So, for practical purposes, the Mpemba effect can seem to happen, but in a severely controlled lab, it doesn't...unless a thermocouple is purposely misplaced...but only because we don't really understand everything that goes into the process of water freezing. Very clear...
@@rashidisw that is a fair question but for many tens and purposes the ice creams are still equal in many ways but as the last test veritasium talked about explained that even slight discrepancy can change the results for instance if you put in a few grams more or less suger for an example but things like convection could an explanation or contributer aswell
@@rashidisw I can think of a number of significant ways in which ice cream differs from water. Ice cream is an emulsion with not only various minerals but many different organic compounds like fats and proteins which can change their structure irreversibly when heated up. Pure water heated up to 100 degrees and cooled back down is virtually indistinguishable from water that was never heated up in the first place. Try boiling ice cream and then cooling it back down, it'll never look like ice cream again.
Under controlled situations. However, some other elements make hot water freeze faster, not like cold water. But yeah, it looks like it's not about the water being hot but the environment provoking effects.
@@duvan-solis So basically, every time someone witnessed hot water freezing faster in the past, it was just a coincidence due to environmental variables?
@@mat5473 which could still be useful information to know. I mean knowing how to make things freeze faster would likely be applicable in multiple settings. But it's not an innate property of water.
I always find these kinds of things fascinating. Something so seemingly simple turns out to be far more complicated than we know. And the moment your brain glitches when it suddenly realizes just how amazing something normally taken for granted is, that's an amazing feeling.
@MineSweeper IIRC, it has more to do with the fact that if you take water from your tap, hot water could be more contaminated with unwanted components stemming from the boiler system or heaters. Impact is not significant of course, but generally people take normal water.
This reminds me of something I've heard about Ice melting in salt water. Normally you'd expect it to melt faster with saline content. But because it dilutes the upper layers of the water, makes it less dense, so there's less mixing going on than there would be otherwise, had it melted in pure water. This thin upper layer of less dense water would gradually become cooler as the ice melts, which in turn makes it harder to melt more ice. It's a weird thermohaline balancing act. Without this, the artic ice probably would've been dramatically smaller now.
for those of us that actually churned ice cream by hand why do you suppose we salted the ice outside the churn? to keep the ice from melting so fast lol it also aided in making the ice that much colder to speed up the churning process. it was a big deal to have the family together on the weekends to congregate, eat and making ice cream was a family affair. i so miss those days
test it with your freezer, get 2 dishes with pre-boiled distilled water, make one hotter, add equal amounts of pointy things to them (just add a wet wooden toothpick in each one of them) so no supercooling happens, insulate the bottom of the containers, cover them so no evaporation happens, the water is in dishes so not much convection there, and the water is distilled and boiled so no much gases and salts in there, put them into the freezer and watch what happens from 15 to 15 minutes
@@Incognito-co6og Exaclty so why would you coment that instead of quoting what the contestant said? This way it looks to someone who doesnt know that Gordon said something stupid.
Funny, my wife and I tested this theory this winter (Northern Michigan). We had been talking about hot vs cold freezing for some time ago. We woke up one saturday to find it was -10F (-23C) outside and decided to put two equal glass 2cup measuring cups full of water outside, one hot, one cold. Filled both with tap water, the hottest it would go, and the other with the coldest it would go. Sat them both outside and watched through the window. The cold water cup froze what appeared to be a couple minutes faster. Nothing scientific, just personal observation. We figured doing the test outside, there would be less chance of being off by the freezer temp slightly rising from hot water, and having to pump to get the freezer temp back. Outside would remove that variable, and any variable of the cup sitting next to another frozen object. Both cups were in the shade, and about 3ft apart from each other.
But did you consider that maybe the warm cup was being heated from the presence of the cold cup (which was warmer than ambient temperature) in such close proximity, and thus caused the warm cup to freeze slower? Nah, jokes and science aside, it sounds like you two have a cool marriage. (Maybe because the marriage was hot at the start?)
The problem with your experiment is you used thick glass to encapsulate both bodies of water, and therefor the temperature retention (thermal mass) of the glass continued to affect both bodies of water after they were placed outside. IOW the thermal mass of the hot glass kept the water inside from freezing as fast as it could have. You would have done better to put the two bodies of water in thin plastic bags for a more accurate result. And after what Will Smith did to Chris Rock the other night at the Oscars, I won't dare make any jokes which involves your significant other, but will just commend you both for being able to endure Northern Michigan winters together. ☺
One issue I can see here is that hot water went through some sort of heater, which introduce a lot of extra impurities to the water. This is why you don't use the hot water tap when cooking!
I love love love that your video isn't full of unnecessary sound effects and music. Honestly I'm so sick of the audio hype on the other channels. Thank you for just sharing without all that background noise.
5 possible explanations a.k.a. hypothesis or as stated here proposed mechanisms. While you could argue why even go indepth with these and not just dismiss them and explain why.. it would probably not make much for a video and people usually like to get something explained before you tell them that it isn't really useful .. no .. wait.. maybe not.. :-P
@CG Account He didn't say it was real. He said, "According to the Mpemba effect..." which is accurate. In other words, it's like an optical illusion -- real in a sense, but not real in another sense. I didn't feel misled at all. The storytelling needed that mystery to draw the viewer in and I thought the explanation at the end was satisfying, though his, "Here's what I think..." was egocentric, as if he came up with the solution on his own, which he's done more than once. Scientists, not him, did the hard work and found that the Mpemba effect is not replicable every time and that anomalies cause it. But I appreciate his bringing us these fascinating science factoids/facts/findings.
He clearly states that there is no Mpemba effect; one learns this close to the end of the video at approx 06:40. Seems clear to me: he presents the idea, explores 5 possibilities for its explanation, finds them inadequate, draws his conclusion. Others' confusion confuses me!
The original story even says "to ensure he had a spot, he put his ice cream in while hot" ie earlier than everyone else. So his hot ice cream had time to be cooled down by the freezer before everyone else could put their cooled down ice cream in. If that time was long enough to be cooled below room temperature, then it would have frozen faster.
No. Some of his classmates already put their ice cream in the freezer and he was getting worried that his wouldn't cool down in time until the others would take up all the room, so he put his ice cream in while it was hot. So there was cool ice cream and hot ice cream at the same time in the freezer, and then the hot one freezed faster.
It does exist in real life, since again all the impurities and everything he mentioned would be a part of it. However in a controlled, test environment it doesn't show off? I honestly don't get the conclusion of the video. IRL it clearly works but in lab no?
@@DamienDarksideBlog _"I honestly don't get the conclusion of the video. IRL it clearly works but in lab no?"_ Which, I believe, is pretty much exactly what I said, right?
Can we see an infrared recording of hot water vs cold water being cooled? Then we don't have to keep measuring the temperature of water at specific points with a thermocouple and making measurement errors like this.
Yea.. but .. IR camera has to be calibrated... and the emissivity and reflection of water .. the surface etc.. make this way more inaccurate . I dont even think if u did tbe two as a side by side comparison u could justify it
The infrared camera uses electricity to operate the sensor, which means that the camera sensor has electricity running through it to capture the image. Electricity always generates heat in electronics so that would affect the experiment if the camera was within viewing of the controlled experiment.
@@hunterwilhelm it's ridiculous, because if the camera heating could affect freezing of water, then your PC would be able to burn your house just by heating up
@@hunterwilhelm Easily avoidable by placing the camera in front of a freezer with seethrough door. The problem is elsewhere and someone already mentioned it here. The reflectivity of water etc...
Funny you should say that because as black-hole research tells us everything has information coded in it; for it to disappear thermodynamics would have to be wrong. Then we have the facts that super cooling and crystallization is not well understood, as pointed out in here, so is clearly not easy to tell what resonant waves are doing in water. It is a stretch to claim they don't do something as it is to claim they do, however, the crystallization mystery points at that in some circumstances they do...
+Ramiel You are confusing what black hole information paradox really means. Example take a hard disk and melt it into pool of metal. Now it really has forgot what was written on it. Thermodynamics does not say water have to have memory. In fact, if water would have memory (despite of the fact that it cannot be demonstrated), it would go against homeopathy. Because then water would have memory of absolutely everything it touches, which would make example tap water homeopathic product for and against millions of things. Also super cooling and crystallization are quite well understood, and more over nothing to do with memory of water. Not even water.
He neglected the fact that putting the hot mixture in the freezer cooled it to room temperature faster than his classmates' mixtures, which were left out to cool to room temperature, per Newton's Law of Cooling. It then had time to cool from there towards freezing while his classmates were still waiting for their mixtures to cool enough to put in the freezer per the directions.
Andrea De Domenico All the videos on this channel will have this format (illustrations, greenscreen, etc.), instead, on veritasium, videos will vary more widely (chats with scientists, hands on approach to phenomena explanations, occasional philosophical discussions, etc.); if I understood correctly that is
In 1971, 7th grade science class, we tested this hypothesis as a homework project. In our home freezers, each of us put six Dixie cups of cold water and six of hot water with regular checks of the state of the water. Roughly 30 kids in the class, with 12 cups each, that's 360 samples. As I recall, one kid claimed that he had one hot cup freeze before the cold ones. We all assumed that he was lying because he wanted the attention.
Cold water never boils. It has to get hot before it will boil. To prove this for yourself, put some water in the refrigerator and some water in a kettle on the stovetop and turn it on (don’t forget to turn it on). The water on the stovetop will boil if you turn the heat up high enough. The water in the refrigerator will not boil unless there’s something wrong with your refrigerator. Water boils at 100 degrees Celsius or 212 degrees Fahrenheit at sea level. That’s hot, not cold. I have just used many words to say something that could have been said in one short sentence. I could have used bigger fancier words and it would have been just as dumb. Now I’ll explain why hot water never freezes. Blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah. Water freezes at zero degrees Celsius or 32 degrees Fahrenheit at sea level. That is cold, not hot. In conclusion, cold water doesn’t boil. Hot water doesn’t freeze. This is known as the VTI (Vlad The Impala) effect. 🤪 Of course Aristotle knew it 2,300 years ago. 🤨
@@plur5ever Actually I didn’t know that. I hadn’t heard of that channel. I did see the quotation marks though and I did see the “what?” I figured you were quoting something I didn’t think that you seriously thought cold water would boil. I just figured you were goofing around and I was goofing around too. I didn’t mean anything by it. Peace - Jeff
He added cold water to the hot water in the pot.....he made it warm vs the boiling it was at already. It's like throwing ice in ur hot tea, then being confused that it doesn't stay hot.
