Yes, it is wonderful in it‘s simplicity! And now let's complicate it a little. All of these distances are subject to the Uncertainty Principle. How does that change the picture?
@physics-for-all-with-edward
8 ай бұрын
the distances are very vague anyway...
@blackimp4987
10 ай бұрын
interesting video but the underlying music is very annoying with too high volume
@physics-for-all-with-edward
10 ай бұрын
Yes... you live and learn
@florinadrian5174
10 ай бұрын
4:00 It would be so much better if you added also the resulting force (repulsion minus attraction) to the graph. Then the sweet spot would be much clearer. Question, though: you said 1:40 that the diameter of a proton is 1 femtometer. This coincides neatly with the arrangement of hadrons in the nucleus. So isn't this diameter the result of the balance of forces as a function of inter-hadron distance? Or is there something else that is measured to give us the 1 femtometer?
@physics-for-all-with-edward
10 ай бұрын
There are probably many factors as you suggest - one of which is that we don't consider the wave function at all at this level of physics - and this in turn means that nucleons with different quantum numbers can (in principle) be 'on top of each other'. It is also the case that if you look at 'representations' of the nuclei there do appear to be some spaces... but don't forget, we are firmly in the realm of models.
@lee-bv4tw
Жыл бұрын
Super helpful !!! thank you !!! 🫶🫶
@physics-for-all-with-edward
Жыл бұрын
You're welcome
@jessicaarverne1181
8 ай бұрын
I wonder if, with this simple classical physics description of the strong force, it would be possible to elaborate a computer simulation that allows to create a computer model of stable nucleus and compare it with real nucleus ?
@physics-for-all-with-edward
8 ай бұрын
Great question. I wonder if anyone has done it - probably wouldn't work though - else why would we have the SNF?
@solapowsj25
9 ай бұрын
The nucleus consists of its shell layer having nucleons within.
@physics-for-all-with-edward
9 ай бұрын
What do you nean ? Not heard of this before. Can you explain ~ what is the shell around the nucleus
@rodschmidt8952
8 ай бұрын
ChatGPT says (edited to remove redundancy): "The structure of the nucleus can be described in terms of shells, or energy levels, similar to the electron shells in the electron cloud surrounding the nucleus. Nucleons are organized into these energy levels, and each level can accommodate a certain number of nucleons. This model has been successful in explaining certain nuclear properties, such as the stability of certain nuclei and the occurrence of nuclear magic numbers."
@2945antonio
9 ай бұрын
Very good lecture. Could you please do away with the annoying music in the background? Thank you.
@physics-for-all-with-edward
9 ай бұрын
Yeah - I know - hope it was still useful/interesting. We live and learn - check out kzitem.info/news/bejne/l4aJxZiCnnmBoaQ or kzitem.info/news/bejne/mY5tnWebq5unqHY for physics minus the music.
@surkewrasoul4711
Жыл бұрын
😂
@bloodyorphan
Жыл бұрын
Also , The Standard Model of General Relativity has proven protons are 10c^3 and Neutrons are 20c^3 , Neutrons reside "Underneath" the proton by the protons' depth in the weight space. They do not interact as Fermions with each other, Neutrons can "trap" a proton but they do not repel. Hydrogen will form H2 naturally, this is a polarity probablility equation, if both apertures of two Hydrogen atoms are pointing give or take directly at each other they will drop one electron and start sharing the other electron .... NATURALLY!! I.E. Protons do not always repell each other regardless of distance from each other, you have to add polarity into the equation or you are no longer describing Reality. **EINSTEIN**
@physics-for-all-with-edward
Жыл бұрын
maybe so... I don't know ... either way this is not relevant because it is not required for my students exams
@bloodyorphan
Жыл бұрын
@@physics-for-all-with-edward Only the chosen few eh?
@timgerk3262
10 ай бұрын
I've never seen someone bold enough to explain a classical model of the SNF. 🍻 thanks! There's an inverse lesson here too that a simple model (isn't the nucleus a sphere?!) hugely aids understanding, therefore gain intuition.
