This really helped combine some other explanations I've seen which finally got a lot of it to click - plus adding some new info. Greatly appreciate it!
The algorithm has brought you and I together, and though the reflection video is the only one I've watched, I'm anticipating a banger of a binge for the remaining 33 videos here. I love being disappointed so I'll set really high expectations, that way if your channel meets those expectations, I can still be disappointed by not being disappointed by the unmet expectations. It's a lose-lose, so for me it's already a. Goddamned win-win. Great...
@@SomethingAbtScience show the new photon with the same wavelength is the result of the constructive interference? If so what is the range of the previous wavelengths?
fun video, i really enjoy this specific style of educational video i have been seeing lately. mostly normal video with subtle humor thrown in here and there that doesn't distract from the topic. very much my style of humor
MEN I am afraid to express how this video is good because i think that you will be bad after this and you will stop to question the quality of the video, and it’s scope. this is absolutely good, I look at almost all video about this and especially science asylum, I understand but now this is like a nectar of information
i had already read about huygen's explanation for the wave front in my optics class but it didn't actually click that that's how refraction works until I saw the animation lol. good video.
In the case of shiny metals, you may want to refer to the Pauli exclusion principle. The photon is absorbed by the electron. The electron changes in energy due to the absorbed photon but there are no available states (energy levels) so it has to give up the photon.
Cool video and really gave me a really much more comprehensive understanding of this topic. Love your channel so far and I think it would really help your channel if you worked on your audio mastering a bitt your voice is extremely quiet and the level varies by a lot
I'm Brazilian, and i like the entire video, but as a Brazilian i know the most people in my country don't understand English, please make a IA dubbing in Portuguese for my country. Nice job bro!
awesome video, very good to avoid misconceptions and i love your humor. just wanted to note that i noticed that the movement of the electron at 04:00 is wrong. since the vectors show the acceleration the movement would show the double-integral of a sin-wave: a -sin wave or a sin with π or 180° phase shift. just wanted to add that since everything else seemed so perfekt :)
i know this is considering semi classical interpretation but in QFT neither the electric not the magnetic field is fundamental, that is it doesnt exist, all there is is the electromagnetic field. interactions merely look like electric or magnetic effects to us dependent on our frame of reference/speed. light therefore isnt some combination of electric or magnetic field, its a wave in a electromagnetic field. this is obvious when you consider that photons do not have any self interaction, therefore quite a bit of the explaining there wasnt accurate.
@@sudazima I definitely should have clarified that that this is a classical explanation and that the magnetic field is not a fundamental force, but rather an electric field observed from a moving frame of reference. But I don't think using the classical interpretation to explain reflection is misleading in any way. I learned about the classical definition of light way before I understood special relativity, and that's how it should be.
all good and well, but what IS this "electromagnetic field"? a transverse wave cannot travel THROUGH any thing. it is only ever something itself moving. which we decided isnt happening, as a vacuum is "nothing". good old michelson and morley "proved beyond reasonable doubt" that there is no "substance" to allow these waves, whatever they or, or however they propagate, to exist... yet we convince ourselves they do... we get told from early on to "look at the ripples on the surface of the water"... and? they are a SURFACE phenomena. we never get told to picture the water column under the crests and troughs, that there must be increases and reductions of pressure at right angles to these surface ripples. nor do we get told to contemplate the column of air above the ripples on the surface of the water, that must also experience these changes in pressure as something is displaced. we never even start to consider that whatever caused the perturbation in the first place must also produce pressure waves that propagate through whatever the medium happens to be... that rock that hits the water to create the ripple? you can determine when it hit the water as it produces a tell tale compressional wave, well before the ripples reach any measuring device... here is a guitar string. its motion is a transverse wave. not part of the string moving independently. the ENTIRE string moves. simultaneously we get a pressure wave propagating at right angles. you cannot have a transverse wave, the typical depiction of EM radiation, travel THROUGH anything. the entire mass, substance, call it what you will... in this case, the entire universe... must also have some type of compressional artefact propagating at right angles. the more i dig into the old books, definitions of things like "gilberts", the unit of magneto motive force, or other such fundamentals of our modern day physics, such as coulombs, the basis of amperes, volts, charges, henries, or other mainstays of our equations... ergs, dynes, "forces"... or ESU versus EMU... the more handwaving i see as something fundamental is wrong yet we have gone to far down the rabbit hole to turn back now. the more the whole quantum theory turns into so much gibberish based on a flawed perception of what is taking place. but dont worry, maxwell solved those issues with his equations, hertz showed us "wavelike propogations" with his flawed experiments, einstein solved more problems with his "equations", and little trails left in fog show "subatomic particles"... who am i to argue? i choose not to waste my time on something that appears like nothing more than a wild goose chase, mental gymnastics trying to understand something that may or may not amount to no more than a delusion. a misconception.
even though its technically wrong, classical stuff is usually taught before the modern versions because it is easier and still useful in 99% of regular scenarios.
