The atoms of the philosophers are not what modern scientists understand by that name. Democritus described not only essential particles, but a-tomic, so small that cannot be divided. Atoms, as it turns to be, are divisible, and thus they are not truly atomic, in the meaning of the Greek root. Democritus' speculated atoms are more likely Plank's quanta.
Democritus said so small it could not be divided and remain the same substance. You can't break an atom up and have the same thing, you have pieces but not the same thing. A gold atom is gold, a proton or an electron from a gold atom is not gold.
@@fairygoatmother yes I feel like your comment is more important than the like ratio portrays... But yeah you’re right, man. Just know that I know you’re right lmao
3:57 The first picture of an atom, the Iridium atom, was done with an Ion Microscope. I remember seeing a picture of this in a TIME LIFE science book from the late 1960's. The Iridium atoms looked like round dots surrounded with concentric rings bunched together in a geometric pattern. The image was very two dimensional. What the atom looks like, is whatever reality we impose on it - - that's how things work at the atomic & subatomic level - - in our effort to observe them we change them.
+Josh Hooper people are not into reality or science or whatever. it's all about money and fun these days. Niki Minaj hits 1m views within hours of publishing a new booty shaking video
Excellent video...and production. One of the red herrings encountered with learners is whether or not you can "see" an atom, whether or not the human eye can discern interaction between light and matter with or without the aid of optics. At the "atomic" level; presence, structure, character, behavior and interaction can be detected and as a consequence, the results can be visualized, imagined and expressed graphically in two or three dimensions. Your animation does well to illustrate why you cannot "see" and atom. The illustration of an atom enlarged to the size of a stadium and the nucleus a size of a pea in the center of the field and the electrons as numbered grains of sand doing ellipses at the speed of light further demonstrates that even if you could "get small", you would still not be able to "see" the atom.
OK I HAVE A QUESTION! If these atoms could only be detected through a device that picks up on tiny size differences isn't it safe to say that these atoms are actually more of like a blobbish lil thing?? Or perhaps it is such a small thing that our minds can only understand it through a form of perspective, meaning atoms have a set of known constants (laws) about them AND a set of variables about them? I mean like although schools teach the atom to be one thing isn't there inevitably DIFFERENT perspectives on what the atom can be? Hope you read this..
Atoms aren't blobs. They aren't anything really from what I understand. They're mostly magnetic field, where the electrons appear and reappear inside. Then there's virtual particles and the Higgs boson field, and dark matter and a bunch of other wacky science stuff. Atoms are complicated and we probably will never really truly understand what they "are". But then again, someone said that flying machines where impossible and you know how that turned out. I may be proven wrong. Tl,DR: atoms are magic space balls.
One thing not often mentioned is what frequency electrons actually vibrate at. An electron wavelength is around 10^-10 meters. Electrons travel at close to the speed of light, around 5x10^6 meters/second. An electron thus travels 5x10^16 wavelengths per second (AKA "Hz"). By comparison, the frequency of visible light is around 5x10^14 Hz. So an electron vibrates at frequencies around 100 times that of visible light, i.e. in the ultraviolet spectrum. And that is why your eyes cannot see the vibration of electron orbitals around the nucleus of an atom.
There is no way to "see" an atom due to the size relationship of photons to atoms. Our eyes rely on reflected photons from our surroundings. You can create a "braille" image using the scanning tunnelling microscope. You can "map" the location and approximate size at best. What is it that you're trying to see? An electron quantum probability cloud around particles that are not solid and defy any normal physical description? Invisible vibrating strings in a quantum field? Forget it. You can't "see" this shit, and you can barely make sense of it on a quantum level. The best you can do is look at the equations. Then look at what happens when you smash this shit together at the speed of light. Forget about "seeing"
@@hwfq34fajw9foiffawdiufhuaiwfhw Thats just the braille he was talking about. The dots are not atoms themselves but the topography of the outer electron shells.
Trying to see atoms is about as precises as trying to type on a keyboard with boxing gloves on. Even that's probably easier since you can probably just hold some chopsticks in each glove and use that to hit the keys.
