Many thanks to our sponsor for making this video possible: Go to ground.news/ArvinAsh to see through media bias and get all sides of every story. Subscribe through my link for 40% off unlimited access this month.
Can you cover the new JWST discoveries of large, mature galaxies in the early universe? Brian Green and others made some comments that suggest areas outside the observable universe might have banged and cooled sooner than our area. Are there galaxies speeding toward us faster than the speed of light or is everything moving away faster than the speed of light? What’s the deal with Andromeda moving toward us if the latter?
if oxygen always bonds with itself and is colorless through this process, shouldn't the same thing happen with flourine? isnt flourine gas also a molecule?
12:15 : sO MERCURY DOESN'T "WET" LIKE LIQUID GALLIUM BECAUSE OF THOSE TWO OUTER ELECTRONS BEING HELD CLOSER TO THE NUCLEUS, THEREFORE MAKING IT MORE "INERT"?
Mercury can wet and display capillary forces, just with a narrower group of metals. Mercury and gold get along just fine. Not like gallium or lead, though. Lead acts like it will wet anything. It's useful to break surface tension in soldering alloys, but that also makes it very persistent in biological tissues.
@@cvp5882 Mercury can't wet anything. Wetness is a property of Water, solely of water, and no other object other than water can make anything else wet. And some things can't become wet in the first place, like Talc. you might as well say that oxygen is wet, if you believe any metal is wet, oxygen can also display capillary forces, but that is not wetness. wetness is unique to the chemical compound of water. To be wet is to contain or retain water in some capacity. That Mercury or Gallium or Lead can infuse with other metals, doesn't make them water.
One great thing about these videos is not AI narrated and the sound quality is excellent without having a huge enormous oversized microphone in the foreground covering over a third of the frame.
I'm a senior Doctor, and involved in teaching medical students and registrars. Teaching doesn't come natural to me but I have found your simplified method of explaining in short bits and pieces and your laid-back soft approach very useful, so thank you for not only educating me into subjects not familiar to me, but also educating me into how to educate!
@@halfsourlizard9319 you could've googled what a senior doctor is instead of being disrespectful. A senior doctor is someone who oversees the intern-doctors/assistant doctors and teaches them.
@@halfsourlizard9319 you could have done so with more respect. Also that sounds like a nitpick and as I said anybody reading can just google the definition if they are that interested.
I’m often disappointed with information content on RU-vid. Typically because the information is misleading/flat out wrong or it’s not explained well or over explained. This is my new favorite channel. Thank you for the work you put into these great videos.
And about the color of Gold, I think this deserve more detailed explanation, because: 1. Copper is also of different color than other metals, but its 4s electron certainly does not have as high energy as Gold's 6s electron, then why does it also absorb lower energy light? 2. If Gold's 6s is closer to 5d so it can absorb lower energy light, then why not other elements of similar or heavier weight, e.g. atom order 78 (Pt) to 84 (Po)?
When thinking about copper, gold and silver we have to take into consideration that another effect takes place in the metallic lattice: the "cloud" of electrons has similar properties to a plasma, since it's a loosely connected group of electrons. Copper gold and silver, having all 3 a full d¹⁰ orbital and an half full s¹ orbital are uniquely positioned to absorb ultraviolet light in a way that causes imbalances in the distribution of electron, and the subsequent return to a stable condition causes a "shift" in the reflect light, giving us the same effect of reflecting visible light that other metals have, just with a yellow/red tint. Given the fact that copper's valence electrons are in a lower energy state than gold's it tends to absorb less red light compared to gold because it needs an higher energy wave to be excited. Since gold's electrons are farther from the nucleus a lower energy wave (in this case red light) is sufficent to excite them and so we see a reflected yellow tint. Hope i gave some more details, cause colour is a fascinating topic to study and in general reflection and absorpion are crucial properties to analyze molecules. Sorry for any spelling and phrasing errors, it's 1 am and I'm tired ahahahh
There's so much high-level information packed into such a concise video in a way that is both extremely understandable and entertaining to a layperson. And even though it's really fun to watch, you don't treat viewers like they can't handle information that is above what most other science videos get into. This video is a case in point, although you have done this again and again. Thanks for all of these fantastic videos!
Your videos are so amazing, you are able to explain complex topics in a very simple manner, and your voice doesnt let a person get bored. that's why i always look at your channel for complex quantum science videos
Fluorine gas exists as diatomic molecules so your simplistic explanation of single valence shell electrons absorbing photons is misleading. There is no unpaired electron to jump to a higher energy level, it is part of a covalent bond (sigma bond) and that is where we must look to understand the color of Fluorine gas as well as the colors of the rest of the Halogens.