The only instance of that I've personally seen was when my grandmother would splash water across the porch (because the duck pooped on it again). But that was a very large concrete porch, and the water spread way out, causing a huge amount of surface area per volume, so it's possible in that instance that most of the hot water could've evaporated, vs only a small percentage of the cold. (It definitely did make a big cloud of steam)
@@kathrynck when you throw the hot water I to the very cold air, it evaporates very quickly into steam, but because the air is too cold to hold that vapor, it almost immediately condenses back into tiny droplets, which are smaller than the original hot water droplets, and therefore freeze faster. It's such a cool effect and requires the air temperature to be below a certain threshold to work.
Star Wars Lore I'm pretty sure it shorts the part of the circuit by connecting things that aren't supposed to be connected. Due to the high conductivity of water
Hello Derek, May I ask why a second channel? I would think that this content would fit on your main channel. So I'm curious what drove you to make a new one. As always, I love your content ;) (my very first video was also about the mpemba effect. But it was my very first video in my life. It was bad! Thanks for this insight about this phenomenon, that's very interesting).
I don't think Derek does this kind of thing without reason. So I'm curious to know what it is. I'm gonna read the comments now (since you added an Edit, I guess there's something interesting)
Scilabus Scilabus Well, he's using another format here. With Veritasium he mostly goes to places, his second channel is a behind the scenes and an 'impromptu' video channel. This seems to follow SciShow and the like format; just one person in front of a blue screen. I'm curious to see if he manages to find interesting topics that haven't been covered by all those channels.
I guess that it may be a more "scientific" chanel where he goes in less details and expects his folowers to have a litle bit more knowlege than on the others. At list it's what it looks like to me. I mean, wouldn't he explain what supercooling is on his other channel? And if that's what it is i'm in, even if I may not understand some topics, I'll just have to search on my own for the litle details I do not understand ^^
Not in a lab. Also they removed the "freezing" and just went with "Get to 0 degrees" which is not what we were looking for, but cool. It works, and science can control it in labs if they try really hard. The video did an absolute piss poor job at the last third.
@@kaleb982010 nah man, i think 0 is like the "grey area" where there is still some liquid and some freezing. solid freeze start at -10. but yeah this is my real life condition, not the controlled environment so maybe there is some explanation needed
@@asphorcata pure water a 0° and 1 atmospheric pressure will freeze eventually. The hot vs cold was simply measuring which freezes quicker. The video does a bad job of differentiating between first to zero and first to freeze experiments.
What about throwing a bucket of water into the air at -40? When the water is boiling, it condenses to snow before reaching the ground, but when it is cold, most of it hit the ground.
Nicholas R.M. when the water is thrown it turns into a mist due to its temperature. As a mist, the water will have a larger surface area and will cool much more quicly.
Yeah, like 'DicksOut' said, I think that has more to do with the fact that the individual steam particles will freeze faster than the water in a more tightly packed liquid state.
A bucket is a terrible idea. Use a cup, you'll achieve finer results. Also, wear gloves. Don't think that the water will freeze instantaneously because if it's hot enough, it can burn and scar your skin.
What we have to take away from this is that scientists couldn’t come up with an answer as to why this happens. Also this contradicts our current knowledge of thermodynamics and finally that it was easier to find a way to negate the effect. So all in all they found it easier to say fuck it and claim that is not a real phenomenon. Way to go science! 😂
Well they basically proofed that it doesnt matter how warm or cold water is for the time it needs to freeze. r at least, it doesn't matter as much as litterly everything around it. So you may or may not be faster with freezing hot water, but you definitly know you would have been if you tried it with cold water in that exact same circumstance. which is funny because people knowing this would still take the chance of beeing faster with warmer water for whatever reason.
@@wingedfish1175 well thats the thing though, it is indeed faster to freeze cold water. To make the decision to use warm water is just nonsense. because it definitly is worse than cold water. It just might not matter if you wanna race against someone with it.
Well it seems to me to be result of an out side source much less than heat plus water cools faster its possibly a combination of multiple easy to reach scenarios to attribute this effect. Instead one explicit answer futher study may yield that for example just spit balling that going to a high/varying pressure; source heated water to a low pressure source a fridge may yield results. Or bubbles increasing top surface increase surface area may freeze faster. Or even better yet what the last study cited that in the direct center doesnt actually change faster just it is perceived since the out side solidify faster. But when you average out the heat then disproves it. Other wise super cooling may actually be the key to the answer. Im no expert by any means but brushing it off weither its true or not isn't going yield a explanation what actually happened
Answer: No but small tweaks like moving the thermocouple causes different rates of freezing which is cool. OK go and have a rest and save the 7min. Or just watch it anyways as it is kinda interesting.
Moving the thermocouple aka a temperature sensor didnt cause the water to freeze at a different rate. They put it in the beaker to see if there were any convection currents present, basically just hot water and cold water mixing to "stir" the water in essence. We don't have any type of sensor to really measure water flow on such a tiny scale in existence although they could've just put a drop of dye. They mentioned the beakers were sealed in some tests and even a drop of dye could fudge the experiment so probably why they didnt try that. Also has to be introduced at the right time otherwise it'll just mix before the water finishes boiling...
Bowl of water at 33° in a plastic dish, bowl of water at 120° in a plastic dish. Put them outside on a freezing day and see which becomes ice faster. It’s the cold water.
so... are there just enough variables that there's a big range of cooling speeds for both hot water and cold water that overlap and allow people to witness hot water freezing faster often enough to be psychologically relevant but not statistically significant
i thought the mpemba effect was because the hot water than the cold water like ice is less dense than water so the freezing took place faster as the expansion was already done. like inflating a semi inflated balloon
He just give a blunt observation. The other guys gave input, I don't think it's about credit but conclusion, each of the guys took the experiment under different circumstances.
That's because there was research data not just observation. Remember, the difference between messing around and science is writing it down (Quote by Myth Busters).
No Google, I don't want to use my real name. but how did he do the comparison ?. when he boil water in mountain, the regular water must be already frozen
the problem is that you basically start the timer for number 1 as soon as you take it off fire, so number 2 should freeze two minutes after number 1 since they both experienced the same source of heat. if number 2 freezes before number 1, then you might need to question the experiment, because wtf changed? air speed? temperature? how does H2O at 100c cools down faster then H2O at 100c that has been out for 2 minutes? would number 1 freeze faster if you heated it back up again to 95C while number 2 was nearing 90c? Aristotle was a very clever man, but his methods were bound to be slightly wrong, physics says Energy in = Energy out.. unless you add or subtract energy. the idea of hot water freezing faster then cold water invites the idea of a perpetual motion machine.
Did an experiment in the winter on this. We filled 2 glasses with tap water, one as hot as possible and one as cold as possible, and threw the water out the window from the first floor. The water from the hot glass turned to powder (snow) by the time it reached ground, not disturbing the snow below. The water from the cold glass didn't change at all and splashed the snow.
I once filled 2 ice cube trays, one with cold water, the other with hot. Put them in a frost free freezer with the cold air blowing on both of them. The cold filled tray definitely had a crust of ice over it first. But if you throw a cup of boiling water into the air in sub zero weather, it will evaporate into a frozen cloud before it hits the ground. Cold water will still be a liquid when it hits the ground. The rapid movement of the molecules in boiling water causes them to separate in the air allowing them to freeze instantly.
Hot water vaporizes more easily at low pressure too it's why water boiling on Mt. Everest never gets hot enough to cook pasta. I bet the places that get sub zero are at high elevation and low atmospheric pressure in the demonstrations. The vapor gives off it's heat more rapidly because of the increased surface to volume ratio of water droplets. It's also why steam burns more badly in a short time than boiling water more heat transferred more rapidly its just the heat going the opposite way. heat of vaporization is why boiling water holds it's temp the extra heat escapes with the vapor. tossing it in the air speeds up the vaporization process and hence heat transfer. the cold water never vaporizes. If you could spray the cold water out of a warm nozzle (so the nozzle doesn't clog with ice ) to match the vapor particle size they would freeze at the same speed.
The whole "throwing hot water evaporates" thing is the same as your breath. In the cold, you can see the warm water vapor in your breath. If the air coming out of your lungs was the same temperature as the outside air, you wouldn't see your breath. The hot water doesn't "freeze" when thrown into cold air. It evaporates very fast (it would evaporate slower in warm air). When most of it evaporates, it might leave a few bits of liquid water which will instantly freeze depending on how low the temperature is outside. If you misted cold water into cold air, it would freeze just the same as the "mist" that's left after most of the hot water evaporates when you throw it in cold air. Hot water DOES NOT freeze faster that cold water. The freezing point of water is always different from collection to collection based on different mineral contents. The Mpemba effect has been observed to be both true and false in controlled experiments. Basically, if EVERY variable is identical, hot water WILL take longer to freeze because it has more energy to dissapate than cold water. But water is never "just water" and that's why sometimes hot water freezes faster than cold water and sometimes it doesn't.
@@themonsterunderyourbed9408 it's very predictable by the triple point on a phase transition graph. It's basic chemistry and physics. Pressure and temperature are key to phase transitions. Also water has hydrogen bonding without which, based only on molecular mass water should be a gas at room temperature. But it is liquid due to the polarity or dipole moment of the water molecule leading to hydrogen bonds. Solutes or dissolved salt ions and other particles in water can effect the phase transitions by interfering with the hydrogen bonds by lowering the freezing point or boiling point at standard pressure for example. The Empemba effect is not a real effect... it's a misinterpretation of the phenomenon of supercooling of the water that was not heated first. Water that is both relatively pure and is in a very smooth sealed container, so there is no nucleation point for a crystal to form can cause this super cooled liquid water phenomenon. Usually the vessel is sealed so the pressure above the liquid drops adding a confounding variable. In Canning food a vacuum seal forms by this drop in temperature and therefore pressure inside the cooling jar relative to the outside when the gasses condense as they cool. The water can sometimes drop below the freezing temperature in this circumstance and remain liquid. It's like a beer from the freezer that instantly freezes when it is opened or disturbed. The alcohol and CO2 are interfering with the hydrogen bonds that also contribute to crystallization. Water when boiled maintains 212 degrees because the extra heat is given off by the phase transition to gas as the hydrogen bonds are broken at the surface tension. Break the hydrogen bonds and cause vaporization. smaller droplets of water have less surface tension as does water being heated. While it is heated the bonds get weaker and weaker until steam can escape. The temp at which this happens depends on the pressure and temperature of the atmosphere on top of the water surface. At zero or much lower pressures the water will boil at much lower temperatures than 212 F at a certain pressure or negative pressure relative to the atmospheric pressure well below 14.7 PSI or 760mm Hg water can boil at room temp. If you put a vacuum pump on a sealed jar of water you can get it to boil at room temperature.