The reason Rontegen, and not Tesla, is stated as the discoverer of X-rays is because Rontegen was actually working on, and made public the science at the same time. Where Tesla discovered it years earlier, but he wasn't specifically working on it that we know of. It's not clear that Tesla was working specifically on that science because any notes on it were destroyed in the fire set by the people that didn't want this knowledge to get to the public. --- If you do a Google search of X-ray creator Rontegen comes up. But with a little digging you find Tesla was most likely the originator of the active science behind it. --- It's pretty clear that there are people who want Tesla's memory to be vanquished. We know the government confiscated Tesla's notes after he died. We know JP Morgan (Big Banker) defunded his projects, and Thomas Edison basically stole his research for profit. So there's definitely something shady going on when it comes to giving credit to Tesla.
I never knew that mendeleev didn't believe in atomic theory, and now that you've mentioned it, I can't find any further details about it. I'd really be appreciative if someone could provide me with some further references to find out more.
To my knowledge, you can also use a transmission electron microscope to view atoms. Though it needs to be a high resolution type. (and use phase contrast if im not mistaken). Its also possible to view atoms using a scanning electron microscope, as hitachi proved with their new 1MV SEM
@@scottmenard5528 well, since i made that comment 4 years ago, i have gained much in the way of knowledge on the subject of microscopy. And i can without a shadow of a doubt say that the electron microscope, as well as the tunneling electron microscope and atomic force microscope can all see atoms. I have done so with my own eyes using an electron microscope
@@lbochtler I'm confused on being able to see atoms. Some say there are actually molecules like in the IBM boy and his atoms, others say it's impossible to see atoms. What's the deal?
@@kalidilerious technically speaking, you are seeing the interactions of your test setup with the atoms, not the atoms themselves. Well at least not to the point of being able to differentiate neutrons and protons in the core. So both are technically speaking semi correct. But for all intents and purposes you are indeed seeing atoms in your example. Higher resolution images have been made since then, mostly by means of the electron microscope, but these where of crystal lattices instead of individual atoms.
What about maharshi kanad he told in 600 BC that if we go on dividing matter a time will come when it will no longer be divisible and that stage is 'anu'
Do you think higher resolution imaging and video footage could be rendered to observe two atoms bonding and the behavior of proton etc in relation to their nuclei.
I wanted to see Electrons the quantum particle that occur in a major part in nature, they Interact with elements in all their states of matter, ionizing, or it can Interact magnetically and in other ways...
3:25 Franklin never gave Watson permission to view slide "51", but Franklin later became the Administrator of Air Force testing land near Roswell, New Mexico.
just a real basic point...if you spin cubes and other shapes it motion becomes a sphere. we do not see atoms with visible light, we only do radar and sonar like things and get reflections of their actions
@@shallabim912 An atom "is" a Subatomic particle. Yes, Im aware the term "sub" atomic means "under" the atom. But the entire atom is like taking a picture of a guitar string. (A comparison I used in a lecture of mine in case anyone happens to copy/steal it) When you pluck a guitar string it appears as though the string is in several places at once. Yet when you take a picture, it seems as though it "knows" you are measuring it and it stays still. The atom doesn't literally know it's being watched.
Isn't the guitar string moving in any direction, therefor moving in time? And when you take that photo, you're taking a measurement of the string in that specific point in space-time, thus it appears static in the photo as opposed to the moving string, giving the illusion that it resolved it's position due to observation. Could uncertainty principal be explained by this?
Daniel Santos No, the uncertainty principle is very different. The analogy youre drawing is equivalent to classical physics, theres nothing quantum about it. When you take a picture of course its a moment in time. General uncertainty relations in QM arise from the wave property of matter. It is simply a result of wave dispersion discovered by Fourier a century before QM existed The collapse of the wavefunction (which youre referring to) is a completely separate being from heisenberg
"See" has more than one meaning, for sure. I mean, think about it. Let's say you place a grain of rice under a towel. Can you see it? No one would say they could. Now remove the towel and use an extremely thin sheet of opaque tissue. Can you see it now? Many would say, No, but I can see it's outline and I know it's a grain of rice. Well how far away from "seeing" is that second example? It's analogous to "touch." When are we touching something? At what point when the atoms of my hand close in on the atoms of the tabletop am I "touching" it? When my mind feels my hand cannot move any further? From a molecular standpoint, the moments before I feel resistance and after I feel resistance are essentially the same. So it comes down to my perception to decide when I'm "touching" something.
Thanks to my fellow Egyptian-American, Mr Ahmed Zewail we now can see atoms in action. Furthermore, humans have advanced even further building up onto his discoveries.
Plato was still on the right track, in that he decided that what made Gold different from Lead was that it's atoms were fundamentally different in some way.
