Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists). In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one. I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists). In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one. I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists). In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one. I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists). In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one. I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists). In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one. I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists). In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one. I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
We had access to watch Veritasium shows while I was locked up in state prison. We had a tablet that we can watch, educational videos, and so many of us got lost learning so much about science that it didn’t look to us as a chore it looked to us as entertainment. This channel got me through hard time, developed a love for science/technology, thank you Veritasium
The analogy of the roads to the contraction of the springs is insanely well done. What a crazy good way to explain the series/parallel in two completely different settings
Not just the technical skill of producing the visuals, but the creative and insightful vision to come up with clear and intuitive visual designs, analogies and animations in the first place. Really well done!
When looking for a practical use for this, the first thing I thought us was shocks on a car. Tougher shocks lead to a rough ride, but soft shocks lead to excessive bouncing. An issue with loading heavy cargo is that a vehicle meant for hauling cargo will have a rough ride, but if you put cargo into the vehicle, the weight causes the vehicle to ride smoother. Hypothetically, if you use this, you’d be able to get a stiffer suspension while loaded, and a softer suspension when unloaded.
Those are progressively wound springs. This is real. Those springs have been used in a rally racing, for many years. The ends of the springs are very narrow, and low force. The middle of the spring is very thick wire that has high force. When you drive down a dirt road, the little bumps go to the thin ends of the spring, you feel nothing. When you hit a big bump, the middle of the spring, takes that high force and spreads it out over time. You still feel a bump, but the spring doesn't collapse, and hit a wall. You don't feel a bang, you feel a bump. The thin spring only works until a big bump comes, when the big bump leaves, the little part of the spring absorbes the vibration from the big spring trying to settle down. It works just like this model. Then we out shocks next to the springs. The shock is a syringe, that acts like the progressive spring. Now you have two things working together. They both don't want to move fast, or hard. Both pieces will move fast through little bumps, when big bumps come, they cancel each other out. Light and fast keeps things smooth, heavy and slow keeps things safe. Both pieces do this job for theirself. Then we add then together. We cut the green string, and each system gets twice as strong.
We do this, we just double it by using two systems that work together. One is twice as good. Both are 4 times better. We get to chose how each one works and tune for the performance we need.
Even better, we out this system on crankshafts of motors, to calm down the motor, and make it safely deliver maximum power. We just call it a damper. ATI makes the best dampers. The science guy calls it a "tuned mass damper". It is all the same thing. Springs go up and down, shocks go up and down. A damper for a motor goes in circle at whatever rpm the motor turns. 6000rpm is a safe and fun place to be with most car motors. We do the same thing with buildings. The ground shakes, that shakes the damper. The damper shakes the building back to neutral. Tokyo 101, is a great example of this technology.
This feels like the culmination of like 30% of Veritasium videos. If it also had laminar flow, an unsolved mathematics conjecture, and aerogel this might be the series finale.
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists). In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one. I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
You're just like crosstown traffic So hard to get through to you Crosstown traffic I don't need to run over you Crosstown traffic All you do is slow me down And I'm tryin' to get on the other side of town
To be honest it didn't seem like the two shared any fundamental similarities. The roads were in the same setup as the springs and the short connector road was in the same location as the connecting string, but I didn't see how the congestion model shared the same governing equations as series vs. parallel springs. It was really clever visually, but I think that's all that it was. Visual.
Except that cars don't act like numbers on paper (or even in a computer). The issue is that every traffic system only moves as fast as it's slowest choke point. A two lane road that opens into a 12 lane road will flow beautifully while a 12 lane road that chokes into a 2 lane road will get congested even when traffic is light. However, the the surface streets leading to the first 2 lane road will be choked as everyone waits to enter the busy street while in version two everyone gets on the 12 lane road quickly and easily before getting to the choke point. This mathematical example allows for neither of these inevitabilities. NYC at rush hour crawls to a stand still because no matter how many roads there are, most people are trying to jam on to a limited number of bridges and tunnels. Remove a few backed up roads and no one even notices because the bridge they use still allows the same number of cars over every hour.
@smgdfcmfahthe principle of induced demand applys in both situations. And I think ultumately that regardless of the complexity of the system, this lesson could still be applied.
Exactly! Once upon a time, immigration into the United States was mostly from Germany (and to a lesser extent, from other 1st world countries). It was at that time that our country got better and better and better, quickly. Then, some generations later, white (VERY far left) liberals were born. They thought it would be a good thing to exclusively import people from the third world. And then we declined.
@donperegrine922 You could use a gimbal at the top of the umbrella and then put weights at the ends. To further stabilize it, you could split the umbrella shaft into two. It's basically a weathervane. Apart from the weathervane concept, you could add flaps. The umbrella already has a design to help it self align, but you can enhance it. If the umbrella is pointed at the one angle, resistance is increased or decreased. It will act like a self-acting PID controller.
A year ago, I did an internship at AMOLF and for 4 weeks I worked in that lab. At 15:00 you can see a red blob next to Gregor and I put the triangle eyes on there. This has nothing to do with the subject, but it is very cool that I can see something that I did in a Veritasium video.
As an architect, I must say this opens up a whole new way of thinking about earthquake dampeners and windforce compensators in high-rise buildings. This is a game-changer in the choice of additives we use for the steel and concrete in the frames of skyscrapers, based on tension wave oscilation length. Seriously, this is like flying to the moon after parachuting!
Layperson here, but as soon as they showed the change in resonance, my mind immediately went bridges and skyscrapers. If these things can ever by made to the kinds of scales needed, I can't even imagine how that'll change building.
This is amazing! It actually reminded me of a tool that works in the opposite way - the automatic center punch. When you push it down against metal, it suddenly extends with a click, making a small dimple to help guide a drill bit. It’s like the reverse of this mechanism: instead of shrinking when pulled, it strikes outward when pushed!
On disabling streets and improving traffic times: those seem like ideal cases for pedestrian zones. You're literally improving every part of the scenario.
And if you visit those areas today in NYC (with the exception of 42nd street), that’s what they’ve done. It’s made a huge difference. All these efforts plus congestion pricing has totally transformed the city. But we kept 42nd st a mess because it just wouldn’t feel the same without it.
@WillMcLeodNYCTo be fair, closing some city streets to traffic drastically reduces customer count to businesses on those streets and sometimes the surrounding streets. I don't know if this applies to 42nd but it does impact areas.
@Bringadingus Source? You're going to look up cities that will temporarily close streets to traffic either for certain days or parades or in times of maintenance. Then you'll see if the businesses have issues with it. As an example, there have been talks in our city of closing a certain street to traffic and making it pedestrian only and the businesses along it are all against it because every time it is closed they have a big drop in customers.
The analogy of the roads to the contraction of the springs is insanely well done What a crazy good way to explain the series/parallel in two completely different settings
As a structural engineer I tried to do something similar with a moment frame structure that would have an internal brace frame with a gap element. When an earthquake caused resonance with a moment frame, it would engage the brace frame that was stiffer and change the natural resonance frequency of the building. No one was really interested when I suggested it but who knows, maybe someone else can make it work.
