Lecture Three: The Chemical History of a Candle - Products of Combustion (4/6)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 июн 2016
- Bill Hammack presents Lecture Three of Michael Faraday’s lectures on The Chemical History of a Candle. A free companion book helps modern viewers understand each lecture - details at www.engineerguy.com - as does a commentary track and closed captions for each lecture.
►Free Companion book to this video series
www.engineerguy.com/faraday
Text of Every Lecture | Essential Background | Guides to Every Lecture | Teaching Guide & Student Activities
In these lectures Michael Faraday’s careful examination of a burning candle reveals the fundamental concepts of chemistry, while at the same time superbly demonstrating the scientific method. In this lecture Faraday investigates one of the products of combustion produced by a candle - water. From water he produces hydrogen and oxygen, whose properties he will investigate in more detail in the next lecture.
LINKS TO OTHER VIDEOS IN THIS SERIES
► Lectures
(1/6) Introduction to Michael Faraday’s Chemical History of a Candle
• Introduction: The Chem...
(2/6) Lecture One: A Candle: Sources of its Flame
• Lecture One: The Chemi...
(3/6) Lecture Two: Brightness of the Flame
• Lecture Two: The Chemi...
(4/6) Lecture Three: Products of Combustion
• Lecture Three: The Che...
(5/6) Lecture Four: The Nature of the Atmosphere
• Lecture Four: The Chem...
(6/6) Lecture Five: Respiration & its Analogy to the Burning of a Candle
• Lecture Five: The Chem...
► Bonus Videos: Lectures with Commentary
Lecture One: A Candle: Sources of its Flame (Commentary version)
• Commentary Lecture One...
Lecture Two: Brightness of the Flame (Commentary version)
• Commentary Lecture Two...
Lecture Three: Products of Combustion (Commentary version)
• Commentary Lecture Thr...
Lecture Four: The Nature of the Atmosphere (Commentary version)
• Commentary Lecture Fou...
Lecture Five: Respiration & its Analogy to the Burning of a Candle (Commentary version)
• Commentary Lecture Fiv...
►Subscribe now! ruclips.net/user/subscription_...
►Become an advanced viewer of Engineer Guy videos - help evaluate early drafts
www.engineerguy.com/preview
COMPANION BOOK DETAILS
The companion book is available as an ebook, in paperback and hardcover - and for free as a PDF. Details on all versions are at www.engineerguy.com/faraday
Michael Faraday’s The Chemical History of a Candle
with Guides to the Lectures, Teaching Guides & Student Activities
Bill Hammack & Don DeCoste
190 pages | 5 x 8 | 14 illustrations
Hardcover (Casebound) | ISBN 978-0-9838661-8-0 | $24.95
Paper| ISBN 978-1-945441-00-4| $11.99
eBook | ISBN 978-0-9839661-9-7 | $3.99
Audience: 01 - General Trade
Subjects
SCI013000 SCIENCE / Chemistry / General
SCI028000 SCIENCE / Experiments & Projects
SCI000000 SCIENCE / General
EDU029030 EDUCATION / Teaching Methods & Materials / Science & Technology
This book introduces modern readers to Michael Faraday’s great nineteenth-century lectures on The Chemical History of a Candle. This companion to the RUclips series contains supplemental material to help readers appreciate Faraday’s key insight that “there is no more open door by which you can enter into the study of science than by considering the physical phenomena of a candle.” Through a careful examination of a burning candle, Faraday’s lectures introduce readers to the concepts of mass, density, heat conduction, capillary action, and convection currents. They demonstrate the difference between chemical and physical processes, such as melting, vaporization, incandescence, and all types of combustion. And the lectures reveal the properties of hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon dioxide, including their relative masses and the makeup of the atmosphere. The lectures wrap up with a grand, and startling, analogy: by understanding the chemical behavior of a candle the reader can grasp the basics of respiration. To help readers understand Faraday’s key points this book has an “Essential Background” section that explains in modern terms how a candle works, introductory guides for each lecture written in contemporary language, and seven student activities with teaching guides.
Author Bios
Bill Hammack is a Professor of Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering at the University of Illinois-Urbana, where he focuses on educating the public about engineering and science. He is the creator and host of the popular RUclips channel engineerguyvideo.
Don DeCoste is a Specialist in Education in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Illinois-Urbana, where he teaches freshmen and pre-service high school chemistry teachers. He is the co-author of four chemistry textbooks. 