It's hard to realize how tiny an atom is, but even harder to realize how tiny are the subatomic particles compared to the atom. and even harder to realize how tiny a quark is.
Uh actually, no you CANNOT see an atom, nor will you ever be able to, since an atom is smaller than the wavelength of light. What you CAN see is the vague electron cloud and can accurately create a representation of an atom.
The electron cloud goes around the atom, you cannot say however that the electron cloud is bigger than the atom, since it's simply it's most external layer
Luis Sierra but how can you truly know what it looks like if its never been seen? Have you ever run full speed through fog because you were pretty confident there wasn't anything in the road probably not
@@SheikhN-bible-syndrome cloud is just a metaphor, In reality the "electron cloud", is just a region in space where you are more likely to find an electron, buy yeah it is indeed invisible.
tomorrow i got chemistry test and i just cover chapter 1, 6 more to go and i stumble to this video. after this i want go to sleep. just pray for tomorrow test :((
Most of the volume of an atom is emptiness that cannot be seen or sensed. At best one can sense the electromagenetic field caused by the spinning electrons. this resembles looking at a planet that is covered with clouds.
Wow! I’m no physicist, but I’ve had a seemingly huge problem here ever since that famous IBM demonstration. Yet what about the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle? I believe that this is still significant for objects up to the size of atoms. So, how come this and similar feats of locating an atom, picking it up and relocating it, all involving the precise, simultaneous knowledge of both its position and momentum, appear to negate HUP!?
Excellent video buddy, you have done a great job. But at 2:59 you shouldn't give so much details about the DNA & etc biology topics, still its ok. I hope you can fix that problem, have a nice day!
Very good video. Informative and comprehensive. As you apear interested in discovery. You may find it useful to know number of points. Photon did not bounced back from atom. It bounced back from field of forces emitted from atom. This is long way from nuclei. In the same way the needle moving over atom is moving over the force filed emitted by atom. Mankind dose not have the technology to see atom. The best means of seeing structure of atom is gravity microscope. When you understand nature of gravity not just the effect of it, you will be able to see atom by gravity microscope. Detail on official request only. MG1
Isn't most of the atom empty space? So why do atoms appear as solid spheres in these photos? Is it just how these techniques show the atoms just like how infrared telescopes represent their data collected using different colours/wavelengths of visible light? I.e. taking something humans can't see and putting it into human understandable forms.
You're seeing the outer electron cloud reacting to the beam of photons to detect the electric potential; the photons (x-ray or whatever photon wavelength in the needle is exciting the electrons around each atom providing data that can be imaged) that image is the fuzz of all locations electrons. Even better quantum electrons can observe the wave function of the election which gives even more detail of the atom showing the orbital of the electron. io9.gizmodo.com/the-first-image-ever-of-a-hydrogen-atoms-orbital-struc-509684901 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scanning_tunneling_microscope
A bit disappointed that you did not show more of these images the different techniques gave us. Especially the chemical bonding and nonbonding. You explained it well and then....no examples of his laser-ography?? This is a visual medium, if you going to tell someone about a cool subject and how people discovered certain things, it would be nice to actually slide in some actual images or clips of what they did. That being said, I thought it was a well thought presented overview of the topic in 5 min.
that pens end probably *touches* the surface with the electron, and the survice electrons will react as acordingly, but that doesnt mean you just found a shape.
Atomism first appeared in India by Jain in the 7th Century BCE. Buddha however instead said we are made of 4 great elements and mind. Later Buddhism also adopted Atomism but Buddha himself saw this world as the waves. So far, Democritus visited India and appreciated India.
When I was a kid, I used to play in a darkened room to grab mysterious clumps of dots that move like butterflies. My father said he couldn't see the atoms, and I thought it would be a fault, but if moving or colored atoms were discovered in the future, they would be small red circles. I want to know what a moving atomic substance looks like like a butterfly flying. 私は子供の頃、真っ暗にした部屋で蝶のように動く不思議な小さな点の塊をつかむ遊びをしていたことがある。 父親は原子は見えるわけがないと言っていたし、私も気のせいだろうと思っていたけれど、もしも動く原子や色のついた原子が将来発見されることがあれば、赤い丸の小さな塊で蝶の飛び方のような動く原子の物質が何なのか知りたい。 ｈ／ｗｈｙ＝ｙｈｗｈ＝３６０° ｅｄｄｉｅｅ５５
How about Field Ion Microscopy, which was invented in 1951 by Erwin Wilhelm Müller and his Ph.D. student Kanwar Bahadur, way before STM and Electron microscopes and able to image the single atom in real space. STM has always took credit to "see" the atoms at first place, which is not true.