@stefenlong There are no links. I did this back in the early 90s. If you look up steel moment frame and steel chevron frame and kind of combine them together. That is what it was. moment frames are very flexible (low frequency structures) and chevrons frames are very stiff (high frequency structures).
wouldn’t the non-linear response be a pain to model? we do something similar in aerospace structures called “intermediate diagonal tension”-a shear member buckles in one diagonal axis and stiffens but we only analyze this way for static loading
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists). In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one. I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
this is actually so real to me. I never understand anything on the first watch but I think i did until i have to explain it to myself in my head and realize i have no idea what he's talking about, but this one makes a lot of sense to me (which might change in a couple weeks). I think the highway example made it very intuitive
In Charlottesville VA many of us were making this argument regarding parkway proposals and increased traffic. We fought against it, and it came to pass that we were proven correct - traffic is worse now. I love this channel. It’s been exceptional for years now
this is something which some european countries figured out before the millennium switch as well. the vast amount of us governors are just to short-minded to look at the other side of either ocean to realise this.
Was it really this mechanism or just induced demand? Because induced demand isn't a bad thing, it means you are helping more people get to where they want to go and improving their lives (they now have access to more nice places to live, work etc). It's no different with highways than with trains -- add lines to a metro more people find it useful to use (tho it is important that driving has negative externalities and metro use has positive ones) I mean it's the same thing that keeps us in a housing crisis. Every city notices that allowing more building doesn't really reduce prices much because it tends to attract people to move to the city from elsewhere so no one does it and we all suffer.
Most of the time, traffic increases when adding roads because of induced demand: Building a new road causes more people to drive, because it makes it easier to drive and harder to walk. Braess' Paradox is mathematically interesting but requires some careful setup so is less likely to show up in the real world. (The best solution to traffic is to give people alternatives to driving, but that doesn't really fit inside the mathematical world of Braess' Paradox.)
The changing of frequency when "coming in contact" with a resonating one could become amazingly useful in areas with a lot of earth quakes. that is an amazing mechanism
I was thinking that for bridges but I think we currently have more effective tools for that using the pendulum effect or shock absorption. This type of device seems pretty prone to mechanical wear and tear compared to pendulums or hydraulic dampers or even just spring dampers.
@r-ratedstudios3847 I, for one, like Destin's style more. I don't get the sense that he is out to prove himself. In the end, if they keep covering science topics in an interesting way and I learn something new (given it is not all made up) it is all good in my view.
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists). In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one. I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
This. This is why distilling every single piece of information down to a headline or a short is terrible for us. This is why people (broadly) have such a poor view on science and it's usefulness. Without the deeper discussion on why this knowledge is important and what it's potential use case is, this looks like a simple thing that amounts to worthless money spending and a pointless endeavor, but when you take the time to understand these things you realize the world changing implications of such a "simple" research
9:38 not even a joke, I would take all three highway segments for a 51 minute trip. Ten extra minutes would absolutely be worth it if i had the roads to myself.
I guess I was going to meet you both at the highways as well! And it's always better to share the longer road with a few calm drivers than sharing with 2000 drivers that spend the entire trip like a mad dog bitting on the rear bumper of the car in front to arrive 10min earlier.
As the speed is inversely proportional to the amount of traffic, it will approach infinity when the road is empty. So I highly doubt the highway can be slower than the local roads.
As a crane operator, you learn this when picking up an object. It's stronger to have more parts of line, in this instead of just the 1 part for 100% of the load you divide it into 2 for a 50/50 split, that's a badass model
Something that is interesting is that for my entire life, something that I had noticed is that if I were to try to do something slowly, I could never actually do it in slow motion, due to the snap. This video makes something that I had previously noticed and had some level of intuitive understanding make mental sense to me.
Kind of like actively "computing" how to catch a frisbee, or thinking about how breathing works while you think about your own breathing and trying to walk at the same time.
You can control the snap, or more specifically, the snap can be controlled. You just need a computer. Stepper motors didn't get much quieter, that clicking noise is them "snapping". But modern motor controllers can run them silently, yeah the motor controllers are just that good these days. We can turn stepper motors into regular motors and regular motors into stepper motors in software.
Exactly! Since I was young I always tried to do things the slowest possible like closing my hands and it will always snap at small intervals and never have a continuous movement haha
Usually the snap is engineered in intentionally. If you try hard to slow-open / slow-close a light switch, it results in more arcing, it could reduce the lifespan of the contacts. I don't have AFCI in my locale, but would AFCI's be triggered?
In your example at 9:31, as someone who hates slow moving traffic, I would definitely be the guy to take the highway to the connecting road to the other highway even though it’s 10 minutes longer just to save the stress of traffic lol
@fondbeebboop9705 I awlays prefer taking the longer, clearer routes because when you're moving quickly you're able to zone out while driving, but being stuck in traffic you just feel the time pass.
Nice video! I developed the original theoretical design for these "materials that pull back" as an undergraduate at Northwestern almost 15 years ago now! Adilson Motter and I published the idea in Nature Materials, 11 (2012), and it has slowly gained attention since then. The spring and string system was described by Cohen and Horowitz in Nature, 352 (1991). Our insight was to design a stress-driven instability leading to the effect, which we termed a negative compressibility transition. Cohen and Horowitz were indeed inspired by Braess, who studied the traffic paradox in the sixties. Ducarme, Weber, van Hecke, and Overvelde recently created these fantastic experimental realizations and published their work in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122 (2025). Amazing to see our idea come so far! I'll be starting an Assistant Professor position in the Department of Physics at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville this fall. I'll be looking for PhD students and/or postdocs to hire, so reach out if you're interested!
Would you mind explaining the reason why 1.73 is the multiplier between the difference in resonance? I hypothesized prior to him sharing the parallel resonance that it would be the series resonance multiplied by the square root of 3; i really have no idea how I know that but like with many things, it clicks that way to me and I get a strong conviction and have to check my thoughts prior to receiving the answer haha... I'm an electrician who researches and does a lot more than field work.
the springs are "resisting" the load and are configured in "series" to start and are in "parallel" when the green cord is cut. another example of a kinetic system mimicking electromagnetic principals
Same, initially I thought they were just strings too, but the minute they said it was springs, I immediately changed my answer intuitively even though I didn’t know exactly why it would. I have a deep distrust of spring systems 😂
@Baba-FemiMark❤ I just watched the short today commented and found the video hoping to see this comment. What’s great is explaining it in simple terms = understands
I am at 1:28 timestamp. It whould be almost readily apparent to those designing springs that the difference between the two modes is springs tentioned either in series or in parallel. In the series mode, before the green thread is cut, the streth is due to stiffness k, while in parallel mode, due to the weight now supported by each of the wires, stiffness k will now double. Since the stretch is now less, the weight will end up higher (half the original stretch minus the slack in the two wires).