Damn I love people who really get this stuff, what a good explanation this is. You have a great grasp of the subject, looking forward to more of your content!
Reflection is both key and lock. 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ "Before I start, I must see my end. Destination known, my mind's journey now begins. Upon my chariot, heart and soul's fate revealed. In time, all points converge; hope's strength resteeled. But to earn final peace at the universe's endless refrain, we must see all in nothingness... before we start again." 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ --Diamond Dragons (series)
Cool stuff, thanks! A note on the reason for refraction angle. Science Asylum pointed out that this change in direction can also be seen as the direction of constructive interference. I don't remember the explanation though.
Something cool I realized some time ago is that light with an electric field that has no horizontal component parallel to the surface it will refract into, cannot reflect if the reflected ray is 90° relative to the refracted ray. This is because the atoms can't both generate an electromagnetic wave into the material and one parallel to the electric field of the refracted wave. This gives us Brewster's angle.
@@SomethingAbtScience Yeah I learned about Brewster's angle and its application to polarizing glasses in University in different classes, but it never really clicked until I left.
So I have thought about how light is re emitted and not reflected in metals. But when it comes to water or glass the most I could find with googling was that its due to the boundary layer between the two materials air - glass - water causing a refractive effect. So the part you have with the surface glass atoms vibrating is a bit interesting. Would the glass vibration be measurable with a small enough piece of glass?
I mean, yes, you're right about the explanation of reflection, but as far as I know, in the context of light, absorption is the effect of electrons taking all the energy from photons and jumping to a higher energy level. In your explanation you used the word absorption to describe wave phenomena, which I find a bit confusing. (Maybe this is because I am not a nativ Englisch speaker)
Do a video about how wavelength information is communicated to the prism to know what direction the light should travel in. Is that information at the leading edge of a light wave, or does the prism somehow see the wavelength coming and direct it?
I feel like I’m hearing you say that magnetic fields are caused by accelerated charges. I hope I’m correct in saying this but in fairly certain that it is any MOVING (doesn’t require acceleration) charge creates the magnetic field.
my brains still too smooth to understand the change in direction. But basically your other point was its deconstructed and then reconstructed into light again?
Yep, even more so than on Earth since it has no atmosphere. However, the moon's surface is blindingly bright! So, the required eye protection may prevent you from actually seeing many stars.
Interesting description of the phenomenon of reflection. It might have been nice if you stated this is the THEORY of what we believe is happening. For this theory to be true, there must be losses for that photon to be "re-emitted" in this fashion, yet we do not have the tools to measure the slight decrease in wavelength. In short, what I am saying is that what you stated as fact has not yet been shown to be true by experiment.
I asked myself the same question making this video. Apparently, the photon’s behavior is wave-like, even when it’s just one photon. It behaves probabilistically, and its behavior aligns with constructive interference of paths near the classical trajectory, leading to the reflection law we observe macroscopically.
If you read this, I have a topic proposal on EMF Wave Propagation that I have never seen any other physics channel cover: Could you demonstrate how Fresnel lenses (& other diffraction grating patterns) are able to focus γ-rays akin to a lens can focus less energetic frequencies of light thanks to the least action principle. As a fundamental principle of the universe, I assume the gamme photons still follow the path of least resistance (although the Feynman integral over the infimite potential paths does factor in longer paths with with extremely minute probabilities; sorry I forgot all the jargon), so how does a grating yield paths that focus extremely high frequencies onto photographic plates or imaging sensors? Where in the frequency spectrum do glass lenses become ineffective at slowing the beams? Could a metallurgist make an ensemble of metal alloys that can exist in a solid configuration such that gradients of refractive indexes for a given X or gamma-ray frequency travelling through its continuum yield a lensing effect on rays arriving perpendicular to its surface? how does that math work that causes diffraction grating lensing phenomena to emerge?
This makes no sense, reflections on refractions are not due to space time bending, we clearly see that the light is not falling a straight path, this is like saying that when a ball hits the wall and bounces off, that the ball isn’t changing directions. You need to rethink your belief.
"i've been practicing this motion a lot" lmao
Awesome video, excited for the next one!
It's the moment I subscribed.
This channel has potential!
Absolutely!
Agreed.
it’s massive and it will be powerful!!!
This really helped combine some other explanations I've seen which finally got a lot of it to click - plus adding some new info. Greatly appreciate it!
