This video is sponsored by Brilliant. The first 200 people to sign up via 🤍brilliant.org/veritasium get 20% off a yearly subscription. Special thanks to: Bruce Sherwood, Ruth Chabay, Aaron Titus, and Steve Spicklemore 🤍matterandinteractions.org VPython simulation: 🤍tinyurl.com/SurfaceCharge Thanks to Ansys for help with the simulations: 🤍🤍ansys.com/products/electronics/ansys-hfss Huge thanks to Richard Abbott from Caltech for all his modeling Electrical Engineering YouTubers: Electroboom: 🤍🤍youtube.com/c/Electroboom Alpha Phoenix: 🤍🤍youtube.com/c/AlphaPhoenixChannel eevblog: 🤍🤍youtube.com/c/EevblogDave Ben Watson: 🤍🤍youtube.com/channel/UCgZUVIEtBnnBpFWJuxl_E5g Big Clive: 🤍🤍youtube.com/c/Bigclive Z Y: 🤍🤍youtube.com/user/ZongyiYang NYU Quantum Technology Lab 🤍🤍youtube.com/channel/UCk7io8SN3ZwKvkpnMCbIGsA Dr. Ben Miles 🤍🤍youtube.com/channel/UCUeZBocfxALSUdOgNJB5ySA Further analysis of the large circuit is available here: 🤍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: 🤍ve42.co/Universe2021 ▀▀▀ References: A great video about the Poynting vector by the Science Asylum: 🤍youtu.be/C7tQJ42nGno Sefton, I. M. (2002). Understanding electricity and circuits: What the text books don’t tell you. In Science Teachers’ Workshop. 🤍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. 🤍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. 🤍ve42.co/Muller2012 Galili, I., & Goihbarg, E. (2005). Energy transfer in electrical circuits: A qualitative account. American journal of physics, 73(2), 141-144. 🤍ve42.co/Galili2004 Deno, D. W. (1976). Transmission line fields. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, 95(5), 1600-1611. 🤍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
Scientific illiterate here. So is the conclusion that electricity doesn't 'flow' through wires via the movement of electrons, but is 'moved' via electrical fields that work in one direction, and that wires merely help to 'channel' these fields? (Hence why you can have wireless charging?) That was probably written very badly, so any clarification would be great!
I am so confused
Thanks of people's who things are better understanding than this guy here, You make another great video ! even better then previous one and Im glad that I found it :) But, as not English mind I have to say:, I haven't seen any big misconceptions like they tried to show us. all explanation was clear and acceptable straight up.....and most important - we can see it in real life.....
but still happy that other guys have lot to say- thanks of them this video explained easy most "things about electric flow "
after all this Years working with "this matter" I think that this video is closest to the truth.!
love You mate .......
I would like to see actual measurement when the bulb is on the short leg to the right
and the switch is on the short leg on the left
versus where you show them on the long legs
Congratulations! You've extended the anode and the cathode of a direct current circuit. In this video you did not account for the fact that an air gap is a form of insulation. In your last video you did not account for the fact that standard insulation is used to dampen fields of induction. There is a reason why magnetic wire utilizes lacquer as an insulation, a less dampening effect of the fields of induction. If Induction worked in the way you claim then alternating current through a coiled wire would not be needed to induce current on an opposing coiled wire, all wiring of automotives and home electrical system's would go haywire.
Stop using light as a constant. The measure of light is limited by our measure of light.
Thought, measure, truth, philosophy, thought. A coned spiral of understanding, ever growing, never ceasing. Deep study.
Main stream science is caught in an endless loop.
me flip switch lights turns on unga bunga
At oI_X2cMHNe0&t=13m30s 13:30 : the only reason there is a current flowing in the discinnected wire is, that there is a closed cirquit with a current in it and therefore an e-field.
Therefore it dies NOT disprove a causality break
What if you use a coaxial cable? It shields totally for any Electric field.
What if there was a switch on either side of the battery and the 2 switches closed at the same time. In the 1 switch scenario the field is already set up.
Great job man! Here from Brazil!
I have one doubt that if u kept 2 light bulbs really really close but one is not connected to the cercuit and one is should it still light up?
This is the twist of Darek...
Loved it 😊😊😊
As a former bioinformatics student I think this is unnecessarily complicated and idiotic; therefore I propose that in the future all energy transfer shall happen using ATP and NADP.
Nice video, cleared a lot of my doubts.
You're being sneaky again Derek. At the end you basically said "so you can see you'd get a non-negligible current within the first second" - but most of the criticisms that said the current would be tiny weren't complaining that you wouldn't get a non-tiny current "within the first second" - they were complaining that it would be tiny "at 1/c seconds", which it would, on that graph it wouldn't even show a rise it would be so small/close to the green supply line jump.
More proof that you simply can't use any of these criticisms as an opportunity for self growth, you're purely wired to narcissistically defend every point to the death and even re-framing criticisms into forms where they're beatable and then beating them to feel superior instead of taking on those criticisms as stated properly and addressing them honestly.
Anyone with self respect making this video would've approached it more sincerely, this is more like a "I'm sorry you interpreted me wrong I guess I didn't communicate it properly and here's 24 minutes explaining why I'm still right", when it needed to be "I'm sorry my video was misleading, I should have stated the truth of the model, I'll do better next time". As my maths professor once said, "getting the right answer for the wrong reasons is just as bad as being wrong", and in your case saying the right words with the wrong intentions is just as bad as saying the wrong ones.
I hope you grow out of this phase where you're throwing away your credibility for views, and you learn to return to an attitude where "gotcha-ing" people for clicks is not the main goal, and instead the main goal returns to a sincere intent to educate and communicate ideas fairly.
I hope you learn how to properly react to these things one day.
Is there any chance you could do a breakdown of Nikola Tesla's Wardenclyffe Tower. Did it have veracity?
Can ask has anyone done this test without using a switch and just connect the battery to test how long it takes to turn on. The electros wont be primarily lined up if the battery not been in tge circuit
So how about alectric and magnet?