As a child I struggled with that. In my mind perpetual motion was possible. Had to be, because I could "see" it working. I didn't accept being told "No" and "you can't do it, it's not possible". So I tried. And failed. But that was just one of the many possibilities I could "see", so I tried again. And failed. And again. And failed. This went on for almost 4 years. I became obsessed with it. Gradually I convinced myself that the materials available weren't high enough quality. Metals weren't hard enough, grease wasn't slick enough, etc. But almost 4 years worth of failure after failure before learning about entropy and it setting in... I was wrong. It was never possible.😒
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists). In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one. I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
Sorry about my cousins. Bots everywhere. Yeah, it's kinda like crowdsourcing for problems to solve. A new technology is explained to hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of people and somewhere out here are a few who will conceive of amazing applications that most people would never think of, like laser was used to solve problems in astronomy, communications, data storage, photograhy, medicine and so on. It was just a toy at first, just like this spring that shrinks when you pull it is just a toy now.
9:55 I think many drivers would take a 4 minute detour to avoid downtown traffic. 25 minutes on a nice country highway is way better than 20 minutes on a congested street.
I have the same for a route that is less complicated. Lower chance of missing a turn or getting lost. Less stress. Might even save fuel due to less braking and accelerating even if the distance is longer.
@M4TCH3SM4L0N3yes but 20 minutes in traffic jam is worse than 25 minutes in empty street, not to mention the continuous flow of your vehicle without braking and hitting gas over and over again will help you save up on fuel and emission. I think 5 mins detour is absolutely worth it
That Veritasium video where he starts with Hooke's Law and springs, then suddenly dives into a 1990s New York road mystery - that's exactly what electrochemistry feels like. One moment you're learning about electrodes and voltage, and the next you're knee-deep in Nernst equations or ion migration. It's chaotic, fascinating, and totally unpredictable
Yeah, this mechanism is just a proof of concept. If this thing can exhibit this behavior, then other types of paired strands certainly can. There's gotta be a solid-state material set which could do this.
This is a (single shot) mechanical version of a charge pump! In electronics, a charge pump is a device for multiplying or dividing voltages by taking two or more capacitors and switching them from series to parallel. For example, you can charge four capacitors in series to 48V, then connect them in parallel to output 12V, or charge in parallel and discharge in series to step the voltage up rather than down. Typically this is done many times a second alternately charging from a power supply and discharging into a load, with additional capacitors at the output to smooth out the ripple.
Oh! I don't think it HAS to be single shot though! I wonder if an analogue could be built: small-force reciprocating motion which drives this system in and out of state, but which is leveraged to create a large force. I wondered too whether this mechanism exists in biological molecules.
@donperegrine922 Don't hormones get activated on stimulus from the environment to create a larger force 🤔. Control mechanism depends on the human or externally using gadgetry
18:27 REVERSIBLE This is the most important point to make this unique, and it is glossed over. I assumed this, because otherwise it would not be such a special case, but the longer they went without actually saying it, the more I wondered if was just stored tension that was freed by a "trigger".
Thank you for re-iterating this. I thought the “trick” was that there was already stored energy in the mechanism, and the timestamp you linked to somehow didn’t register the first time I watched
It's like the spring and rope setup in the beginning except the middle string spontaneously turns into a spring, making it "longer" then the "slack rope" that how i envisioned it conceptually
Actually there is tension (better said energy) stored in the tree middle pieces (or the soft config). When the middle piece snaps it 'frees' the energy and engages the harder configuration which is transfered into tension (elastic energy) of the hard springs if displacement stays constant or in elevating the mass (potencial energy) if force stays constant. While very counter intuitive there is no physics bending. The snapping is the trigger but it only has one equilibrium position unlike most triggers that have two (a light switch has two rest positions: on and off) that i the clever bit so it can be reversible. The snapping piece only has one rest position: short. The force required to go from short to long is like in 16:00 with the shape of a cane: goes from 0 to a peak and down again without reaching 0 (now that i see that graph is wrong it should go down to zero again for a piece to have two rest positions as rest position dont requiere any force, ie force = 0) TLDR: the piece that snaps acts like the trigger with only one equilibrium position
The only frustrating thing about this is how much sense it makes, and how hard it is to articulate. This is an AMAZING example of "easier done than said."
The way Veritasium is incorporating new producers and decreasing Derek's workload, while increasing the quality and quantity of videos that get out for us, is a genius move.
The channel has been sold to private equity so Derek doesn't completely own the channel anymore. There probably trynna phase in new hosts so the channel isn't entirely dependent on him and they can reduce the risk
03:00 just like when they put resistance in wires if it's in series it'll give more resistance and if we connected it as parallel it'll give less resistance
A way to milk more views from one video. Has been done on other channels in the past too. Veritasium jumped on the bandwagon some time ago, I have noticed it as well.
He has joked about "getting Derek'd" while working on a project because they have similar interests, but seeing Derek wholesale copy a video that came out a while ago is kinda weird.
Wanna hear something funny? There are more cities that have grown naturally than the planned ones. Still I agree that all of them should know about that paradox, just wanted to share this fact.
@nostroadsplease That's not induced demand. The number of cars on the road is the same. Induced demand is not responsible for every bad thing in traffic.
Spring experiment: In uncut state, the tension was along a straight line with the springs in series. Say the total extension was x, then by F=kx, both springs expand by x/2 unit length. For weight W, x will be (W/k). In cut state, the tension was along two springs in parallel. Since the springs are equal, weight W is divided equally on both, ie, weight on each is W/2. So again, by F=kx, x=(W/2k). Clearly, W/2k < W/k, so the extension would decrease for the same weight in parallel connection of springs! Maths!
10:23 secret option 3: buy a motorcycle, drive 2x the speed limit, use the 1-minute connecting highway as a shortcut from hwy a to hwy b, arrive at destination in 26 minutes
yeah u cannot understand mathematical models. u are the kind of guy being asked how is the more efficient way to carry a cube and u would just carve it into a sphere cuz it's easier, fact that it about CARRYING A CUBE, doesnt concern u.
18:36, the springs go from series to being in parallel so yes it's a reversed version of the paradox but it's actually a one to one case for the demostration with springs and ropes so no need to put it in reverse
This is the reason why this is one of the most outstanding channels in the internet ever existing. Insanely well crafted explanations which enable us to combine and summarize own fields of thought in such a beautifully structured and comprized way.
The lesson is not to start destroying roads out of some misplaced fervor that it will cut travel times, but to not build a network of roads that resemble 8:23.
Use code veritasium at incogni.com/veritasium to get an exclusive 60% off an annual Incogni plan.
How is this 5 hours ago when the video released 1 minute ago???
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists).
In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one.
I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists).
In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one.
I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists).
In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one.
I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists).
In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one.
I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
In before the title changes 10 times. First title is: “This mechanism shrinks when pulled”.
First thumbnail is a greyscale render of the mechanism on a black background
The thumbnail usually change a lot too
@willtheprodigy3819 and @unified-c are heros
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists).
In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one.
