the electrical field cascade. The field acts on the charges within the battery so they drive each other continuously, equal and opposite. Until the potential charge difference is equalized, and so then the circuit charges can equalize to a stable state as well.

Vor 3 Monate
niq3d
niq3d

This was my thought as well, I made a note to use this video as an example of how the scientific method and peer review can work. it makes you see the real potential to educate among those who for whatever reason don't want to delve too deeply into the text books, but want to go further than the standard videos and documentaries will usually go. thoroughly enjoyable!

Vor 3 Monate
Jan Bunes
Jan Bunes

@veritasium I am so very grateful for the brilliant lessons you are giving to us on Youtube! I particularly like that you approach, not dogmatic, and humility where warranted, observation based knowledge discovery! thanks! :) By the way, do you play Raft, or just like the music? Would be fun to play the game with you, take care!

Vor 11 Tage
Aulis Vaara
Aulis Vaara

A long time ago I read or heard about AI generated circuit boards that had unconnected circuits that you couldn't remove without stopping the circuit board from working. Now I understand better why this is the case.

Vor 18 Tage
TRANS PON
TRANS PON

Hi, could fields or energy works as Mr Plank's said with light? Particle and/or frecuency... Thanks for your videos, they are great.

Vor 2 Monate
Abhishek Madhu
Abhishek Madhu

Thank you so much for this video. I have a degree in engineering and I didn’t know about this. I always thought its electrons that flow from one end to the other.

Vor 2 Monate
BPFeldman
BPFeldman

What I love about this is that this is truly an application of the scientific method within the scientific community. One person (or group) makes an experiment and hypothesis, peers challenge/prove/disprove the original hypothesis, and experiment with their own experiments, explanations, and hypotheses, and then communicate back to the scientific community. This results in further testable hypotheses and finally consensus. Those that question science sometime feel that science is a collection of edicts set in stone foisted upon them by the elite, but science is beautiful because it demands challenge for it work! I wish I were a writer to explain my thoughts better, but this video and situation surrounding it were simply too inspiring not to comment on.

Vor 3 Monate
Adirbal
Adirbal

@Peter Lonjers That could be true, and it also makes more sense than just randomly bringing that thing up. I interpreted it as defending Derek because he is acting like Russia (and indirectly defending them), but it could also be the other way around. I think I interpreted it that way because, in this video, Derek is (apparently) actually in the right, and he was missunderstood in his previous video / he didn't explain himself propperly, so the whole "I was right all along!" feel drove me in that direction.

Vor 3 Monate
Civsuccess2
Civsuccess2

The video before was simply misleading because it violated causality. Now, Veritisium said the switch side actually forms a circuit and is able to radiate the magnetism to 1 meter away. That makes the switch side wire electromagnet. Hence, it does work on the light bulb through the magnetic field. It's similar to wireless charger.

Vor 3 Monate
Георги Георгиев
Георги Георгиев

@M.N have you used the equivalent of the non ideal capacitor, using ideal components, if you can do that, this whole thing is trivial, even if you are an [pick at random] engineer. As seen in this video(but not the last) . the LC bit is(should be) known to everyone with an electrical (near) degree. I guess mine was nearer(timewise) than yours(even if i didn't finish it, it's complicated and personal). A joke i've heard here: knowing how good of an engineer i am, i don't want to go to the doctor.

Vor 3 Monate
Peter Lonjers
Peter Lonjers

@Adirbal I think you are missing the point electron resonator is not defending Russia they are calling out this channel for acting like Russia. At least that is how I read their comment. Which is clearly an exaggeration. But I also think people praising this video are missing the point of why people were so up in arms about the first video.

Vor 3 Monate
bbarr97
bbarr97

Several questions generated from this video. 1. Could someone be electrocuted by the open circuit wire example that was nearby the closed circuit? 2. Does this bring possible validity to the cancer clusters that were nearby large power line sections? (I didn't read cases, so not sure of court results)

Vor 2 Monate
Yoy Piur
Yoy Piur

I like the visuals, they are perfect. However, for explaining this complex stuff, I would simplify (compress) the content even more.

Vor 19 Stunden
Salamon Shevda
Salamon Shevda

awesome! I wish we had this kind of channels when we were learning science in 90's ))

Vor 2 Monate
Bad O'shan
Bad O'shan

It amazes me how much we can do with things we don't really understand. There is a lot more to be learned about magnetism/electricity than we think we know right now.

Vor 2 Monate
MihaiDesigns
MihaiDesigns

🤯 Amazing work, Derek! Thank you!

Vor 3 Monate
Vegan_Semih_Cyprus_33
Vegan_Semih_Cyprus_33

Crucial 👉The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 💖

Vor 3 Monate
Jamie Angus-Whiteoak
Jamie Angus-Whiteoak

This was nice! 💖 Here's another test which would be interesting to see. Leave your line open circuit at both ends. I think, following your description what should happen is that the light will turn ON after W/c seconds (W=width of the transmission line) then it will turn OFF after L/c seconds (L= total length of the line, and the switch and LED are placed exactly in the middle. :-) Why? Because the field gets the LAD via the short distance and switches it ON then the field propagates down the line to the short circuit and then brings the information that no current can flow back to the LED! BTW These effect have to be considered when you power trains with electricity because you have a moving load at 200kph or more down a transmission line, and it matters!