@physics-for-all-with-edward
10 ай бұрын
Sure. It's the syllabus for pre University. Everyone knows it's a v v v simplified model and doesn't really do anything other than describe.... and doesn't even don't very well
@fredturk6447
9 ай бұрын
Good basic explanation. However, students should also get a flavour of quantum chromodynamics describing the nature of protons and neutrons containing 3 quarks of different colour states plus sea of virtual stuff). How gluons hold the proton and neutron together via the strong force and how the strong nuclear force is a residual of the strong force outside baryons. (Role of mesons and gluons). Could you do another tutorial on that to give a bit more depth in a purely descriptive manner? You deal with up down flavours etc so colour should be covered as it is critical in the strong force understanding?
@physics-for-all-with-edward
9 ай бұрын
Thank you so much for your comment! I'm glad you enjoyed the basic explanation and I appreciate your suggestion to dive deeper into quantum chromodynamics. I will have to have a think about that. My target audience is really those who are (or have) studied physics pre university so on one hand what you suggest isn't required of them. On the other hand I do make some videos eg on attosecond pulses (kzitem.info/news/bejne/l4aJxZiCnnmBoaQ ) and the fifth force (kzitem.info/news/bejne/0o2umoisgKqCd3Y ) so I think it would certainly be interesting for a good number of them, and useful too as it would likely crop up at uni for those majoring in physics.
@MrKotBonifacy
9 ай бұрын
Well, I tried my best to listen to your lecture but just couldn't figure out how to turn off this background noise completely drowning out your words (and pretty annoying as well, but that goes without saying, I guess) - so I gave up in less than ten seconds. I mean, for fork's sake, it's no brainer! WHY on Earth (and how) can anyone actually arrive at that brilliant idea ("Brilliant, my dear Baldric, brilliant indeed") that adding some nonsense "thumpy-thumpin" ON TOP of one's speech would make it more comprehensible? Maybe it wouldn't be much of impediment for native speakers with good "young" hearing, but guess what, SOME folks out there are not young any more and for their hearing actually filtering out different "tracks" could be quite challenging (to put it mildly).
@physics-for-all-with-edward
9 ай бұрын
I'm sorry to hear that you had trouble with the background noise in the video. Thank you for watching and giving it a try - as someone who struggles sometimes with understanding voices on films I totally get it. The video was made back in April 2022 - when I was a newbie to videos, and I was using sound in those days because I thought that was what everyone did. However, I have now stopped with the backing tracks (except in a few places) - not really suited to complex(ish) explanations I decided. I have noticed that I didn't do a captions track so when I get time I will add that in.
@MrKotBonifacy
9 ай бұрын
@@physics-for-all-with-edward Thanks for your reply and explanation. Good to hear you "mended your ways" (and soundtracks ;-) I have to admit it was an outburst of frustration, but videos like that are really annoying for an almost sixty years old fella who's hearing was never that great to start with. I promise I'll check out your latter videos, latter on. Cheers.
@Pants4096
Жыл бұрын
I loved everything about this video, EXCEPT.... i kept throwing things at the screen every time you said "new-queue-lar" ಠ_ಠ It's new-cle-ar!!!
@physics-for-all-with-edward
Жыл бұрын
Ha ha. Sorry guvnor. It's ma inner cockney. Now where's ma barrow?
@physics-for-all-with-edward
Жыл бұрын
BTW... hope it was useful (despite my poor diction)
@TheZimberto
11 ай бұрын
Loved this, too. But isn't the plural of nucleus, nuclei?
@jnhrtmn
9 ай бұрын
I always saw the Strong force as the invention that saved them from having to rethink electric charge, and that's its ONLY job. Charge was already established into math, and that will NOT be second-guessed. If charge changes when crammed into a nucleus at nuclear energies, I cannot imagine what all must change. I would bet my life that there is a complexity that is hidden by the Strong force invention. That's one "force" down, 3 to go.