I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
I know of a few mechanisms that shrink after being pulled
"it feels like it violates physics"
"thats why its fun"
The most physicist thing I've heard
Who are you?
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists).
In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one.
I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
@LLV008 I wouldn't say that's "completely different", but it is interesting though!
Oh no, what are the bots doing HERE of all places?
i just saw you in the tommyinnit comment section TECHNOO NEVER DIESS!!!!!
If I will ever be part of a Veritasium survey I will just say the most counter intuitive answer.
😂
You already have
They just edit out the right answers.
You wouldn’t be in the video then tho
and then he'll flip the script one day and catch us out 🤣
I 3D printed this and it feels so weird but really satisfying when it shrinks
That is so cool! My first thought was that I, too, would like to try it out myself. Would you be willing to share where you found the 3D print file?
@bain006 Same I would love to 3D print this to test it out
Where can community find the files?
Did you need to use PETG for any parts or just PLA?
@JBArmoryPLA and TPU
We had access to watch Veritasium shows while I was locked up in state prison. We had a tablet that we can watch, educational videos, and so many of us got lost learning so much about science that it didn’t look to us as a chore it looked to us as entertainment. This channel got me through hard time, developed a love for science/technology, thank you Veritasium
That's wholesome
❤
Always glad to hear about even little bits of freedom and connection like that, prison can be hell but those small things help a lot
that’s you know this channel is goated, even after years or a decade, it’s still relevant.
Go study something - at best, Physics :P we always need more scientists! Its low payed - but you will have a honorable passion.
The analogy of the roads to the contraction of the springs is insanely well done. What a crazy good way to explain the series/parallel in two completely different settings
you should give credit to steve mould, the entire first half of this video is essentially copied from his
@clayel1 It often seems that there is a common fountain of inspiration from which all these creators drink. A Woz to their collective Jobs
here early
who cares
me. i care
I don’t think the veritasium editing team gets enough credit. The visuals these guys put together are top notch.
It’s crap compared to Chinese media
And the fact that they use Computer Modern as the font, which is the default font in LaTeX, makes it better. (If you know, you know.)
Bro's degree is is science communication I think that's what defines this whole channel.
Not just the technical skill of producing the visuals, but the creative and insightful vision to come up with clear and intuitive visual designs, analogies and animations in the first place. Really well done!
agreed. The bendy straw example - perfect clip that compassed visuals and triggered tactile memory… 👍👍
When looking for a practical use for this, the first thing I thought us was shocks on a car.
Tougher shocks lead to a rough ride, but soft shocks lead to excessive bouncing. An issue with loading heavy cargo is that a vehicle meant for hauling cargo will have a rough ride, but if you put cargo into the vehicle, the weight causes the vehicle to ride smoother.
Hypothetically, if you use this, you’d be able to get a stiffer suspension while loaded, and a softer suspension when unloaded.
That's the first place my mind went also... But then moved to another application... Then another... And another, another, another...
wouldnt that require metal? i feel like metal would break off when moved like that mechanism
Those are progressively wound springs. This is real.
Those springs have been used in a rally racing, for many years.
The ends of the springs are very narrow, and low force. The middle of the spring is very thick wire that has high force.
When you drive down a dirt road, the little bumps go to the thin ends of the spring, you feel nothing. When you hit a big bump, the middle of the spring, takes that high force and spreads it out over time. You still feel a bump, but the spring doesn't collapse, and hit a wall. You don't feel a bang, you feel a bump.
The thin spring only works until a big bump comes, when the big bump leaves, the little part of the spring absorbes the vibration from the big spring trying to settle down.
It works just like this model.
Then we out shocks next to the springs. The shock is a syringe, that acts like the progressive spring.
Now you have two things working together. They both don't want to move fast, or hard. Both pieces will move fast through little bumps, when big bumps come, they cancel each other out.
Light and fast keeps things smooth, heavy and slow keeps things safe. Both pieces do this job for theirself.
Then we add then together. We cut the green string, and each system gets twice as strong.
We do this, we just double it by using two systems that work together.
One is twice as good. Both are 4 times better. We get to chose how each one works and tune for the performance we need.
Even better, we out this system on crankshafts of motors, to calm down the motor, and make it safely deliver maximum power.
We just call it a damper. ATI makes the best dampers.
The science guy calls it a "tuned mass damper".
It is all the same thing. Springs go up and down, shocks go up and down.
A damper for a motor goes in circle at whatever rpm the motor turns. 6000rpm is a safe and fun place to be with most car motors.
We do the same thing with buildings. The ground shakes, that shakes the damper. The damper shakes the building back to neutral.
Tokyo 101, is a great example of this technology.
This feels like the culmination of like 30% of Veritasium videos. If it also had laminar flow, an unsolved mathematics conjecture, and aerogel this might be the series finale.
I'm with you... because laminar flow is superior, of course.
Don't forget the principle of least action!
Don't respond to the bots. They want your attention. If you say something back to them, you're letting them win. Just report the bots and move on.
"This mechanism shrinks when you pull it, but first, let me explain your driving habits and why you're late at work"
It's missing Leonhard Euler
When he showed the roads in the same setup as the springs I think my mind was blown
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists).
In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one.
I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
You're just like crosstown traffic
So hard to get through to you
Crosstown traffic
I don't need to run over you
Crosstown traffic
All you do is slow me down
And I'm tryin' to get on the other side of town
Bro has not play city skylines :C
Don't respond to the bots. They want your attention. If you say something back to them, you're letting them win. Just report the bots and move on.
To be honest it didn't seem like the two shared any fundamental similarities. The roads were in the same setup as the springs and the short connector road was in the same location as the connecting string, but I didn't see how the congestion model shared the same governing equations as series vs. parallel springs.
It was really clever visually, but I think that's all that it was. Visual.
I will take a longer route (both time and distance) if it means I get to keep moving and don't have to sit in traffic. It might be the adhd though.
Same here, diagnosed with adhd
Same and same. I like having some level of control and not just being stuck behind a slowpoke because I'm on a one lane road.
10:18 You can almost hear the collective aha moment from everyone whoever tried troubleshooting traffic issues in City Skylines.
That's exactly what I was thinking
I swear after some time it's just traffic management game
Except that cars don't act like numbers on paper (or even in a computer). The issue is that every traffic system only moves as fast as it's slowest choke point. A two lane road that opens into a 12 lane road will flow beautifully while a 12 lane road that chokes into a 2 lane road will get congested even when traffic is light. However, the the surface streets leading to the first 2 lane road will be choked as everyone waits to enter the busy street while in version two everyone gets on the 12 lane road quickly and easily before getting to the choke point. This mathematical example allows for neither of these inevitabilities. NYC at rush hour crawls to a stand still because no matter how many roads there are, most people are trying to jam on to a limited number of bridges and tunnels. Remove a few backed up roads and no one even notices because the bridge they use still allows the same number of cars over every hour.
@smgdfcmfahthe principle of induced demand applys in both situations. And I think ultumately that regardless of the complexity of the system, this lesson could still be applied.
