Parth G
Parth G
  • 163
  • 11 145 947
The Guy Who Fought Einstein... and Won
He battled with Einstein about Quantum Physics, and WON
Niels Bohr was a genius in his own right, contributing hugely to the developing theory of quantum mechanics. In this video, we take a look at what is probably his most famous work - the Bohr Model of the atom.
Before Bohr came along, scientists suspected that atoms contained scattered regions of positive charge, with small negative electrons distributed throughout. This was known as the Plum Pudding model.
Ernest Rutherford, conducting the Gold Foil / Geiger Marsden experiment with his students, realized that this could not be right. When positive alpha particles were fired at a thin gold foil, instead of them all passing right through with minimal deflection, something curious was observed.
Some passed through with minimal deflection, others passed through with large deflections of around 90 degrees, and a very small proportion actually came back almost towards the detector - at nearly 180 degrees of deflection. Rutherford said this was like firing a shell at a piece of tissue paper, and the shell coming back to hit you - very unexpected.
He realized that the positive regions in the atoms must have been distributed over very small regions, with all the positive charge being concentrated there. So when the alpha particles came very close to these regions, they would deflect hugely. A glancing blow resulted in the roughly 90 degree deflections. However because atoms were mainly empty space, the large majority of alpha particles passed right through the gold foil.
Rutherford then developed his Planetary model - with electrons orbiting the positive region known as the nucleus. This was great, but had problems of its own. If electrons were to orbit the nucleus, then they would be accelerating due to their constant change in direction.
The physics of charged objects told us that accelerating charges would radiate, and lose energy. This can be seen from the Larmor formula, which calculates the given power radiated by a charge at a given acceleration.
Therefore, Rutherford's atoms should have been unstable, with the electrons radiating energy away and spiraling inward to the nucleus. This is where Bohr came in.
Bohr realized that there was something holding electrons specific distances away from the nucleus. He called these "allowed" locations "energy levels". His model explained why electrons did not radiate constantly, and also explained the emission spectra observed from atoms. Instead of emitting radiation at all frequencies as electrons spiraled, we would only see specific emissions based on the differences in energies of the allowed levels, whenever electrons transitioned inward.
He also found a wonderfully neat mathematical relationship that explained where the "allowed" energy levels were in relation to the nucleus. He found that an electron's angular momentum in a particular energy level had to be a multiple of the Reduced Planck Constant - a very important constant in quantum mechanics.
The angular momentum of the electron, dependent on the mass and speed of the electron, as well as the radius of the path it was moving on, could be calculated by setting the electric attraction force between the electron and the nucleus to be equal to the centripetal force needed to keep it moving on that orbit. From there, with a bit of math, it was possible to calculate exactly where (i.e. at what radii) the allowed energy levels could be found!
Thanks for watching, please do check out my links: MERCH - parth-gs-merch-stand.creator-spring.com/ INSTAGRAM - @parthvlogs PATREON - patreon.com/parthg MUSIC CHANNEL - Parth G Music Here are some affiliate links for things I use! Quantum Physics Book I Enjoy: amzn.to/3sxLlgL My Camera: amzn.to/2SjZzWq ND Filter: amzn.to/3qoGwHk Chapters:
0:00 - Niels Bohr - An Introduction
1:12 - The Plum Pudding and Planetary Models of the Atom
3:16 - The Big Problem with Rutherford's Model
5:14 - The Bohr Model of the Atom
6:17 - What Are the "Allowed" Energy Levels?
8:31 - More About Bohr
Переглядів: 9 164