Neutrons and Protons are made of quarks. Electrons and quarks are fundamental, that is they are not "made" of anything. Some, including myself, think they may be made of more fundamental strings of String Theory.
Mate, who wrote your script. You jumped from Greece to 1800s. What of the Golden Age of Codoba and Granada where from the Einstein's and Newton's got their inspirations from.
+Purpel Fais Electrons cannot be observed, it's imposible to capture an electron in just a position, the protons and neutrons are inside the sphere ("shell" / nucleus) and that's what you see.
Great presentation there, Lincoln.
Lmfao
Its only 5 bucks
The atoms of the philosophers are not what modern scientists understand by that name. Democritus described not only essential particles, but a-tomic, so small that cannot be divided.
Atoms, as it turns to be, are divisible, and thus they are not truly atomic, in the meaning of the Greek root.
Democritus' speculated atoms are more likely Plank's quanta.
Democritus said so small it could not be divided and remain the same substance. You can't break an atom up and have the same thing, you have pieces but not the same thing. A gold atom is gold, a proton or an electron from a gold atom is not gold.
@@fairygoatmother yes I feel like your comment is more important than the like ratio portrays... But yeah you’re right, man. Just know that I know you’re right lmao
Is this guy Abraham Lincolns son?
More likely, his great, great grandson.
that's what I thought toooo!! U know, great minds think alike XDDD
I guess so(very similar in face). But, Abraham Lincolns was not a liar, I guess.
To skinny
Grandson
Always wanted to see atoms playing jump rope! Thanks made my day!
MIKE SOUSA Thanks for Ahmed Zewail
thank you so much on the lesson on atoms and for the emancipation proclamation.
+aperez12374 oh my gosh. I knew he looked familiar!!!
Kimberly Waggoner yay!!! somebody got my dumb joke!!
+aperez12374 yeah I actually laughed out loud at that! 😂 very clever.
Kimberly Waggoner me and you......same clever mind
3:57 The first picture of an atom, the Iridium atom, was done with an Ion Microscope.
I remember seeing a picture of this in a TIME LIFE science book from the late 1960's.
The Iridium atoms looked like round dots surrounded with concentric rings bunched together in a geometric pattern. The image was very two dimensional.
What the atom looks like, is whatever reality we impose on it - - that's how things work at the atomic & subatomic level - - in our effort to observe them we change them.
And that's why you should trust science. They wouldn't show you something that's not true wrong. All lies. Can't see atom. In 1969, 2022.
Not science to change things observe. And prove. Not 9h can't see it, make up a thing, and call it. Not science
You put in so much effort to your videos!! You deserve 1 million + subs
Thanks! We're on our way...
Reactions Good luck! I'm sure you will get there soon.
They deserve 1 million $$$ from Monsanto.
+Josh Hooper people are not into reality or science or whatever. it's all about money and fun these days. Niki Minaj hits 1m views within hours of publishing a new booty shaking video
+Josh Hooper The information width is so vast in this video, I totally am impressed. Done with perfection.
Excellent video...and production. One of the red herrings encountered with learners is whether or not you can "see" an atom, whether or not the human eye can discern interaction between light and matter with or without the aid of optics. At the "atomic" level; presence, structure, character, behavior and interaction can be detected and as a consequence, the results can be visualized, imagined and expressed graphically in two or three dimensions. Your animation does well to illustrate why you cannot "see" and atom. The illustration of an atom enlarged to the size of a stadium and the nucleus a size of a pea in the center of the field and the electrons as numbered grains of sand doing ellipses at the speed of light further demonstrates that even if you could "get small", you would still not be able to "see" the atom.
They deserve credit. Their work was BASED on Rosalind Franklin's work. If she could have built the model first she would have.
The production level of this video reminds me of the new "Cosmos" series--wish they'd make more of them!
eatmorenachos Wow thanks! That's a great club to be in. We have a really talented team that we're super proud of.
eatmorenachos Also I agree with your username.
+Reactions lol
OK I HAVE A QUESTION!