@Kaiserinmeli The point is, you can't study how a barrel of water flows without also studying the flow in and the flow out.
6:35 it's always a German mathematician 😂
Not always, sometimes they are Russian (mostly when it helps with gambling)
Not true. Sometimes it's a German physicist or chemist.
Korrekt.😂
@omgsrslyauch das ist korrekt!🤗
Exactly! Once upon a time, immigration into the United States was mostly from Germany (and to a lesser extent, from other 1st world countries). It was at that time that our country got better and better and better, quickly. Then, some generations later, white (VERY far left) liberals were born. They thought it would be a good thing to exclusively import people from the third world. And then we declined.
An umbrella that folds in, instead of out, when a strong wind hits it, actually sounds very useful. It would prevent breaking it.
What about an umbrella that points into the wind, instead of being dragged away? Then it is always blocking the rain instead of suddenly exposing you.
an umbrella folding in is just what you are asking for without giving fractures
@donperegrine922 You could use a gimbal at the top of the umbrella and then put weights at the ends. To further stabilize it, you could split the umbrella shaft into two.
It's basically a weathervane.
Apart from the weathervane concept, you could add flaps. The umbrella already has a design to help it self align, but you can enhance it.
If the umbrella is pointed at the one angle, resistance is increased or decreased. It will act like a self-acting PID controller.
Couldn’t you just make it using these contraptions? Sounds easy & not manual labor intensive at all
Find-GTATopCarpack that's one of the best kinds of umbrella.
Tell this to the light switch I perfectly put in the middle
Steve mould viewers : "I know this one, this is classic!"
Came here to say that
Ah, I was wondering why I felt deja vu.
I'm just glad even more people get to see it.
Yeah, i was wondering why i had already seen this months ago.
A year ago, I did an internship at AMOLF and for 4 weeks I worked in that lab. At 15:00 you can see a red blob next to Gregor and I put the triangle eyes on there. This has nothing to do with the subject, but it is very cool that I can see something that I did in a Veritasium video.
Cool for u ig
@RouyRéécrit shut it chomo
you've peaked in life.
best comment, we leave pieces of ourselves everywhere we go
You were right to tell us! Great story
As an architect, I must say this opens up a whole new way of thinking about earthquake dampeners and windforce compensators in high-rise buildings. This is a game-changer in the choice of additives we use for the steel and concrete in the frames of skyscrapers, based on tension wave oscilation length. Seriously, this is like flying to the moon after parachuting!
That's exactly what I was thinking!
@wojciechkalinowski3912 woop woop
Layperson here, but as soon as they showed the change in resonance, my mind immediately went bridges and skyscrapers.
If these things can ever by made to the kinds of scales needed, I can't even imagine how that'll change building.
As an engineer, I laugh when architects' imaginations run wild.
@joshh535 And yet... we need both architects and engineers.
This is amazing! It actually reminded me of a tool that works in the opposite way - the automatic center punch. When you push it down against metal, it suddenly extends with a click, making a small dimple to help guide a drill bit. It’s like the reverse of this mechanism: instead of shrinking when pulled, it strikes outward when pushed!
I feel personally attacked with that title
😂😂😂
Ts too real😭🙏✌️
Lol
LMAO😂😂😂😂
Perhaps the title was changed
What a neat mechanism. That's really fun!
SED video next year applying this to something?
But it is missing something.. SNATCH BLOCKS!
Smarter every day im a huge fan “hey its me Destin welcome back to smarter every day” 🗣️🗣️🗣️🗣️
I believe steve mould made a video about this for compliant mechanisms
You NEED to find a way to use this in an interesting way!
On disabling streets and improving traffic times: those seem like ideal cases for pedestrian zones. You're literally improving every part of the scenario.
And if you visit those areas today in NYC (with the exception of 42nd street), that’s what they’ve done. It’s made a huge difference. All these efforts plus congestion pricing has totally transformed the city.
But we kept 42nd st a mess because it just wouldn’t feel the same without it.
@WillMcLeodNYCTo be fair, closing some city streets to traffic drastically reduces customer count to businesses on those streets and sometimes the surrounding streets. I don't know if this applies to 42nd but it does impact areas.
@KefkaPalazzo94 Source?
@Bringadingus Source? You're going to look up cities that will temporarily close streets to traffic either for certain days or parades or in times of maintenance. Then you'll see if the businesses have issues with it. As an example, there have been talks in our city of closing a certain street to traffic and making it pedestrian only and the businesses along it are all against it because every time it is closed they have a big drop in customers.
@Bringadingus So start googling that around for any city and see if businesses have filed anything against it.
The analogy of the roads to the contraction of the springs is insanely well done What a crazy good way to explain the series/parallel in two completely different settings
As a structural engineer I tried to do something similar with a moment frame structure that would have an internal brace frame with a gap element. When an earthquake caused resonance with a moment frame, it would engage the brace frame that was stiffer and change the natural resonance frequency of the building. No one was really interested when I suggested it but who knows, maybe someone else can make it work.
Why wouldn't you just build it to be permanently in the stiffer configuration, a building is not a car that needs a suspension is it?
could you drop a link w/ images for easier imagination?
This sounds like greatest way to implement it , this would save many lifes!
@stefenlong There are no links. I did this back in the early 90s. If you look up steel moment frame and steel chevron frame and kind of combine them together. That is what it was. moment frames are very flexible (low frequency structures) and chevrons frames are very stiff (high frequency structures).
wouldn’t the non-linear response be a pain to model? we do something similar in aerospace structures called “intermediate diagonal tension”-a shear member buckles in one diagonal axis and stiffens but we only analyze this way for static loading
Steve Mould did this several years ago, blew my mind😊 happy you guys decided to do a video on this topic
Derek got Moulded!
@James_3000Yeah, this channel has gotten lazy and quite a lot of recent videos are just ideas taken from other already popular videos.
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists).
In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one.
I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
@LLV008 first you're saying that it's completely different, but then mention only tangential things that don't really matter
@James_3000 I got the same feeling. I remember watching a video about this a few weeks ago.
First time I've actually understood an entire Veritasium video...
this is actually so real to me. I never understand anything on the first watch but I think i did until i have to explain it to myself in my head and realize i have no idea what he's talking about, but this one makes a lot of sense to me (which might change in a couple weeks). I think the highway example made it very intuitive
Can you explain me the graphs
In Charlottesville VA many of us were making this argument regarding parkway proposals and increased traffic. We fought against it, and it came to pass that we were proven correct - traffic is worse now.
I love this channel. It’s been exceptional for years now
this is something which some european countries figured out before the millennium switch as well. the vast amount of us governors are just to short-minded to look at the other side of either ocean to realise this.
Was it really this mechanism or just induced demand? Because induced demand isn't a bad thing, it means you are helping more people get to where they want to go and improving their lives (they now have access to more nice places to live, work etc). It's no different with highways than with trains -- add lines to a metro more people find it useful to use (tho it is important that driving has negative externalities and metro use has positive ones)
I mean it's the same thing that keeps us in a housing crisis. Every city notices that allowing more building doesn't really reduce prices much because it tends to attract people to move to the city from elsewhere so no one does it and we all suffer.