Wow, thanks! It's such a great feeling to have something click.
A new video just in time for Christmas 👍
Holy cows!🐄🐄🐄 Thank you! Merry Christmas
The algorithm has brought you and I together, and though the reflection video is the only one I've watched, I'm anticipating a banger of a binge for the remaining 33 videos here. I love being disappointed so I'll set really high expectations, that way if your channel meets those expectations, I can still be disappointed by not being disappointed by the unmet expectations. It's a lose-lose, so for me it's already a. Goddamned win-win. Great...
Lol. Hopefully, I've disappointed you further! You will be.
2:59 when the bathroom starts glowing 💀
You explain things with better context than any teacher/professor i've seen. Good shit man
Absolutely brilliant video mate. keep up the good work and dry humour
Thanks!
So basically the photon gets absorbed and it’s energy is used to recreate a new photon with the same wavelength?
Exactly!
@@SomethingAbtSciencebut thst still technically is a change in direction? Or can be described that way?
@@SomethingAbtScience show the new photon with the same wavelength is the result of the constructive interference? If so what is the range of the previous wavelengths?
fun video, i really enjoy this specific style of educational video i have been seeing lately. mostly normal video with subtle humor thrown in here and there that doesn't distract from the topic. very much my style of humor
I finally understand why light appears to slow down in a substance
Great video. Very informative and entertaining. Can’t wait to see more.
I may soon forget most of what was explained, but atleast I enjoyed listening to it lol
I just glanced at this and saw “luigi can’t change direction.” I don’t think I’m okay
Fantastic! Great teacher who explains it in their own great way, excellent job man! looking forward to more
MEN I am afraid to express how this video is good because i think that you will be bad after this and you will stop to question the quality of the video, and it’s scope.
this is absolutely good, I look at almost all video about this and especially science asylum, I understand but now this is like a nectar of information
So good watching young and based people beautifully explaining things.
You got my subscription in the first 2 minutes
Here before 50k subs :) glad to see some new science communicators
i had already read about huygen's explanation for the wave front in my optics class but it didn't actually click that that's how refraction works until I saw the animation lol. good video.
Pretty nice video and well done expenation. Bravo👏
In the case of shiny metals, you may want to refer to the Pauli exclusion principle. The photon is absorbed by the electron. The electron changes in energy due to the absorbed photon but there are no available states (energy levels) so it has to give up the photon.
Cool video and really gave me a really much more comprehensive understanding of this topic. Love your channel so far and I think it would really help your channel if you worked on your audio mastering a bitt your voice is extremely quiet and the level varies by a lot
Very well said! You explain things very simply and concisely, I could learn that from you 😵💫 great video!
Good video. Keep ‘em coming.
I'm Brazilian, and i like the entire video, but as a Brazilian i know the most people in my country don't understand English, please make a IA dubbing in Portuguese for my country.
Nice job bro!
Hey, love your videos, love your sens of humour, keep going !!
Thanks! Will do
u deserve wayyyyy more subs
awesome video, very good to avoid misconceptions and i love your humor.
just wanted to note that i noticed that the movement of the electron at 04:00 is wrong. since the vectors show the acceleration the movement would show the double-integral of a sin-wave: a -sin wave or a sin with π or 180° phase shift.
just wanted to add that since everything else seemed so perfekt :)
Thanks! That is a great point.
very good video but it's destructive interference not deconstructive
mega high quality content! Thanks for the explanation, I'm surprised I never questioned why and how reflections works!
i know this is considering semi classical interpretation but in QFT neither the electric not the magnetic field is fundamental, that is it doesnt exist, all there is is the electromagnetic field. interactions merely look like electric or magnetic effects to us dependent on our frame of reference/speed. light therefore isnt some combination of electric or magnetic field, its a wave in a electromagnetic field. this is obvious when you consider that photons do not have any self interaction, therefore quite a bit of the explaining there wasnt accurate.