Відео

Quantum Physics is So Weird that We Need to "Interpret" It.
Переглядів 7 тис.5 місяців тому
The theory of quantum physics has existed and grown for more than a hundred years. And in that time it's extremely, ridiculously, successful at predicting how the universe around us behaves. But there's one small problem with it. It makes absolutely no sense, whatsoever. Quantum mechanics, like other theories, is based on mathematical assumptions or "postulates". In this video we look at two su...
The Guy Made Most Physics Theories Redundant.
Переглядів 117 тис.6 місяців тому
His discoveries made famous physicists' theories redundant... but also a lot easier to solve! Hermann Weyl contributed a lot to physics and math, including showing how Maxwell's Electromagnetism could be perfectly combined with Einstein's Relativity. However outside the physics and math circles, he isn't exactly famous. In this video we start by looking at scalar and vector fields - regions of ...
How Schrodinger Came Up With His Famous Equation (But EASIER)
Переглядів 40 тис.7 місяців тому
The Schrodinger Equation is one of the most important equations (if not THE most important equation) in the theory of quantum physics. But where does it come from? How did Schrodinger derive it? Although it's a quantum form of the law of conservation of energy, its derivation isn't discussed anywhere near as much as it should in my opinion. I've even heard some people say that the equation CAN'...
Nobel Prize in Physics 2023 Explained: The Fastest Light (Pulses) Ever Made.
Переглядів 39 тис.8 місяців тому
The 2023 Nobel Prize in Physics has been awarded to three experimental physicists at the cutting-edge of the subject! Pierre Agostini, Ferenc Krausz, and Anne L'Huillier were each given a 1/3 share of the prize, and it's exciting to see that fairly new, experimental physics is being recognised on such a large scale. The award was given for work on "attosecond physics", a fairly new area of phys...
The School Teacher Who Won a Nobel Prize for Understanding Gases.
Переглядів 13 тис.9 місяців тому
The Ideal Gas Equation regularly fails. Johannes Diderik van der Waals was a school teacher who completely changed our understanding of the physics of gases. In this video, we take a look at the van der Waals Gas Equation - a brilliant upgrade to the Ideal Gas Equation, which uses sound logical arguments to improve on the Ideal Gas Model. To understand the changes made by van der Waals, we star...
The Man Who Saved Quantum Physics When the Schrodinger Equation Failed
Переглядів 132 тис.10 місяців тому
The Schrodinger Equation regularly fails. In this video we look at two upgraded equations (including the famous Dirac Equation) that work in both quantum and relativistic environments. The Schrodinger Equation is famous, and rightly so. It's the governing equation of a theory called quantum mechanics. It can very accurately predict how quantum systems (i.e. very small systems) will behave throu...
Meet the Man Who Solved General Relativity in a Month.
Переглядів 22 тис.11 місяців тому
The Einstein Field Equations can be used to predict the existence of gravitational waves! In the theory of General Relativity, the Einstein Field Equations is a tensor equation that governs the theory completely. It links together the distribution of stuff (e.g. mass, energy, momentum, and pressure) found in any region of spacetime that we want to consider, and the warping of the spacetime in t...
The Forgotten Maxwell Equations.
Переглядів 23 тис.Рік тому
To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/ParthG/. The first 200 of you will get 20% off Brilliant’s annual premium subscription. James Clerk Maxwell is most well know for his four equations that completely describe everything in Classical Electromagnetism - they're known as Maxwell Equations. However, did you know that he has yet more equations named...
Entropy: Two Simple Ideas Behind Our Best Theory of Physics
Переглядів 18 тис.Рік тому
To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/ParthG/. The first 200 of you will get 20% off Brilliant’s annual premium subscription. Our most robust theory of physics so far seems to be #thermodynamics Here are two simple assumptions behind statistical mechanics, the small-scale detailed description of thermodynamics. #statisticalmechanics #entropy The S...
The 2005 Nobel Prize Controversy: The Indian-American Physicist Who Should Have Won It Instead
Переглядів 21 тис.Рік тому
To try everything Brilliant has to offer FREE for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/ParthG/. The first 200 of you will get 20% off Brilliant’s annual premium subscription. The 2005 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to Roy J. Glauber for his work on Quantum Optics. However, the decision to award the Prize to Glauber was controversial. Many physicists believed that E.C. George Sudarshan made j...
Why Noether Was the Most Important Female Mathematician (According to Einstein)
Переглядів 15 тис.Рік тому
Offset your carbon footprint on Wren: www.wren.co/start/parthg1m The first 100 to sign up will get their first month of the subscription covered by Wren for free! Emmy Noether was a brilliant mathematician, who was described by Einstein as "the most significant creative mathematical genius thus far produced since the higher education of women began". In fact, she may have been one of the most i...
Einstein's final work is STILL unfinished. Here’s what it means.
Переглядів 34 тис.Рік тому
To try everything Brilliant has to offer FREE for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/ParthG/. The first 200 of you will get 20% off Brilliant’s annual premium subscription. This is Einstein's final contribution to physics... and unfortunately it was left unfinished. Also, a huge thanks to @ChrisPattisonCosmo for working with me on this video. You need to go check out his channel now if you hav...
The TRUE Difference Between a Quantum Computer and Your Home PC.
Переглядів 10 тис.Рік тому
Offset your carbon footprint on Wren: www.wren.co/start/parthg1m The first 100 to sign up will get their first month of the subscription covered by Wren for free! Here's what you need in order to build a quantum computer: a bunch of qubits, and a way of keeping them all entangled and stable without decohering. But what does all of this even mean? In this video, we start by understanding that cl...
The Universe Exists Because of Identical Particles.
Переглядів 12 тис.Рік тому
The universe as we know it, can only exist if certain particles are absolutely identical to each other (assuming also that quantum mechanics is correct...) Here's a talk I did recently (huge thanks to Reading School for inviting me) discussing this rather interesting concept. We started by considering the structure of atoms. We know that each atom has protons and neutrons in a nucleus, and elec...
Why Physicists Call This Equation the GOLDEN RULE of Physics.
Переглядів 22 тис.Рік тому
Why Physicists Call This Equation the GOLDEN RULE of Physics.
The Single Basic Concept found in (Almost) All Fundamental Physics Equations.
Переглядів 27 тис.Рік тому
The Single Basic Concept found in (Almost) All Fundamental Physics Equations.
Quantum Energy is NOT REAL.
Переглядів 20 тис.Рік тому
Quantum Energy is NOT REAL.
Nobel Prize in Physics 2022 Explained: Quantum Entanglement, Proving Einstein Wrong
Переглядів 165 тис.Рік тому
Nobel Prize in Physics 2022 Explained: Quantum Entanglement, Proving Einstein Wrong
Physics Is Nearly Complete.
Переглядів 37 тис.Рік тому
Physics Is Nearly Complete.
The Schrodinger Equation is (Almost) Impossible to Solve.
Переглядів 56 тис.Рік тому
The Schrodinger Equation is (Almost) Impossible to Solve.
The Most Powerful Tool Based Entirely On Randomness
Переглядів 13 тис.Рік тому
The Most Powerful Tool Based Entirely On Randomness
The Mathematical Bridge That Links Two Completely Different Neighborhoods of Physics
Переглядів 29 тис.Рік тому
The Mathematical Bridge That Links Two Completely Different Neighborhoods of Physics
There are 8 Maxwell Equations, Not 4.
Переглядів 34 тис.Рік тому
There are 8 Maxwell Equations, Not 4.
I Taught Myself Particle Physics in 1 Week!
Переглядів 39 тис.Рік тому
I Taught Myself Particle Physics in 1 Week!
Here's What a Quantum Wave Function REALLY Represents
Переглядів 27 тис.2 роки тому
Here's What a Quantum Wave Function REALLY Represents
Do Antiparticles Move BACKWARDS in Time?
Переглядів 27 тис.2 роки тому
Do Antiparticles Move BACKWARDS in Time?
Here's What Maxwell's Equations ACTUALLY Mean.
Переглядів 124 тис.2 роки тому
Here's What Maxwell's Equations ACTUALLY Mean.
The Most Famous Equation In the World Is INCOMPLETE! E=mc2 Explained by Parth G
Переглядів 25 тис.2 роки тому
The Most Famous Equation In the World Is INCOMPLETE! E=mc2 Explained by Parth G
To Understand ALL of Relativity, You Need to Know This One Concept.
Переглядів 12 тис.2 роки тому
To Understand ALL of Relativity, You Need to Know This One Concept.