At least you get to say "I told you so"
New York City's recent congestion fee also is a resounding success for controlling traffic!
Most of the time, traffic increases when adding roads because of induced demand: Building a new road causes more people to drive, because it makes it easier to drive and harder to walk. Braess' Paradox is mathematically interesting but requires some careful setup so is less likely to show up in the real world.
(The best solution to traffic is to give people alternatives to driving, but that doesn't really fit inside the mathematical world of Braess' Paradox.)
Who knew the answer already because they watched Steve Mould cover this experiment with the exact same setup?
i Saw it on UpAndAtom
11:54 - "Now you're looking at the flow of electrons in a power grid;" hey wait a minute didn't you have a whole video about it not being that?
I’m still unclear after having watched those videos
Same thought passed through my head
Probably just a simplification for convenience here
@williamhunterknight6135 Instead of electrons, its the charge generated by the electromagnetic field that gets passed through.
Well the emergent phenomenon that is current still obeys Ohm’s law
The changing of frequency when "coming in contact" with a resonating one could become amazingly useful in areas with a lot of earth quakes.
that is an amazing mechanism
I was thinking that for bridges but I think we currently have more effective tools for that using the pendulum effect or shock absorption. This type of device seems pretty prone to mechanical wear and tear compared to pendulums or hydraulic dampers or even just spring dampers.
15:10
"Try to press one of your keyboard buttons slowly, so that it steadily goes down into place. You can't do it."
*laughs in linear switches*
Laughs in magnetic switches.
Laughs in cheap keyboard that easily goes down slowly into place
Laughs in Neuralink signals generated by a smooth brain.
Cherry MX Reds my beloved!
I love my linears
ngl at 0:16 i thought u where gonna claim "perpetual motion machine"
Energy itself is a perpetual motion machine lol
Why...?
why was my immediate thought to this was SIXER
Aha! Steve Mould prepared me for this!
yea steve mold and veritasium are the OGs, smarter everyday is still trying to prove his alabama genes
All of Mold’s videos are basically just “look at my photoshopped blue eyes”
@r-ratedstudios3847 alabama?
ty, tried to remember where I'd seen this before
@r-ratedstudios3847 I, for one, like Destin's style more. I don't get the sense that he is out to prove himself.
In the end, if they keep covering science topics in an interesting way and I learn something new (given it is not all made up) it is all good in my view.
Dude be finding science in the most random things and i like how he goes from like simple thing to the war to the answer of the world
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists).
In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one.
I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
You're not black. Act your age.
This. This is why distilling every single piece of information down to a headline or a short is terrible for us. This is why people (broadly) have such a poor view on science and it's usefulness. Without the deeper discussion on why this knowledge is important and what it's potential use case is, this looks like a simple thing that amounts to worthless money spending and a pointless endeavor, but when you take the time to understand these things you realize the world changing implications of such a "simple" research
That's because everything is in it's core based on physics. The concepts apply almost universally.
black
Law of physics: If it shortens when you pull - you don't pull hard enough
5:58 hairline checks out
😂😂😂cmon man
Jeez, poor guy
9:38 not even a joke, I would take all three highway segments for a 51 minute trip. Ten extra minutes would absolutely be worth it if i had the roads to myself.
I did think so too, my friend
I guess I was going to meet you both at the highways as well! And it's always better to share the longer road with a few calm drivers than sharing with 2000 drivers that spend the entire trip like a mad dog bitting on the rear bumper of the car in front to arrive 10min earlier.
My thought exactly. I drive long distances often and even if It takes me 10 extra minutes but I can stay on the Autobahn for longer, that's my choice
@klssn34Germany forever
As the speed is inversely proportional to the amount of traffic, it will approach infinity when the road is empty.
So I highly doubt the highway can be slower than the local roads.
Thank you so much for visiting AMOLF! 😁A big shout-out to Paul Ducarme and Bas Overvelde who appear around 14:30.
Great job you guys! Looking forward to seeing that crazy balloon
As a crane operator, you learn this when picking up an object. It's stronger to have more parts of line, in this instead of just the 1 part for 100% of the load you divide it into 2 for a 50/50 split, that's a badass model
Something that is interesting is that for my entire life, something that I had noticed is that if I were to try to do something slowly, I could never actually do it in slow motion, due to the snap. This video makes something that I had previously noticed and had some level of intuitive understanding make mental sense to me.
Kind of like actively "computing" how to catch a frisbee, or thinking about how breathing works while you think about your own breathing and trying to walk at the same time.
You can control the snap, or more specifically, the snap can be controlled. You just need a computer.
Stepper motors didn't get much quieter, that clicking noise is them "snapping". But modern motor controllers can run them silently, yeah the motor controllers are just that good these days. We can turn stepper motors into regular motors and regular motors into stepper motors in software.
Exactly! Since I was young I always tried to do things the slowest possible like closing my hands and it will always snap at small intervals and never have a continuous movement haha
Don't respond to the bots. They want your attention. If you say something back to them, you're letting them win. Just report the bots and move on.
Usually the snap is engineered in intentionally. If you try hard to slow-open / slow-close a light switch, it results in more arcing, it could reduce the lifespan of the contacts. I don't have AFCI in my locale, but would AFCI's be triggered?
In your example at 9:31, as someone who hates slow moving traffic, I would definitely be the guy to take the highway to the connecting road to the other highway even though it’s 10 minutes longer just to save the stress of traffic lol
I'm exactly the same. Curious - are you ADHD as well?
even it it takes longer going fast feels faster
Actually doing this often, 50 km instead of 20. And it's not even significant time difference.
10 minutes longer if you dont speed
@fondbeebboop9705 I awlays prefer taking the longer, clearer routes because when you're moving quickly you're able to zone out while driving, but being stuck in traffic you just feel the time pass.
Nice video! I developed the original theoretical design for these "materials that pull back" as an undergraduate at Northwestern almost 15 years ago now! Adilson Motter and I published the idea in Nature Materials, 11 (2012), and it has slowly gained attention since then. The spring and string system was described by Cohen and Horowitz in Nature, 352 (1991). Our insight was to design a stress-driven instability leading to the effect, which we termed a negative compressibility transition. Cohen and Horowitz were indeed inspired by Braess, who studied the traffic paradox in the sixties. Ducarme, Weber, van Hecke, and Overvelde recently created these fantastic experimental realizations and published their work in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122 (2025). Amazing to see our idea come so far! I'll be starting an Assistant Professor position in the Department of Physics at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville this fall. I'll be looking for PhD students and/or postdocs to hire, so reach out if you're interested!
