Added: 2 years ago
From: nottinghamscience
Views: 5,299
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (67)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Does Martyn stay behind the desk because his pants are on the other desk in the corner? Why are uncut videos showing the footage counter? When will you listen to RavnoUK and 67 other people and start marketing a Professor Poliakoff action figure? What will the hair feel like?

  • When electron is converted to photon it has more physical energy to cut metal than being in a form of electron. Therefor photon has more mass and has stronger physical existence. That is not stupid that is what you called research, and the reason it's different from the text book. Electron has to be converted to photon to have a stronger phisical form when dealing with other elements, fourth dimension.

  • Electron is a radiant energy like plasma. Electron ls lighter than light, meaning light is heavier than electron.

  • @SpaceTrooper50 An electron is not lighter than light. Light has zero rest mass. An electron has 515KeV rest mass.

  • @Aviatorsmith Thats what they want you to know because there is no technology to measure the weight of light or even the weights of electrons that you cannot even see. But in the real world sunlight pushes the electrons on PV solar panels through the wires into the batteries, because light is heavier than electrons.

    Ok explain it don't just read it.

  • @SpaceTrooper50 If you do not know how photovoltaic cells work, go look it up. Photons do not push electrons in PV solar panels. The photon supplements the electron with energy to escape the molecules they are held in to carry the current.

    Photons have been shown to be massless time and again. It is the gauge boson for the EM force which carries an infinitely distant field. A massive boson will have a limited field.

    Where is your evidence to show that your facts are correct?

  • Can you film electrons?

  • EPIC TIE.

  • Give this man a Nobel!

  • Did Einstein have a theorie about the particle like property of photons? I thought he explained this by the momentum of the waves wich caused electron's to shoot out a thin piece of metal. Something like that if the wavelength wasn't big enough it woudnt matter what frequency the photons were when hitting the metal, the electron's wont shoot out. So i thought it was a theory about the wave length property of photo'n's. Maybe I am wrong. does anyone else know about this?

  • @ytkoekie2000 The effect you are talking about is the photoelectric effect. It shows that light exists as quanta or particles and disproves the field theory of light. Another such effect is Compton scattering.

  • @Aviatorsmith If photon has zero rest mass, how do you think a laser is able shape wooden objects or cut metal? I think you misunderstood how photovoltiac cells works. The photon does not supplemets the electrons. Because photovoltiac cells has a fixed amount of electrons at any given time photons is what move the electron through the wire into the batteries. Just like wind turbine the electrons does not comes from the air but from the PM magnets, the wind just pushes the lectrons to the wires.

  • @Aviatorsmith All ENERGY has mass

  • @SpaceTrooper50 Yes. The energy in light is energy from the EM field. This energy translates to only a small amount of mass. Photons have no rest mass. The mass in electrons constitutes a lot more energy. You still haven't brought up evidence for your ridiculous claim. Dozens of scientists all over the world have agreed dozens of years ago that photons are massless. Now you claim that they are all wrong? Are you trolling or are you an idiot?

  • @Aviatorsmith You have to think Fourth Dimensionally! I did give you a couple of example (evidence) why photon is heavier than electron, but you failed to comprehend it. You also did not explain how you able to measure the weight of electron that you cannot even see.

    Good scientist accept the truth as fact to have progress. Think about the LASER as an example. Ok here's another one, @USPTO 29/358,016. Do your research on photon, your last question shows the lack of intelligence.

  • @SpaceTrooper50 The fourth dimension has nothing to do with it. I have already explained what was wrong with your example. Let me try to explain. You do not measure the mass of the electron literally using the weighing scale. The mass of the electron is calculated through the amount of deflection it experiences when exposed to a magnetic field. The more massive the electron, the smaller the deflection. Thus the mass of the electron has been experimentally calculated.

  • @SpaceTrooper50 About your second paragraph, I suggest you do your research. The reason why photons are able to seemingly "push" objects like in the example of the laser you gave, is due to it's momentum which is shown in the equation E=hf. It's a packet of energy. It does not contain mass. Classical physics ie F=ma does not apply here. The photon does not need mass to apply a force to another object because it is pure energy and when something absorbs it, all the energy gets transferred.

  • @Aviatorsmith Photon is not subject to gravity therefor it is reasonable to say that photon has no rest mass. But it is not reasonable to say that photon is massless because all energy has mass E=MC2. I did my research in this area for over ten years, about visible and invisible particles that are not subject to gravity under Fourth Dimension. I'm able to calculate that photon is heavier than electron, meaning I figure-out how to 'create' energy.

  • @Aviatorsmith You're the only Einstien that don't believe in E=Mc2, I rest my case.

  • @SpaceTrooper50 Your stupidity in unbound. If you have only a partial understanding of the subject, don't act like an idiot. Go google "rest mass of photons". Just because energy can be converted to mass and vice versa, it doesn't mean that they exhibit the same properties. Not only have you got your concepts wrong, you are blatantly arguing without any research whatsoever. I rest my case.

  • how is possible the photons with zero mass can be attracted by super gravity fields like "black holes? I have heard about Einstein's theory for the particle nature of light, but on the other hand we accept that photons have zero mass. Please someone let me explain ....Thanks!

  • @omerta410 perhaps because the gravity fields can be modeled as a time-space distortion, and a big mass can cause big distortion around it. So the light traveling near this "big mass thing" appears to bend for a distant observer.

  • @omerta410 E=mc2 tells you that mass equals energy.

    Try o think of it like this:

    Mass is affected by gravity.

    Mass is a form of energy.

    Photons are a form of energy.

    Photons are affected by gravity.

    Got it? :D

  • I want to go to Nottingham University. To bad Im stuck in america! I love science and I would die for it. Well maybe not really...