КОМЕНТАРІ

  • @abhijithkv5759
    @abhijithkv5759 14 годин тому

    you are great . I never give like this video. Because your videos are precious and i never allow to spread this by you tube algorithm .😂😂

  • @meijang940
    @meijang940 День тому

    have u ever studied physics in a gifted skl before parth

  • @user-ie9tb4pr1c
    @user-ie9tb4pr1c День тому

    thanks a lot. I'm a computer scientist and haven't studied physics for 7 years. but everything was explained so well that I was able to understand.

  • @isonlynameleft
    @isonlynameleft 2 дні тому

    Great video! Definitely a difficult subject to try to explain in a few minutes 😅 One constructive critique though is that your notation wasn't consistent exactly, that makes it really difficult for beginners to follow.

  • @mswaminathan9726
    @mswaminathan9726 2 дні тому

    so fast the talk lacks credence as to which formula or theorem of Ramanujam he connects to black hole why youtube encourages such sustandard video degranating great mathematician Ramanujam

  • @beetlesstrengthandpower1890
    @beetlesstrengthandpower1890 3 дні тому

    9:00 to skip requisite knowledge

  • @AlboonS-zy7su
    @AlboonS-zy7su 3 дні тому

    "the outbreak that shall not be named". 2 seconds later "I want to take your mind and my mind off this whole corona virus outbreak"

  • @grumpyg9350
    @grumpyg9350 3 дні тому

    73’s everyone

  • @SidharthD-lj4sy
    @SidharthD-lj4sy 4 дні тому

    Bro! You Nailed it........