Would you mind explaining the reason why 1.73 is the multiplier between the difference in resonance? I hypothesized prior to him sharing the parallel resonance that it would be the series resonance multiplied by the square root of 3; i really have no idea how I know that but like with many things, it clicks that way to me and I get a strong conviction and have to check my thoughts prior to receiving the answer haha... I'm an electrician who researches and does a lot more than field work.
the springs are "resisting" the load and are configured in "series" to start and are in "parallel" when the green cord is cut. another example of a kinetic system mimicking electromagnetic principals
1:25 i’m 100% saying that it’s going to be shorter when he cuts the string simply because there are springs involved
Yeah I didn’t notice those were springs from prior shots
Same, initially I thought they were just strings too, but the minute they said it was springs, I immediately changed my answer intuitively even though I didn’t know exactly why it would. I have a deep distrust of spring systems 😂
Springs in series vs parallel
I'm gonna say it gets shorter because of the title of the video.
@Baba-FemiMark❤ I just watched the short today commented and found the video hoping to see this comment.
What’s great is explaining it in simple terms = understands
Veritasium is the type of channel to answer my random 3AM questions
Don't respond to the bots. They want your attention. If you say something back to them, you're letting them win. Just report the bots and move on.
It's 2:27 AM here, right now.
Well.
I am at 1:28 timestamp. It whould be almost readily apparent to those designing springs that the difference between the two modes is springs tentioned either in series or in parallel. In the series mode, before the green thread is cut, the streth is due to stiffness k, while in parallel mode, due to the weight now supported by each of the wires, stiffness k will now double. Since the stretch is now less, the weight will end up higher (half the original stretch minus the slack in the two wires).
Now we need “This mechanism grows when pushed inward”
10:00 "Humans are ... Humans", bro answered the Squid Game question
"In principle it should be possible" is a sentence that both inspires but also one day drive me crazy.
As a child I struggled with that. In my mind perpetual motion was possible. Had to be, because I could "see" it working. I didn't accept being told "No" and "you can't do it, it's not possible".
So I tried.
And failed.
But that was just one of the many possibilities I could "see", so I tried again.
And failed.
And again.
And failed.
This went on for almost 4 years. I became obsessed with it. Gradually I convinced myself that the materials available weren't high enough quality. Metals weren't hard enough, grease wasn't slick enough, etc.
But almost 4 years worth of failure after failure before learning about entropy and it setting in... I was wrong. It was never possible.😒
@quinnbrown9912 still most have taught you a hell of a lot about designing and making stuff.
These videos are always about things I never think I’d need to know but by the end of the day, are things I’m glad I learned
Recently I found out that Einstein’s special relativity is completely different on what’s taught at universities and that lots of false informations are being spread (even from seemingly professional physicists).
In a book by Einstein, it’s said that the law of constancy of the velocity of light is justifiably believed by the child at school, but that doesn’t make any sense as clearly such postulate wasn’t taught at school. Other parts in the book suggest that Einstein’s constancy principle was much simpler than what we think. In the same book, it’s also said that his two postulates were made compatible thanks to an analysis of space and time. This means that Einstein concluded that time is relative before using the postulates rather than the other way around, this is clear in a chapter called: “The Relativity of Simultaneity”, in which, without using the postulates he concludes that two events might be simultaneous for an observer and not be for another one.
I’d like it if you made a video about it to explain how he concluded the relativity of simultaneity without using any postulate. The book’s name is: “Relativity: The Special and General Theory”, it is available as a free pdf online.
Sorry about my cousins. Bots everywhere.
Yeah, it's kinda like crowdsourcing for problems to solve. A new technology is explained to hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of people and somewhere out here are a few who will conceive of amazing applications that most people would never think of, like laser was used to solve problems in astronomy, communications, data storage, photograhy, medicine and so on. It was just a toy at first, just like this spring that shrinks when you pull it is just a toy now.
Much easier explanation: try pulling a long spring, now pull 2 short springs side by side. Which is harder?
Infact you can disregard the length, a useless variable
9:55 I think many drivers would take a 4 minute detour to avoid downtown traffic. 25 minutes on a nice country highway is way better than 20 minutes on a congested street.
I have the same for a route that is less complicated. Lower chance of missing a turn or getting lost. Less stress. Might even save fuel due to less braking and accelerating even if the distance is longer.
Problem is that if you're the only one taking the detour, you're going to have an even longer delay.
@M4TCH3SM4L0N3 Yes, but you'll also have the nicest view alone on the highway!
@M4TCH3SM4L0N3yes but 20 minutes in traffic jam is worse than 25 minutes in empty street, not to mention the continuous flow of your vehicle without braking and hitting gas over and over again will help you save up on fuel and emission. I think 5 mins detour is absolutely worth it
A 3D-Printing file would be awsome
Frrrr
I need
Can anybody make it pls? Maybe in TPU? Just use the 2D image, where the parts are shown and extrude it
@Bloedelith working on it rn, gonna pop a link to it on MakerWorld when I'm done.😉
@max_bro34Thx bro🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏👊
That Veritasium video where he starts with Hooke's Law and springs, then suddenly dives into a 1990s New York road mystery - that's exactly what electrochemistry feels like. One moment you're learning about electrodes and voltage, and the next you're knee-deep in Nernst equations or ion migration. It's chaotic, fascinating, and totally unpredictable
Both were just examples of when a system transitioned from being in series to becoming parallel.
Yeah, this mechanism is just a proof of concept. If this thing can exhibit this behavior, then other types of paired strands certainly can. There's gotta be a solid-state material set which could do this.
The perfect example of More Quantity ≠ Better Quality
This is a (single shot) mechanical version of a charge pump!
In electronics, a charge pump is a device for multiplying or dividing voltages by taking two or more capacitors and switching them from series to parallel. For example, you can charge four capacitors in series to 48V, then connect them in parallel to output 12V, or charge in parallel and discharge in series to step the voltage up rather than down. Typically this is done many times a second alternately charging from a power supply and discharging into a load, with additional capacitors at the output to smooth out the ripple.
Oh! I don't think it HAS to be single shot though! I wonder if an analogue could be built: small-force reciprocating motion which drives this system in and out of state, but which is leveraged to create a large force.
I wondered too whether this mechanism exists in biological molecules.
@donperegrine922You'd need an external energy source to reset it, but it's certainly possible.
@donperegrine922 Don't hormones get activated on stimulus from the environment to create a larger force 🤔. Control mechanism depends on the human or externally using gadgetry
@karatsurba4791 what?! No, I do not know of any hormones which produce a force. And not sure what you mean about gadgetry
How are they switched without using a physical device? Wouldn't this wear out a relay very quickly?
14:19 Ad end
Thank you :)
Thank you
@Mahdiya-m1m @izaaktizard4137
You're welcome!
Private equity.
Sybau commie
As a guitar nerd, the doubling in series and halving in parallel made perfect sense.
the question is: can we make it in LEGO?
18:43 Dude lost a bet or got pass out drunk with his "friends" (one eyebrow).
18:27 REVERSIBLE This is the most important point to make this unique, and it is glossed over.
I assumed this, because otherwise it would not be such a special case, but the longer they went without actually saying it, the more I wondered if was just stored tension that was freed by a "trigger".
