Hi friends! Thanks so much for watching this video. I'd like to thank the sponsor, Skillshare - check out Skillshare Premium for free at this link: skl.sh/parthg11201 Also, if you enjoyed this discussion of spin then feel free to subscribe to my channel for more fun physics content. As always, thank you for your wonderful support!
The way I like to think about spin is that it's just some inherent property of a particle, like mass. But unlike mass, which is a scalar, spin is a vector quantity (i.e. 3 components), which obey the same maths as angular momenta do!
I tried a lot of spin explainer videos and sites, this here is the best one on internet (it is amazing that you uploaded the video right when I was having problem with the topic)
These are the most useful videos I have seen anywhere. They use simple direct explanations and examples, and also discuss possible misconceptions. Even though I am retired after teaching Physics for 33 years, I still like to see how other people teach these concepts, and as I said, these are the best I have seen. Anyone who wants to gain a solid education in the basics of physics can do so with these videos.
I suspect that Parth's hair is a quantum system. It exists in a superposition of states, only collapsing into a particular style when observed on RUclips.
Ive watched this and your video on "Why Spin Matters" and now understand Spin more thoroughly than from any other source Ive found in *years* of trying to understand this thing!
This is applying to electrons with a negative charge so we use the “left hand rule”. It essentially reverses the outcomes of the right hand rule used for positive particles
@@RussellSubedi angular momentum is a a vector quantity. Charge is a scalar that is applied to it. Thus, changing the sign of the charge would flip the vector around making the RHR backwards
@@josephtraverso2700 But doesn't that make the magnetic dipole moment of the electron positive for positive angular momentum, but that and the angular momentum must have opposite sign? I'm having problems phrasing it, but I hope you get my question.
I'm an English teacher but I read philosophy on my own. I also read about quantum to make a deeper view of the universe. Now, I'm reading Beyond Weird by Philip Ball. When I don't understand some difficult parts like spin, I watch these suggestive videos. They are amazing for us beginners. Thanks a lot.
Firstly, thanks a ton for the detailed discussion on this topic! It all makes sense except at 10:18: Why not stop at -1/2 h since you have already hit negative here?
5:44 I wish you would write a book. Your explanations are clearer and more intuitive than any of the popular physics books I’ve read. Please consider it!
can we consider that diffraction also happens due to heisenberg uncertainty principle. cause we can also think that photons angular momentum changes (bends) due to decrease in distance in double slit experiment. can it happen like that? this is a question from your diffraction video.
partly yes, i believe, constraining spin in light is polarization, and as far as i remember from a feynman lecture the diffraction event can be explained in the double slit experiment by HUP. As you constrain the possible positions the particle can take, by tightening the slit, and as (∆h/4π ≤ ∆x.∆p) , then a sufficiently small gap requires a larger momentum variance in order to mantain the equation true, so its direction increases in spread.
I came to your channel last 10days and now I see your explanation of topic in simple ways. Wish my school teacher, college professor taught physics in such intuitive ways. Great explanation of each topic. Can you make separate video on quantum states? N, l, m and s, electonic configuration etc.
first time yt algo recommended a vid thats 10mins from its upload rather than 10 yrs and im not even sub to this channel yet. anyways good video here 👏
Amazing content man ! :D Thanks you very much for sharing ! I'm a total noob didnt even graduate but i'm wondering is the spin actually "carrying" the energy of the particule or is it only a way to describe a behaviour of a particule that fits both quantum mechanics and special relativity ? I hope my question makes some sense ^^'
4:44 They _aren't_ actually spinning. They're doing _something_ that's sort of analogous to spinning, hence the name, but not actually spinning. We know that because if they were spinning they'd having to be doing so thousands of time faster than the speed of light.
I’m reading The Amazing Story of Quantum Mechanics by James kakalios & I found this concept so interesting & came across your channel. Thank you for explaining this 🙏🏼 I’m a nurse but I wanna go back to school for physics now 😤All of this is so fascinating
Very cool! I was thinking about the spin of an electron and how it makes it change its path in the presence of a magnetic field. And that's exactly what happened on tube TVs!
Nice video. Fun fact-Nothing in the universe rotates on its axis even the earth,if u think hard u would get that as earth is made up of atoms,molecules and compound they revolves together in a particular direction making it look like rotation on axis on a macroscpic level🙃
I don’t think he knows. And I don’t think mainstream physics has a clue either. And it bugs me that people like this can’t be more honest that they don’t have the foggiest idea how everything fits together. They like to present themselves as know-it-all experts.
Thanks for the video, but although you say a few times “but the particle is not actually spinning, it just behaves as if it’s spinning”, you don’t answer the very obvious question which is “why are you so insistent that the particle is not actually spinning?”, I would really appreciate if you could answer this.