And, Fluorine was misspelled (Flourine) the first time that slide was shown at around 1:32. When that slide appeared again much later in the video, it was the correct spelling. Your point is a good one. Studying the various energy levels for bonding and antibonding orbitals on a molecular orbital diagram for diatomics shows a clear difference between energy of the unpaired radical electrons for each fluorine and the energy of those same electrons after bonding. Despite the errors however, I do like Arvin's channel. He is not one of those typical grandiose science channels who only talks about black holes or what the Universe looked like after the first 3 minutes. His topics vary quite a bit and in my opinion, this "lower level stuff" is way more interesting anyway.
Precisely. The explanation is completely facile. The real reason has to do with the vibrational modes of the diatomic molecules coupling to the electronic excitation levels. It's so cringe seeing all these "this is the most amazing explanation of chemistry ever!" and "I wish my teacher would have taught chemistry like this when I was in school, maybe I would have learned something!" comments on bad videos like this.
Keep in mind two different ways of knowing, 1 technical 1 basic, stil accomplish the same thing. Here is a good example: an amazing home run hitter knows less about the aerodynamics and physics of the baseball bat design than the engineer but still remains the only one that can hit home runs l@@Muonium1
This actually makes so much sense, that I sent the link to my middle school chemistry and physics teachers. This one will be seen in classrooms. And it belongs there.
Wonderfully satisfying to watch these videos... several aha moments as the explanations connects seemingly disparate facts that were studied, but never really understood! Thank you for providing delightfully educative videos!
Imagine the reaction a medieval alchemist would have, if he could see us. Through a little rectangle, we see a bright, friendly fellow explaining to us in clear terms every mystery of the alchemist's work. For free. As we make lunch in our kitchen, or are carried along in ground craft or aircraft. Its a miracle. Its so valuable. Im so happy for this.
I'm not a smart man...... I am however very curious and interested in your subjects......... you are patient and I can keep up with most of these concepts........in time I gain more and more understanding........very much like your videos... 16:16 😊
Those are some really nice and elegant explanation of some pretty complex topics that usually require months of explanation to grasp. And as many commenters pointed out, Fluorine exists in the diatomic form F2; but while being tecnically wrong in not showing the molecular orbital the explanation of light was beautifully conveyed and I think it still stands as a great way to imagine the interaction between waves and electrons. As for anyone curious about the complete explanation: All electrons exist in an orbital, a specific "shape" in 3D space in witch we usually consider most probable to find said electron. Every orbital has an associated wave, and it's interaction with the wave of the photon determines what frequency of light we get after reemission. When we form a bond the wave function of 2 *atomic* orbitals combine into a new *molecular* orbital, that has different proprieties and a different wave function. It now basically acts like an atomic orbital that absorbs and reflects light in it's own unique way. Since in different molecules we get interactions between different orbitals we get the whole range of possible colours.
I am certain that I have been presented all of this information over my years of schooling, but never laid out this succinctly. Absolutely fantastic descriptions!
This is an incredible video. I would have loved to hear you go on and on for hours describing how the properties of various substances emerge from quantum mechanics (and relativistic effects! I hadn’t heard of that before!) Anyway, this was great. I’m glad to have found this channel.
@@ArvinAsh "It's all quantum mechanics." Soooo true. We arise from interacting fluctuations among a few overlapping quantum fields. Is it 12+12+4 fields?
Amazing video. If high school taught chemistry like this I’d have seriously considered chemistry as my professional calling! Amazing video as usual Mr. Ash. Thank-you!
This would make an outstanding book on chemistry going through each element one by one. The opening would also show the complete diagram of each individual atom with its electron orbital system explained. Following pages would explain how that configuration describes its properties in every manner. The first chapter would just explain or go over the basic chemistry laws like Pauli exclusion and others needed to grasp how the elements interact. Maybe it already exists and if so I will pick it up. A future video should explain why elements are so many times not in their standard configuration and remain that way. I have to label this video OUTSTANDING especially in its presentation.
Thanks Arvin, was hoping you'd do this sequel and as you promised you did, and it is awesome to see that a few basic principles make up all the properties, maybe a bit wilder with quantum effects but I really love the video. Thanks for your work!
This video was very interesting, and satisfying. I vaguely remember my physics teacher talking about the colour of metals in high school, but he didn't really care that much to teach students, he had been teaching since just after WW2, 30 years before he got around to me.
An exceptional video, because it clearly & succinctly explains these questions so many have wondered about. Its paired sister (predecessor) video is also great! Highly recommend both (in addition to your earlier one on atomic Quantum effects).
I’m *really* glad you mentioned the relativistic effects and explained the in quantum mechanical and energy-mass terms. So tired of hearing people get the relativistic part right, but going all early-Bohr model about it. Also, air is about 78% nitrogen - not 99%. Fluorine is spelled with “uo”. Sorry to nitpick - I really value your content, and I love the accuracy of your info. Your channel is awesome - thank you!
