This video is sponsored by Brilliant. The first 200 people to sign up via https://brilliant.org/veritasium get 20% off a yearly subscription.
Special thanks to:
Bruce Sherwood, Ruth Chabay, Aaron Titus, and Steve Spicklemore
https://matterandinteractions.org
VPython simulation: http://tinyurl.com/SurfaceCharge
Richard Abbott from Caltech
Electrical Engineering YouTubers:
Electroboom: https://www.youtube.com/c/Electroboom
Alpha Phoenix: https://www.youtube.com/c/AlphaPhoenixChannel
eevblog: https://www.youtube.com/c/EevblogDave
Ben Watson: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgZUVIEtBnnBpFWJuxl_E5g
Big Clive: https://www.youtube.com/c/Bigclive
Z Y: https://www.youtube.com/user/ZongyiYang
Further analysis of the large circuit is available here: https://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: https://ve42.co/Universe2021
???
References:
A great video about the Poynting vector by the Science Asylum: https://youtu.be/C7tQJ42nGno
Sefton, I. M. (2002). Understanding electricity and circuits: What the text books don't tell you. In Science Teachers' Workshop. -- https://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. -- https://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. -- https://ve42.co/Muller2012
Galili, I., & Goihbarg, E. (2005). Energy transfer in electrical circuits: A qualitative account. American journal of physics, 73(2), 141-144. -- https://ve42.co/Galili2004
Deno, D. W. (1976). Transmission line fields. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, 95(5), 1600-1611. -- https://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
i would like to imagine electrons this way: like the iron fillings align themselves to the magnetic fields, the electrons align themselves to the electric field!
@josevictorino.9343 Says:
Cool video but can someone explain why turning on one switch doesn’t turn on all of the lightbulbs on the house?
@王杰-f6k Says:
don't get scammed by Veritasium, and don't even bother arguing with him using those fancy electromagnetism formulas and laws. The guy just made a damn wireless charger. According to his own model, if you slide that bulb and the adjacent wires closer to the power switch, the light gets brighter; move them further away, and it dims. Why? Because it’s a fing* wireless charger! Moving it closer just bumps up the fing* transfer efficiency! In that bshit* experiment of his, if you just ground the two wires next to the power source and slap antennas on both sides of the light bulb, it would still work! Because it's a fing* wireless charger!
@王杰-f6k Says:
Stop confusing people with all this unnecessary hype! Your model is literally just a gigantic wireless charger.
During the first year, the electric field is propagating inside the wires; because this field is changing, it continuously radiates electromagnetic waves. The 1-meter section of wire connected to the bulb is essentially acting as an EM wave receiver. So for that first year, the bulb is powered entirely by low-efficiency near-field wireless coupling (wireless charger).
Only after one year, when the signal finally travels back, does the system establish a stable, steady-state field and switch to high-efficiency wired power transmission. You just dressed a basic radio antenna problem (wireless charger) up as a 'circuit paradox' to chase views!
@youtubeviewer4127 Says:
6:24 wouldnt that be a magnetic field, because the electrons are moving? Or are both fields there, in the same place?
@tusharbanne Says:
So if we have some electric field absorbing material around the wire, would the electrons not flow?
@Jevin-gn1vv Says:
for me, electricity and magnets are all black magic
@steveamerine7666 Says:
Still have no idea how electricity actually works.
@easyinventors8653 Says:
I'm a jee aspirant.
Your explanation is crystal clear for me but still I seek for explanation using formulas and conceptual analysis that u did.
Thank u a lot.
@THEONLYETP Says:
wow my post was deleted! Oh well! Very nice discussion. My opinion is the same on electricity and force fields.
reality-does-not-exist-until-it-is-measured-confirmed-after-australian-physicists-re-conduct-the-quantum-experiment
elementary-particles-do-not-exist-part-1/
@zathaziel-m7n Says:
Whats stopping someone from disconnecting the lightyear long cable to transfer data quicker than the speed of light
@large_MARGIN Says:
It’s really fun how people will make an entire response video based entirely on their own misconception.
@sharongonzales2495 Says:
Wow! You are SO inspirational, how you handled this entire situation, the lessons you learned, and welcomed the input from others. What a great attitude you have. Thank you!
@sixmax11 Says:
this is what good teachers do, they inspire thought in their students.