Наука
I love how often faraday is like "we have some water here. I can prove it's water by dropping potassium in it." Like I understand the limitations of the time and that he's trying to prove conclusively that it is water quickly in a lecture setting. It's just funny that the solution to that problem is a comically violent reaction.
Faraday seems to have really loved blowing stuff up with potassium.
Faraday was a genius
Lesson I got from this: Don't use water to put out a potassium fire
* Don't use water to put-out *any* metal fire. ;)
:)
You, Minute Physics as well as SciShow and watching various lectures from the Royal Institution have really opened my eyes to the beauty of the sciences, and I cannot thank you enough for that. I wish high schools taught more interesting aspects of the sciences such as the ones you and the others cover so often, maybe then more young teens would be hooked on science. I waited until college to really immerse myself in the sciences, and I regret not doing it sooner. Thank you for being an inspiration!
I didn't realize Faraday was a fan of Diet Coke.
He is trying to lose some weight.
+engineerguy haha!
@6:33 "these bottles are made of cast iron."
bill those are housings for fragmentation grenades 😂
They're grenade shaped but they definitely aren't from real grenades. Cast iron wouldn't be a good frag grenade anyway because it wouldn't produce sharp thin shrapnel
@@elthomas_ If you also saw the way the cast iron blew up, you could see that it only spilt into about 5-6 parts. A frag grenade would have to split into 50+ pieces, a lot more than what Bill Hammock used.
These lectures are so calming compared to the rest of the RUclipss
Much of what makes these lectures so admirable despite the brilliant content is the orator who is an adept performer and the gentle editing to direct the viewer's attention. Had these not been constructed with care and craft, the outcome of their presentation might be dimmed.
I absolutely love these lectures. Thank you for all the effort you have put into this!
Love it! My high school chemistry teacher did the bubble demo shown at 13:30. A few of us went on to become chemical engineers :-)
I love it how by lecture 3 all who stayed are really interested and all the bullshitters got filtered
Rushiano r/Gatekeeping
Don't reply to the comment with the subreddit, that's cringy as fuck.
These lectures are just great. You did an awesome job on these.
I think I found one of the revisions of the original text: "Indeed, in former times, balloons used to be filled with this gas." When Faraday died, they were still using hydrogen for that, no?
Very poetic narration! Hats off.
i fall asleep listening to this guy. his voice is sooo soothing
Thank you so much for doing these lectures and demonstrations, my (homeschooled) children are loving them and we're using it for our term science curriculum.
I Wonder if Faraday wore safety glasses...
These series are wonderful! It would be wonderful if you could go over Newton's experiments on light too.
7:23 there is now acetone all over the place...
Indeed there way: it was a mess ... and we did it at least twice!
The odor must have been luxurious. :)
Sure, but you can make the mess and the odor go away with a match.
I could watch this all day
Just found your vlog. I believe you have captured the lyric verses found in Dr. Faraday's 'The Chemical History of a Candle' and his scientific intent exquisitely. I am listen and following along with Dr. Faraday's original text with delight.
Cheers,
Mark
**********************
+Mark Beeunas i hope you are using the book we wrote ... PDF at www.engineerguy.com/faraday
Yes Sir. Thanks
Just after the potassium experiment;that look on your face! kid in the candy shop.
How hard was it to stay 'in character'?
+timholith45 hard. In general these where quite hard to film. I had to say words that were not my own while doing something -- if you watch my other videos I don't often do much, we let the animations do the heavy lifting.
I think you did a great job of staying in character (although I'm not sure how many takes you did).
I feel you speak quite quickly, it might be easier to be more natural at a slower pace.
you are the best, I love your channel
Amazing.
I love this series, although I must admit while I admire you staying true to Faraday's original wording I'm not a fan of the flowry language. I can understand it, but not as easily as if more modern phrasing was used.
Isn’t there at least some Carbon Monoxide also thrown off by the incomplete combustion of the candle as well ? I.E. like an oil or gas furnace, generator, or oven ?
2:23 Would you not get that much condensation on the ice vessel, if the ambient air was humid? Without a control test side-by-side, how can Faraday's statement be confirmed?
I love it 🎉
These are beautiful videos. Can't wait to subject my kids to them.