  • @itsmeabhi222
    @itsmeabhi222 4 дні тому

    Bruh! You earned my subscription with this one. I’m learning Maxwell’s equations for an exam tomorrow.

  • @padakutamatar7077
    @padakutamatar7077 4 дні тому

    How did schrodinger come up with this ??

  • @adamkr5506
    @adamkr5506 4 дні тому

    I love mechanics

  • @sailexw6414
    @sailexw6414 4 дні тому

    What I dont understand is that this "intrensic angular momentum" is caused by a spinning dipole thus creating the up or down direction of the magnetic field.. buuut.. how can a point particle have a dipole?? You cant have a positive and negative side of something that doesnt have sides....

  • @jeffknott1975
    @jeffknott1975 4 дні тому

    Keep that moustache! Care and treasure it like you would a small child, that tash is well on its way to magnificence!

  • @farpurple
    @farpurple 5 днів тому

    are particles are states of spacetime and other fields or they are actually particles in spacetime? So particles? uh hate it..

  • @artifintel
    @artifintel 5 днів тому

    We need to make your clone by ai and distribute to science classes all around the world :)

  • @mk123ify
    @mk123ify 6 днів тому

    Thanks sir, it's been a great help for me..keep pouring this kind of useful information..thanks again

  • @ninenine7966
    @ninenine7966 6 днів тому

    Thanks a lot. It is a good idea that explain with the picture. Now I can understand well with your help.

  • @yahyasheikhnejad1877
    @yahyasheikhnejad1877 6 днів тому

    based on the teta and phi you defined at 5:40, the formula for ds (at 6:30) is not correct! ds^2= r^2(d.phi^2 + sin(phi)^2 . d.teta^2). Please check it out once again.

  • @yahyasheikhnejad1877
    @yahyasheikhnejad1877 6 днів тому

    this video gives unfortunately the sense of understanding something while almost nothing is added to the audience. This is actually the illusion of understanding. It is inevitable to engage in mathematics while we talk about extremely complicated physical concepts that scientists have already given different interpretations.

  • @DK-ss9nd
    @DK-ss9nd 7 днів тому

    Riddle me this Batman. How is it that electricity, magnetism, gravity and light can all be solved by the same equation yet to the non physicist mind they seem to be 4 totally different things? Thanks

  • @GopalSharma-cp9vs
    @GopalSharma-cp9vs 7 днів тому

    Creationists be going crazy after reading the title .

  • @schmetterling4477
    @schmetterling4477 8 днів тому

    I guess the SEO is not working well on this one. ;-)

  • @sachitsharma1661
    @sachitsharma1661 8 днів тому

    The beauty of physics is that it gives a body {itself} to the soul {mathematics} , so i can see and imagine it

  • @nick45be
    @nick45be 8 днів тому

    11:54 why the minkowski diagram axes are oblique?

  • @alphaomega1089
    @alphaomega1089 9 днів тому

    It wasn't the spooky action at a distance. He was mocking the idea of choice within the physical realm. He imagined two entangled bodies would have symmetry in their properties - e.g.: clockwise or anti-clockwise. Since QM stated neither would know which they are: how then, if separated by a vast distance, how then can they settle on a state that complemented the other? Hence why the idea of hidden variables to explain it. I don't know what experiment was conducted to get their results. The problem is: even if entangled the pairs don't have to correlate when separated. Why? Your measurement (environment) can alter them. If up and up, so what? If up and down, then as it was meant to be. What Bell originally proposed would have generated a correlation less than 22%. AE said 100%. Bohr said 50%. What did those Nobel Prize winners measure?

    • @alphaomega1089
      @alphaomega1089 9 днів тому

      If the result is 25% then the experiment was fine tuned to show this. Similar to two coins tossed: one would expect 50% to be the outcome over a long period (many flips). But since they are entangled and pressured to remain that way by the experiment: 25% to 75% is the best you'll get with internal choice (resistance to change) at play.