  • fantastic video! all your videos with professor are gems of erudition

  • The time display divides a second into 25 parts, not 100 like I usually see.

  • hi so if you negatively charge water you can dissociate it far more efficient than faraday stated...please view my latest video and appreciate a reply for tweaking or if i can arrange somethimng as i live near nottingham.

  • Well, the rest mass of the photon is indeed zero, but, as it travels at the speed of light, it has an energy, hence a mass, which is why the light of stars is bent by gravity.

  • Light is bend by the gravity due to the distortion of space-time caused by a massive object. It is not about photon having a mass. It doesn't have a mass.

  • Well, it does indeed have no mass at rest, but you can calculate the mass corresponding to the energy it have.

  • i want a tie with the periodic table

  • Dear Nottingham University

    I would like to buy a M Poliakoff action figure. So pleeeeassseeee Make it :D

  • @RavnoUK make this happen please

  • @RavnoUK that would be soooo sweet!!!

  • @RavnoUK I'll 53rd that :P

  • thankyou for this vid - really enjoyed it (wt ws the litle brown thing next to you ? )

  • if a photon can also be a particle? how come it has no mass?

    rather does it just behave like a particle?

  • It's a massless particle. Common sense tells us that a particle must have mass, but that's not always the case. Mass itself is only just a property of a particle that allows it to interact with gravity field.

  • @sc0rpi0n0 but light can interact with gravity

  • @puretroublema - Photons don't interact with gravity. Technically speaking, light moves in space-time, and since mass bends space-time, light curves accordingly. But this doesn't mean gravity directly interact with photons.

  • @puretroubleman - What I meant by "mass is a property which allows it to interact with gravity field" should be read "...interact with Higg field."

  • wonderful video. I'm just a bit un-certain about the Electron :)

  • "I'm happy!"

    What a wonderful man

  • I'm polish and I studied chemistry and physics in high school. The weird thing about this movies is that I understand everything what these scientist are saying but when I try to speak like them - I just can't do this.

    These guys rocks! I wish have teachers like them!

  • The look at 3:35 was like "Oh my God, why did he have to ask this...!" Prof. Poliakoff was a bit annoyed maybe? :D

  • i love martyn poliakoff

  • He's very good at his explanations and doesn't bullshit when he's doesn't know or isn't sure.

  • yes, i hate when people try to do that. so obvious. like their voices are replaced with a ringing bell. I really want to go to this Uni just to do this subject. If someone had said I'd want to do Science at UNI level even last year I would have laughed my head off. love these vids.

  • Hmmmmm a Chemist trying to explain Quantum Physics

  • Is that a bad thing? We chemists work a lot with Quantum Mechanics as well. We even have our own derivation class from that: Quantum Chemistry!

  • Just finished a year of undergraduate quantum chemistry. It's at least as important to chemists as it is to physicists :p

  • Ok, what happens when a water molecule's hydrogen electrons migrate to the orbit of the oxygen, leaving each hydrogen without electrons, and the oxygen with two extra electrons? I understand that such events would be rare, as the electrons of the oxygen also are subject to migration. Does there exist a molecular "memory" that holds the molecule together until an electron returns to the hydrogen orbit?

  • Good question and not totally sure. But probably is linked to the fact that electrons do not really act as particles at the atomic level. They can be thought of as matter waves, at any given time there is a number of places we could expect to find the electron. Anyway the wave equation for an electron in a covalent bond will give a number of places it can be at a given time, some more likely than others. -

  • - So it sort of exists in all places at the same time. Would guess that has something to do with it, but is really not an easy question -.-

  • - So it sort of exists in all places at the same time. Would guess that has something to do with it, but is really not an easy question -.-

  • Do you know that at the sub-atomic level you have identified a Faster Than Light Event ?

  • Roddyoneeye: Since the oxygen with the extra electrons would have a net negative charge, and the hydrogens without electrons would have a net positive charge, wouldn't they remain bound by their opposite charges attracting?

  • This would be the case in a ionic bond, which the water molecule doesn't have. (The hydrogen-oxygen-bond in water has ionic properties, but is mainly covalent; actually pure ionic bonds don't exist at all, they all have a covalent part)

  • If so, then does not the electron's orbit exist for that time, without the existence of the electron in the orbit? If though, you attribute the electron as Both a Particle And a Wave,are you not then describing the electron as a porous "string" surrounding the nuceuleus (please forgive the spelling) vibrating in response to the energy passing through that orbit?

  • Try to forget about the electrons actually having orbits around the nucleus. Instead imagine there being energy configurations that the electron can be in. For each energy configuration there is a wave equation that describes the electron. The wave equation shows the regions in that energy state where the electron is more likely to be found when an observation is made. If you remember the funny shapes of the orbitals from chemistry, (groups of litttle balls joined together in different shapes)-

  • - Well these funny shapes are solutions of the wave equation, showing where the electron can and cannot exist and where it is most likely to exist.

  • The problem is, that you think of the electron as a particle circling around atoms, which is an image you often see in popular science.

    But that's what he meant with "you have to be very good at math to understand it". In molecular orbital theory the electron is around all atoms at the same time in a (standing) wave-like fashion. The molecular orbital is a weighted sum of the atomic orbitals, which are described by wave functions (you need Schrödinger's equation to solve the linear combination)

  • Cool, thanks.

  • very confusing :S

  • Main video on electrons can be seen over at our sixtysymbols channel....

    The Professor was cool with us using his rare outtakes - even he makes a slip of the tongue from time to time!

  • Haha, he is a great sport for letting you post his minor bloopers. "An electron is a positively charged particle." That was classic.

  • This man is a complete legend, wish i had of seen these nottinghamscience videos before i made my ucas choices lol

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more