@physics-for-all-with-edward
9 ай бұрын
You might be right. I sometimes wonder when the next 'physics revolution' is coming.
@jnhrtmn
9 ай бұрын
@@physics-for-all-with-edward It's a HUGE bandwagon now. I don't think it can change. I've spent 20 years trying to get physics to see that angular momentum in the gyro lies to you and hides the true cause. They literally don't want cause. Their description don't fail , so they refuse to see it another way. I created a gyro using straight-lined motion, BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THE CAUSE OF THE EFFECT, and spin only sets a rate for tilt velocity changes to happen. See if you can see the cause (my latest video). The straight-lined gyro is in an older video which is a chain traveling in a square path. Professors said, "It's still doing a 360 degree turn albeit 4 different turns." That's not it.
@bretts6861
9 ай бұрын
Agree. They’re trapped in these conventions and have to come up with all sorts of concoctions to justify them. I have yet to hear anybody truly explain the distinction between a positive and a negative charge.
@physics-for-all-with-edward
9 ай бұрын
My students ask what charge is.... 'it's a field'... but what's a field? 'Something with a charge in it'... etc
@rodkeh
10 ай бұрын
I'm sorry to have to say this but this is all just theoretical nonsense. This is what you think happens, based on your understanding of The Standard Model. The SM is wrong! Matter and Energy are not transmutable one to the other. They are disparate and distinct from one another and all matter holds and is surrounded by, an energy envelope but each particle of matter can only hold on to a limited amount of energy and any extra is repelled by the energy already resident. FYI: the difference in mass between a proton and a neutron is exactly equal to the mass of exactly two and one half electron masses. An electron is made of two particles of matter forming a dumb bell shape, which is how and why, electrons spin and we are able to see and tell that it spins. You mention the fact that the repulsive forces between protons grows inversely to the square of the distance. In exactly the same way, the attractive forces between proton and electron grows just as much. Electrons do not orbit or reside in a region floating above a proton. Electrons smash into the proton, which is a seething mass of over 1800 Electrons, all closely and densely pact but the proton has reaches an equilibrium point and the internal mass can not hold, even one more electron, so another one is ejected somewhere else, so it might seem to be orbiting but we are seeing different electrons every time. The repulsion between free electrons determines the shape of the electron clouds we observe, at the exit point on the proton, the shape and distribution of those clouds, changes as the number of nucleons changes. It is only in the presence of other protons, that the mass grows sufficiently to be able to attract and hold an extra two and one half electrons and thus a neutron is born and that is why any neutron will lose the extra electrons as soon as it is ejected from the atom, because there is no longer sufficient extra mass to hold them. The neutron is said to decay back to a proton state. FYI: The proof of these facts: that there is a single factor of mass that is the basic building block of everything and anything in the universe, including the universe itself, lies in the mass data, of The Periodic Table of Elements and Isotopes. The most trusted data known to science and man.
@physics-for-all-with-edward
10 ай бұрын
So thanks for you comment. As a teacher of 16-18 year olds I need to stick to the curriculum... but I always like to sow a healthy dose of questioning. And of course, this is a model, and models change as we learn move. And sometimes models are put away as we study more for more advanced ones
@rodkeh
9 ай бұрын
@@physics-for-all-with-edward a very well measured response. If you wish to challenge your students and to me you sound like an enlightened teacher, try throwing down the glove. Ask them, "How would they prove the existence of a single elementary, factor of mass, an integer value, with a data set of analogue values? Assuming that the data set is of sufficient accuracy and sufficient precision."
@aquamanGR
7 ай бұрын
All good, except it's not the "nuculus", but rather the "nucleus". Great video otherwise!
@physics-for-all-with-edward
7 ай бұрын
sigh. Hope it was useful/interesting otherwise
@aquamanGR
7 ай бұрын
@@physics-for-all-with-edward Very much so!