    • @alphaomega1089
      @alphaomega1089 9 днів тому

      ua-cam.com/video/mRT5zXAwvBs/v-deo.html Tim Maudlin | Bell’s Theorem and Beyond: Nobody Understands Quantum Mechanics | The Cartesian Cafe

  • @alphaomega1089
    @alphaomega1089 9 днів тому

    If AE really believed in super determinism then no free will exist. His theory didn't matter when it came down to the grand scheme of things. He believed in God. His downfall when viewing reality. An abstract notion at best or grossly humanized at worst. A mechanical universe is governed by uncertainty. It operates on a feedback loop. If this happens then this. The key word is 'if', not when this must happen. You are not viewing reality when you use the EMF. It is a recording device. We don't even know how accurate it is. Are there any distortions or fictitious aspects to it?

  • @markomus1
    @markomus1 9 днів тому

    04:27 Based on the diagram above, where in the world would this bathtub exist outside your mind?

  • @diegocirilo1973
    @diegocirilo1973 9 днів тому

    this is not the only time that sudarshan have these type of problems

  • @MusicSaavedra
    @MusicSaavedra 9 днів тому

    Amazing video! Truly incredible content you are making here!

  • @preethi2802
    @preethi2802 9 днів тому

    areyyy Parth G, you did a great job making this video....finally got a clear insight on wat all these terms mean!!

  • @vikramantin3995
    @vikramantin3995 10 днів тому

    Thanks a bunch! You made it comprehensible enough for a non-physicist layman.

  • @marcopilati7464
    @marcopilati7464 10 днів тому

    Great anc very clear explenation. You're a very clever Professor.

  • @zazaza5535
    @zazaza5535 11 днів тому

    Amazing

  • @stefanblue660
    @stefanblue660 11 днів тому

    To bring it down simple, electrons are going up or down in a magnetic field.

  • @saadkhan8308
    @saadkhan8308 12 днів тому

    Dude you just both made this concept make FULL sense to me and peak my interest about this thing that just felt like a syllabus requirement, by making me realize just how ODD virtual images are. That's genuinely fascinating.

  • @laks318
    @laks318 12 днів тому

    No words!!!!!!as usual....❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤...thank you very very very much..........u r exceptional....

  • @codybarton2090
    @codybarton2090 13 днів тому

    Great video

  • @TheDavidlloydjones
    @TheDavidlloydjones 13 днів тому

    Just say No to silly hair-cuts, OK? "Superposition"? Um, no.

  • @travusfaulkner1461
    @travusfaulkner1461 15 днів тому

    I need to watch more of your videos so i can explain something to you over the phone and my reasons why space and time need to be separated. We are making a huge mistake because of this. I need help advancing my garage theory of quantum mechanics and space.

  • @heavymetalnewsdesk
    @heavymetalnewsdesk 15 днів тому

    The actual explanation is even simpler. E=mc2 is the formula for kinetic energy and means resting mass has no kinetic energy. E is Energy, M is the mass of the object you are calculating. C is the constant speed of the object you are calculating. If m is resting then C=0. so E=500lbs (0 x0) for instance

  • @petergreen5337
    @petergreen5337 15 днів тому

    ❤thank you very much publisher

  • @iainwatson5610
    @iainwatson5610 15 днів тому

    Have you covered Eigen values?

  • @skibaa1
    @skibaa1 16 днів тому

    1:30 a rocket velocity does not have to be higher than the escape velocity to leave Earth, if it uses engines (as it looks on your video BTW). It is a very common mistake to think so. The truth is: the escape velocity is necessary to leave Earth without engines, as a free falling body. If you move 11 km/s your orbit will become open and you will fly to infinity while free falling. But if you have enough fuel, you can fly to any distance from Earth even at walking speed

  • @JeronimoFonseca
    @JeronimoFonseca 16 днів тому

    Thanks! If this is the current model, then light "bending" is not the best term for it, as light does not really bend, just propagates without interference at the edges of the wave, right?

  • @codybarton2090
    @codybarton2090 16 днів тому

    Great video

  • @whatismyname8835
    @whatismyname8835 16 днів тому

    As for someone who likes science in school but hasn’t even looked at math or science since if I learned physics would it be a waste of time as I’m learning coding too

  • @cdalton3169
    @cdalton3169 17 днів тому

    Good job, man! Great explanation…

  • @elijahl-s5184
    @elijahl-s5184 17 днів тому

    Do you have a recommendation for a book on how Chemistry is understood via QM?

  • @user-ef9zk6np2e
    @user-ef9zk6np2e 17 днів тому

    But when E itself is not changing then B would remain same (constant E will produce constant current so magnetic field will remain constant) then why this equation?