So theres two reasons I've heard, with the second making the most sense: 1) its a point particle, meaning that there is no surface/volume to do the spinning; 2) one "revolution" of spin does NOT return it to its original position. It actually takes two revolutions, and they call this a Spinor. There is a video by PBS Spacetime on Spin and spinors thats really good, I suggest watching it
@@kidzbop38isstraightfire92 thanks. I think I watched that PBS video. But whilst I appreciate the spin 1/2 characteristic rules out something simple like a spinning top, I don’t see why it necessitates making the leap to thinking of spin as an abstract property that has no physical meaning, I.e there is not something going around and around with a twist
@@ajhcornwall agreed on why it doesn't rule out a physical spin...I actually think there is a physical spin (granted, I'm a casual physics follower so I dont know what I'm talking about), but I guess the point is that it doesnt follow conventional spin rules, according to most physicists.
Wolfgang Pauli said regarding quantum mechanics, "the best that most of us can hope to achieve in physics is simply to misunderstand at a deeper level"
@@ajhcornwallI had the same thought. It seems as tho someone made a calculation a long time ago and said "if it were spinning, the surface has to be moving faster than the speed of light" so it can't be. But they assumed it was a sphere for that calculation. As far as I have found there are no other reasons to say spin isn't actually rotation, but I could just be wrong.
b/c all fields (particles) transform as some representation of the Lorentz group (that's math). Physically, it means it's the geometric thing that is compatible with special relativity, i.e., has no rest frame and has the same physics, regardless of motion.
Question : to know weather an electron is spin up or down ie: spinning clockwise or anti clockwise dont you have to know which part of the electron is the top surely the direction of spin reverses if the observer stands on their head (so to speak)
Just a thought. Can an electron possibly be a wave on a string describing half a wave on one complete loop of the string. Then measuring the spin at any one state would also give the anti-phase state of the wave(180 degrees). Hence the crest of the wave would be time dependent(I.e. phase).
Hey I was hoping for some intuition about why the spin causes this behavior in a magnetic field. How does special relativity explain the spin property as you mentioned?
A simple way to look at it is that a moving charge creates a magnetic field, just like in an electromagnet. That's all happening because of the electrons flowing through the circuit. Same is true with a single electron, since it has charge and a kind of movement even at rest, it constantly has its own little magnetic field. This is called the 'electron magnetic dipole moment' if you want to check it out.
I have a simple analogy that can easily explain this concept. Imagine a sphere. Now imagine the sphere turning. That is spin. Except, it's not a sphere and it is not turning
I have a question in case of torque- can a single force generate torque or is there multiple forces needed to generate torque?? Please answer my question 🙏
This is how "Spin UP and Spin DOWN" can be explained versus the weird Quantum Mechanics popularized version (weird Stern-Gerlach interpretation). Here is the link to the explanation and the experiment that anyone can do: ruclips.net/video/yKbDCy7htXo/видео.html
Hey, I like your videos. I want to one thing and that is, " Rutherford model big mistake was Maxwell law which says if electron spin constantly it will lose power and fall inside nuclease" I want to know the deep of these theory
That’s saying if electrons orbit the nucleus, they would lose energy as radiation and “fall” into the nucleus. That’s how we know electrons don’t orbit atoms. But quantum spin is different. That’s why De Broigle thought that electrons were standing “waves” instead. Like photons, electrons are also subject to wavelike behavior.
@3:15 In your video. the angular momentum vector for the cricket ball is incorrect and does not follow the rules of a vector product or so called “right hand rule”.
I have a question.When a electron absorbs a photon does it gain the spin angular momentum of the photon on top of its spin angular momentum? Basically do you add the 2 spins to get the total spin?
No! It is only the total angular momentum that is conserved! Spin is just one part of this, the other being “orbital” angular momentum. The electron will absorb the photon and remain as a spin 1/2 particle but maybe gain some orbital angular momentum!
Reduce h / ( mass * radius ) / speed of emf = fine structure constant. Not mentioned here. However, many that explain this question the speed of the electron (hundreds or even million times faster than the speed of light). Not true. Below 1%. As shown here, Dirac factored in the fine structure in his equation.
( 1.054571817e-34 / ( 9.109382902843941771e-31 * 5.291772085936e-11 ) ) / 299792458 fine structure constant in natural units, α = e^2 / 4π (divide this by 12 and you'll get one and what is visible to us in the universe). In fact, there are 8 components needing 4 more to become visible (exchange).