@Miguel.Gallego Says:
You are great Derek, but as you make it clear in this video, you made a mistake in the first one saying that the main power didn’t go through the wire but instead through the air.
@JordanResendizyo Says:
scientific rage bait
@JordanResendizyo Says:
isnt it like pushing a stick thats really long and asking if it would push at the other side of the stick at the same time?
@Firstlast-h6e4s Says:
As we actual electricians like to say we exist because electrical engineers need heroes too.
100% of electrical projects have engineering errors. But what do I know my family has only been building mass scale electrical projects for 101 years.
@TTchjvcg Says:
Thank you for this video, very enlightening!
@nagarjunaasam5714 Says:
Wait, wait wait. How did you come to the conclusion V=IR for your load in the short term ?
@t00lape44 Says:
I did have a question,. If there's a break at the far end of the circuit, will the bulb turn OFF in 1 sec after it has turned ON by closing the switch? As you mentioned, the further the switch is from the battery the longer the bulb will take to turn ON. Well, should one consider the break as another switch 1 light second away?
@김민정-j5n5j Says:
❤
@Jude-k3y Says:
So if the wire isn't closed, does it turn off in one or two seconds?
@Piotr-n8s Says:
I called the original video silly and here you are: it was silly. Hats down for effort and honesty but this shows that there are limits of sicentific investigation of something you do not understand.
There are many things wrong with the whole experiment, it would be too tedious to rectify them all in a short post. But at the most general level author confuses "some" electromegnetic disturbance (no matter how small) getting through (via all kind of "parasitic", secondary properties of a system) with serious transfer of power. The full transfer of power requires builing up magnetic field along the whole power line and that is a huge amount of energy BEFORE it can reach the load. The video explains how energy is stored in the electromagnetic wave but then it fails to recognize that this energy also comes from the battery. And it does not jump across 1m of air because the air is not a convenient environment for electric field to form (drastic simplification). So the electric field "has to go around" which requires building a huge amount of energy on the way. Matching impedance, "small" instantaneous energy transfer, etc are just various forms of confusing basic concepts of electrical engineering.
What surprises me is that so many people with scientific background did not call this out.
Perhaps if you just asked experienced electrical engineer you would be spared these errors. And not, you do not need Caltech lab to detect and quantify this phenomenon. I can do that with my my old scope I keep in my basement after retiring. I have seen it countless times. Actually a big part of my job was to engineer out the delay you are describing here.
More luck with other topics.
@Ol_Graybeard Says:
Tesla is smiling.
@xkid4444 Says:
If there is no name for the initial jump in power, I'm gonna call it Derek's power... or Muller's power?
@parimalparimal Says:
Best Veritasium video 👍
- an electrical engineer
@simon6071 Says:
5:52 Obviously, Veritasium is too ignorant to understand that in a DC circuit with a steady current, as when a light bulb is being lighted up with a battery, there is neither excess positive charge nor excess negative charge in any portion of the two wires because when the current is flowing steadily, the number of positive charges and the number of negative charges on any portion of the wires are the same and their electric field outside the wire cancel out each other. If we test for electric field outside the wires with an electrostatic fieldmeter when a steady current is flowing through the wires, we will detect zero electric field along any portion of the wires. I=V/R Since both the voltage of the battery and the total resistance of the circuit are constant, I should remain the same. That means the number of electrons passing through any portion of the wires per unit time would be the same instead of having different concentrations of electrons at different portions of the wires as wrongly depicted by Veritasium.
@ogafestus3118 Says:
I still think you're wrong, but until I can prove it: great job👍🏾
@TomandMia-m7e Says:
This legit blew my mind. 👍😀
@JayyThe13th Says:
So instead of electrons acting as a domino effect where one affects the next one at a time, its like dominoes but hey are rigidly connected to each other with little arms with joints, so as soon as one starts moving, the movement is initiated through the entire body of the circuit, not in a perfect line of electrons though of course
@TheMooski Says:
Is it still correct for pcb/chips etc
@Momo-bb2fn Says:
14:00
@sajaandrew4143 Says:
Brother,the electric field acts as a compass that directs the electrons (align). And remember the energy just passes through the electrons (like the Newton's cradle).This is possible because the electrons just shuffle in place (wiggly move) 10:29
@sajaandrew4143 Says:
Hi, don't know if you will see this, but l encountered the same event also, the Earth is picking us for a reason. Think of the copper wire as the guide for the energy (electric field) to flow in a specific point. The electrons just maintain the field or just pass the energy.