@@sudazima I definitely should have clarified that that this is a classical explanation and that the magnetic field is not a fundamental force, but rather an electric field observed from a moving frame of reference. But I don't think using the classical interpretation to explain reflection is misleading in any way. I learned about the classical definition of light way before I understood special relativity, and that's how it should be.
all good and well, but what IS this "electromagnetic field"?
a transverse wave cannot travel THROUGH any thing. it is only ever something itself moving. which we decided isnt happening, as a vacuum is "nothing". good old michelson and morley "proved beyond reasonable doubt" that there is no "substance" to allow these waves, whatever they or, or however they propagate, to exist... yet we convince ourselves they do...
we get told from early on to "look at the ripples on the surface of the water"... and? they are a SURFACE phenomena. we never get told to picture the water column under the crests and troughs, that there must be increases and reductions of pressure at right angles to these surface ripples. nor do we get told to contemplate the column of air above the ripples on the surface of the water, that must also experience these changes in pressure as something is displaced. we never even start to consider that whatever caused the perturbation in the first place must also produce pressure waves that propagate through whatever the medium happens to be... that rock that hits the water to create the ripple? you can determine when it hit the water as it produces a tell tale compressional wave, well before the ripples reach any measuring device...
here is a guitar string. its motion is a transverse wave. not part of the string moving independently. the ENTIRE string moves. simultaneously we get a pressure wave propagating at right angles. you cannot have a transverse wave, the typical depiction of EM radiation, travel THROUGH anything. the entire mass, substance, call it what you will... in this case, the entire universe... must also have some type of compressional artefact propagating at right angles.
the more i dig into the old books, definitions of things like "gilberts", the unit of magneto motive force, or other such fundamentals of our modern day physics, such as coulombs, the basis of amperes, volts, charges, henries, or other mainstays of our equations... ergs, dynes, "forces"... or ESU versus EMU... the more handwaving i see as something fundamental is wrong yet we have gone to far down the rabbit hole to turn back now. the more the whole quantum theory turns into so much gibberish based on a flawed perception of what is taking place.
but dont worry, maxwell solved those issues with his equations, hertz showed us "wavelike propogations" with his flawed experiments, einstein solved more problems with his "equations", and little trails left in fog show "subatomic particles"...
who am i to argue? i choose not to waste my time on something that appears like nothing more than a wild goose chase, mental gymnastics trying to understand something that may or may not amount to no more than a delusion. a misconception.
even though its technically wrong, classical stuff is usually taught before the modern versions because it is easier and still useful in 99% of regular scenarios.
This was very well explained. Great job!
Thank you!
Damn I love people who really get this stuff, what a good explanation this is. You have a great grasp of the subject, looking forward to more of your content!
Nice video! Keep up the good work!
This was actually funny. Well done!
Super funny and really informative. I like your skits. You should keep making videos
Thanks! I'm glad you think so.
Wow, great explanations! Didn't know about it... Thanks!!
Glad it was helpful!
Reflection is both key and lock.
🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨
"Before I start, I must see my end. Destination known, my mind's journey now begins. Upon my chariot, heart and soul's fate revealed. In time, all points converge; hope's strength resteeled. But to earn final peace at the universe's endless refrain, we must see all in nothingness... before we start again."
🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨
--Diamond Dragons (series)
Cool stuff, thanks! A note on the reason for refraction angle. Science Asylum pointed out that this change in direction can also be seen as the direction of constructive interference. I don't remember the explanation though.
Normalize your volume please. (It's too low) Great vid.
Huh. It’s 3:30 AM, and here I am learning something.
Another banger🔥
I can't tell whether this is an actual explanation of something interesting I have never heard of before, or satire
BTW, thanks and Merry Christmas 🎄
You're very welcome. Thank YOU for the drug money😀and for watching. According to my UA-cam analytics, you're my biggest fan!
@SomethingAbtScience
Haha, hilarious:-) Merry Christmas and happy New Year 👍
Good video. Should have mentioned Fermat's Principle at the end though. I think it would tie the video together nicely.
Good call!
The ending was the best 👌
Something cool I realized some time ago is that light with an electric field that has no horizontal component parallel to the surface it will refract into, cannot reflect if the reflected ray is 90° relative to the refracted ray. This is because the atoms can't both generate an electromagnetic wave into the material and one parallel to the electric field of the refracted wave. This gives us Brewster's angle.
Huh, that's very interesting. I must look more into Brewster's angle
@@SomethingAbtScience Yeah I learned about Brewster's angle and its application to polarizing glasses in University in different classes, but it never really clicked until I left.
ahh really loved the video, I had this question from few months but was really lazy to find the cause for it. THANK YOU!!
That's great to hear! You're welcome.
Nice video dude
Dope video, your audio is slightly low. At least on my phone
Shit. Thanks for letting me know!
This is so good!
I must say thank you very much you explained it very well
finally new video 🔥
So I have thought about how light is re emitted and not reflected in metals. But when it comes to water or glass the most I could find with googling was that its due to the boundary layer between the two materials air - glass - water causing a refractive effect. So the part you have with the surface glass atoms vibrating is a bit interesting. Would the glass vibration be measurable with a small enough piece of glass?