Thank you, finally :') This is what a high school teacher, a chemschool teacher and 3 college professors couldn't manage to tell me really? :') I mean they probably told me the most of it but I always got the story of yeaa it's called spin but it's not really spinning and it's a magnetic constant of sorts. Which is all nice and stuff but the little detail that slipped there is that it's a result of this implicit angular momentum, that clears up the entire picture for me :')
Out of curiosity I wanted to know since we know that ocean water contains salt and we know salt water conducts electricity fairly well Then what if we insert high voltage electrodes in th ocean would it conduct electricity and if yes then till how far can it conduct As it seems absurd to assume that we can conduct electricity through an ocean across continent but can find a scientific reason why not
is this correct? Spin is a quantum mechanical property of electrons, which can be compared to a kind of "rotation," but it is important to understand that this "rotation" is not like the rotation we are familiar with in everyday life. Electrons have two possible spin values, often referred to as "up" and "down" (commonly written as +1/2 and −1/2). Although we use the term "spin," it does not refer to an actual physical rotation but rather to an internal quantum mechanical property. Two electrons cannot have the same spin and be in the same orbital, which means that each orbital can hold a maximum of two electrons with opposite spins. You might wonder why there can be up to 8 electrons in some energy levels when only two electrons can occupy each orbital. This is because each energy level, also called a shell, consists of multiple orbitals. For example, in the first shell, called the K shell, there is only one orbital, so it can hold only 2 electrons. In the next shell, the L shell, there are four orbitals (one s-orbital and three p-orbitals), so it can accommodate up to 8 electrons. Orbitals are regions where it is probable to find electrons. You can think of them as small "rooms," and each room can contain two electrons, one with spin-up and one with spin-down. Btw im 15 so dont jugde
If the wave function collapses when you measure the spin in one direction, then why are you even able to measure it in a perpendicular direction, because the wave function has already collapsed? Or did the wave function only collapse in the direction you measured it in and it still exists in the perpendicular direction?
I watched a video earlier today relating to quantum computers and spin I have to say that was a far ore intuitive explanation which I could grasp. If I'd have seen this first I feel lie I'd be confused as ever lol. Example talking about states of angular momentum being either whole or half states, 1 over 2 = half state... OK. 3 over 2 = half state... Egh? You need models bro, she made models out of card board and junk. Lol She had a laser and abit of quartz, a cave man quantum computer she threw together. That said appreciate the sentiment thank you for the video
Bro but can we relate spin with shape of the object like in one book it is given that if spin is 1 then the object would look similar after one rotation if 2 then half rotation but how to deal it in the case of electron is there any shape with repeats itself after 2 complete turns Thank you love your videos
In part it is because it is massless. Massless particles are only permitted 2 spin states (“degrees of freedom”) according to quantum field theory. The same would be true for the graviton if it exists! It should have 5 spin states as it would be a spin 2 particle but this is reduced to 2 on account of it being massless.
A big NO here! Stern-Gerlach device is like applying a hammer to a coin tossed and spinning in the air. It WILL end Face or Tails up after being slapped with the hammer, but it tells is nothing about its actual free spin in the air - only that it was a little-bit-more-Face-up for example so that's why the hammer forced it to be Face-up. Same with Stern-Gerlach device, when you shoot electrons thru it, they can have any spin, but when passing thru the magnetic field of the Stern-Gerlach device depending on if their spin was a little-bit-more-UP(or Down) they'll end in on of the two extremes depending on the orientation of the MEASURING DEVICE! So is it a product of a bad** experimental method? Yes, absolutely! And also the Heisenberg uncertainty principle has nothing to do with this. It's just about limitation of our math method, which unfortunately is embedded in one of our most powerful math methods (Fourier Transforms) and for some reason many scientists think that Math IS Reality, which it simply isn't no matter how powerful it is. So it's best to say Stern-Gerlach device is our best method we have to measure particles' spin even though it's very limited. And that Heisenberg uncertainty principle only shows the limit of OUR ABILITY to know something about particles, but about their actual REALITY! Being able to operate under limited information and with imperfect methods is great skill, and in all of our history we've been doing just that (to different degrees), but don't mistake our limitations for limitations of reality! ** bad - like how Democracy is bad. There are plenty examples of its weaknesses and failures, but it's still the best government system we have.
What I dont understand is that this "intrensic angular momentum" is caused by a spinning dipole thus creating the up or down direction of the magnetic field.. buuut.. how can a point particle have a dipole?? You cant have a positive and negative side of something that doesnt have sides....
Spin can be anything. Who knows about the axis of rotation of those particles therefore, there could be infinite number of spins for a single particle. Wouldn't you agree? Does that make sense to you??
Curious, at 5:27 you state that as soon as a measurement the electron wave function collapses. Why is it that the wave function collapses (or gets disturbed) yet in the quantum eraser experiment they at like their measurements, instruments, splitting crystal, mirrors/lens doesn't have ANY effects on photons! Therefore, they can say with certainty that they're something spooky going on. Yet, why doesn't the splitting crystal, half-silver mirror and lens have any "unknown" effect on they experiment? If you influence something, you have changed the natural nature of that thing. You may not know HOW you changed it, but you manipulate it, you changed it! I would like to see and hear your thoughts of the of the quantum eraser experiments. Do you think, half-silver mirrors, lens, splitting crystal have any "unknown" effects on the quantum eraser experiments?