If these atoms could only be detected through a device that picks up on tiny size differences isn't it safe to say that these atoms are actually more of like a blobbish lil thing?? Or perhaps it is such a small thing that our minds can only understand it through a form of perspective, meaning atoms have a set of known constants (laws) about them AND a set of variables about them? I mean like although schools teach the atom to be one thing isn't there inevitably DIFFERENT perspectives on what the atom can be?
Hope you read this..
Atoms aren't blobs. They aren't anything really from what I understand. They're mostly magnetic field, where the electrons appear and reappear inside. Then there's virtual particles and the Higgs boson field, and dark matter and a bunch of other wacky science stuff. Atoms are complicated and we probably will never really truly understand what they "are". But then again, someone said that flying machines where impossible and you know how that turned out. I may be proven wrong.
Tl,DR: atoms are magic space balls.
Man:how to see real electrons in an atom
Heisenberg:j want to know your location
I will just give him my exact momentum. Good luck finding me now Heisenberg 😘
Really amazing how we can actually see atoms these days. We've come a long way
It's super crazy. I can only imagine how we'll see them in another few decades.
oh yeah>? Please give a link for detailed video or picture
@@ACSReactions I'm sure we will be able to easily see them in 4k
One thing not often mentioned is what frequency electrons actually vibrate at. An electron wavelength is around 10^-10 meters. Electrons travel at close to the speed of light, around 5x10^6 meters/second. An electron thus travels 5x10^16 wavelengths per second (AKA "Hz"). By comparison, the frequency of visible light is around 5x10^14 Hz. So an electron vibrates at frequencies around 100 times that of visible light, i.e. in the ultraviolet spectrum. And that is why your eyes cannot see the vibration of electron orbitals around the nucleus of an atom.
Excellent video and very well narrated.
Thank so much!
Saved my life! Especially with my test coming up! Thanks you!!
There is no way to "see" an atom due to the size relationship of photons to atoms. Our eyes rely on reflected photons from our surroundings. You can create a "braille" image using the scanning tunnelling microscope. You can "map" the location and approximate size at best. What is it that you're trying to see? An electron quantum probability cloud around particles that are not solid and defy any normal physical description? Invisible vibrating strings in a quantum field? Forget it. You can't "see" this shit, and you can barely make sense of it on a quantum level. The best you can do is look at the equations. Then look at what happens when you smash this shit together at the speed of light. Forget about "seeing"
outerrealm thank you ! .... I mean fuck they pull shit out of there ass In order to explain things .
@@hwfq34fajw9foiffawdiufhuaiwfhw Thats just the braille he was talking about. The dots are not atoms themselves but the topography of the outer electron shells.
Trying to see atoms is about as precises as trying to type on a keyboard with boxing gloves on. Even that's probably easier since you can probably just hold some chopsticks in each glove and use that to hit the keys.
Incredible good video. I have an biophysics exam tomorrow also about STM.
Thank you! That made the topic soooo easy to understand.
The reason Rontegen, and not Tesla, is stated as the discoverer of X-rays is because Rontegen was actually working on, and made public the science at the same time. Where Tesla discovered it years earlier, but he wasn't specifically working on it that we know of. It's not clear that Tesla was working specifically on that science because any notes on it were destroyed in the fire set by the people that didn't want this knowledge to get to the public.
--- If you do a Google search of X-ray creator Rontegen comes up. But with a little digging you find Tesla was most likely the originator of the active science behind it.
--- It's pretty clear that there are people who want Tesla's memory to be vanquished. We know the government confiscated Tesla's notes after he died. We know JP Morgan (Big Banker) defunded his projects, and Thomas Edison basically stole his research for profit. So there's definitely something shady going on when it comes to giving credit to Tesla.
Tesla never discovered it. Stop spreading bullshits you read from the internet.
Very nice of you to display the original text! Hearing lost!
Beautifully explained, Sam. Thank you!
Gang of freemason fooks may you all enjoy hell when you're stuck there
Nice work,thanks. Nothing quirky or "funny" -thank goodness.Just excellent presentation of information. Cheers!
Wonderful video!! Well done!!
Very well produced video man, credit to you and everyone involved.
Awesome video, awesome host!
I never knew that mendeleev didn't believe in atomic theory, and now that you've mentioned it, I can't find any further details about it. I'd really be appreciative if someone could provide me with some further references to find out more.
To my knowledge, you can also use a transmission electron microscope to view atoms. Though it needs to be a high resolution type. (and use phase contrast if im not mistaken).