@elizabethreyna8354
7 ай бұрын
Wow awesome finally I learnt why neutrons are made of . You have a new subscribe I love your explanation so easy and deep. Thanks a lot know i know the existans of neutrons. Beleive me nobody could answer my question thanks a lot 🙏🙏🙏🙏
@physics-for-all-with-edward
7 ай бұрын
So glad it answered your question. It's a really great area of physics. Thanks for the sub. Let me know if you have any more questions that would make good videos
@elizabethreyna8354
7 ай бұрын
@@physics-for-all-with-edward professor hope you can do a video about electron or photon and how to understand it in a easy way just like this video. I have whatched many videos according to quantum field theory they say it is a quanta of field but it is still a wave, so my question is a how long does a photon or electron are. Some people say there is a chunk of that field, so they are not to long but others say it is too long so I am confuse how to at least picture also how does electron looks in an atom 🙏🙏🙏🙏
@physics-for-all-with-edward
7 ай бұрын
Been a long time since I did that stuff. I just did one on proton to neutron ratio from a Fermi direction. And one on the wave/particle argument from the photoelectric effect. Currently working on a Lorentz factor vid. I'll think your idea over. BTW I am no prof.
@elizabethreyna8354
7 ай бұрын
@@physics-for-all-with-edward thanks it will be awesome videos like those 🙏 and hope calling you a professor does not bother you. For me you area a professor bacause thanks to you i was able to learn a deep knowledge so easy thanks
@victorsauvage1890
8 ай бұрын
Now you're talking!
@physics-for-all-with-edward
8 ай бұрын
Excellent
@rodschmidt8952
8 ай бұрын
So the protons, which repel each other, will gravitate (ha, ha!) to the outside of the nucleus, so we'll have a sphere of positive charges all trying to get away from each other, or from their common center. And then it will probably form a football shape (American football--to you, handegg) so that the points can be even farther way... or will it? What is the most stable shape of a handful of marbles which all attract each other, but half of which also repel each other? And then when this shape gets too extreme, part of it will break off. (And still all subject to the Uncertainty Principle!)
@physics-for-all-with-edward
8 ай бұрын
Haha, love the "gravitate" pun! It's amazing how protons manage to find their own personal space in the nucleus. As for the marbles, I guess they have their own little dance going on - without the SNF of course
@dubiousName
7 ай бұрын
Please don't use "… should not exist …" in a title while something clearly does exist. Poor man's choice.
@physics-for-all-with-edward
7 ай бұрын
well, I take your point but in the context of this video - and given the understanding of the audience I am aiming at, I think its valid. But I hate clickbait and YT is totally full of it
@BeIteshazzar
8 ай бұрын
what if the strong nuclear force is long range but gets weaker (inverse square) and we call it gravity after a certain point..
@physics-for-all-with-edward
8 ай бұрын
I guess youre suggesting that grav changes its properties depending on distance? Could it go repulsive at close range? And it wouldn't be inverse square either from about 4fm.
@user-charlieccchong
8 ай бұрын
Sciences are nothing but rationalization by group of so called geniuses😂
@physics-for-all-with-edward
8 ай бұрын
Said the person using their 'puter...
@Cd3
8 ай бұрын
I'm left here thinking... each sphere is a sphere of influence? Surely there is no hard border between the edge of a proton and the edge of a neutron... when it's made of quarks.. and if that's the case... do quarks have to arrange themselves per proton in an atom? Like a crystal structure? Is that why atoms with extra neutrons become less stable such as uranium during fission?