It would be interesting to do the same test with small suspended particulates (diatomacious earth would be a good medium, would not effect the chemistry of the water but provide lots of sharp angles for crystallization to begin). Could be the early heating process left more particulates suspended than the water that was left to cool.
You could probably spend less fine looking at previous experiments and the conditions. In labs, water is all coming from the same source. It's likely they just heated one sample with a hot plate
Since hot water gets cold at an accelerated rate, could it create increased chances of inconsitencies in the water (like holes which would end up freezing), which would begin the freezing effect before cold water creates the inconsistency when freezing? It's much easier to freeze a smaller area than a larger area, right?
True but I think the convection currents caused from the differences in temperature would cause them to even out into a gradient rather than stay in pockets
Wife: "Did you finish making the ice cream?" me: "I sure did" Wife: "where is it?" me: "Well, because of the Mpemba effect triggered a secondary Mandela effect. It was there and now its not"
I learned something from it, the 5 ways of explaining it was actually pretty cool, I knew before that the more heat an object has it loses that heat energy faster(That been like comparing 2000 down to 1000 and 1000 down to 0, the speed of two material cooling down the same amount of Celsius but one with higher temperature will cool faster), but the hot water thing is something I know but don't understand exactly how and why it works like that, simply because u can't possibly under the same condition having a thing that has more heat energy than another one, and have them both cool down to a certain amount of heat energy. So this video did help, it is also good to know. Btw, Scientists are pretty BS at times like this, because you simply can't prove it, therefore the conclusion is it doesn't exist... Yet... When you can it is true, no matter how stupid it seems. Also any effect might one day come in handy, and when you think about this, if people can spend years talking about toilet paper orientation, and where to start eating a banana, I don't see a problem with people trying to explain and uncover the truth behind a thousand years old question that is very interesting and hard.
@@nateman10 You're full of shit. Your clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Scientists don't fucking make stuff up to make it easier for themselves you dumb prick. All this so called documentation was actually wrong and it's actually an extremely complicated thing to describe. You clearly are completely ignorant of science and how science works, so why are you here?
Mpemba effect is most easily observed in the way us Northern folk would prove it. In South Dakota, where I grew up, we would throw cup fulls of water into the air when it was 20 or 30 below zero. Hot water would freeze before it hit the ground whereas cold would not. My hypothesis was that there was greater distance between water molecules when warm, therefore allowing them to radiate out more heat energy faster, without getting in each other's way..so to speak
I don't understand the reason for Mpemba effect not existing after all. Even if there was a study which showed that warm water doesn't freeze faster than cool water it doesn't rule out all these experiments which agreed that there's something like Mpemba effect. It just shows that Mpemba effect might need some additional conditions. The condition might be that cool water was poured to the container, then the other water was boiled and only then poured to another container. So the boiling water was moving more than the cool water and thus the states of waters were not the same. That's probably wrong but it's just an example of a condition for boiling water to freeze faster. The argument about measuring the temperature in different places also don't satisfy me because how improbable would it be for everyone to luckily measure both waters in such spots so that it appeared that the effect takes place. And lastly, I don't think it would break the laws of thermodynamics. It wouldn't mean that water has memory of its earlier states. It would only mean that we're only considering the temperature of the water and not other properties like directions of every molecule. So the water has no memory but contains more information than we assume.
I am no professor in thermodynamics or physics in general, but don't some elements have better conductivity? Like for example copper vs aluminum. I know these are different elements, but let me get to my point. Probably different states of elements release heat faster than others. In this case it's room temperature water vs hot water, which have different energies, so wouldn't it be logical that the hot water releases its energy (heat) faster? When I was a kid, I used to put hot water and cold water in an unsealed ice tray in the freezer and always when I checked on them, the hot water was frozen solid, while the cold water was liquid in the middle and has a layer of ice on the outside. My theory might be wrong, but I want to learn / understand, so easy with the political correct answers / replies. Thanks !
Hot water does indeed release energy faster, but in doing so it reduces the temperature. At some point that temperature will be the same as the starting temperature of the cold water, thus it would cool at the same rate as the cold water. It would then follow the same curve as the initially cold water.
The result only states that hot water does not reach 0C faster than cold water. Not that hot water put in a freezer wont freeze faster than cold water. Due to so many things affecting the actual point of state change, there are literally a fractal's worth of possibilities. It is one of those tricky things that is a little more difficult to picture than it is to describe and is therefore more difficult to comprehend through non-mathematical (non-statistical) means. It doesn't help that water in general does not like to behave consistently on the molecular level. It is very prone to influences that are difficult to negate/control.
This was what I wanted to say, but you put it clearer than I could. I would like to see someone *try* to (and succeed) determine what some of these "additional conditions" are that *will* produce the Mpemba effect that were reported in the past by experimenters that we assume were less careful in their procedures.
This is a great point. We often use approximations that almost match the things we see. Sometimes we forget that it is small things that contribute to the existence of all large things. It _could_ be some quantum scale change in the water that might contribute to this result. Though I rather like the convection hypothesis myself.
so in short Mpemba effect wasnt real because it wasnt because the temperature that affect the speed of water freezing but something else that just happen to be really hard to notice or to be included in the controlled variable? interesting
oh right long time ago I watched a video about mpemba effect and it said we are still not sure yet but that was before 2016 which is when they finally figure it out so yea
Actually you're not taking into account of explanation 6: Hot water: The thermostat in the refrigerator detected that the temperature is not low enough, and therefore blasted the inside of the refrigerator with cold air, with the compressor running at 100% the whole time Cold water: Refrigerator chills water slowly, running compressor at a lower work load to increase power efficiency.
but theyre putting both containers in the same freezer/fridge, therefore both containers would be blasted with extra cold air and the colder water should still freeze faster
Yes, but in a real life scenario, you wouldn't freeze hot and cold water at the same time in the same fridge. For example, you boil water (water is not safe straight out of tap in most countries) and you are super thirsty, but the water is too hot to drink, therefore you put it in a freezer. ----------- Even in a controlled scientific experiment, they will still separate hot and cold water into two identical freezers or two separate runs with the same freezer. This is because some would argue that the air temperature directly around the cups will contaminate the results.
Let me get this straight: in the first experiment, all Students boiled a mixture of water and cream and one of them (Mpemba) put it in the freezer immediately, while the rest let the mixture "cool down" a bit. Let's say for a quarter of an hour, then all of them put the mixture in the freezer. One and a half hour later, they check their ice cream and only Mpemba s was frozen. And no one at the University realized, that Mpembas mixture was in the freezer for 105 minutes, while the others where only 90 minutes in the freezer and 15 minutes at room temperature??? In which case classic thermo dynamics would predict, Mpembas mixture to be the coldest...
I also wonder if his hot mixture raised the freezer temperature slightly by the time his cooled, leaving the others with a warmer freezer that takes longer.
It was mentioned that Mpemba was pressed for time and wanted to compete or submit his work or whatever it was. This means he finished boiling his after all the other students had already let theirs cool and put it into the fridge. He was pressed for time and put his in after theirs were already cool and his was still boiling hot. A big no-no in the culinary world because you can cause all the other food to thaw and spoil.
lets also not forget that freezers kick on when the temperature rises. they aren't on all the time. in the original observation,the compressor was probably on more than it was when you place an already cooled liquid into the freezer
I assume they accounted for the different time lines. There are other factors. When Mpemba's ice cream went into the freezer, there was only container in there. This single container had far less mass than the surrounding cold environment. It's easier to cool less mass than more. Plus, his container displaced very little cold air. Then when the students added theirs, all of the containers then replaced a whole lot more cold air. And then all their containers had a lot more thermal mass, increasing the temp. of the freezer. And the freezer then had to work harder to bring the temp down, if it even did. So many variables here that apparently weren't considered - or at least discussed.
I've always been highly suspicious of when people tell me this. It has never made any logical sense to me, and your very first chart is precisely what my thinking on the issue has been. Thanks for this.
Keep in mind he says it doesn't exist while stating that it exist and there's the fact there are some other variables that are unknown. Logically we just end up at the starting point without a real clear answer. One more thing, hot water make clear and durable ice while cold water does not.
@@robymaru03 actually, he states that under perfect conditions, the effect does not it exist, there are external forces that can cause a similar result however
@@robymaru03 You can see very clear ice at Lake Baikal in Siberia, and that lake isn't heated. You can see plenty of videos and pictures on it, if you don't want to travel to Siberia to check for yourself.
Certainly hot tea will feel colder than room temperature if you touch it once it has cooled. However, this is because water is a good conductor of heat whereas air is not - this means that air feels warmer than tea (mainly water) even if they are at the same temperature. A good comparison is holding both a metal hole punch and a book, one in each hand - they are at the same temperature (room temperature), but the hole punch feels colder because it takes heat from your hand faster. The same occurs with tea compared to air and other standard domestic items. Very good question - had me thinking then! :-)
Partly psychological. Take a hot cup of tea and an ice cold soda. Leave them both in a room till they have reached room temperature. As we expect tea to be hot, it’s tepidness is exaggerated as appearing very cold. Conversely, the soda appears warm, when in fact they are identical.
lick walls, iron objects and then try the tea again. You are comparing not temperature but the attitude of temperature feeling by your body parts. That is also a reason why hand is quite poor fewer indicator.
I would say the effect isn't one of warmer water reaching 0 degrees faster, but in fact freezing solid more quickly once it reaches zero due to an effect on nucleation.
As soon as I heard about this I thought it might have something to do with the warm water having more energy to allow the molecules to getting into their crystalline form easier
Having tried this I know it's BS, I took cold water from the tap, and boiling water, poured the same among of each into identical pie plates. Put them both outside in sub zero (C) temperature, the cold water froze first, and for confirmation did it again reversing the pie plates and location outside. Each time the cold water froze considerably faster, not even a close race.
Now take warm to hot water from tap and try again. I've tried it also. As far as I know, warm water freezing faster than cold water, is because impurities and not the temperature. Warm water from tap has more bacteria than cold. Ice particles need something to attach themselves to, to be able to form, like bacteria or dust for example. Now if you boil water, it will kill most of the bacteria and therefore will freeze slower. Another similar example is rain. A rain cloud's water particles needs something to grab to, to be able to form bigger droplet. Like bacteria or dust particles.
I haven't tried yet but it may be in the wording, possibly water that had been boiled may freeze faster than water that had never been boiled, if they are the same temperature when they are introduced to freezing temperature.
Now try it again with distilled water and see what happens. Maybe its stuff they put in tap water that messes with the process? Tap water is bad water in many countries, including 1st world ones.
@@Deusaga interesting, actually I used water from an aquifer, known for being some of the purist water in the world. I'm not interested enough to do it again, but you could if your inclined.