Thank you for re-iterating this. I thought the “trick” was that there was already stored energy in the mechanism, and the timestamp you linked to somehow didn’t register the first time I watched
It's like the spring and rope setup in the beginning except the middle string spontaneously turns into a spring, making it "longer" then the "slack rope" that how i envisioned it conceptually
While not a stored tension, it seems like instead it is built up as you pull it in this case, making the thing naturally reversible
Actually there is tension (better said energy) stored in the tree middle pieces (or the soft config). When the middle piece snaps it 'frees' the energy and engages the harder configuration which is transfered into tension (elastic energy) of the hard springs if displacement stays constant or in elevating the mass (potencial energy) if force stays constant. While very counter intuitive there is no physics bending. The snapping is the trigger but it only has one equilibrium position unlike most triggers that have two (a light switch has two rest positions: on and off) that i the clever bit so it can be reversible. The snapping piece only has one rest position: short. The force required to go from short to long is like in 16:00 with the shape of a cane: goes from 0 to a peak and down again without reaching 0 (now that i see that graph is wrong it should go down to zero again for a piece to have two rest positions as rest position dont requiere any force, ie force = 0)
TLDR: the piece that snaps acts like the trigger with only one equilibrium position
Yup the reset is the main mechanism, the rest are just tugging it with different spring tension
The only frustrating thing about this is how much sense it makes, and how hard it is to articulate. This is an AMAZING example of "easier done than said."
The sponsorship transition was kind of crazy.
it is a good feeling when you really understand a veritasium video
The way Veritasium is incorporating new producers and decreasing Derek's workload, while increasing the quality and quantity of videos that get out for us, is a genius move.
The channel has been sold to private equity so Derek doesn't completely own the channel anymore. There probably trynna phase in new hosts so the channel isn't entirely dependent on him and they can reduce the risk
stop yoinking my sploinky, bro...
11:39 I live there! Voronezh mentioned yay!
8:58 everytime Google Maps suggest a faster route
So this time steve mold did not get dereked. He was the first one to make a video on this
no up and atom was 3 years earlier still, and who knows, maybe someone else was 3 years earlier still.
If this guy was my high school physics teacher, I would have paid soooo much more attention in class 😂
03:00 just like when they put resistance in wires if it's in series it'll give more resistance and if we connected it as parallel it'll give less resistance
Thanks for writing this so I don't have to 😁
The Title is going to change 1000 times in the next week
and the thumbnail
Click it and it gets shorter
A way to milk more views from one video. Has been done on other channels in the past too. Veritasium jumped on the bandwagon some time ago, I have noticed it as well.
@ErikZiakis that not the whole point of a youtuber's career
Thumbnail has already changed once in the first hour that ive noticed
can we acknowledge steve mould and his demonstration of the spring and strings too? he did a brilliant demo
He has joked about "getting Derek'd" while working on a project because they have similar interests, but seeing Derek wholesale copy a video that came out a while ago is kinda weird.
Why Steve and not Jade? Her video did the same thing years earlier.
My grandpa always told me if I kept pulling on it I would go blind, now I have to worry about it shrinking 😩
10:14 send this to every city planner on the planet...
Wanna hear something funny? There are more cities that have grown naturally than the planned ones. Still I agree that all of them should know about that paradox, just wanted to share this fact.
@ーーーーーー-g2bgrown naturally only to have sections demolished and paved over for that faster 1 minute section.
10:52 Perfect example of a crash on the highway. It comes to a stop and people use planes and fly. 🤔
That's hilarious 😂
the ultimate prefishing hook,goes between the hook and line,when the fish bites it pulls back suddenly catching the fish.where is my nobel prize?
A self-setting hook so you don't have to wait for the nibble and then jerk it manually. I award you the Nobel Prize.
Can’t believe that guy left his eyebrow at home that day
15:25 Carbon fiber hulls on submersibles also have a breaking point you cannot continue to gradually and gracefully delaminate.
Haha nice reference
21:54 has the mechanism inadvertently snapped and stolen his eyebrow 😂
Lmao good one
The traffic example feels like a prisoner's dilemma generalized to more than 2 players.
Induced demand!
Yes, definitely a form of collective action problem.
@nostroadsplease That's not induced demand. The number of cars on the road is the same. Induced demand is not responsible for every bad thing in traffic.
Spring experiment:
In uncut state, the tension was along a straight line with the springs in series. Say the total extension was x, then by F=kx, both springs expand by x/2 unit length. For weight W, x will be (W/k).
In cut state, the tension was along two springs in parallel. Since the springs are equal, weight W is divided equally on both, ie, weight on each is W/2. So again, by F=kx, x=(W/2k).
Clearly, W/2k < W/k, so the extension would decrease for the same weight in parallel connection of springs! Maths!
this is the earliest ive been here.
Samee
Don't respond to the bots. They want your attention. If you say something back to them, you're letting them win. Just report the bots and move on.
That is awesome! Is 3D model available to print it yourself?
Or just buy it, would be so cool
It's really strange that the Chinese have not copied it yet, no Temu version so far
1:04 Just casually chilling outside the Rijksmuseum?
he sure did
Dat dacht ik!
I noticed that European switches appear in the video too.
Who's Rick and why does he have a museum
The guesses the people did really makes me think they had 350 day summer breaks
Derek knows we stay awake till 12 am only to watch the physics, that's why he scheduled this 6 hours ago.
He has hacked yt algorithm, thus the frequent changes after posting
Yeah i do
10:23 secret option 3: buy a motorcycle, drive 2x the speed limit, use the 1-minute connecting highway as a shortcut from hwy a to hwy b, arrive at destination in 26 minutes
Yep just casually break the space time continuum 😊
i like the way you think - lets call those highways autobahn ;D
yeah u cannot understand mathematical models. u are the kind of guy being asked how is the more efficient way to carry a cube and u would just carve it into a sphere cuz it's easier, fact that it about CARRYING A CUBE, doesnt concern u.
@charon7320you must be fun at parties
@charon7320 Oh okay, thinking outside the box, coming up with unconventional ideas most people wouldn't consider, is a flaw and weakness, cool cool.
Pulling out has never been less risky❤❤
I just watched the explanation and I was correct!
18:36, the springs go from series to being in parallel so yes it's a reversed version of the paradox but it's actually a one to one case for the demostration with springs and ropes so no need to put it in reverse
20:29 So you can change the stiffness without changing the lenght. Thats new.
mine shrinks after i pull it too
PRPLXD_xx means he is jorking it
PRPLXD_xx Masturbation
PRPLXD_xx now you have done it you fake. Who hears 'jorking' a lot?
Mine grows at first but then shrinks after a while
Are we deadass 💔
Absolute brilliant video 👍
Shorts be like:
This is the reason why this is one of the most outstanding channels in the internet ever existing. Insanely well crafted explanations which enable us to combine and summarize own fields of thought in such a beautifully structured and comprized way.
So you got sold, plan to tell us about it?
The lesson is not to start destroying roads out of some misplaced fervor that it will cut travel times, but to not build a network of roads that resemble 8:23.
"The more you try to pull out, the more it is pulled in." Sounds about right 😂