Its also possible to view atoms using a scanning electron microscope, as hitachi proved with their new 1MV SEM
Nope. Can't see them even with a fancier named microscope. That's why we should have facts and theory's separated. Trust science though
@@scottmenard5528 well, since i made that comment 4 years ago, i have gained much in the way of knowledge on the subject of microscopy. And i can without a shadow of a doubt say that the electron microscope, as well as the tunneling electron microscope and atomic force microscope can all see atoms. I have done so with my own eyes using an electron microscope
@@lbochtler I'm confused on being able to see atoms. Some say there are actually molecules like in the IBM boy and his atoms, others say it's impossible to see atoms. What's the deal?
@@kalidilerious technically speaking, you are seeing the interactions of your test setup with the atoms, not the atoms themselves. Well at least not to the point of being able to differentiate neutrons and protons in the core.
So both are technically speaking semi correct. But for all intents and purposes you are indeed seeing atoms in your example. Higher resolution images have been made since then, mostly by means of the electron microscope, but these where of crystal lattices instead of individual atoms.
@@lbochtler Interesting. This stuff is beyond my knowledge so it makes me curious.
I like the narrator's delivery and earnest manner. The beard gives him just the right amount of quirkiness, like I'd expect in a smart/geeky person.
Great video and excellent delivery.
sir can u tell me which software you are using for chemistry animations....
What about maharshi kanad he told in 600 BC that if we go on dividing matter a time will come when it will no longer be divisible and that stage is 'anu'
You look like Abe Lincoln!
after coming out a crack den
I bet he doesn't go to the movies..
Please keep making more videos like this and keep inspiring the world
Do you think higher resolution imaging and video footage could be rendered to observe two atoms bonding and the behavior of proton etc in relation to their nuclei.
I wanted to see Electrons the quantum particle that occur in a major part in nature, they Interact with elements in all their states of matter, ionizing, or it can Interact magnetically and in other ways...
3:25 Franklin never gave Watson permission to view slide "51", but Franklin later became the Administrator of Air Force testing land near Roswell, New Mexico.
thank you so much
just a real basic point...if you spin cubes and other shapes it motion becomes a sphere. we do not see atoms with visible light, we only do radar and sonar like things and get reflections of their actions
Excellent video, truly amazing
Good job giving credit to Franklin 👏
Great video! Have they been able to look any closer since that photo from the early 80’s?
I heard that the atoms don't even take any physical form until a person is knowingly looking to see them.
Stargate Max Quantum Mechanics are confusing as hell..
No... that's subatomic particles. A bit off.
Edit: I love stargate.
@@shallabim912 An atom "is" a Subatomic particle. Yes, Im aware the term "sub" atomic means "under" the atom. But the entire atom is like taking a picture of a guitar string. (A comparison I used in a lecture of mine in case anyone happens to copy/steal it)
When you pluck a guitar string it appears as though the string is in several places at once. Yet when you take a picture, it seems as though it "knows" you are measuring it and it stays still.
The atom doesn't literally know it's being watched.
Isn't the guitar string moving in any direction, therefor moving in time? And when you take that photo, you're taking a measurement of the string in that specific point in space-time, thus it appears static in the photo as opposed to the moving string, giving the illusion that it resolved it's position due to observation. Could uncertainty principal be explained by this?
Daniel Santos No, the uncertainty principle is very different. The analogy youre drawing is equivalent to classical physics, theres nothing quantum about it. When you take a picture of course its a moment in time. General uncertainty relations in QM arise from the wave property of matter. It is simply a result of wave dispersion discovered by Fourier a century before QM existed
The collapse of the wavefunction (which youre referring to) is a completely separate being from heisenberg
Great Video !!
"See" has more than one meaning, for sure. I mean, think about it. Let's say you place a grain of rice under a towel. Can you see it? No one would say they could. Now remove the towel and use an extremely thin sheet of opaque tissue. Can you see it now? Many would say, No, but I can see it's outline and I know it's a grain of rice. Well how far away from "seeing" is that second example?
It's analogous to "touch." When are we touching something? At what point when the atoms of my hand close in on the atoms of the tabletop am I "touching" it? When my mind feels my hand cannot move any further? From a molecular standpoint, the moments before I feel resistance and after I feel resistance are essentially the same. So it comes down to my perception to decide when I'm "touching" something.