@@fburton8 Remember that two ampules of a gas (fluorine) are not necessarily identical. One may appear "stronger" or more colorful than the other. Continuing pedantic mode... the "color strength" of a gas ampule depends on the gas' density (pressure) within its ampule. Dense gas would have more atoms per unit volume, so it would be more likely to experience photon-excitation causing more photons to be emitted (of its natural "color"). That will make its color "stronger". *_So summarizing, a gas' density directly affects its color "strength" (saturation)._* So, theoretically, even Helium (normally colorless) _should_ exhibit very faint color properties when at the highest density (whilst still a gas). This would be extremely rare, since He has only 2 electrons -- and for color to emerge, one/both of those electrons would need to bet temporarily excited to a higher orbital -- which is very very (did I say, _VERY_ much) difficult. This is theoretical, but still experimentally determinable.
Wow. I believe in your previous video on this subject I wrote a comment asking you to create another video explaining the colours of the elements, and this video is very close to what I wanted you to talk about. (Of course, I can't prove you saw my comment.) I was hoping for the exact numerical values of the differences between the energy levels for the different electron shells, but this was more of a qualitative discussion. Well, this is a big topic and maybe you can expand on this area in future videos. For example, I would like you to show that the differences between energy levels in differing shells are usually not in the visible light spectrum, but in this video you seemed to imply that the energy level differences were mostly in the visible light spectrum. (There are only a few energy level differences that correspond to the spectrum of visible light.) For another example, I would like you to explain whether the number of protons in the nucleus impact the exact numerical values of the energy levels in the different shells. For a third example, your animations implied that an electron would only jump up or down a single level, but I think that's completely wrong, they can (and will) jump multiple levels at once.
I do not agree with Arvin stating that halogens have an unpaired electron in the gas phase, as they are diatomic. That cannot be the explanation why they have color.
Elements get their properties due to the structure of their atoms and the interactions between those atoms. This includes factors such as electron configurations, the types of bonds they form, and how they interact with light. Here’s an explanation for each of the properties you mentioned: ### Mercury (Hg) - Liquid at Room Temperature Mercury is a liquid at room temperature due to its unique electronic configuration and weak bonding between atoms. Here's why: 1. **Electron Configuration**: Mercury's electron configuration ends in a filled \(4f^{14} 5d^{10} 6s^2\) subshell. The filled d-subshell contributes to weak metallic bonding. 2. **Relativistic Effects**: For heavy elements like mercury, relativistic effects (due to high atomic number) cause the s-electrons to move faster and be more tightly bound to the nucleus, reducing overlap with other mercury atoms. 3. **Weak Interatomic Forces**: The weak overlap of mercury atoms leads to weaker metallic bonds, resulting in lower melting points, thus making mercury a liquid at room temperature. ### Gold (Au) - Yellow Color Gold appears yellow due to the way its electrons interact with light: 1. **Electron Transitions**: Gold has a partially filled d-band. The energy required to promote an electron from the filled d-band to the conduction band falls within the visible spectrum. 2. **Relativistic Effects**: These effects lower the energy levels of the 6s orbital and raise the energy levels of the 5d orbital. This causes gold to absorb blue light, and the reflected light is predominantly in the red and yellow part of the spectrum, making gold appear yellow. ### Oxygen (O₂) - Colorless Oxygen is colorless because of its molecular structure and electronic transitions: 1. **Molecular Orbitals**: In its most stable form (O₂), the electron transitions that absorb light occur at wavelengths in the ultraviolet region, which are not visible to the human eye. 2. **Diatomic Molecule**: O₂ molecules do not absorb visible light significantly, thus they appear colorless. ### General Principles Behind Elemental Properties The properties of elements are fundamentally determined by: 1. **Atomic Number and Electron Configuration**: Determines the chemical behavior, type of bonding, and reactivity. 2. **Interatomic Forces**: Van der Waals forces, covalent bonds, ionic bonds, and metallic bonds affect the state of matter and structural properties. 3. **Relativistic Effects**: For heavier elements, relativistic effects can alter energy levels and bonding properties. 4. **Crystal Structure**: The arrangement of atoms in a solid affects its mechanical and optical properties. 5. **Quantum Mechanical Effects**: The behavior of electrons as both particles and waves influences chemical and physical properties. In summary, the distinct properties of elements arise from their atomic structure and the principles of quantum mechanics, which govern how electrons are arranged and how they interact with other atoms and with electromagnetic radiation.
He gave those explanations in the video. Saying "here's an explanation for each of the properties you mentioned" makes it sound like this is your original work.
