Lec 3 | MIT 5.111 Principles of Chemical Science, Fall 2008

[arsenelupin123]

You don't need to know the mass of the electron to measure its kinetic energy. All you need is its charge and a potential difference.

[arsenelupin123]

Her argument is a bit misleading. Just Coulomb's law could lead to a stable Rutherford atom if the atom is moving around, just like a planet around the sun. The problem is that Coulomb's law alone does not account for radiation, and with radiation the electron would be losing energy and collapse.

[Alexlehtofication]

Man there getting hotter



[ikoronduka]

lol we in the physics department chew Quantum Mechanics in our sleep.

[clairebehun]

brilliant video

[distractionxx]

great video thanks

[davidfof13]

as expected of MIT

[bribribri56]

some really good stuff here

[thegeffc]

you have some great stuff here

[NganaJHone]

I am very happy to see the vidoe Wave-particle duality of light from you, hopefully the others also are happy for You

[Ondelendo]

Steady I Really Like This Video Wave-particle duality of light

[bebeheuy]

Good, I like that you share this video, I wish success always Wave-particle duality of light

[willamricard]

Nice Video Lecture 3: Wave-particle duality of light That You Share , So Very Nice Thanks You

[imegatrone]

I Really Like The Video Wave-particle duality of light From Your

[bundawartini]

Your Video Is Very Useful Sharing Lecture 3 Wave-particle duality of ligh

[anakmudajaman]

after i watched this video Wave-particle duality of light, my insight is very open because the video is very good to give information

[StAngersucks]

ångström is pronounced more like.. ongstroem

[phnaargos]

35:30

[phnaargos]

at 35:34 did she mean to say wave instead of particle?

[RickiKatlynoo710]

geil bin ein luder

[brian5446]

quantum physics + boobs = awesome

[Dorkus89Malorkus]

@brian5446 Except it's chemistry.

[MeyerMack]

@brian5446 I was just about to say the EXACT same thing! weird

[SnakePlisskenPMW]

can some one point me out to a lec. on the law of super positioning?

[agapitoflores001]

Chemistry can be interesting depending on the professor.

[MrSimonk24]

Science is sexy.

[TheKishorechandiit]

Man she is hot.

[Drombom]

She is so sexy

[gogerychwyrndrobwll]

This lecture is so... wrong.

[sekwah09]

The lecturer raises a good point about the importance of not only using the equations to derive various entities but to think qualitatively about the equations.

The need to reiterate this point compliments her style of lecturing. I wish we had a lecturer like her when we was learning about Q Mechanics.

[Nicola72av]

WOW!!!

This lecturer is FANTASTIC!

Thanks a lot teacher!

I send you a dear greeting from Italy.

[sana123001]

she is just amazing,fantastic,awsome.she really made me to love chemistry.

[rustyscrapper]

I guarentee the lecturer was a career student now in her 30's having attended universtiy her entire life and being hired as a profesor after 12+ years of university education, the only reason being hired. Puking out what she was taught, not really understanding it but able to re produduce the lecture.

[lockdownD7]

@rustyscrapper Yea, cause that's how you get to be a professor at MIT.

[LogicalFlawDetector]

I have never ever seen such a crystal clear lecture. She explained the derivation from a historical perspective.

[dociccio]

But clearly this lesson is a lot much easier than the real ones for the undergraduate at MIT, I suppose... Can anyone confirm to me this aspect?

[vgstrat28]

@dociccio This course for starting university course from scratch... Advanced students take 5.112, which is much more challenging... THis is just a starter to ensure that you don't have any gaps on basics of Chemistry...

[bonnarj7]

model-reality confusion apparent. too much school.

[bonnarj7]

she is dull, like most MIT professors. You want to see real scientists, go to princeton physics dept. MIT is lame.

[woo216]

@bonnarj7 yeh your right bro princeton physics is fucking insane, ive experienced both and Princeton professors rape mit professors' assholes.

[bonnarj7]

F->0 is about as true as F->Infinity as r->0. Chemists are so lame. MIT sucks, they cannot even get the basics right. I guess she read this in a book. Oh goody, goody. Your mommy is so proud of you!

[bonnarj7]

F->0 ? wrong!

[bonnarj7]

I'm glad to see that the MIT students really are a bunch of lame brains. I went to a state university. Our classes were much more difficult, by far. MIT, Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Cornell, Berkeley, Caltech are all complete bullshit schools. I guess cheating really does get you somewhere. By the way, this lecturer is a moron. As usual, the chemist is teaching wrong physics once again. MIT is bogus. MIT is filled with a bunch of half-wits that are good at memorizing things out of books.

[tekhiun]

@bonnarj7 Oh wow yet another genius that's wasting time here on youtube. You really didn't get what was the point to that exercise mate.

[Kdaljeet]

@bonnarj7 sounds like someone got a bunch of rejection letters.

[hassenichjesehn]

7:20 thats not the reason we need quantum mechanics at all. that's like saying the newtownian mechanics don't work because the moon is not crushing into the earth. ever heard of bohr's model of the atom? chemists... :P

[gneric187]

HAWWWT :3

[thwei64]

try the solid state chemistry lecture in mit by donald sadoway

[mordorsss]

nice lecture...reminds me of my childhood crush.

[karlkarlkarl1234]

This lecturer is a babe!

[fr3d420]

anyone got a link to the pics of quantum dots, that sounds cool and boo hoo to copyright bull crap.

[Parvizbabak]

perfectttttttttttttttttttttttt­tttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt­tttttttt

[mrallankey]

awesome lecturer! I have never found chemistry this interesting and easy to understand

[lilkoopa23]

@mrallankey

Hohoho! You can say that again.