Fucc, yeah, finally I'm starting to comprehend more (which means I'm not really getting anything because that's what happens when you're trying to figure out quantum mechanics...?). Whatever. There we go physics degree. I've been preparing my tears for you.
According to the Right Hand Rule. Grab a globe, with the north pole facing up, spin an normal so that we see the east coasts first: Spin up. Reverse the direction of the globe's rotation, and we see the west coast first.Spin Down. Change direction again and we are back to spin up. Now turn the globe upside down while its spinning, we still see the east Coasts first. But again :Spin Down So there are clearly two physical yet different manifestations of spin up and two for spin down This is obvious to a child... why is it NEVER discussed?
In a job interview ,sometimes it is asked to write three forms of Heisenberg uncertainty principle.I thought that they asked just to confuse the candidate🤭🤭.. I really did not know about its third form.. Thank u Mr
If you didn't mention that special relativity being compatible with quantum mechanics I would never have known. I am not surprised that fermions and bosons have this half spin difference. I came to this video thinking that spin is some way affects these two groups of particles. My hypothesis was leaning towards the effect of spin on mass.
I am coming to the conclusion that up/down spin is like up/down quarks, or even positive and negative charge; they are behavioural descriptions, not explanations.
didn't like this video man, but it's not about you. it's the subject! Finally got know who's that guy that shows up at pbsst every second episode. Keep it up
you just explained clearly in a 12 mins video something my well paid professor cannot explain in a full semester. something seems to be wrong with the system
Agreed. If you can't explain something you are either a poor communicator, or, you don't actually understand it. Try explaining it so that your grandmother understands it. Tell me its angular momentum doesn't help. Telling me about quantum entanglement doesn't help. Just tell me what it actually is. Telling me its called spin but that the particle doesn't spin is massively unhelpful.
Hi friends! Thanks so much for watching this video. I'd like to thank the sponsor, Skillshare - check out Skillshare Premium for free at this link: skl.sh/parthg11201
Also, if you enjoyed this discussion of spin then feel free to subscribe to my channel for more fun physics content. As always, thank you for your wonderful support!
Dude. This was awesome. Keep it up
I guess you are an Indian?
Hi Parth, awesome videos. I had some questions regarding your video on diffraction. Is there any way to address you personally? thanx heaps
mr. parth can u make a new video its already been one week
i mean i wanna learn something new
Nice explanation. Well done!
Thanks Arvin, love your videos! :D
And i love both of your videos.. A big Thank you and love from India.
Hey Arvin!
Love your vidoes!❤
Llove you Arvin
Two finest physicist 🤩
The way I like to think about spin is that it's just some inherent property of a particle, like mass. But unlike mass, which is a scalar, spin is a vector quantity (i.e. 3 components), which obey the same maths as angular momenta do!
that works for integer spins.
Mass isn't an inherent property of particles though.
@@spikkelkip8128 Mass is internal momentum
For the simplest non-trivial representation, spin 1/2, spin is a spinor.
I tried a lot of spin explainer videos and sites, this here is the best one on internet (it is amazing that you uploaded the video right when I was having problem with the topic)
Me: "gonna learn today what spin is "
Someone : "what is spin?"
Me: 🤷
Also every physicist : 🤷♂️🤷♂️
Everyone - 🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️
These are the most useful videos I have seen anywhere. They use simple direct explanations and examples, and also discuss possible misconceptions. Even though I am retired after teaching Physics for 33 years, I still like to see how other people teach these concepts, and as I said, these are the best I have seen. Anyone who wants to gain a solid education in the basics of physics can do so with these videos.
Thank you so much
You gave me hope!
I read your description and you seem like the worlds most unlikable and close minded person.
Omg..the evolution of ur hairstyles is funny man😂..
I suspect that Parth's hair is a quantum system. It exists in a superposition of states, only collapsing into a particular style when observed on RUclips.
@@tmhood 😂
Ive watched this and your video on "Why Spin Matters" and now understand Spin more thoroughly than from any other source Ive found in *years* of trying to understand this thing!
3:08 using the right hand rule, shouldn't up be counterclockwise while down be clockwise?
This is applying to electrons with a negative charge so we use the “left hand rule”. It essentially reverses the outcomes of the right hand rule used for positive particles
@@josephtraverso2700 Shouldn't angular momentum be independent of charge?
@@RussellSubedi angular momentum is a a vector quantity. Charge is a scalar that is applied to it. Thus, changing the sign of the charge would flip the vector around making the RHR backwards
@@josephtraverso2700 But doesn't that make the magnetic dipole moment of the electron positive for positive angular momentum, but that and the angular momentum must have opposite sign? I'm having problems phrasing it, but I hope you get my question.
@@josephtraverso2700 thanks buddy
Please do the Dirac equation
Yes please!