I did not expect that twist at the end to be honest :)) I always thought about this effect at a molecular level by considering movement. The molecules in water move around more than the ones in cold water so there's a higher chance of them reaching the sides of the container and lose their kinetic energy by colliding with lower moving, lower temperature molecules. There's also a higher chance of hot water meeting cold water and loosing it's energy this way. It seemed to make sense to me since I usually stir my tea to make it cool faster. Or at least that's what I thought until now anyway.
Yes, I can dismiss the Mpemba-Effect out of hand, because I've tried it several times and there was no such effect in every halfway realistic scenario. I've won all bets against this effect so far and I've tried it in many different setups. Starting with boiling water against fresh tap water. It only worked once in very shallow insulated bowls without cover, where a lot of the hot water evaporated. Much more than 3%. About 15%. So it wasn't miraculous why this 15% less water froze faster later on. Covering it with plastic wrap disabled that and again the cold water froze faster. My guess is that there is no effect.
Ive tried it too...its pure crap that gets repeated in an echo , less than 0.000001% of people have the sort of mind that actually tests this, and then the truth gets treated as a democracy so if the vast majority of idiots believe it..it MUST be true
@@seedmole Actually it is exactly the scientific process. Hypothesis => [Loop: Experiment => Evaluation] => Acceptance or Dismissal This one has failed and looped quite often in every realistic scenario, that I can safely dismiss this hypothesis. Only when I severely rigged the whole experiment in favor of the hot water it worked. And then it simply worked for a different reason. Try it yourself! You actually have to put in some cheaty effort to get it to work. And I bet you won't make it the first times.
The Mpemba effect can only be observed in the right circumstances. At its core, surface area is the main component allowing this effect to take place. Due to a processed called convection, as hot water is chilled, the warm water in the center of the beaker rises to the top of the beaker creating physical movement. The longer this process goes the more it speeds up at a comparably exponential rate. This causes more and more surface area, of the water, to be exposed. However, many other factors can prevent this exponential-flow-process, such as obstructions or even how the beaker is made. Cold water is slow to start this process of convection due, in part, by the fact the water molecules in the cold water are less disrupted by the cold temperatures. This is only my understanding. Edit: I also wanted to add. The best way to cool a constantly heated item is by passing hydrogen molecules over its surface area. Factors such as how cold the hydrogen particles are make little difference in cooling the item. The main component is the passing over of the hydrogen Molecules. So in relation the the mpemba effect; As more and more convection takes place, more and more water is exposed to hydrogen molecules.
I had considered this question back in the early 70s. I did an experiment to measure the time it took for hot water at 185degrees F. vs. water at 40degrees F. Both samples were distilled water in the same type of container and the same amount. The results of my experiment was that the cold water froze first.
The kids pot probably warmed up the freezer before the other kids put their ice cream in, people want to believe that something weird like hot water freezing faster exists because that would show a hole in our basic understanding and that's exciting but I don't believe it's true
@@baseddino when it is supper cold outside like -18 or something. I took hot water from the dispenser and when I tossed n out it turned to snow instantly. Cold water didnt
That is actually a very plausible explanation for the "real world experiments". The freezer's compressor will run full power all the time more or less as soon you put the warm water in. When you put in cold water it will maybe trigger only after a while.
That was my take-away as well: when dealing with perfectly identical samples, there was no mpemba effect. In all other cases one was revealed, and even in the hyper-controlled cases results could occur by adjusting where the thermometer was. So it is likely that there is something about hot water that results in the mpemba effect that isn't the water being hot itself, but is something that is likely to be caused by the higher starting temperature in messy real-world settings.
I've always had the belief that hot water would freeze faster than cold water. I I'm a plumber and I would say every time I've gone to somebody's house where the water line is frozen in the winter time it's 90% of the time the hot side. Sometimes it's both but a majority of the time if it's one of the water lines it's the hot side. I don't know if any of these studies were done on water under pressure if that would change how the water is able to exhaust it's thermal heat versus water that is just at atmospheric conditions. Is there any study done on water in this regard?
I have had the exact same experience at my cabin multiple times. I also figured it had to do with the water pressure becoming lower in the hot water pipe as it cools and so it freezes quicker.
If you're still interested in it, look into the fourth phase of water and/or dr gerald Pollack. That will help give you the answer to how there structure of water is altered during cooling and heating and you should be able to connect the dots.
Hot water pipes freezing has nothing to do with fictitious effects or pressure. Firstly if you're really a plumber you should understand that pipes don't actually burst when they freeze. Not most of the time anyway. They generally burst when someone turns on a faucet or an appliance that uses water that has a frozen section in it's source somewhere. The pressure difference caused on either side of the frozen slug is what causes the pipe to burst at a weak spot, which is not always where the freeze actually is. Pipes freeze when it's cold. When it's cold most people turn on the hot water first to let it get hot first and then add cold water to make it comfortable even though doing the opposite is safer and would prevent the occasional scalding. When the hot water pipe bursts the cold never gets turned on as the home owner heads into the basement to find out why there's no hot water. The hot water pipes tend to freeze before the cold water pipes for the simple reason that pipes don't actually freeze because of the temperature in the basement or outside wall, which is usually not low enough to freeze the water in the pipes. They freeze because of a cold draft hitting the already cold outside surface of the pipes. It may be slight but the heat that transfers from the water through the pipe wall creates a thermal difference around the hot water pipe that will create its own small draft or draw the air currents from an existing draft to it until the imbalance in temperature has gone away. In the houses I've seen inside of the hot water pipe is almost a foot away from the cold pipe. Plenty of space for the standing water in the hot water pipe to create a draft that first cools and then freezes it solid without effecting the cold water pipe.
in peoples fridges maybe, where the higher heat makes the fridge run more and the coils stay cooler longer to remove the heat maybe, but like you said, it defies physics. i think people get confused in the throwing boiling water into extremely cold dry air and it dissipates instantly. cold water doesn't work because it doesn't have the energy to evaporate so quickly.
This is the answer. It's not an experiment about the characteristics of water. It's an experiment about the mechanics of refrigeration and thermostats.
Take Numberphile for example, one of Brady Haran's many channels. He created Numberphile2 for "behind the scenes" footage, basically dividing up every topic into 2 videos. More videos = more views = more money
"Hot water freezes faster than cold wtf" "ok so in every test we just gonna ignore the freezing part cause freezing is heccin weird." then what's the point, really?
1. Most precise and reliable variable is temperature 2. Process of freezing is unpredictable 3. Water freezes at 0° 4. Lets see what happens when water is cooled to freezing temperature 5. if for the sake of experiment they assume that it will freeze at 0°, there is no need to wait for all of it to freeze, making end result hard to reproduce
@@g.ferreira6745 but the questen was not "do hot water cools faster than cold water", but "do it freezes faster". the point is the change in physical state. the whole video is pointless. though it was not reproducible in the last very controlled experiment, in an open system (outside) hot water can rapidly cools down via evaporation. that don't even mess with thermodynamics.
I think Sciencium is more direct/faster content (not sure if google motivated it) Veritasium will remain a hybrid between Science/philosophy and other influences, hence longer 2Veritasium will be similar to Veritasium but include other thoughts, tech, youtube, different format etc vlogging In essence Sciencium focuses entirely on the knowledge, Veritasium dates back from his PhD about HOW we find truth (misconceptions etc), not just on disseminating knowledge
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Mpemba was the ultimate hipster. He froze his ice cream before it was cool.
Benjamin go home...
Hipsters are so passé, and so are hipsters jokes. I mean it would have been funny 2/3 years ago, but nowadays I don"t even care about hipsters.
Don't listen to these guys, puns are great :D You guys are focusing on the wrong part, the funny bit is at the end.
xl pfff that's so lumbersexual
lol this is the second best comment i have read this year...
"I thought cold water was supposed to boil faster than hot water"
-some hell's kitchen episode
That's why I'm here lol
@@lesliee.4525 Dude same lol
😂😂i am here becoz of that
yo wtf. i just watched that clip a while ago, and for some "reason" this pop up in my recommendation. RUclips is surely spying on us.
@@sentane8031 Got you m8
If vsause did this, this would be an hour long video that would include WW2 events.
this guy!
Haha! EXACTLY!
I'd say only 30 minutes
So true
And I'd enjoy every minute.
So, for practical purposes, the Mpemba effect can seem to happen, but in a severely controlled lab, it doesn't...unless a thermocouple is purposely misplaced...but only because we don't really understand everything that goes into the process of water freezing.
Very clear...
Well, in controlled lab its uses most pure water as possible, while in that ice cream making can we truly said it was pure water?
@@rashidisw that is a fair question but for many tens and purposes the ice creams are still equal in many ways but as the last test veritasium talked about explained that even slight discrepancy can change the results for instance if you put in a few grams more or less suger for an example but things like convection could an explanation or contributer aswell
@@link7417 "tens and purposes"
@@rashidisw I can think of a number of significant ways in which ice cream differs from water. Ice cream is an emulsion with not only various minerals but many different organic compounds like fats and proteins which can change their structure irreversibly when heated up.
Pure water heated up to 100 degrees and cooled back down is virtually indistinguishable from water that was never heated up in the first place. Try boiling ice cream and then cooling it back down, it'll never look like ice cream again.
@@link7417 The phrase is "intents and purposes"
I was recommended this because of that hell's kitchen video
" I thought cold water was supposed to boil faster than hot water"
"WHAAAAAAAT????"
@@Ricky911_ he was so confiused he forgot he was angry
I searched for this video bc of that
*sanctuary garden plays*
WHaT?
But steel is heavier than feathers
@Toughen Up, Fluffy *boot stayle es heayviea dan fehdhehs*
ruclips.net/video/N3bEh-PEk1g/видео.html
But there both a kilogram
I really wanna look at the size of it Thats cheating
Buh deyre boath a keilogriem
Ah doon geh it
This man really made me question my intelligence for 6 minutes before he threw in "but oh yeah, this effect doesn't exist"
Under controlled situations. However, some other elements make hot water freeze faster, not like cold water. But yeah, it looks like it's not about the water being hot but the environment provoking effects.
@@duvan-solis So basically, every time someone witnessed hot water freezing faster in the past, it was just a coincidence due to environmental variables?
@@mat5473 Yes.
@@mat5473 which could still be useful information to know. I mean knowing how to make things freeze faster would likely be applicable in multiple settings. But it's not an innate property of water.
Yea that's what I was expecting actually, I was really contemplating and thinking how this just doesn't make any sense
I always find these kinds of things fascinating. Something so seemingly simple turns out to be far more complicated than we know. And the moment your brain glitches when it suddenly realizes just how amazing something normally taken for granted is, that's an amazing feeling.
@Repent or you will likewise perish. No.
There is always more shit going on than we can know
@Repent or you will likewise perish. what on earth does your statement have to do with this video?
