This is seriously impressive, one of the best science channels out there on RU-vid, you put so much effort into each video. I feel like i'm being sucked into this video.
Most teachers today are neither good in studies nor good in any of the fields of profession. I used to hate them until I realized that nothing is perfect and so it’s okay if teachers are not perfect. If you think about it, none of the scientists have all the answers and they can’t teach you everything!
Your channel has quickly become one of my favorites in this field. as a chronic "But why is that? ... But then why is THAT?" interrogator, much to my parents' and teachers' chagrin, I love your ability to explain advanced physical phenomena in ways that are both elegant, easy to understand and novel all at the same time. I love those "oh it all makes sense now" moments when the penny finally drops, and your channel serves those moments all. the. freaking. time 😍. Keep doing what you're doing, and more of it! 😄😄
Your videos are extremly useful for me . I complted my 12th just 6 months ago . Your every video explains in detail a physics lesson we had in our 11th and 12th . Loved it ❤❤❤❤lesson name (nuclei)
Your shirt should say "I am" instead of "I am a" because the images read "acute tea pi" which is "a cutie pie" so whole thing becomes "I am a a cutie pie"
i guess.. many would just skip the the two a's because humans tend to read these repetitions only once without noticing any difference. i skipped two 'the's too lol did you notice?
Mahesh great video, as always! Thank you for bringing the joy of understanding things to the masses. Can't wait for the "other videos" about the "stories that are for another video"!😁
This is BRILLIANT!!! I'm a lurker, but I just HAD TO comment this time. What an amazing video. You just explained WHY the universe is made of these particular building blocks in a way that anyone can understand. And the title is so modest. Even "the Element of Life" does not prepare a person for the grand scope of this video! Oh, and that ad segue was absolutely shameless. I love it! Mahesh, thank you!
Hello Mahesh! As we all know that your content is unmatched and the way you put it, I think even a child can make a bit sense out of it. But I also think that you should get more traction than what you get right now. Some HI generated suggestions are :D 1. Change the colour scheme of the videos. Don't use black as the background. Use more vibrant colours, but not that vibrant that it becomes annoying. On the colour picker take the colour toward the white part. I think you get the point. 2. Thumbnails! Again use good quality graphics and a better colour scheme. It is not necessary to convey the whole "video topic message" in the thumbnail only. Half goes in the title and the other half in the thumbnail. 3. May be hire a graphic designer/editor if you don't have already. And if you have, then tell them to do a better job. I wish the best for this channel!
"something to talk about in another video" makes me more excited and frustrated. surely we all will watch a 3hr science documentary with such intuitive explanations about such common science questions
I love how you embrace the hard questions for us! My mind was blown recently when I learned that in a nuclear reactor, neutrons aren't blasting uranium some apart like bullets. The neurons have to be SLOWED DOWN to cause fusion. Why? Because with the right amount of energy, the neutron can get captured by the uranium atom, putting it into an unstable state and causing it to split! 😮
I'll watch the video later after getting time soon...i have come here just to like the video, because i already know, as always, this video is going to be amazing!!❤❤❤
You're an amazing teacher. It's always a pleasure to learn more from you. Please continue making these awesome videos. I also wonder if random decay can be explained somehow. For the decay to happen, does some other preceding action must happen? Do nucleons move perhaps?
sir we celebrated teachers day today at school and i thought of you . thankyou for being my teacher . sir . i would like to wish you HAPPY TEACHERS DAY !🪻💐💐🌻🌻
Wow.. You are truly one of your kind, I spent very long time on Quora to understand the nucleus energy levels, and you have summed it all up in 15 minutes, Your explanation of nucleus energy levels dwarfed every other one I've heard, and yes we want to hear all those stories for another day. All of them. 🙃
I knew most of the rules and behaviours, but I've never seen them put them together so intuitively. I knew the what, and the how, but never could grasp the why. Now I get it! It's so easy to understand, you should make qm for kids 😊
Wow that diagram for neucleons energy stability is brilliant!! ❤️✨️😌 Love all the quantum exceptions, and Yes I do want to learn how Alpha Decay works! 😁 Edit: I did learn something new, I didn't know neucleons also had a spin pauli exclusion principle in the nucleus.. It makes sense, but I just didn't know both of them had a spin
Hypothetical: if the ratio of the strength of electromagnetism to the nuclear force (between nucleons) was different, would the point of highest nuclear stability shift from iron-56?