I'm an English teacher but I read philosophy on my own. I also read about quantum to make a deeper view of the universe. Now, I'm reading Beyond Weird by Philip Ball. When I don't understand some difficult parts like spin, I watch these suggestive videos. They are amazing for us beginners. Thanks a lot.
You explain physics better than anyone else on RUclips. Point blank
That disallowed spin 0 photon NEEDS its own explanation!
gauge invariance gobbles it up.
Firstly, thanks a ton for the detailed discussion on this topic! It all makes sense except at 10:18: Why not stop at -1/2 h since you have already hit negative here?
Oh, I think I get it! By negative limit, you mean the negative counterpart of the maximum positive momentum, right?
@@yilizhang790 i have the same doubt and i think u r right bro 👍
I had the same question
holy grale what a yt cannel feels great to have found u!!!
5:44 I wish you would write a book. Your explanations are clearer and more intuitive than any of the popular physics books I’ve read. Please consider it!
can we consider that diffraction also happens due to heisenberg uncertainty principle. cause we can also think that photons angular momentum changes (bends) due to decrease in distance in double slit experiment. can it happen like that? this is a question from your diffraction video.
partly yes, i believe, constraining spin in light is polarization, and as far as i remember from a feynman lecture the diffraction event can be explained in the double slit experiment by HUP. As you constrain the possible positions the particle can take, by tightening the slit, and as (∆h/4π ≤ ∆x.∆p) , then a sufficiently small gap requires a larger momentum variance in order to mantain the equation true, so its direction increases in spread.
@@vitorgracia5113 thanks
I came to your channel last 10days and now I see your explanation of topic in simple ways. Wish my school teacher, college professor taught physics in such intuitive ways. Great explanation of each topic.
Can you make separate video on quantum states? N, l, m and s, electonic configuration etc.
first time yt algo recommended a vid thats 10mins from its upload rather than 10 yrs and im not even sub to this channel yet. anyways good video here 👏
I come hete because I wanted yo understand more about the muon g-2 experiment and in order to understand that, have to understand "spin" first😂
It's just like attending to my college quantum class, but more juicier and spicier.
Thanks. Wonderfully explained.
Amazing content man ! :D Thanks you very much for sharing ! I'm a total noob didnt even graduate but i'm wondering is the spin actually "carrying" the energy of the particule or is it only a way to describe a behaviour of a particule that fits both quantum mechanics and special relativity ? I hope my question makes some sense ^^'
The BEST explanation I've found so far. Succint, precise, no fancy effects/graphics. Brevity is the soul of wit!
4:44 They _aren't_ actually spinning. They're doing _something_ that's sort of analogous to spinning, hence the name, but not actually spinning. We know that because if they were spinning they'd having to be doing so thousands of time faster than the speed of light.
I’m reading The Amazing Story of Quantum Mechanics by James kakalios & I found this concept so interesting & came across your channel. Thank you for explaining this 🙏🏼 I’m a nurse but I wanna go back to school for physics now 😤All of this is so fascinating
It definitely possible, one of my friends in my year at uni did a full medical degree and worked as a doctor for 2 years then switched to physics
Thank you so much. This really help me understand better especially electron spin 👍😀
Very cool!
I was thinking about the spin of an electron and how it makes it change its path in the presence of a magnetic field.
And that's exactly what happened on tube TVs!
Thanks Parth 💜
Angular momentum
Nice video. Fun fact-Nothing in the universe rotates on its axis even the earth,if u think hard u would get that as earth is made up of atoms,molecules and compound they revolves together in a particular direction making it look like rotation on axis on a macroscpic level🙃
Semoga bnyk skses dgn channel ini!
Yes, that is all well and good, but "what" exactly is spin? And why do electrons have to spin around twice in order to spin around once?
I don’t think he knows. And I don’t think mainstream physics has a clue either. And it bugs me that people like this can’t be more honest that they don’t have the foggiest idea how everything fits together. They like to present themselves as know-it-all experts.
@@ajhcornwall Oh, I think he knows. He just doesn't want to tell us because he thinks we can't handle the truth.
What do you think of Vivian Robinson’s particle model that describes spin?
You’re amazing! 🙌🏼
Great video, thanks!
Just say No to silly hair-cuts, OK?
"Superposition"? Um, no.
Thanks for the video, but although you say a few times “but the particle is not actually spinning, it just behaves as if it’s spinning”, you don’t answer the very obvious question which is “why are you so insistent that the particle is not actually spinning?”, I would really appreciate if you could answer this.