Thanks to my fellow Egyptian-American, Mr Ahmed Zewail we now can see atoms in action. Furthermore, humans have advanced even further building up onto his discoveries.
4:14 where they put that xenon - ibm like pattern- atom? What kind of surface smoother that that atom it self?
This was so awesome. I LOVED the animations!
true
What is your qualifications/University ......Sir
It's funny that after he talked about atoms so much, I didn't heard anywhere he saying "Quantum"
Good presentation
Good explanation
PL translation in Hindi language
Also write in English Hindi language
Plato was still on the right track, in that he decided that what made Gold different from Lead was that it's atoms were fundamentally different in some way.
Even before Democritus the Indian Sage called "Kanada" (Sanskrit "Kana" means Atom) mentioned about this. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanada_(philosopher)
This guy killed it. I wish he could teach all the other subjects.
It's hard to realize how tiny an atom is, but even harder to realize how tiny are the subatomic particles compared to the atom. and even harder to realize how tiny a quark is.
Tom Russle And how are strings (if they exist)
so we have lots of people to thank for this discovery
Uh actually, no you CANNOT see an atom, nor will you ever be able to, since an atom is smaller than the wavelength of light. What you CAN see is the vague electron cloud and can accurately create a representation of an atom.
+Sahil M The electron cloud is part of an atom.
The electron cloud goes around the atom, you cannot say however that the electron cloud is bigger than the atom, since it's simply it's most external layer
Luis Sierra but how can you truly know what it looks like if its never been seen? Have you ever run full speed through fog because you were pretty confident there wasn't anything in the road probably not
@@SheikhN-bible-syndrome cloud is just a metaphor, In reality the "electron cloud", is just a region in space where you are more likely to find an electron, buy yeah it is indeed invisible.
Isn't the cloud just electrons moving super fast so as to appear to be a sort of cloud rather than seeing each particle?
tomorrow i got chemistry test and i just cover chapter 1, 6 more to go and i stumble to this video. after this i want go to sleep. just pray for tomorrow test :((
How did it go?
Thanks for mentioning Franklin. :)
Why don't you guys have ads on your show?
This is great! Subscribed. I want more!
Thank you so much sir
I A. M. IN the BUILDING BLOCKS OF LIFE. SPACE, AND MATTER,
I. A. M IN SCIENCE
I.. ISOTOPES
A.. ATOM
M.. MOLECULES
Most of the volume of an atom is emptiness that cannot be seen or sensed. At best one can sense the electromagenetic field caused by the spinning electrons. this resembles looking at a planet that is covered with clouds.
Wow! I’m no physicist, but I’ve had a seemingly huge problem here ever since that famous IBM demonstration. Yet what about the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle? I believe that this is still significant for objects up to the size of atoms. So, how come this and similar feats of locating an atom, picking it up and relocating it, all involving the precise, simultaneous knowledge of both its position and momentum, appear
to negate HUP!?
Excellent video buddy, you have done a great job. But at 2:59 you shouldn't give so much details about the DNA & etc biology topics, still its ok. I hope you can fix that problem, have a nice day!
Very good video. Informative and comprehensive. As you apear interested in discovery. You may find it useful to know number of points. Photon did not bounced back from atom. It bounced back from field of forces emitted from atom. This is long way from nuclei. In the same way the needle moving over atom is moving over the force filed emitted by atom.
Mankind dose not have the technology to see atom. The best means of seeing structure of atom is gravity microscope. When you understand nature of gravity not just the effect of it, you will be able to see atom by gravity microscope. Detail on official request only. MG1
Quite surprised you didn't mention the etymological origin of the word "atom".
Plato is right here in my heart and somewhere else
Thank you! This was actually super helpful! I learned alot!
Isn't most of the atom empty space? So why do atoms appear as solid spheres in these photos? Is it just how these techniques show the atoms just like how infrared telescopes represent their data collected using different colours/wavelengths of visible light? I.e. taking something humans can't see and putting it into human understandable forms.
You're seeing the outer electron cloud reacting to the beam of photons to detect the electric potential; the photons (x-ray or whatever photon wavelength in the needle is exciting the electrons around each atom providing data that can be imaged) that image is the fuzz of all locations electrons.