My teachers never answered my questions about this but today you have given a super clear answer! I'm feeling so happy that I saw your video. I still have a question: Why don't two free neutrons bind together by the strong force? Many thanks.
A very interesting video about the stability of elements and the uniqueness of iron atoms. I think a lot of interesting questions are connected with the stability of the iron atom. The answers to these questions will definitely lead to the discovery of interesting physical effects and the production of iron-based materials with unique properties (it is already possible to consider options from electrical superconductivity and self-healing materials, as there are already significant shifts in these directions) Is there a desire to delve even deeper into the question "what is the logic of nature for the possibility of the existence of such a large number of stable elements"? Regarding the stability of elements, there are three important points: 1) magnetic moments in a proton (14.1*10(−27) J/T) and in a neutron (−9.7*10(−27) J/T) have the opposite sign and different strength of action when viewed separately from each other. And the magnetic moment of an electron (μe = −9.3*(10−24) J/T) is about 1000 times stronger than the magnetic moments of a proton and a neutron. We know that in the Universe, atoms of elements form molecules to obtain a better balance of forces of interaction between the structural elements of atoms. Therefore, the hydrogen molecule (H2) is more stable than individual hydrogen atoms (H). But at the level of the magnetic moments of the proton, neutron, and electron, we do not see this balance in atoms and molecules. I do not understand this and have not yet found an answer to the nature of the formation of the balance with such experimental data for individual protons, neutrons and electrons; 2) Atoms of different chemical elements have different densities, which indicates a different geometry of space filling with protons and neutrons in the nucleus of atoms. The geometry of filling the space also affects the stability of the elements; 3) In nature, individual electrons and protons seem to exist forever, and individual neutrons exist for up to 30 minutes according to available experimental data. 🙏🙏🙏
I was hoping to see the spacing of the energy levels vary, to show that having additional protons required additional energy (the potential energy from electrostatic repulsion) and to show that as a result, the higher energy levels for protons would outpace those for neutrons, and thus more neutrons would be energetically favorable
Nicely done. I personally think its better to explain the entire thing in terms of energy levels though. Things will always try to fill the lowest energy levels, so why do heavier nuclei have more neutrons than protons? It's simply because the energy levels are not the same for protons and neutrons. The Coulomb force pushes the energy levels apart for protons, making them fill up faster compared to neutrons. And it is because the strong force is short ranged that the effect is only apparent for larger nuclei. It's all the same in the end. Nature will be nature. Explanations are just what we use to understand.
Mahesh sir it seems i only get more questions when i try to find the answers. Now i ask, why is Pauli exclusion principle a thing? Why is it true? Why cant just ALL the electrons stay in the same orbital? This is one of the reasons why i always disliked chemistry, there's so much to be said.
@@DrDeuteron See, it's always something even more complex that explains it and that in itself needs to be explained and then you fall down this rabbit hole of what the hell do i even know?
@@AbhinitPradhan not really. Pauli exclusion principle is applied in quantum mechanics where we just claim particle are indistinguishable (which is more than identical), but in quantum field theory it makes sense that a bump in a field is indistinguishable from an identical bump, and then when you insist fields don't transform information faster than light you get the results--but it's super technical.
He did such a cool transition to square space, even I didn’t notice when he was saying about square space. By the way how do you actually see atoms and nuecleas?
Hi Mahesh.... Thanks for explaining difficult concepts intuitively. Can you explain why signs for electrodes of electrochemical and electrolytic cells opposite in chemistry and physics? Cathode is positive in Electrochemical cell in chemistry but it is taken as negative in physics, why?
I like the concept of your shirt but I have a bone to pick with it. If you read it as is, it says “I am a acute tea pi” but it would be much better if it said “I am acute e pi. For e you could have it say lim n → ∞ ( 1 + 1 n ) n to represent e, but there are better symbols you could use outside of a youtube comment. (I assume you didn’t create the shirt, just making a comment about it lol)
I get that you draw the energy levels with equal steps for simplicity's sake, but it does make me wonder if the energy levels are actually the same for both nucleons. Doesn't the positive charge of the nucleus influence the energy levels of the protons more than those of the neutrons?
Are you going to make a video explaining why the strong nuclear force only acts at short range. Thats another thing I've never been able to understand. Shouldn't its strength drop off by the inverse square of distance, the same as the electromagnetic force?
As a biochemist I will say that is _an_ important element for life ( especially for its redox characteristics) but it certainly isn't _the_ element of life! Carbon knocks it into a hat every time!