So theres two reasons I've heard, with the second making the most sense: 1) its a point particle, meaning that there is no surface/volume to do the spinning; 2) one "revolution" of spin does NOT return it to its original position. It actually takes two revolutions, and they call this a Spinor. There is a video by PBS Spacetime on Spin and spinors thats really good, I suggest watching it
@@kidzbop38isstraightfire92 thanks. I think I watched that PBS video. But whilst I appreciate the spin 1/2 characteristic rules out something simple like a spinning top, I don’t see why it necessitates making the leap to thinking of spin as an abstract property that has no physical meaning, I.e there is not something going around and around with a twist
@@ajhcornwall agreed on why it doesn't rule out a physical spin...I actually think there is a physical spin (granted, I'm a casual physics follower so I dont know what I'm talking about), but I guess the point is that it doesnt follow conventional spin rules, according to most physicists.
Wolfgang Pauli said regarding quantum mechanics, "the best that most of us can hope to achieve in physics is simply to misunderstand at a deeper level"
@@ajhcornwallI had the same thought. It seems as tho someone made a calculation a long time ago and said "if it were spinning, the surface has to be moving faster than the speed of light" so it can't be.
But they assumed it was a sphere for that calculation.
As far as I have found there are no other reasons to say spin isn't actually rotation, but I could just be wrong.
Need to know why spin occurs
b/c all fields (particles) transform as some representation of the Lorentz group (that's math). Physically, it means it's the geometric thing that is compatible with special relativity, i.e., has no rest frame and has the same physics, regardless of motion.
Didn't understand that concept 10 minutes ago now i do, thanks
Imagine it's a ball and it's spinning - except it's not a ball and it isn't spinning
3:16 isn't your convention for the direction of the arrow (i.e. left-handed) opposite to the usual one? 🤔
Question : to know weather an electron is spin up or down ie: spinning clockwise or anti clockwise dont you have to know which part of the electron is the top surely the direction of spin reverses if the observer stands on their head (so to speak)
The wilder the hair, the more trustable the science source.
Boy you are amazing physics guy ♥️
Just a thought.
Can an electron possibly be a wave on a string describing half a wave on one complete loop of the string. Then measuring the spin at any one state would also give the anti-phase state of the wave(180 degrees). Hence the crest of the wave would be time dependent(I.e. phase).
Hey I was hoping for some intuition about why the spin causes this behavior in a magnetic field. How does special relativity explain the spin property as you mentioned?
Thanks for the video btw
A simple way to look at it is that a moving charge creates a magnetic field, just like in an electromagnet. That's all happening because of the electrons flowing through the circuit. Same is true with a single electron, since it has charge and a kind of movement even at rest, it constantly has its own little magnetic field. This is called the 'electron magnetic dipole moment' if you want to check it out.
I miss information how somebody came up with 1/2 spin. Referring to Stern-Gerlach experiment do not explain anything.
I have a simple analogy that can easily explain this concept. Imagine a sphere. Now imagine the sphere turning. That is spin. Except, it's not a sphere and it is not turning
HAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH
@@JAUNEtheLOCKE Hey, I took the liberty of going through your channel. I must say, you're very fucking talented it's unbelievable. How old are you????
Nice, and not too dumbed down.
Hi Parth, awesome videos. I had some questions regarding your video on diffraction. Is there any way to address you personally? thanx heaps
love ur content thnx
I have a question in case of torque- can a single force generate torque or is there multiple forces needed to generate torque??
Please answer my question 🙏
Just the thing is that I am doing a general thesis and please can you explain genearal relativity in like real depth??
This is how "Spin UP and Spin DOWN" can be explained versus the weird Quantum Mechanics popularized version (weird Stern-Gerlach interpretation). Here is the link to the explanation and the experiment that anyone can do: ruclips.net/video/yKbDCy7htXo/видео.html
Really helpful, thank you!
You are the best:)
we wand the motion in one and two dimensional with your good teaching test :)
In case you don't know it's 100 years anniversary of Sterm Gerlach Experiment today
Hey, I like your videos. I want to one thing and that is, " Rutherford model big mistake was Maxwell law which says if electron spin constantly it will lose power and fall inside nuclease"
I want to know the deep of these theory
.. Interested
That’s saying if electrons orbit the nucleus, they would lose energy as radiation and “fall” into the nucleus. That’s how we know electrons don’t orbit atoms. But quantum spin is different. That’s why De Broigle thought that electrons were standing “waves” instead. Like photons, electrons are also subject to wavelike behavior.
thank you :D
@3:15 In your video. the angular momentum vector for the cricket ball is incorrect and does not follow the rules of a vector product or so called “right hand rule”.
I have a question.When a electron absorbs a photon does it gain the spin angular momentum of the photon on top of its spin angular momentum? Basically do you add the 2 spins to get the total spin?
No! It is only the total angular momentum that is conserved! Spin is just one part of this, the other being “orbital” angular momentum. The electron will absorb the photon and remain as a spin 1/2 particle but maybe gain some orbital angular momentum!
Reduce h / ( mass * radius ) / speed of emf = fine structure constant. Not mentioned here. However, many that explain this question the speed of the electron (hundreds or even million times faster than the speed of light). Not true. Below 1%. As shown here, Dirac factored in the fine structure in his equation.