Vor Monat
Jamie Angus-Whiteoak
Jamie Angus-Whiteoak

@Simon Bocanegra Thiel Not really. Also in that example the transmission line is OC (open circuit) at one end and SC (short circuit) at the other. These respond differently to the propagating electric field. If both ends are OC at each end then long term current cannot flow as there is no unbroken circuit. But in the time it takes fr the electric field to propagate to the OC and then Back current can flow. So the light would turn on and then turn off.

Vor 16 Tage
Simon Bocanegra Thiel
Simon Bocanegra Thiel

isn’t this covered around minute 13? the effect on the disjoint wire. i don’t think you get a “current can’t flow” response to get rid of the effect from the electric field

Vor 17 Tage
Física o algo por el estilo
Física o algo por el estilo

Yes! now you're right, it's a great improvement over the original video. I see a lot of intellectual honesty in your videos, you get better without fear of admitting when not everything you explain is quite correct or when it needs polishing (excuse my bad english level)

Vor 2 Monate
Biker Jock
Biker Jock

Fascinating! I’m going to watch this video a few more times to see if I can understand the concepts well enough to explain it to someone else. Then I’ll know if I’ve got it or not.

Vor Monat
gnehsse
gnehsse

Fascinating! It's cool that the light bulb gets a decent amount of energy before it actually turns all the way on

Vor 2 Monate
Ernest Williams
Ernest Williams

Positive or negative, this is what true science and engineering is all about. The discourse and discussions you have with others in the fields, is, to borrow a phrase, brilliant. Great video.

Vor 3 Monate
Kevin Hill
Kevin Hill

But I am not explaining anything anymore . I’ve got to work on setting up soMe way of getting paid for all this. My goal is something that isn’t being accomplished with all the I interference to my life. Blame whoever turned me into a science project . Then you can ask them what to do about any claims about me. It’s not my fault industry turned me into freak. I am a natural force that is none of a lot of peoples business.

Vor 3 Monate
Kevin Hill
Kevin Hill

It’s more than that

Vor 3 Monate
Prep Expert
Prep Expert

I see what you did there

Vor 3 Monate
Jeffrey craig
Jeffrey craig

Ac

Vor 3 Monate
Bram Kivenko
Bram Kivenko

Why can't he say the word "antenna"?

Vor 3 Monate
Raquel Pesce
Raquel Pesce

Increíbles vídeos y representaciones!! Me encantaría poder debatir con mis alumnos viendo ambos, necesitaría este vídeo en español. GRACIAS!!

Vor Monat
Dan Chilson
Dan Chilson

awesome video. great use of the scientific method and general productive collaboration. i love the internet. sidenote- why did they build their experimental circuit so high off the ground?

Vor 23 Tage
X F
X F

Thank you. I must say I am getting a bit angry at my childhood teachers, who seemed to have not taught me the truth. Surely the education leaders of the 60;s, and before and after, knew about Relativity, and gravity, and with this subject; electricity. Yet we were taught simplifications because they believed it was for the benefit of our simple minds. I am so thankful now to you, and so many others, for learning the truth about so much science..

Vor 2 Monate
smevox
smevox

I look forward to more videos proving this wrong again. Also haven't seen why batteries lose energy.

Vor 2 Monate
Nathan Rich
Nathan Rich

Both videos were successful in that they taught many people, including myself, a very interesting aspect of electricity.

Vor 3 Monate
Mant101
Mant101

@Taytyaaytyat how do the electric fields go though that tinfoil hat?

Vor 3 Monate
Kris Battersby
Kris Battersby

@E. B. C. That's the spirit! Degrade one group to show how much you like this group! You are definitely correct.

Vor 3 Monate
Yerris
Yerris

@ARCHOCK ENCANTO Did you not watch his latest video? And hes a retired millionaire, an early investor in bitcoin. Why does he need any "payment"?

Vor 3 Monate
Those Weirdos
Those Weirdos

No, they didn't. They failed to teach you correct information.