If you feel one day that you have discovered something new and unusual, mind it guys... there is always a Greek homie who found it centuries ago. XD
But from this we learn that you can still get it named after yourself
草
@2 Nep8id6 surely you jest
@@marios1861 Hey, don't be calling them Shirley.
There is a verse in the Bible that says there is nothing new under the sun.
"Why are you boiling cold water?"
"Because I thought it boils faster, Chef"
*"...What?"*
There is a good reason to boil cold water, though. Bacteria that live in cold water will die in hot water so you end up with "cleaner" water.
If i remember correctly, gordon ramsay was confused because the girl ADDED cold water to already boilling water to boil faster
@MineSweeper IIRC, it has more to do with the fact that if you take water from your tap, hot water could be more contaminated with unwanted components stemming from the boiler system or heaters. Impact is not significant of course, but generally people take normal water.
@@ewoudjoy True. I never drink hot water from the tap because it tastes awful.
She a lil confused
Vsauce without going off topic 10 seconds into the video, i love it.
Tim Stahel LOL right?
Dude, you made me laugh so much. It's almost too true. :')
Tim Stahel I am the 793 subscriber!
it's veritasium/sciencium... not Vsauce
I love that about Vsauce. Both channels are great
This reminds me of something I've heard about Ice melting in salt water. Normally you'd expect it to melt faster with saline content. But because it dilutes the upper layers of the water, makes it less dense, so there's less mixing going on than there would be otherwise, had it melted in pure water. This thin upper layer of less dense water would gradually become cooler as the ice melts, which in turn makes it harder to melt more ice. It's a weird thermohaline balancing act.
Without this, the artic ice probably would've been dramatically smaller now.
Cool story bro.
@@mann_idonotreadreplies i find it rather cool honestly
for those of us that actually churned ice cream by hand why do you suppose we salted the ice outside the churn? to keep the ice from melting so fast lol it also aided in making the ice that much colder to speed up the churning process. it was a big deal to have the family together on the weekends to congregate, eat and making ice cream was a family affair. i so miss those days
But does cold water boil faster ?
No
You forgot the Lamb sauce!
Actually yes, fr
*FACT:* If you mix hot water with hot ice you get boiled ice and it's the source of all energy.
Oh now you're doin it
So... is that a no? Or a maybe? Or sometimes?
Yeah I'm confused
It's a no, because of thermodynamics.
test it with your freezer, get 2 dishes with pre-boiled distilled water, make one hotter, add equal amounts of pointy things to them (just add a wet wooden toothpick in each one of them) so no supercooling happens, insulate the bottom of the containers, cover them so no evaporation happens, the water is in dishes so not much convection there, and the water is distilled and boiled so no much gases and salts in there, put them into the freezer and watch what happens from 15 to 15 minutes
Check and write down when and which start freezing first then when and which turned 100% solid first
Sometimes. But if everything is properly controlled, no.
"What? " - Gordon Ramsay
I dont get this... It wasnt Gordon who claimed cold water boils faster but one of the contestants...
@@martinbudinsky8912 Gordon ramsay said 'what?' after the terrible logic the contestant gave him.
@@Incognito-co6og Exaclty so why would you coment that instead of quoting what the contestant said? This way it looks to someone who doesnt know that Gordon said something stupid.
@@martinbudinsky8912 bruh
@@martinbudinsky8912 read the video title then read this comment again
Funny, my wife and I tested this theory this winter (Northern Michigan). We had been talking about hot vs cold freezing for some time ago. We woke up one saturday to find it was -10F (-23C) outside and decided to put two equal glass 2cup measuring cups full of water outside, one hot, one cold. Filled both with tap water, the hottest it would go, and the other with the coldest it would go. Sat them both outside and watched through the window. The cold water cup froze what appeared to be a couple minutes faster. Nothing scientific, just personal observation.
We figured doing the test outside, there would be less chance of being off by the freezer temp slightly rising from hot water, and having to pump to get the freezer temp back. Outside would remove that variable, and any variable of the cup sitting next to another frozen object. Both cups were in the shade, and about 3ft apart from each other.
But did you consider that maybe the warm cup was being heated from the presence of the cold cup (which was warmer than ambient temperature) in such close proximity, and thus caused the warm cup to freeze slower?
Nah, jokes and science aside, it sounds like you two have a cool marriage. (Maybe because the marriage was hot at the start?)
@@Considerers was seriously about to blast you so hard hahahaha glad I read that whole comment. Like the way you tied it all together at the end
@@Considerers I'm so glad that the effect really doesn't exist... For his marriage's sake...
The problem with your experiment is you used thick glass to encapsulate both bodies of water, and therefor the temperature retention (thermal mass) of the glass continued to affect both bodies of water after they were placed outside. IOW the thermal mass of the hot glass kept the water inside from freezing as fast as it could have. You would have done better to put the two bodies of water in thin plastic bags for a more accurate result.
And after what Will Smith did to Chris Rock the other night at the Oscars, I won't dare make any jokes which involves your significant other, but will just commend you both for being able to endure Northern Michigan winters together. ☺
One issue I can see here is that hot water went through some sort of heater, which introduce a lot of extra impurities to the water. This is why you don't use the hot water tap when cooking!
I love love love that your video isn't full of unnecessary sound effects and music. Honestly I'm so sick of the audio hype on the other channels. Thank you for just sharing without all that background noise.
I think that's because he and his video content is entertaining by itself and doesn't need to add distractions to his videos.
I have to agree, nothing worse than silly background noise so common on this venue.
@@elchegos Yeah, video games that have music are just compensating for bad gameplay. A great video game doesn't need music.
I especially hate when the stupid background noise and music is 10 times the volume of the speaker
It's real. Here are 5 explanations. So in conclusion... it isn't a real effect and doesn't happen
5 possible explanations a.k.a. hypothesis or as stated here proposed mechanisms.
While you could argue why even go indepth with these and not just dismiss them and explain why.. it would probably not make much for a video and people usually like to get something explained before you tell them that it isn't really useful .. no .. wait.. maybe not.. :-P
CG Account Thanks for that comment. This video hurt my brain.
yeah kinda poor explanation isnt it.
@CG Account He didn't say it was real. He said, "According to the Mpemba effect..." which is accurate. In other words, it's like an optical illusion -- real in a sense, but not real in another sense. I didn't feel misled at all. The storytelling needed that mystery to draw the viewer in and I thought the explanation at the end was satisfying, though his, "Here's what I think..." was egocentric, as if he came up with the solution on his own, which he's done more than once. Scientists, not him, did the hard work and found that the Mpemba effect is not replicable every time and that anomalies cause it. But I appreciate his bringing us these fascinating science factoids/facts/findings.
He clearly states that there is no Mpemba effect; one learns this close to the end of the video at approx 06:40. Seems clear to me: he presents the idea, explores 5 possibilities for its explanation, finds them inadequate, draws his conclusion. Others' confusion confuses me!
You look like that guy from Veritasium
Nevermore Yeah it's Dirk from Veristablium
Nevermore Yes! His name is Dalek, he is Derek's twin.
He's Derek's evil twin!
Yeah! He finally managed to clone himself.
Yeah, just like the guy from Foo Fighters looks like the drummer from Nirvana. Strange world.
The original story even says "to ensure he had a spot, he put his ice cream in while hot" ie earlier than everyone else. So his hot ice cream had time to be cooled down by the freezer before everyone else could put their cooled down ice cream in. If that time was long enough to be cooled below room temperature, then it would have frozen faster.
@Repent or you will likewise perish. Ok
@Repent or you will likewise perish. Allah is asking me to ratio you. Blessed be His name!
No. Some of his classmates already put their ice cream in the freezer and he was getting worried that his wouldn't cool down in time until the others would take up all the room, so he put his ice cream in while it was hot. So there was cool ice cream and hot ice cream at the same time in the freezer, and then the hot one freezed faster.
You must have missed teh rest of the video explaining all the scientific tests to control for all that. Including when Mpemba did his.
@Repent or you will likewise perish. dude.. this is the kind of things you'd wanna say to turn someone away from religion..
I learned that the Mpemba Effect both does, and does not, exist.
Schrödinger's effect I guess
@@kajxqeirscl
That's both true and false. I guess.
🤷
It does exist in real life, since again all the impurities and everything he mentioned would be a part of it. However in a controlled, test environment it doesn't show off?
I honestly don't get the conclusion of the video. IRL it clearly works but in lab no?
@@DamienDarksideBlog
_"I honestly don't get the conclusion of the video. IRL it clearly works but in lab no?"_
Which, I believe, is pretty much exactly what I said, right?
@@xenaguy01 yup same here
Can we see an infrared recording of hot water vs cold water being cooled? Then we don't have to keep measuring the temperature of water at specific points with a thermocouple and making measurement errors like this.
Yea.. but .. IR camera has to be calibrated... and the emissivity and reflection of water .. the surface etc.. make this way more inaccurate
.
I dont even think if u did tbe two as a side by side comparison u could justify it
The infrared camera uses electricity to operate the sensor, which means that the camera sensor has electricity running through it to capture the image. Electricity always generates heat in electronics so that would affect the experiment if the camera was within viewing of the controlled experiment.
@@hunterwilhelm it's ridiculous, because if the camera heating could affect freezing of water, then your PC would be able to burn your house just by heating up
@@hunterwilhelm Easily avoidable by placing the camera in front of a freezer with seethrough door. The problem is elsewhere and someone already mentioned it here. The reflectivity of water etc...
@@martinbudinsky8912 wait i thought thermal vision doesnt see through glass?
OMG don't mention water "memory"! The homeopathy quacks will have a field day.
EEVblog like Nobel laureate luc montigers experiment
+Theresa Quinn
His claimed result have not been independently replicated. Thus they are widely considered pseudoscience.
EEVblog wow Dave watches Veritasium! Gday Dave.
Funny you should say that because as black-hole research tells us everything has information coded in it; for it to disappear thermodynamics would have to be wrong. Then we have the facts that super cooling and crystallization is not well understood, as pointed out in here, so is clearly not easy to tell what resonant waves are doing in water. It is a stretch to claim they don't do something as it is to claim they do, however, the crystallization mystery points at that in some circumstances they do...
+Ramiel
You are confusing what black hole information paradox really means. Example take a hard disk and melt it into pool of metal. Now it really has forgot what was written on it.
Thermodynamics does not say water have to have memory. In fact, if water would have memory (despite of the fact that it cannot be demonstrated), it would go against homeopathy. Because then water would have memory of absolutely everything it touches, which would make example tap water homeopathic product for and against millions of things.
Also super cooling and crystallization are quite well understood, and more over nothing to do with memory of water. Not even water.