@physics-for-all-with-edward
8 ай бұрын
Thanks for your comment - interesting question. I think the idea of a border is probably wishful thinking that breaks apart down at the small scale. One thing is sure, these particles are not the snooker balls that we teachers talk about. A crystal structure implies something rigid - and I very much doubt that the quark arrangement is rigid. I think the bond between the quarks is described by the colour charge, and the gluons 'passing' between then - I am tinkering around with the possibility of making a video about that as I would like the opportunity to refresh myself about how it is thought to work
@leonhardtkristensen4093
7 ай бұрын
@@physics-for-all-with-edward To this one I would like to put in that I believe we have a lot of thoughts wrong about the atoms. In my opinion there is no such thing as a solid particle. I believe that what we think of as particles are really some form of standing waves of energy. We know pretty well that a photon is a wave. The only reason we think of it as a particle is that when it does some thing for us it happens at a spot. Never mind that those spots may be much larger or much smaller that the photon. The photon energy is absorbed into some thing most often influencing an electron. Photons in the infrared spectrum do only get absorbed as kinetic energy I believe. In the light spectrum a photon may cause an electron to move it's position in an atom or leave it. It needs a quantum (amount) of energy to do that. I can't see that we can't get energy out of a wave. Why does it have to be a particle? The electron often behaves like a wave too. I believe what happens to it when it is accelerated is that it's frequency is increased. I have got that from some body talking about Particle accelerators. All the measurements giving any kind of picture of what is inside an atom that I have seen have only been some kind of fussy reflections. The problem is that we don't have anything small enough to scan it with to give a good picture. The mathematics - although a good tool - is only a tool. It can not make a perfect picture out of imperfect and imagined input's. I believe we are still some way from knowing the whole picture - what energy really is - what electric potentials and magnetic forces really are etc. Also what are atomic forces really. Do we know them from anything else than there has to be a strong force to keep our "current" model of the atom together? We can measure how we feel it but not what it is.
@mchlbk
5 ай бұрын
Better without the music.
@physics-for-all-with-edward
5 ай бұрын
yeah, I know. You live and learn eh?
@JinkunYan
Ай бұрын
@@physics-for-all-with-edward I like the music! It is an amazing video! I love it so much!!!
@physics-for-all-with-edward
Ай бұрын
@@JinkunYan (me too - but maybe too loud...)
@draganpetrovic1991
9 ай бұрын
The best explanations! Easy and clear. Thanks!
@physics-for-all-with-edward
9 ай бұрын
You are too kind
@physicsbhakt7571
10 ай бұрын
Bro Don't be discouraged by lesser number of likes It is just because there are very few who are interested in physics of this high-level
@physics-for-all-with-edward
10 ай бұрын
Thanks. We press on. I thought interaction with that video was pretty good tbh. Are you a teacher of some sort?
@B_r_u_c_e
9 ай бұрын
Fantastic! Thank you.
@physics-for-all-with-edward
9 ай бұрын
Your welcome. Hope it helped
@fredrik3685
10 ай бұрын
👍
@physics-for-all-with-edward
10 ай бұрын
😝
@lolilll
Жыл бұрын
Thanks this really helped
@physics-for-all-with-edward
Жыл бұрын
really glad to hear that - thanks for letting me know. Share and enjoy
@braaitongs
Жыл бұрын
How do we know that the strong nuclear force is a force and not an acceleration like gravity?
@physics-for-all-with-edward
Жыл бұрын
gravity is a force that produces an acceleration. Same as strong force.
@braaitongs
Жыл бұрын
@@physics-for-all-with-edward According to general relativity, it is just a bending of spacetime, so how can it create a force to act on a body? The body just "falls" to the centre?
@physics-for-all-with-edward
Жыл бұрын
yes that's true - but currently the very very large (general relativity) and the very very small (quantum) worlds don't play ball in the standard model... @@braaitongs
@braaitongs
Жыл бұрын
@@physics-for-all-with-edward which in my mind makes either both of them incorrect or one of them more correct than the other. My opinion is that general relativity is the one that is wrong.
@physics-for-all-with-edward
Жыл бұрын
Well maybe soon there will be some new physics 🤔
@bloodyorphan
Жыл бұрын
When will you people start teaching the real Inverse square law ?? E=1/(R2/R1)^2 Without the R2 ratio it does not work both ways !! **EINSTEIN**
@physics-for-all-with-edward
Жыл бұрын
I guess when the A Level syllabuses' ask me to.
@bloodyorphan
Жыл бұрын
@@physics-for-all-with-edward Well now you can never go back M8! hahahahaha
Пікірлер: 89