Vor 3 Monate
Keit Hammleter
Keit Hammleter

He's a lot better in this video than he was in the first one - but he still says things that are wrong. Getting roughly the right answer doesn't necessarily mean you have a full and correct understanding of the details. Ordinary electrical tradesmen routinely apply Ohm's Law, though very very few could explain or derive it, just as anyone can competently drive a car without knowing engine thermodynamics. He's getting closer to understanding that in a DC or low frequency AC circuit the fields outside the wires have nothing to do with conveyance of energy from battery to bulb. But he still said things like the current propagates at the speed of light. No it doesn't, because any wire has inductance and capacitance to something, which he seems to have sort of appreciated later in the video. He's gone down a rabbit hole in saying that the electrons in a conductor are driven along by an internal field in a conductor, which is correct. The internal field is possible because practical conductors have resistance. But you can, with a bit of cooling, have a superconductor - there is no resistance and no internal field then. But those electrons, having kinetic energy, still can convey energy from a source to a load, just the same - if the source is a DC source (and in practice a low frequency AC source). He's glossed over that the rise on voltage across his resistor was not just a simple step to the final (steady state) value - there was a an early small step due to the parallel line's characteristic impedance that he seems to have focused on. Actually, there will be a series of steps converging on the final full voltage, due to energy reflected at the short circuits at the ends of his two transmission lines, so a packet of energy goes back and forth until losses absorb it - its just that his experimental method does not resolve all the steps. He goes on about wireless charging of battery powered devices - but this has absolutely nothing to do with whether of not energy in a simple circuit is conveyed by the electrons or not, it is merely an example of a specialised power transformer. Current (which MUST be AC) forced to flow in one winding sets up an oscillating magnetic field inducing a voltage in another winding. Here is a thought experiment for you: Imagine a vacuum, and inside it a hot cathode, which emits electrons in all directions (thermionic emission), as electrons in a conductor have an average speed that increases with temperature, but with a statistical distribution of speed, so some of the faster electrons have enough kinetic energy to escape the positive electric field from the atom nuclei. Once these electrons escape, they keep on going. Now, imagine a sphere nearby with a small hole in it, surrounding the cathode. Electrons that happen by chance to to leave the cathode in the direction of the hole pass right through it. Connect the plate via a return wire to the cathode, otherwise other electrons hitting the sphere will build up a charge on it. Now, back to the electrons passing through the hole. They are now not subject to any applied electric field, but they will keep on going, as they have mass and inertia. Does this flow of electrons constitute a current? Yep, it sure does. Can it deliver energy to a remote conductor? Yep - it sure can. Even if the mean distance between electrons is sufficient to make inter-electron electric field interaction negligible. Because each electron carries a little bit of kinetic energy (obtained from the heat applied to the cathode in this case), as it has mass and velocity.

Vor 18 Stunden
Geodesic Interpolation
Geodesic Interpolation

Hey I appreciate that you went on ElectroBoom's channel, that was pretty cool. Thanks for being active in the community.

Vor Monat
Samuel Cooper
Samuel Cooper

The combination of these two videos need to be a part of graduate E&M curriculum. So much more clear to see it broken down with imagery than Jackson.

Vor Monat
JF KV
JF KV

Anecdotally, this is an interesting (an perhaps the best) application of the Cunningham's Law ("The best way to get the right answer on the internet is not to ask a question; it's to post the wrong answer.") where the answers help spread knowledge of the topic at hand and the scientific method itself.

Vor 2 Monate
Katie Barber
Katie Barber

it makes me so happy to see the YouTube science community coming together and working on stuff like this peacefully happily and cooperatively especially in such awful times

Vor 3 Monate
Arihant Vyas
Arihant Vyas

@Fn Ln Yeah, no problem.

Vor 3 Monate
Fn Ln
Fn Ln

@Arihant Vyas oh ok. well, no problem, i guess.

Vor 3 Monate
Arihant Vyas
Arihant Vyas

@Fn Ln No, I am not being sarcastic. I really didn't know that Adam self was being satiric. I thought he one of those SJWs who always have a problem with everything. So I wanted more information from him about when Derek didn't represent women or people from the other race in his videos, so that I could start an argumentative conversation with him.

Vor 3 Monate
Fn Ln
Fn Ln

@Arihant Vyas are you being sarcastic? i cant tell

Vor 3 Monate
Arihant Vyas
Arihant Vyas

@Fn Ln Thank you, I was confused whether he really meant what he wrote so I wanted to make sure.

Vor 3 Monate
CC
CC

I love when someone says your wrong lol I look forward to watching you prove yourself right

Vor 2 Monate

Nächster

This is why we can't have nice things

17:30

This is why we can't have nice things

Veritasium

Aufrufe 18 000 000

Why Gravity is NOT a Force

17:34

Why Gravity is NOT a Force

Veritasium

Aufrufe 9 200 000

VANTAGE is INSANELY OP in Apex Legends

14:29

I Completely Broke the Entire Game with Just 1 Item in Raft

32:05

3 Perplexing Physics Problems

14:00

3 Perplexing Physics Problems

Veritasium

Aufrufe 8 900 000

A Physics Prof Bet Me $10,000 I'm Wrong

17:56

A Physics Prof Bet Me $10,000 I'm Wrong

Veritasium

Aufrufe 12 000 000

What is electricity? - Electricity Explained - (1)

10:39

What is electricity? - Electricity Explained - (1)

Into The Ordinary

Aufrufe 1 900 000

The Absurd Search For Dark Matter

16:32

The Absurd Search For Dark Matter

Veritasium

Aufrufe 5 300 000

The Longest-Running Evolution Experiment

17:17

The Longest-Running Evolution Experiment

Veritasium

Aufrufe 5 400 000

Why You Should Want Driverless Cars On Roads Now

18:08

Spinning Black Holes

10:14

Spinning Black Holes

Veritasium

Aufrufe 4 800 000

VANTAGE is INSANELY OP in Apex Legends

14:29