( 1.054571817e-34 / ( 9.109382902843941771e-31 * 5.291772085936e-11 ) ) / 299792458
fine structure constant in natural units, α = e^2 / 4π (divide this by 12 and you'll get one and what is visible to us in the universe). In fact, there are 8 components needing 4 more to become visible (exchange).
I have another basic question:- Why is there so many exceptions in Chemistry?
Thank you, finally :') This is what a high school teacher, a chemschool teacher and 3 college professors couldn't manage to tell me really? :') I mean they probably told me the most of it but I always got the story of yeaa it's called spin but it's not really spinning and it's a magnetic constant of sorts. Which is all nice and stuff but the little detail that slipped there is that it's a result of this implicit angular momentum, that clears up the entire picture for me :')
But it doesn't have angular momentum, just to clear any confusion
Out of curiosity I wanted to know since we know that ocean water contains salt and we know salt water conducts electricity fairly well
Then what if we insert high voltage electrodes in th ocean would it conduct electricity and if yes then till how far can it conduct
As it seems absurd to assume that we can conduct electricity through an ocean across continent but can find a scientific reason why not
We can and we do. It's called Single Wire Earth Return and is occasionally being used for DC transmission through undersea cables.
Is 1/2 hbar the energy of the electron from its spin?
WE ACHIEVING THE GOLDEN RATIO WITH THIS ONE 🗣🗣🗣🗣🗣🗣🗣🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥💯💯💯💯💯💯💯
If an electron is held still or made to stop spinning ,does it disappear?
is this correct? Spin is a quantum mechanical property of electrons, which can be compared to a kind of "rotation," but it is important to understand that this "rotation" is not like the rotation we are familiar with in everyday life. Electrons have two possible spin values, often referred to as "up" and "down" (commonly written as +1/2 and −1/2). Although we use the term "spin," it does not refer to an actual physical rotation but rather to an internal quantum mechanical property. Two electrons cannot have the same spin and be in the same orbital, which means that each orbital can hold a maximum of two electrons with opposite spins.
You might wonder why there can be up to 8 electrons in some energy levels when only two electrons can occupy each orbital. This is because each energy level, also called a shell, consists of multiple orbitals. For example, in the first shell, called the K shell, there is only one orbital, so it can hold only 2 electrons. In the next shell, the L shell, there are four orbitals (one s-orbital and three p-orbitals), so it can accommodate up to 8 electrons.
Orbitals are regions where it is probable to find electrons. You can think of them as small "rooms," and each room can contain two electrons, one with spin-up and one with spin-down.
Btw im 15 so dont jugde
bro ur mad or what...u ur self is understanding what ur explaining ....up down....clock wise anticlock wise......left right......
I think you might have flipped the direction of the spin at 3:13, by the right hand rule
THE ARROWS ARE POINTING IN THE WTONG DIRECTION
Wrong**
@@danishsamir8807 *wtong**
@@nuclearnyanboi wrong***
@@danishsamir8807 I bet you'te 14 yeats old. Maybe 18 max
@@nuclearnyanboi I'm 15.
If the wave function collapses when you measure the spin in one direction, then why are you even able to measure it in a perpendicular direction, because the wave function has already collapsed? Or did the wave function only collapse in the direction you measured it in and it still exists in the perpendicular direction?
Why are particles with fractional spin only fermions and why are particles with whole number only bosons?
I absolutely love your videos Parth!
Just to tell you, I am 12 and I just adore your videos!
Im 12 and think u dumb
u know what quantum physics is ?
I watched a video earlier today relating to quantum computers and spin I have to say that was a far ore intuitive explanation which I could grasp. If I'd have seen this first I feel lie I'd be confused as ever lol. Example talking about states of angular momentum being either whole or half states, 1 over 2 = half state... OK. 3 over 2 = half state... Egh? You need models bro, she made models out of card board and junk. Lol She had a laser and abit of quartz, a cave man quantum computer she threw together. That said appreciate the sentiment thank you for the video
Bro but can we relate spin with shape of the object like in one book it is given that if spin is 1 then the object would look similar after one rotation if 2 then half rotation but how to deal it in the case of electron is there any shape with repeats itself after 2 complete turns
Thank you love your videos
please do a video explaining why 0 spin isn't allowed in photons.
In part it is because it is massless. Massless particles are only permitted 2 spin states (“degrees of freedom”) according to quantum field theory. The same would be true for the graviton if it exists! It should have 5 spin states as it would be a spin 2 particle but this is reduced to 2 on account of it being massless.
A big NO here!