He neglected the fact that putting the hot mixture in the freezer cooled it to room temperature faster than his classmates' mixtures, which were left out to cool to room temperature, per Newton's Law of Cooling. It then had time to cool from there towards freezing while his classmates were still waiting for their mixtures to cool enough to put in the freezer per the directions.
what will be the difference between Sciencium and Veritasium?
this is more like SciShow than Vsauce, really
we'll see I guess
Andrea De Domenico All the videos on this channel will have this format (illustrations, greenscreen, etc.), instead, on veritasium, videos will vary more widely (chats with scientists, hands on approach to phenomena explanations, occasional philosophical discussions, etc.); if I understood correctly that is
tronchet sorry but I had to mention... That 'fenomena' is killing me it's 'phenomena'
Klein Bottle ahaha you are right, being italian I get the occasional 'ph' word wrong
In 1971, 7th grade science class, we tested this hypothesis as a homework project. In our home freezers, each of us put six Dixie cups of cold water and six of hot water with regular checks of the state of the water.
Roughly 30 kids in the class, with 12 cups each, that's 360 samples. As I recall, one kid claimed that he had one hot cup freeze before the cold ones. We all assumed that he was lying because he wanted the attention.
Congratulations you have been patiently waiting 50 years for an opportunity to tell that story🤣
@@1414yorks I've recounted that story many times over the intervening years.
Most of the times the right is made fun of by the wrongs
It’s a trick question. Hot water can’t freeze at all.
@Nathan Roberson Sure it can! You just need around 10,000 to 100,000 atmospheres of pressure.
Wtf how did Aristotle freeze his water?
he put in freezer duh...
There are snow covered mountains in Geece. Check it.
Maybe it was salt and ice. Salt water freezes at a lower temperature then fresh water. Such as making ice cream.
he was a cool dude.
@@bobhart7067 Yeah, but that still requires ice
1:06 I didn't know freezers had been invented during Aristotle's time
“I thought cold water was supposed to boil faster!”
“What?”
* visible confusion *
Cold water never boils. It has to get hot before it will boil. To prove this for yourself, put some water in the refrigerator and some water in a kettle on the stovetop and turn it on (don’t forget to turn it on). The water on the stovetop will boil if you turn the heat up high enough. The water in the refrigerator will not boil unless there’s something wrong with your refrigerator.
Water boils at 100 degrees Celsius or 212 degrees Fahrenheit at sea level. That’s hot, not cold.
I have just used many words to say something that could have been said in one short sentence. I could have used bigger fancier words and it would have been just as dumb.
Now I’ll explain why hot water never freezes.
Blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah.
Water freezes at zero degrees Celsius or 32 degrees Fahrenheit at sea level. That is cold, not hot.
In conclusion, cold water doesn’t boil. Hot water doesn’t freeze. This is known as the VTI (Vlad The Impala) effect.
🤪
Of course Aristotle knew it 2,300 years ago.
🤨
@@vladtheimpala5532 You do know that I quoted a Hell’s Kitchen episode, right?
@@plur5ever
Actually I didn’t know that. I hadn’t heard of that channel. I did see the quotation marks though and I did see the “what?”
I figured you were quoting something
I didn’t think that you seriously thought cold water would boil.
I just figured you were goofing around and I was goofing around too.
I didn’t mean anything by it.
Peace
- Jeff
This is the opposite of:
„I thought cold water boils faster than hot water“
A man of culture
I was surprised that youtube recommended me this video under the other (meme) video after I read a comment arguing about this exact same problem.
WHATTT **confused gorden ramsey face**
I actually believed this was true for years
@@Not_Claptrap *confused Gordon Ramsay face*
'did you top it off with cold water'
'Yes chef'
'why'
'i thought cold water would boiled faster than hot water'
'whaaaaat?'
Then the water is not cold
He added cold water to the hot water in the pot.....he made it warm vs the boiling it was at already. It's like throwing ice in ur hot tea, then being confused that it doesn't stay hot.
The only instance of that I've personally seen was when my grandmother would splash water across the porch (because the duck pooped on it again).
But that was a very large concrete porch, and the water spread way out, causing a huge amount of surface area per volume, so it's possible in that instance that most of the hot water could've evaporated, vs only a small percentage of the cold. (It definitely did make a big cloud of steam)
If it's really cold out (like Canada cold), you can throw a bucket of water into the air (as hard as you can) and make it rain snow & sleet.
@@kathrynck when you throw the hot water I to the very cold air, it evaporates very quickly into steam, but because the air is too cold to hold that vapor, it almost immediately condenses back into tiny droplets, which are smaller than the original hot water droplets, and therefore freeze faster. It's such a cool effect and requires the air temperature to be below a certain threshold to work.
@@webby2275 Jew magic, I say
My mom would do that to the porch too, except it was when I pooped the porch
@@kathrynck ee1
This may be a stupid question but how does water ruin electronics?
by creating conducting pathways for current to flow (where it's not meant to), which can create short circuits and fry electrical components.
Star Wars Lore I'm pretty sure it shorts the part of the circuit by connecting things that aren't supposed to be connected. Due to the high conductivity of water
Sciencium ah that makes sense, thanks!
bignate2814 thank you!
Funnily enough, water doesn't. The ions in it do.
Hello Derek,
May I ask why a second channel? I would think that this content would fit on your main channel. So I'm curious what drove you to make a new one.
As always, I love your content ;)
(my very first video was also about the mpemba effect. But it was my very first video in my life. It was bad! Thanks for this insight about this phenomenon, that's very interesting).
I don't think Derek does this kind of thing without reason. So I'm curious to know what it is.
I'm gonna read the comments now (since you added an Edit, I guess there's something interesting)
It may have something to do with him joining Bill Nye on his new show about science? idk
Scilabus Scilabus Well, he's using another format here. With Veritasium he mostly goes to places, his second channel is a behind the scenes and an 'impromptu' video channel. This seems to follow SciShow and the like format; just one person in front of a blue screen.
I'm curious to see if he manages to find interesting topics that haven't been covered by all those channels.
I guess that it may be a more "scientific" chanel where he goes in less details and expects his folowers to have a litle bit more knowlege than on the others. At list it's what it looks like to me. I mean, wouldn't he explain what supercooling is on his other channel?
And if that's what it is i'm in, even if I may not understand some topics, I'll just have to search on my own for the litle details I do not understand ^^
This is actually his third channel, he has 2veritasiun
So we had to listen what is Mpemba effect and how it works and finally we actually gets that Mpemba isn't a real thing.
Bamboozled
Not in a lab. Also they removed the "freezing" and just went with "Get to 0 degrees" which is not what we were looking for, but cool.
It works, and science can control it in labs if they try really hard. The video did an absolute piss poor job at the last third.
@@DamienDarksideBlog 0 is freezing my man.
@@kaleb982010 nah man, i think 0 is like the "grey area" where there is still some liquid and some freezing. solid freeze start at -10. but yeah this is my real life condition, not the controlled environment so maybe there is some explanation needed
@@asphorcata pure water a 0° and 1 atmospheric pressure will freeze eventually. The hot vs cold was simply measuring which freezes quicker. The video does a bad job of differentiating between first to zero and first to freeze experiments.
“You can’t dismiss the Mpemba effect out of hand”
Watch me.
What about throwing a bucket of water into the air at -40? When the water is boiling, it condenses to snow before reaching the ground, but when it is cold, most of it hit the ground.
Exactly, I thought the same.
It's not "snow", it's steam.
Repeat the experiment and let me know if you can get a snowflake .
Nicholas R.M. when the water is thrown it turns into a mist due to its temperature. As a mist, the water will have a larger surface area and will cool much more quicly.
Yeah, like 'DicksOut' said, I think that has more to do with the fact that the individual steam particles will freeze faster than the water in a more tightly packed liquid state.
A bucket is a terrible idea. Use a cup, you'll achieve finer results. Also, wear gloves. Don't think that the water will freeze instantaneously because if it's hot enough, it can burn and scar your skin.
I learned from this video, that in real life the effect exists. But if some scientists in a lab want to try really hard, they can remove it.
What we have to take away from this is that scientists couldn’t come up with an answer as to why this happens. Also this contradicts our current knowledge of thermodynamics and finally that it was easier to find a way to negate the effect. So all in all they found it easier to say fuck it and claim that is not a real phenomenon. Way to go science! 😂
Well they basically proofed that it doesnt matter how warm or cold water is for the time it needs to freeze.
r at least, it doesn't matter as much as litterly everything around it. So you may or may not be faster with freezing hot water, but you definitly know you would have been if you tried it with cold water in that exact same circumstance.
which is funny because people knowing this would still take the chance of beeing faster with warmer water for whatever reason.
@@mauer1 beacsue its better to take a chance on something taht people believe exists then to just ignore it and achieve the same result anyway
@@wingedfish1175 well thats the thing though, it is indeed faster to freeze cold water. To make the decision to use warm water is just nonsense. because it definitly is worse than cold water.
It just might not matter if you wanna race against someone with it.
Well it seems to me to be result of an out side source much less than heat plus water cools faster its possibly a combination of multiple easy to reach scenarios to attribute this effect. Instead one explicit answer futher study may yield that for example just spit balling that going to a high/varying pressure; source heated water to a low pressure source a fridge may yield results. Or bubbles increasing top surface increase surface area may freeze faster. Or even better yet what the last study cited that in the direct center doesnt actually change faster just it is perceived since the out side solidify faster. But when you average out the heat then disproves it. Other wise super cooling may actually be the key to the answer. Im no expert by any means but brushing it off weither its true or not isn't going yield a explanation what actually happened
Answer: No but small tweaks like moving the thermocouple causes different rates of freezing which is cool. OK go and have a rest and save the 7min. Or just watch it anyways as it is kinda interesting.
If someone us watching this it's in order to waste 7 minutes
gg
Moving the thermocouple aka a temperature sensor didnt cause the water to freeze at a different rate. They put it in the beaker to see if there were any convection currents present, basically just hot water and cold water mixing to "stir" the water in essence. We don't have any type of sensor to really measure water flow on such a tiny scale in existence although they could've just put a drop of dye. They mentioned the beakers were sealed in some tests and even a drop of dye could fudge the experiment so probably why they didnt try that. Also has to be introduced at the right time otherwise it'll just mix before the water finishes boiling...
Bowl of water at 33° in a plastic dish, bowl of water at 120° in a plastic dish.
Put them outside on a freezing day and see which becomes ice faster.
It’s the cold water.
so... are there just enough variables that there's a big range of cooling speeds for both hot water and cold water that overlap and allow people to witness hot water freezing faster often enough to be psychologically relevant but not statistically significant
conti nue Exactly right! I wish he'd explained it as clearly as you have though!
sounds about rigth
Yeah. The studies were testing the Mpemba effect and they found it. Surprise surprise.