Just did
@@lars_of_the_north very nice
I love it 😻💖
I love it 💕
Is the electricity experiment a new addition or did Faraday really do that one? I didn’t think such electricity machines were around back then.
Water is by far the most fascinating and fundamental chemical
how come he doesn't take into consideration the possibility that the water was condensed from the air?
He skipped that question and its relevant tests as he did by explaining that the gas he separated was hydrogen rather than proving it.
I don’t understand what he means by the water drop at the bottom of the container with ice in it is due to the flame, when that condensation would form whether or not there was a flame underneath the container.
I love it
I'm not sure if I heard this right, but does this mean regular bubbles out of my sink also make a bang when exposed to flame? Or is that mixture in the bowl somehow made with excess hydrogen? If it's just h2o can I reproduce it with a match and some soap? Might just try it.
Those bubbles were made with hydrogen and oxygen, the components of water. it is only "excess" hydrogen in the fact that it has not yet combined with the oxygen also present to make water. The product of that bang was water, combined from the free hydrogen and oxygen gas in the bubbles.
The regular bubbles from your sink contain only air. While this contains oxygen and trace amounts of hydrogen, there is not enough hydrogen to produce a 'bang' with the addition of a flame. The only reason his bubble ignited in such a way was the gas in those bubbles was two parts pure hydrogen, one part pure oxygen. The composition of the bubble itself of H2O plays no part in the combustion of the gases.
candles, the best way to hold a flame
Woah.. cubic inch of liquid water = cubic foot of steam? Is that a crazy coincidence or the foundations of NIST standard unit of measurement?
Actually neither. Because the vapor could expand throughout the whole volume. It's pressure will be proportional to it's temperature also. So Faraday might just have said that part to make things easy to imagine.
Is there any substance that would be able to contain the expansion of water to ice? Or is that truly impossible?
Rubber, or any other watertight material capable of expanding by 8%.
Where does the hydrogen come from to make the water? The wax I presume, but this is not made explicit.
Indeed it does!
The wax of the candle is made from a mixture of hydrocarbons. The compounds contain both carbon and hydrogen that arrange into the carbon dioxide and water during combustion.
ELI5..The water escapes the iron because it's bigger when frozen?
What happens if you freeze the water, inside a container that IS strong enough to hold it. Will the resulting ice be forced to be that much denser...and sink in water ?
I think the point is that you will not have a container that is strong enough to contain the pressures produced inside and out. The pressure that is built up inside the container from bringing the vapor back to liquid is too strong for the container to remain structurally sound aka your "container" will fail every time.
So, if i place a drop of water inside a meter thick steel block, and freeze it, it will break open the block of steel ?
@@UninstallingWindows Nope, the steel with just take the pressure and prevent the water from successfully freezing, leaving you superchilled water which will freeze and eject itself the moment the lid is removed.
speak plainly, wizard!
He is actually reading from Faraday's lectures, so these are not his own words
What do you mean when you say steam? Do you mean water vapor, or steam? Because steam is invisible and you only get it through heat and pressure. Do you mean when you say steam, to say water vapor?
He said in his intro that he tried to keep it as close to the original language of the lecture as possible, so I would imagine that distinction was one made after Faraday's time.
where is the phlogiston. I want to learn about phlogiston
I think I missed it, but, where does the hydrogen comes from in a candle?
+Andrey Kim good question: it comes from the candle wax. It is a hydrocarbon.
Thank you! So, when heat is applied, hydrocarbons break apart into hydrogen and carbon, hydrogen facts with oxygen producing water and heat (because breaking things apart requires energy, but combining things produces energy (I don't understand why or how...)), and carbon hangs around, getting heated, and that produces light.
Thank you for these lectures! I now suddenly understand what "hydrocarbon" means, and know more about how it burns, and why we use hydrocarbons as fuel.
@@Afaik777 Electric forces are not that easily broken apart that they become free. So no, the hydrogen and carbon do not break apart from one another (unless you fragment them apart with very high forces like in a cyclotron).
It is more so that the particles are agitated enough by heat that they ram into each other - oxygen ramming into the hydrogen or carbon part of the hydrocarbon (candle) molecule, that the distance is close enough for the electric clouds to swap over into a more stable state so new bonds are formed in favour of the old ones.
The more stable bonds can be thought of as 2 pieces of magnets coming together and snapping together at the last moment, producing sound and movement whilst losing potential energy in the process. The movement and sound can be thought of as heat and sound energy when on the microscopic level.