Sir, at 6:59 When I study about weak nuclear force, books teaches us beta decay process but how a force is related to that decay process? Please Explain Plz Plz 😢
Hi Mahesh, beautifully explained why too many neutrons can cause instability, i think a good video to make in the future would be to explain The term Enegy states, alot of people toss this term around without understanding it, from my current reserch i been able to understand most time we talk about energy states we are talking about Potiential energy, if you were to drop a ball from a higer place than antoher it has More potiential energy, and this is the same easenially with a eletctron in a atom and when say bonds form when the electrons drop energy state that excess potiential energy they had Has to go somewhere which is why chemical reactions cause energy sometimes, and also cruically Nuclear reactions, for a while i been plagued of where the energy from nuclear reactions comes from most people just say E=MC square and the diffrence in biniding energy is released as energy but that was never consistent with me as somehow the nucleous got more stable because it has more" binding energy"while also realseing energy and was always confused because like it simultaneously has more energy so its stable but also realses ? Energy like what, i now understand jts Bassicly has to do with potential energy shitfs in the nucleous which makes it more stable and the execess energy has to go somewhere, there are still many questions i have on this subject but I appreciate how you take all these Jargon terms like biniding energy and try to explain whats actually happening, i often dislike how science is thought in school and never explaining the why, for a longest time i could not understand Sound waves i could not visualize what a wave was, it took a while to realse sound is Bassicly a dance of kineitc energy and electrosatic attraction, its a physical process which made much more sense than "wave" and the wave like nature is explained by understanding how the process works.
Oh yes!! I totally hear you! Binding energy was a very confusing term indeed. But then I substituted it for , 'blowapart energy' and then it makes sense. It's more stable because it has a higher 'blow apart energy', i.e. it needs more energy to blow apart. That makes sense :)
@@Mahesh_Shenoy yeah lol, well yeah I usually think about the pion exhange that is making the strong nuclear force ,but that's true, was just confused before as to how it could Gain energy (Binding energy) and realse energy in the form light heat etc, but it Bassicly comes down to the fact that binding enegy is influenced by many different factors inside a atomic nuclie so the system as a whole dosent have to gain energy to have more binding energy just needs to be in a more favorable configuration for Electrostatic forces as you explained in the vid or quantum configurations like more Proton to neutron interactions(as these can also exchange Charges pions not just neutral pions so it's strong than same type reaction proton-proton etc) So it can effectively increase without the system as a whole gaining energy.
One thing I have been puzzled by is why are elements between polonium and actinium so unstable. I made isotope charts colored by half-life and seen where the stable isotopes would be and 'crashing' threw them are highly unstable isotopes with microsecond half lifes which kills any chance of stability here. What causes this?
Its really great but i would say paulis exclution not fully agreeable by this defination. Additionally how does the proton nutron ratio complies with Gibbs free energy?
Some scientists think there's a set of elements beyond the man-made one that are stable, called island of stability. I wonder what's their basis for such
I’m curious to know how these principles factor into the theoretical “Island of Stability” I’ve heard about in relation to super heavy elements. Is there a reason for researchers to believe that there may be a point where the nucleus becomes more stable again?
Hey Mahesh, in your video 'why FTL signal breaks causality ' in that video at 10:03 you said that for the observer moving with 99% c the distance of 1 light year due to length contraction will become 3 light months but as you said in the video 'why can't you still reach the speed of light ' that even after length contraction every observer will agree on the distances because the measurement units too will get length contracted. But then why in ur FTL signal video you said that the distance will be 3 light months?? I didn't understand this. plz explain this bro ??plz reply I'm super confused????
I have a small question. As protons in larger nuclei experience repulsion. So it's it possible that energy levels of protons and neutrons might be different?
I thought it stopped fusing at iron because it takes more energy to fuse it than it releases afterwards, so the sun cools very quick and that's the end of fusion chain. This stability thing is cool but not really relevant?
why I only hear natural fission but no natural fusion? I mean idk, something like plutonium is radioactive and slowly becomes more iron-y by doing nothing, but I never hear about hydrogen slowly becomes iron by doing nothing, even sun need gravity to turn hydrogen into something heavier.
Love the perspective. Both have barriers. They can be overcome when particles are extremely close. For decay/fission that’s a given. Daughter particles are part of the parent nucleus. But for fusion, they are far apart. So, the trouble is in bringing them close enough.