David um no that's not the point at all
Apparently he never studied thermondynaics!
1:44 don't like the sound of those clicking noises. they make me feel uncomfortable for some reason
Shimassi do you have misophonia?
ai, es no bueno
+Shimassi Same here
what's your good name? Because I have some form of this condition myself. I don't like munching sounds
me too man, i would like to know why is that
The channel was created back in 2013?
hahaha... it's been a long time coming!
Sciencium Let's make the name of this channel the name of a new element!
i thought the mpemba effect was because the hot water than the cold water like ice is less dense than water so the freezing took place faster as the expansion was already done. like inflating a semi inflated balloon
Tim van de Goor First of all we got to name element 142 Veritasium ; )
What does 2.72 mean?
edit while typing: I realised it's probably approximation of constant e.
For those wanting just an answer to the question: 6:30
Imagine discovering something Aristotle discovered and getting credit for it lol? Like wtf
He just give a blunt observation. The other guys gave input, I don't think it's about credit but conclusion, each of the guys took the experiment under different circumstances.
Look up Stigler's law of eponymy
That's because there was research data not just observation. Remember, the difference between messing around and science is writing it down (Quote by Myth Busters).
imagine the thing that they both discovered doesn't even exist at all
Excited about the new channel
how Aristotle freeze water?
No Google, I don't want to use my real name. but how did he do the comparison ?. when he boil water in mountain, the regular water must be already frozen
No Google, I don't want to use my real name. lol right
the problem is that you basically start the timer for number 1 as soon as you take it off fire, so number 2 should freeze two minutes after number 1 since they both experienced the same source of heat.
if number 2 freezes before number 1, then you might need to question the experiment, because wtf changed? air speed? temperature? how does H2O at 100c cools down faster then H2O at 100c that has been out for 2 minutes? would number 1 freeze faster if you heated it back up again to 95C while number 2 was nearing 90c?
Aristotle was a very clever man, but his methods were bound to be slightly wrong, physics says Energy in = Energy out.. unless you add or subtract energy.
the idea of hot water freezing faster then cold water invites the idea of a perpetual motion machine.
except that it actually doesn't on a consistent and repeatable basis. did you watch the video to the end?
Well he used his Freezer of course, power by nuclear power.
Or as some "homeopaths" call it, nature.
my monke brain
''FREEZING IS FREEZING, NOBODY CARES HOW LONG IT TAKES THO''
Interesting, but the sound effect for your logo shortly after 7:06 was a jump scare on headphones.
Just start at 5:55 for the answer.
+
Jesus thank you
He says that hot water cools faster in about the first minute
Thank you for that
@@kc-ip2vc
And in reality it does not.
Ooo this is pretty cool.
I should have known you'd be first!
Sciencium Well... I mean... I just finished some homework and was refreshing RUclips at the right time~ :D
azlhiacneg as cool as freezing warm water?
Pun city!
Did an experiment in the winter on this. We filled 2 glasses with tap water, one as hot as possible and one as cold as possible, and threw the water out the window from the first floor. The water from the hot glass turned to powder (snow) by the time it reached ground, not disturbing the snow below. The water from the cold glass didn't change at all and splashed the snow.
the extra steam from the heated water may be breaking the water droplets into smaller parts which then freeze faster
VERITASIUM WANNABE
hah!
vesteel Fuck off, he made this channel, it's in his new video.
Tim van de Goor HAHAHAHAH
+Tim van de Goor Jokes
He even copied the hair.
Me searching i thought cold water was supposed to boil faster on youtube: ok easy
Me after 3 hours:where the fuck it is
I once filled 2 ice cube trays, one with cold water, the other with hot. Put them in a frost free freezer with the cold air blowing on both of them. The cold filled tray definitely had a crust of ice over it first. But if you throw a cup of boiling water into the air in sub zero weather, it will evaporate into a frozen cloud before it hits the ground. Cold water will still be a liquid when it hits the ground. The rapid movement of the molecules in boiling water causes them to separate in the air allowing them to freeze instantly.
Matches convection arguments
basically the same as if you were in a cold room with a group of people youd freeze faster than if you were all huddled up together
Hot water vaporizes more easily at low pressure too it's why water boiling on Mt. Everest never gets hot enough to cook pasta. I bet the places that get sub zero are at high elevation and low atmospheric pressure in the demonstrations. The vapor gives off it's heat more rapidly because of the increased surface to volume ratio of water droplets. It's also why steam burns more badly in a short time than boiling water more heat transferred more rapidly its just the heat going the opposite way. heat of vaporization is why boiling water holds it's temp the extra heat escapes with the vapor. tossing it in the air speeds up the vaporization process and hence heat transfer. the cold water never vaporizes. If you could spray the cold water out of a warm nozzle (so the nozzle doesn't clog with ice ) to match the vapor particle size they would freeze at the same speed.
The whole "throwing hot water evaporates" thing is the same as your breath. In the cold, you can see the warm water vapor in your breath. If the air coming out of your lungs was the same temperature as the outside air, you wouldn't see your breath.
The hot water doesn't "freeze" when thrown into cold air. It evaporates very fast (it would evaporate slower in warm air).
When most of it evaporates, it might leave a few bits of liquid water which will instantly freeze depending on how low the temperature is outside.
If you misted cold water into cold air, it would freeze just the same as the "mist" that's left after most of the hot water evaporates when you throw it in cold air.
Hot water DOES NOT freeze faster that cold water.
The freezing point of water is always different from collection to collection based on different mineral contents.
The Mpemba effect has been observed to be both true and false in controlled experiments.
Basically, if EVERY variable is identical, hot water WILL take longer to freeze because it has more energy to dissapate than cold water.
But water is never "just water" and that's why sometimes hot water freezes faster than cold water and sometimes it doesn't.
@@themonsterunderyourbed9408 it's very predictable by the triple point on a phase transition graph. It's basic chemistry and physics. Pressure and temperature are key to phase transitions. Also water has hydrogen bonding without which, based only on molecular mass water should be a gas at room temperature. But it is liquid due to the polarity or dipole moment of the water molecule leading to hydrogen bonds. Solutes or dissolved salt ions and other particles in water can effect the phase transitions by interfering with the hydrogen bonds by lowering the freezing point or boiling point at standard pressure for example. The Empemba effect is not a real effect... it's a misinterpretation of the phenomenon of supercooling of the water that was not heated first. Water that is both relatively pure and is in a very smooth sealed container, so there is no nucleation point for a crystal to form can cause this super cooled liquid water phenomenon. Usually the vessel is sealed so the pressure above the liquid drops adding a confounding variable. In Canning food a vacuum seal forms by this drop in temperature and therefore pressure inside the cooling jar relative to the outside when the gasses condense as they cool. The water can sometimes drop below the freezing temperature in this circumstance and remain liquid. It's like a beer from the freezer that instantly freezes when it is opened or disturbed. The alcohol and CO2 are interfering with the hydrogen bonds that also contribute to crystallization. Water when boiled maintains 212 degrees because the extra heat is given off by the phase transition to gas as the hydrogen bonds are broken at the surface tension. Break the hydrogen bonds and cause vaporization. smaller droplets of water have less surface tension as does water being heated. While it is heated the bonds get weaker and weaker until steam can escape. The temp at which this happens depends on the pressure and temperature of the atmosphere on top of the water surface. At zero or much lower pressures the water will boil at much lower temperatures than 212 F at a certain pressure or negative pressure relative to the atmospheric pressure well below 14.7 PSI or 760mm Hg water can boil at room temp. If you put a vacuum pump on a sealed jar of water you can get it to boil at room temperature.
It would be interesting to do the same test with small suspended particulates (diatomacious earth would be a good medium, would not effect the chemistry of the water but provide lots of sharp angles for crystallization to begin). Could be the early heating process left more particulates suspended than the water that was left to cool.
You do that
You could probably spend less fine looking at previous experiments and the conditions. In labs, water is all coming from the same source. It's likely they just heated one sample with a hot plate
Bruh I saw this in my recommended and read the channel name as "Sciencecum"
Lmao
... And still you clicked on it? Brave.
@@riftalope indeed
Since hot water gets cold at an accelerated rate, could it create increased chances of inconsitencies in the water (like holes which would end up freezing), which would begin the freezing effect before cold water creates the inconsistency when freezing?
It's much easier to freeze a smaller area than a larger area, right?
True but I think the convection currents caused from the differences in temperature would cause them to even out into a gradient rather than stay in pockets
No, it doesn't do any of that. It's a myth to begin with. No alternative wisdom to be found here.
@@SynomDroni exactly.
@randy marsh put the bong down.
What is a hole in water?
Wife: "Did you finish making the ice cream?"
me: "I sure did"
Wife: "where is it?"
me: "Well, because of the Mpemba effect triggered a secondary Mandela effect. It was there and now its not"
Excellent presentation. I've pondered this process for several years.
No, I did not learn anything from this video except that anything can be fruitlessly argued for a desperately long time.
I learned something from it, the 5 ways of explaining it was actually pretty cool, I knew before that the more heat an object has it loses that heat energy faster(That been like comparing 2000 down to 1000 and 1000 down to 0, the speed of two material cooling down the same amount of Celsius but one with higher temperature will cool faster), but the hot water thing is something I know but don't understand exactly how and why it works like that, simply because u can't possibly under the same condition having a thing that has more heat energy than another one, and have them both cool down to a certain amount of heat energy.
So this video did help, it is also good to know.
Btw, Scientists are pretty BS at times like this, because you simply can't prove it, therefore the conclusion is it doesn't exist... Yet... When you can it is true, no matter how stupid it seems.
Also any effect might one day come in handy, and when you think about this, if people can spend years talking about toilet paper orientation, and where to start eating a banana, I don't see a problem with people trying to explain and uncover the truth behind a thousand years old question that is very interesting and hard.
I always thought hot things cool down faster because of the large temperature difference , so if Delta temp is large, cooling will be faster
I did hot water freezes faster beause of the particals
i know its like stfu and cut to the chase i could of explained the mpemba effect in like 10 seconds
@@nateman10 You're full of shit. Your clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Scientists don't fucking make stuff up to make it easier for themselves you dumb prick. All this so called documentation was actually wrong and it's actually an extremely complicated thing to describe. You clearly are completely ignorant of science and how science works, so why are you here?
I'm looking forward to the content on this channel
Mpemba effect is most easily observed in the way us Northern folk would prove it. In South Dakota, where I grew up, we would throw cup fulls of water into the air when it was 20 or 30 below zero. Hot water would freeze before it hit the ground whereas cold would not. My hypothesis was that there was greater distance between water molecules when warm, therefore allowing them to radiate out more heat energy faster, without getting in each other's way..so to speak
You're right.