On top of that, at the microscopic level change in electron excitation releases additional energy in the form of electromagnetic waves, some of which fall into the visible wavelength we call light.
Turns out faraday was a typical chemist: this is a candle, this is how it burns. Now let’s blow some things up.
Your just a scientist until you cross the wanting to blow things up line it seems, than you become a chemist
I find all of your videos highly interesting. Well... with the possible exception of the diapers.
I wonder how they got easily accessible ice back in the day for such experiments, considering the fact that they didn’t have freezers.
They did have winters
Ice was harvested in the winter and stored in cellar like conditions or thick walled buildings, covered in saw dust.
Oo look! It's a coulombic explosion caused by negative surface tension! Look at those Rayleigh pillars!!!
Isn't the collapse of the bottle more due to temperature change than phase change? Or am I missing something?
When the vapor rises from the water in the bottle it will, on average, be at 100 degrees C. When the lid is capped, and the bottle is put in the ice bath, the water vapor in the bottle cannot be cooled further -- it is already at the temperature which admits a phase transition.
8:00 - I think the more accurate term here is to say that the ice is 'less dense'. I don't think the mass or weight changes so the ice still weighs the same as its same quantity in water - it just has more volume.
Regardless, this is still an excellent video series and I am always happy when I see another Engineerguy video.
Audio seems messed up about 13 minutes in.
I just played the last 3 minutes or so and it seems fine to me ... what kind of device are you on?
Huh. Must have just been a once-off fluke. Seems fine after all!
I'm glad to hear that ... and always welcome comments or questions about playback. Is the only way we can learn what is wrong.
At 2:55 Bill says "water remains always the same as either a solid, liquid, or fluid state." I believe he meant to say "gaseous" instead of "fluid."
Good observation ... but ... that is Faraday's original language. I think that was more common usage at the time ... I looked it up in the Oxford English Dictionary and they list: "Having the property of flowing; consisting of particles that move freely among themselves, so as to give way before the slightest pressure. (A general term including both gaseous and liquid substances.)"
You're right! Thank you for the reply! I was only thinking about the phase diagram of water. I absolutely love your videos. Thank you for your hard work! I'm working on a degree in chemical engineering and your videos make me excited for the work I'll soon be doing. They help me look forward to the light at the end of the tunnel. Thank you.
I'm scratching my head here, how can one electrolyse water into hydrogen and oxygen when water does not conduct electricity? Anyone please?
Peter Peterson good question! The hydrolysis of pure water is a redox reaction driven by electric current. The hydrogen is reduced and the oxygen is oxidized. So there is a flow of electrons but those electrons flow and become a part of the molecules. You might also assume that an intermediate step is the formation of various ions containing partially redoxed O and H varieties.
as far as I am concerned water itself does not conduct electricity, so in this sense only impure water ie a substace mixed with water in solution, will conduct electricity. In other words, to apply the phrase the electrolysis of water is incorrect as it is the substance added to the water that electrolyses!
Love the videos but that "slowmotion" must be the worst i have ever seen :D
Roses are red
Violets are blue
What you are looking for is at 7:22
11:05
FIRST (4/6)
12:25 Hindenburg :-0
🤩
I was completely with you until you made a cast-iron ice grenade, Man, chemistry class in the 19th Century must've been lit.
9:43 So cute...
7:37 what the heck
that face tho
This man needs to explain the major benefits of carbon dioxide to the climate change zealots.
11:24 but i can't see hydrogen
you neglected to state the various stages of ice. all ices beyond ice II are denser than liquid water at 4C
anyone 2019? :)
Me
@@engineerguyvideo XD
You should talk more simply, like in your other videos.
+Tyler Clanders is this meant to be ironic? I cannot tell.
No lol, and it's not meant as an insult of these videos either. It just seems like you are going out of your way to talk poetically instead of a more direct and simple approach.
+Tyler Clanders you know these are Michael Faraday's words from the 19th century ... Not my words ....
Ah that slipped my attention I just re watched the first one. Thanks I thought it seemed weird how you were talking compared to all your other videos, I just assumed you wanted it to sound more aesthetic.
Great lecture. Wish he took time to breath, it seems very unnatural to talk like that.
@engineerguyvideo and @theslowmoguys collab series when?
Damn, just freezing broke cast iron apart.