I mean, yes, you're right about the explanation of reflection, but as far as I know, in the context of light, absorption is the effect of electrons taking all the energy from photons and jumping to a higher energy level. In your explanation you used the word absorption to describe wave phenomena, which I find a bit confusing.
(Maybe this is because I am not a nativ Englisch speaker)
Do a video about how wavelength information is communicated to the prism to know what direction the light should travel in. Is that information at the leading edge of a light wave, or does the prism somehow see the wavelength coming and direct it?
Man this vídeo was *really* good
Great video!
Fuck yeah this is top tier content
So... Why does packing more energy into the EM field require its location to be distributed through space less than an excitation with less energy?
Very well done 👍🏼
Thank you 👍
Wait so… mirrors have lag?
A wee bit, yeah mate
@@SomethingAbtScience That's awesome! Thank you for the explanation, loved it!
Very good structured content, my only advice would be working on audio quality. Keeping audio congruent would earn my subscription!
Pouahhaha what do you mean ?? Audio is more than okay
+ "Earn my subscription" who tf do you think you are
Illiterate viewers represent :) Outstanding explanation, thank you
I feel like I’m hearing you say that magnetic fields are caused by accelerated charges. I hope I’m correct in saying this but in fairly certain that it is any MOVING (doesn’t require acceleration) charge creates the magnetic field.
Nice video but why do you pronounce acceleration without the /k/ sound
I just don't know how to speak properly. I must have some British in me (metaphorically speaking)
@ i thought it was something deep like a different pronounciation or smthn 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭
What about plastic mirrors?
i am so sad i have access to no electrons… but im taking it positively 😅 1:15
Holy banger dude
my brains still too smooth to understand the change in direction. But basically your other point was its deconstructed and then reconstructed into light again?
👌
👌☜(ﾟヮﾟ☜)
Here before you get famous
Thanks for the video, electrons rule.
5:42 It's a bit rich to call a part of your audience illiterate when you pronounce nucleus "nukulus".
Thank you sir
If your standing on the moon can you see the sun or the stars??
Yep, even more so than on Earth since it has no atmosphere. However, the moon's surface is blindingly bright! So, the required eye protection may prevent you from actually seeing many stars.
Interesting description of the phenomenon of reflection. It might have been nice if you stated this is the THEORY of what we believe is happening. For this theory to be true, there must be losses for that photon to be "re-emitted" in this fashion, yet we do not have the tools to measure the slight decrease in wavelength. In short, what I am saying is that what you stated as fact has not yet been shown to be true by experiment.
OK, so then how does a single photon reflect the surface?
I asked myself the same question making this video. Apparently, the photon’s behavior is wave-like, even when it’s just one photon. It behaves probabilistically, and its behavior aligns with constructive interference of paths near the classical trajectory, leading to the reflection law we observe macroscopically.
Subscribed
Fantastic
You sound like a younger JerryRigEverything
Fascinating!
Energy is recursive
Did you shoot a mirror!?
I did. 😎
Brilliant 👍👽
enter the chat: Paraxial light beams....
At some point you might have to admit that you know some stuff. :). Cool video.
Um yes light can change direction!
great
🔥
the explanation for why light slows down in a medium is false but otherwise decent video
6:08 "186000 MILES per second"
ur using miles and the brits are the illiterate, lol
Aluminum is spelled Aluminium most everywhere but the US and Canada and thus pronounced differently.
I subscribed because I liked the masturbation joke.
(But also, for the physics... because I need more physics in my diet.
If you read this, I have a topic proposal on EMF Wave Propagation that I have never seen any other physics channel cover:
Could you demonstrate how Fresnel lenses (& other diffraction grating patterns) are able to focus γ-rays akin to a lens can focus less energetic frequencies of light thanks to the least action principle. As a fundamental principle of the universe, I assume the gamme photons still follow the path of least resistance (although the Feynman integral over the infimite potential paths does factor in longer paths with with extremely minute probabilities; sorry I forgot all the jargon), so how does a grating yield paths that focus extremely high frequencies onto photographic plates or imaging sensors? Where in the frequency spectrum do glass lenses become ineffective at slowing the beams? Could a metallurgist make an ensemble of metal alloys that can exist in a solid configuration such that gradients of refractive indexes for a given X or gamma-ray frequency travelling through its continuum yield a lensing effect on rays arriving perpendicular to its surface?
how does that math work that causes diffraction grating lensing phenomena to emerge?
😂
im gay HELP!
This makes no sense, reflections on refractions are not due to space time bending, we clearly see that the light is not falling a straight path, this is like saying that when a ball hits the wall and bounces off, that the ball isn’t changing directions. You need to rethink your belief.
0:46
Learn to fix the sound, it was too low and changed levels too much.