Even better quantum electrons can observe the wave function of the election which gives even more detail of the atom showing the orbital of the electron.
io9.gizmodo.com/the-first-image-ever-of-a-hydrogen-atoms-orbital-struc-509684901
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scanning_tunneling_microscope
I suddenly have to ask this myself.. its always good to know everything u can ask! 🤓👍
A bit disappointed that you did not show more of these images the different techniques gave us. Especially the chemical bonding and nonbonding. You explained it well and then....no examples of his laser-ography?? This is a visual medium, if you going to tell someone about a cool subject and how people discovered certain things, it would be nice to actually slide in some actual images or clips of what they did. That being said, I thought it was a well thought presented overview of the topic in 5 min.
Can you tell me what is the name of second figure in your thumbnail
We can! It's the Rutherford model.
Well-Done
I feel at home watching anything on physics
that pens end probably *touches* the surface with the electron, and the survice electrons will react as acordingly, but that doesnt mean you just found a shape.
Do we "see" with our tools? Also, great video.
Thank you ❤️
wow great sir...
Atomism first appeared in India by Jain in the 7th Century BCE. Buddha however instead said we are made of 4 great elements and mind. Later Buddhism also adopted Atomism but Buddha himself saw this world as the waves. So far, Democritus visited India and appreciated India.
They didn't base their work off photo 51... Xray diffraction is used to CONFIRM theories, not to get the answer directly.
When I was a kid, I used to play in a darkened room to grab mysterious clumps of dots that move like butterflies.
My father said he couldn't see the atoms, and I thought it would be a fault, but if moving or colored atoms were discovered in the future, they would be small red circles. I want to know what a moving atomic substance looks like like a butterfly flying.
私は子供の頃、真っ暗にした部屋で蝶のように動く不思議な小さな点の塊をつかむ遊びをしていたことがある。
父親は原子は見えるわけがないと言っていたし、私も気のせいだろうと思っていたけれど、もしも動く原子や色のついた原子が将来発見されることがあれば、赤い丸の小さな塊で蝶の飛び方のような動く原子の物質が何なのか知りたい。
ｈ／ｗｈｙ＝ｙｈｗｈ＝３６０° ｅｄｄｉｅｅ５５
Incredible videos!!
How do you find the size of earth?
The video is great, but you depicted Heraclitus when you mentioned Democritus.
wow man.....who are you(sorry if I asked that). you are just too damn awesome.
Since science and its' information is always evolving, do you think it is possible yet to find another particle SMALLER than the Atom ?
quarks
There's PLENTY of particles smaller than the atom. In fact an atom is made of particles.
neutrino.
mrmonte51jm quarks, electrons, photons, protons, neutrons, bosons, leptons, neutrinos, hadrons...
Alonso diaz uña con Als graviton
nice video, help me a lot to remember atom :p
+Alice Guo Glad to help!
How about Field Ion Microscopy, which was invented in 1951 by Erwin Wilhelm Müller and his Ph.D. student Kanwar Bahadur, way before STM and Electron microscopes and able to image the single atom in real space. STM has always took credit to "see" the atoms at first place, which is not true.
whens its dark my eyes dont adjust to the dark it gets Darker and I see these small things
but then what are the atoms made of and what is the things that the atoms made of made of and do on and so on
Neutrons and Protons are made of quarks. Electrons and quarks are fundamental, that is they are not "made" of anything. Some, including myself, think they may be made of more fundamental strings of String Theory.
Cubic crystals with spin. Valency is balancing cubes. They spin because of imbalance. Moments of switch gives quantum tunneling effects.
Higher moment create positive charge and lower negative. Protons spin faster than electron 12 times.
Because sun spins it creates a fabric of space time around 5 million km.
You should run for president, maybe this time, you won't get assassinated
The Greeks found the atom, and then... Religion.
Imagine where we could be today, if humanity had kept hold of their knowledge
Plato wasn't wrong, per se...he just didn't (couldn't) take the idea far enough. He was describing crystals (made of molecules, made up of atoms)....
Every atom Naaraayan
Mate, who wrote your script. You jumped from Greece to 1800s. What of the Golden Age of Codoba and Granada where from the Einstein's and Newton's got their inspirations from.
when i see a atom, i'm seeing his electrons?
no
When you see an atom you're seeing the nucleus, the electrons, protons neutrons all at once (what makes up an atom)
Ava Brothers Not nesseserily.
+Purpel Fais Electrons cannot be observed, it's imposible to capture an electron in just a position, the protons and neutrons are inside the sphere ("shell" / nucleus) and that's what you see.
Bravo for crediting Rosalinde Franklin for DNA. Watson will live to regret this.