Great video! I am a professor of biology, and do have some idea about chemistry, but I have learned a lot of new stuff in this video. Just one small note: it's "fluorine", not "flourine". The latter should be an element in bread making :-)
I have often wondered about all of these questions about elemental differences. Now the trick will be to try to remember all these answers. Interesting video!
I additional to fluorine and other halogena elements, nitrogen and oxygen atoms also have unpaired electrons, so they are not colored. Why? Maybe they also absorb but not in the visile part of the spectrum?
The annoying thing with QM is that a particle like an electron can appear in multiple ways simultaneously, each uniquely fitting a particular context. Electrons and other leptons are fascinating to reconstruct from the field. They are real bicomplex surfaces without a real reference or real relationship with the field. Those qualities belong to hadrons who don't have a real surface separating these roles. All leptons have either inertial or non-inertial frames. They either have a rest state or they never have a rest state. The absence of real reference or field perspective means they will orient and shape relative to real values. This real surface is described as degeneracy pressure. When value is added into it, it contracts. This is why atoms in a period on the table get smaller as their outer shell fills with electrons. But then we add value into that shell. It has nowhere to contract, so it expands until that energy level is filled and is forced to be excluded by the electron as a photon. It's hard to appreciate your explanations here without first understanding why all the visualizations of electrons as points, clouds, etc. are both true and not true. They wear the hats fitting the available contexts. It's easy to fall in love with leptons. They are field dabbling in position.
Thank you, Mr Arvin Ash for producing and publishing this video for us. Marvelous! You have answered many of my questions already. Yet, I have a few more for which I would greatly appreciate your comments: (1) By what is paramaterized the function of the force of attraction between an electron in its orbital and the atomic nucleus? (2) Can the force from (1) be used to calculate an effective radial distance from the nucleus of the electrons to their orbitals, perhaps given that the nucleus and elections are treated as points in spacetime at which their energy is converted purely to mass which warps the spacetime curvature? (3) when electrons are shared between atoms, can this be represented as two topological manifolds coming into contact and sewing together [some of their] (hyper-)faces/edges/vertices, so that objects embedded-within or projected-upon said manifolds can travel between them (I.e., an electron orbiting two atoms might become represented as a "geodesic" on an atom-local subspace).
so much wasted content in our modern world. this is actual information about the world around you. i understand why we serve our feline masters, but how knowledge is less viewed then entertainment worries me. i love to be entertained but i crave to be educated
@@seufimeaqui9034it is _directly_ profitable. The people who know how electricity works, how to generate it, and how to distribute it, and sell it. To everyone. The educated ones at car companies know what they need to make battaries, where to get it, how to package it, and put it in uncle's tesla. And sell it. Towards the top of many large companies are people who learned what things are, how they work, and apply that towards making products to sell on the markets. the entertainment industry finds it easier to sell something quick and easy to understand than to share something of substance.
This was great! Could you please go one little step further and explain which atoms can form bonds (it's not only based on the valence electrons) and then how molecules are formed and how they behave or interact?
I was taught way back that the reason metal conducts electricity is because their valence electrons were easily removed when bumped out of place by the atom next to it when current flows. Your explanation at the 11 minute mark saying that mercury's outer most electrons resist change, then why are there still things like mercury relays? They work using mercury as the conductive path to the load. Why is that?
There is a subtle but important point I made in the video, which is that while Mercury resists sharing (more than other metals), it's still shares more than other elements such as gases. So electrons are still floating around in the metal matrix, just as in all metals, but not are not tied to other atoms so much as to make the matrix immobile as in a solid.
Great video, but as always, good answers create new questions: If Mercury holds its electrons so tightly, which causes it to be in a liquid form in normal conditions, then why is it a good conductor? Doesn't electricity require the presence of free electrons, which can be easily detached from the atom?
Seriously 😮😮😮😮we need more of this on the same topic. I just started to unravel the misery behind all of this, and the video cut short. You'll give us like an hour version on this topic, please. 😊
I wish I had known this stuff when I was studying chemistry. It would have been so much more interesting. Why don't chemistry classes make the material relatable to every day experiences, as Arvin does?
This is a treat, so interesting and useful ! But still lots of wonders, eg. Hg is right next to Au, why are they so different just by one more e? And the common metals Fe, Co, Ni, Cu,... all have a full s orbital at the outer shell just like Hg, then why aren't they liquid? Bcz their larger atomic size thus weaker attraction by the nucleus? But wouldn't this make them softer instead of harder as they are?
Chemistry has always been a mystery to me. I've never been able to quite grok the relationship between electrons in an atom. Finally, due to very visual aids like these, I'm starting to get. It's one hell of a complex, 3D puzzle. I think visually, not abstractly (hens why the math has always eluded me, I can't construct a picture in my mind from mathamatical algorithms, it just does not translate for me. So, thank you for helping me understand this just a little bit better.