Stern-Gerlach device is like applying a hammer to a coin tossed and spinning in the air. It WILL end Face or Tails up after being slapped with the hammer, but it tells is nothing about its actual free spin in the air - only that it was a little-bit-more-Face-up for example so that's why the hammer forced it to be Face-up. Same with Stern-Gerlach device, when you shoot electrons thru it, they can have any spin, but when passing thru the magnetic field of the Stern-Gerlach device depending on if their spin was a little-bit-more-UP(or Down) they'll end in on of the two extremes depending on the orientation of the MEASURING DEVICE!
So is it a product of a bad** experimental method? Yes, absolutely! And also the Heisenberg uncertainty principle has nothing to do with this. It's just about limitation of our math method, which unfortunately is embedded in one of our most powerful math methods (Fourier Transforms) and for some reason many scientists think that Math IS Reality, which it simply isn't no matter how powerful it is.
So it's best to say Stern-Gerlach device is our best method we have to measure particles' spin even though it's very limited.
And that Heisenberg uncertainty principle only shows the limit of OUR ABILITY to know something about particles, but about their actual REALITY!
Being able to operate under limited information and with imperfect methods is great skill, and in all of our history we've been doing just that (to different degrees), but don't mistake our limitations for limitations of reality!
** bad - like how Democracy is bad. There are plenty examples of its weaknesses and failures, but it's still the best government system we have.
What I dont understand is that this "intrensic angular momentum" is caused by a spinning dipole thus creating the up or down direction of the magnetic field.. buuut.. how can a point particle have a dipole?? You cant have a positive and negative side of something that doesnt have sides....
Spin can be anything. Who knows about the axis of rotation of those particles therefore, there could be infinite number of spins for a single particle. Wouldn't you agree? Does that make sense to you??
The imaginary action of an imaginary particle.
Curious, at 5:27 you state that as soon as a measurement the electron wave function collapses.
Why is it that the wave function collapses (or gets disturbed) yet in the quantum eraser experiment
they at like their measurements, instruments, splitting crystal, mirrors/lens doesn't have ANY
effects on photons! Therefore, they can say with certainty that they're something spooky going on.
Yet, why doesn't the splitting crystal, half-silver mirror and lens have any "unknown" effect on they
experiment? If you influence something, you have changed the natural nature of that thing. You
may not know HOW you changed it, but you manipulate it, you changed it! I would like to see and
hear your thoughts of the of the quantum eraser experiments. Do you think, half-silver mirrors,
lens, splitting crystal have any "unknown" effects on the quantum eraser experiments?
Fucc, yeah, finally I'm starting to comprehend more (which means I'm not really getting anything because that's what happens when you're trying to figure out quantum mechanics...?).
Whatever.
There we go physics degree. I've been preparing my tears for you.
Quite bold of you to address a topic like this lol
According to the Right Hand Rule.
Grab a globe, with the north pole facing up, spin an normal so that we see the east coasts first: Spin up.
Reverse the direction of the globe's rotation, and we see the west coast first.Spin Down.
Change direction again and we are back to spin up. Now turn the globe upside down while its spinning, we still see the east Coasts first. But again :Spin Down
So there are clearly two physical yet different manifestations of spin up and two for spin down
This is obvious to a child... why is it NEVER discussed?
In a job interview ,sometimes it is asked to write three forms of Heisenberg uncertainty principle.I thought that they asked just to confuse the candidate🤭🤭..
I really did not know about its third form..
Thank u Mr
If you didn't mention that special relativity being compatible with quantum mechanics I would never have known. I am not surprised that fermions and bosons have this half spin difference. I came to this video thinking that spin is some way affects these two groups of particles. My hypothesis was leaning towards the effect of spin on mass.
Could someone explain me why we consider going a step further to get -3/2 when dealing with n=3/2? Why don't we stop at -1/2? 10:21
I am coming to the conclusion that up/down spin is like up/down quarks, or even positive and negative charge; they are behavioural descriptions, not explanations.
didn't like this video man, but it's not about you. it's the subject! Finally got know who's that guy that shows up at pbsst every second episode. Keep it up
you just explained clearly in a 12 mins video something my well paid professor cannot explain in a full semester. something seems to be wrong with the system
It could be more basic from learning point of view !! Anyways I enjoyed it.
Agreed. If you can't explain something you are either a poor communicator, or, you don't actually understand it. Try explaining it so that your grandmother understands it. Tell me its angular momentum doesn't help. Telling me about quantum entanglement doesn't help. Just tell me what it actually is. Telling me its called spin but that the particle doesn't spin is massively unhelpful.
May you explan about bose-EISTIEN equation.you can also send some through email
Hey ....I loved your explanation.....
Btw are you an Indian¿??
Heeeyy parth !! Why is no further with -ve allowed for spin . And why did you subtracted one and not added one...?
What you are telling sounds like real physics, not like that super simplified stuff, that is taught by other RUclipsrs
3:16 Curl the fingers of your right hand in the direction of the spin and your thumb gives the direction of the spin vector.
Thanks gyro