@Dado_ProductionsYT Says:
Here comes the ice cream man, parked at the end of the road, with the swish of his magic whip all the people at the party...froze! Blur-Ice cream man
@jenslonn6046 Says:
Not watched this yet. But in university we were taught that electrons does move slowly, they push each other, and this movement and the potential difference in charges creates an electromagnetic field. This field carries the energy and travels at the speed of light. Direction of the field is determined by the poynting vector
@ScottCrosby-n4n Says:
Why do you keep using the term "flow" after giving so much effort to show that electrons don't flow and that energy is not contained in the wires with your so-called current? It is very disconcerting to hear you contradicting yourself.
@iamstargazer9320 Says:
OK so I know this is late but does the capacitor effect change based on the medium (in this case atmosphere) or is this just purely a property of the propagation of the electrical magnetic field?
@Gearrion Says:
Nope, you was still wrong and this does not explain your gaffe's at all on it. If you need to add anything after your answer of Yes, then you was just wrong.. So.. Yes, But.. Yes, If... = Your wrong.
@paultaylor2574 Says:
"casual use of units" is not the same as completely forgeting units. Just trying to save face it seems
@R_EditZ-h4j Says:
I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS BY SEEING UR VIDEO 1) How should we define what it means for electricity to “flow,” and does the traditional definition need rethinking?
2) If energy in circuits is carried by electromagnetic fields, how should this change the way we teach electricity?
3) To what extent do simplified textbook models help learning, and when do they become misleading?
4) Should scientific education prioritize conceptual accuracy or simplicity for beginners? Why?
5) How far should schools go in teaching advanced ideas like field-based energy transfer at an early stage?
@tallb Says:
I miss the old veretsium
@MG-cj8ql Says:
I have been a HS teacher for 25 years. In the old days, as a baby teacher, a physics concept or two alluded me and I taught them incorrectly due to insufficient understanding. It's _critical_ to recognize our faults and failings and do our best to learn from them and grow (Look up Johari window). It's something I teach my own students in word and action as often as possible. Having committed more than my share of gaffs throughout the years, my students now know that if MG makes a mistake in class, he's going to apologize and correct it. While I no longer make conceptual mistakes, having learned my lesson in those early years, little things persist here and there. Luckily, my students are gracious and accept some of the messiness of communication without upset. Teaching effectively takes an enormous amount of front-end work. You have to choose words carefully and plan for the unexpected. So kudos to you for admitting and owning mistakes. We all make them. It takes humility to learn. It takes even more to teach.
@johntyra968 Says:
Yeah faster than light communications IS not just possible but soon to be included into 2 modems I'm building. Quantum Entanglement is the secret. Tesla figured it out and our modern science however says its pseudoscience. Practical quantum entanglement will soon be available. The secret is to run his old experiments ourselves and seeing what is real and what isn't.
@KamerKazanci-wj2ou Says:
Veritasium’s answer of 1/c is because of the induction current generated at the lightbulb. What others that disagreed with Veristasium were thinking was about the full battery voltage reaching into the lightbulb. Technically veritasium is correct but the voltage isn’t peak in just 1/c seconds
@HoangNguyen-qw6ze Says:
Well, if your study program teach distribute power system, you will learn about the invisible capacitor.
@odal6770 Says:
Faraday's discovery: magnetism creates electricity just like electricity creates magnetism.
@mangyoldog Says:
Google antenna 🤣
@IamtheLordofDoom Says:
Thankyou for this video. I'm glad I found it before your original video. I thought I understood electricity, but very clearly I didn't (even if I wasn't making the assumptions you described about electrons, I had assumed it was the field IN the wire that did the work). The simulation especially was fantastic, as was the whole explanation. Off to buy a copy of Chabay's book (when I can find one cheap enough) as it looks like a great physics book anyway.
If I may, if you could do a follow up video on why charge builds up on the surface of a conductor (mutual repulsion???) that might be good. I also have questions about how much field goes through the conductor rather than through the space 'inside the circuit' and how much of the energy therefore flows inside vs outside the wires.
LATEST COMMENTS