But why the scientist, the expert said Mpemba effect doesn't exist?
I've taken a cup of cold and a cup of hot water and set them outside in the winter at the same time and the cup of cold water froze first.
@@Starbuckin lmao if the water temperature is 1° it'll prolly freeze faster,
It's probably heat loss from evaporation of the "spray". Interesting to know of your observation.
I really tried to follow what you were saying. Thanks for the video
Sounds like Schrödinger's Mpemba Effect to me!!
I don't understand the reason for Mpemba effect not existing after all. Even if there was a study which showed that warm water doesn't freeze faster than cool water it doesn't rule out all these experiments which agreed that there's something like Mpemba effect. It just shows that Mpemba effect might need some additional conditions. The condition might be that cool water was poured to the container, then the other water was boiled and only then poured to another container. So the boiling water was moving more than the cool water and thus the states of waters were not the same. That's probably wrong but it's just an example of a condition for boiling water to freeze faster.
The argument about measuring the temperature in different places also don't satisfy me because how improbable would it be for everyone to luckily measure both waters in such spots so that it appeared that the effect takes place.
And lastly, I don't think it would break the laws of thermodynamics. It wouldn't mean that water has memory of its earlier states. It would only mean that we're only considering the temperature of the water and not other properties like directions of every molecule. So the water has no memory but contains more information than we assume.
I am no professor in thermodynamics or physics in general, but don't some elements have better conductivity? Like for example copper vs aluminum. I know these are different elements, but let me get to my point. Probably different states of elements release heat faster than others.
In this case it's room temperature water vs hot water, which have different energies, so wouldn't it be logical that the hot water releases its energy (heat) faster? When I was a kid, I used to put hot water and cold water in an unsealed ice tray in the freezer and always when I checked on them, the hot water was frozen solid, while the cold water was liquid in the middle and has a layer of ice on the outside.
My theory might be wrong, but I want to learn / understand, so easy with the political correct answers / replies. Thanks !
Hot water does indeed release energy faster, but in doing so it reduces the temperature. At some point that temperature will be the same as the starting temperature of the cold water, thus it would cool at the same rate as the cold water. It would then follow the same curve as the initially cold water.
The result only states that hot water does not reach 0C faster than cold water. Not that hot water put in a freezer wont freeze faster than cold water. Due to so many things affecting the actual point of state change, there are literally a fractal's worth of possibilities. It is one of those tricky things that is a little more difficult to picture than it is to describe and is therefore more difficult to comprehend through non-mathematical (non-statistical) means. It doesn't help that water in general does not like to behave consistently on the molecular level. It is very prone to influences that are difficult to negate/control.
This was what I wanted to say, but you put it clearer than I could.
I would like to see someone *try* to (and succeed) determine what some of these "additional conditions" are that *will* produce the Mpemba effect that were reported in the past by experimenters that we assume were less careful in their procedures.
This is a great point. We often use approximations that almost match the things we see. Sometimes we forget that it is small things that contribute to the existence of all large things. It _could_ be some quantum scale change in the water that might contribute to this result.
Though I rather like the convection hypothesis myself.
so in short Mpemba effect wasnt real because it wasnt because the temperature that affect the speed of water freezing but something else that just happen to be really hard to notice or to be included in the controlled variable?
interesting
oh right long time ago I watched a video about mpemba effect and it said we are still not sure yet but that was before 2016 which is when they finally figure it out so yea
@@zeromailss i'm just gonna try itmyself
A finding based on physical experiments of water are not "esoteric". I'm confused by the use of this word.
Actually you're not taking into account of explanation 6:
Hot water: The thermostat in the refrigerator detected that the temperature is not low enough, and therefore blasted the inside of the refrigerator with cold air, with the compressor running at 100% the whole time
Cold water: Refrigerator chills water slowly, running compressor at a lower work load to increase power efficiency.
I'm pretty sure that was taken into acconut in the controlled environment. Pro's/scientists controlled every variable, and still failed.
but theyre putting both containers in the same freezer/fridge, therefore both containers would be blasted with extra cold air and the colder water should still freeze faster
Yes, but in a real life scenario, you wouldn't freeze hot and cold water at the same time in the same fridge.
For example, you boil water (water is not safe straight out of tap in most countries) and you are super thirsty, but the water is too hot to drink, therefore you put it in a freezer.
-----------
Even in a controlled scientific experiment, they will still separate hot and cold water into two identical freezers or two separate runs with the same freezer. This is because some would argue that the air temperature directly around the cups will contaminate the results.
Let me get this straight: in the first experiment, all Students boiled a mixture of water and cream and one of them (Mpemba) put it in the freezer immediately, while the rest let the mixture "cool down" a bit. Let's say for a quarter of an hour, then all of them put the mixture in the freezer. One and a half hour later, they check their ice cream and only Mpemba s was frozen.
And no one at the University realized, that Mpembas mixture was in the freezer for 105 minutes, while the others where only 90 minutes in the freezer and 15 minutes at room temperature??? In which case classic thermo dynamics would predict, Mpembas mixture to be the coldest...
Yeah I'm not sure about this. It seems like it's obviously just based on time but maybe I'm missing something
I also wonder if his hot mixture raised the freezer temperature slightly by the time his cooled, leaving the others with a warmer freezer that takes longer.
It was mentioned that Mpemba was pressed for time and wanted to compete or submit his work or whatever it was. This means he finished boiling his after all the other students had already let theirs cool and put it into the fridge. He was pressed for time and put his in after theirs were already cool and his was still boiling hot. A big no-no in the culinary world because you can cause all the other food to thaw and spoil.
lets also not forget that freezers kick on when the temperature rises. they aren't on all the time. in the original observation,the compressor was probably on more than it was when you place an already cooled liquid into the freezer
I assume they accounted for the different time lines.
There are other factors.
When Mpemba's ice cream went into the freezer, there was only container in there. This single container had far less mass than the surrounding cold environment. It's easier to cool less mass than more. Plus, his container displaced very little cold air.
Then when the students added theirs, all of the containers then replaced a whole lot more cold air. And then all their containers had a lot more thermal mass, increasing the temp. of the freezer. And the freezer then had to work harder to bring the temp down, if it even did.
So many variables here that apparently weren't considered - or at least discussed.
I've always been highly suspicious of when people tell me this. It has never made any logical sense to me, and your very first chart is precisely what my thinking on the issue has been. Thanks for this.
Keep in mind he says it doesn't exist while stating that it exist and there's the fact there are some other variables that are unknown. Logically we just end up at the starting point without a real clear answer. One more thing, hot water make clear and durable ice while cold water does not.
@@robymaru03 actually, he states that under perfect conditions, the effect does not it exist, there are external forces that can cause a similar result however
@@robymaru03 that is a myth as well. The charity of ice has nothing to do with the temperature of water prior to freezing
@@robymaru03 You can see very clear ice at Lake Baikal in Siberia, and that lake isn't heated.
You can see plenty of videos and pictures on it, if you don't want to travel to Siberia to check for yourself.
"Something as basic as the freezing of water"
~ water laughing in the back ground
Is it my imagination, or does hot tea cool to below room temperature when left alone?
Certainly hot tea will feel colder than room temperature if you touch it once it has cooled. However, this is because water is a good conductor of heat whereas air is not - this means that air feels warmer than tea (mainly water) even if they are at the same temperature.
A good comparison is holding both a metal hole punch and a book, one in each hand - they are at the same temperature (room temperature), but the hole punch feels colder because it takes heat from your hand faster. The same occurs with tea compared to air and other standard domestic items.
Very good question - had me thinking then! :-)
Partly psychological. Take a hot cup of tea and an ice cold soda. Leave them both in a room till they have reached room temperature. As we expect tea to be hot, it’s tepidness is exaggerated as appearing very cold. Conversely, the soda appears warm, when in fact they are identical.
lick walls, iron objects and then try the tea again. You are comparing not temperature but the attitude of temperature feeling by your body parts. That is also a reason why hand is quite poor fewer indicator.
The evaporation of water can cool the water to below room temperature in the right conditions, but not likely in a cup
@@lorenzo42p you sort of need a big underpresure like a vacuum distilation/filtration set up
Imagine revising the whole steam table because of some ice cream 😂
This dude literally just told me that the mpemba effect happens then tells me at the end that its fake
in the heating industry i noticed hot water lines froze before cold i dont know why.
I would say the effect isn't one of warmer water reaching 0 degrees faster, but in fact freezing solid more quickly once it reaches zero due to an effect on nucleation.
that is the most plausible one
As soon as I heard about this I thought it might have something to do with the warm water having more energy to allow the molecules to getting into their crystalline form easier
Having tried this I know it's BS, I took cold water from the tap, and boiling water, poured the same among of each into identical pie plates. Put them both outside in sub zero (C) temperature, the cold water froze first, and for confirmation did it again reversing the pie plates and location outside.
Each time the cold water froze considerably faster, not even a close race.
Now take warm to hot water from tap and try again. I've tried it also. As far as I know, warm water freezing faster than cold water, is because impurities and not the temperature.
Warm water from tap has more bacteria than cold. Ice particles need something to attach themselves to, to be able to form, like bacteria or dust for example. Now if you boil water, it will kill most of the bacteria and therefore will freeze slower.
Another similar example is rain. A rain cloud's water particles needs something to grab to, to be able to form bigger droplet. Like bacteria or dust particles.
I haven't tried yet but it may be in the wording, possibly water that had been boiled may freeze faster than water that had never been boiled, if they are the same temperature when they are introduced to freezing temperature.
Now try it again with distilled water and see what happens.
Maybe its stuff they put in tap water that messes with the process? Tap water is bad water in many countries, including 1st world ones.
@@Deusaga interesting, actually I used water from an aquifer, known for being some of the purist water in the world. I'm not interested enough to do it again, but you could if your inclined.
@@bipedalbob why lie for attention like a Jeremy
This the one girl from hells kitchen watched.
She just remembered incorrectly and did it backwards lmao
Gordon Ramsey: Why’d you top it off with cold water!
“I thought it would boil faster.”
She a lil confused
I did not expect that twist at the end to be honest :))
I always thought about this effect at a molecular level by considering movement. The molecules in water move around more than the ones in cold water so there's a higher chance of them reaching the sides of the container and lose their kinetic energy by colliding with lower moving, lower temperature molecules. There's also a higher chance of hot water meeting cold water and loosing it's energy this way. It seemed to make sense to me since I usually stir my tea to make it cool faster. Or at least that's what I thought until now anyway.
Yes, I can dismiss the Mpemba-Effect out of hand, because I've tried it several times and there was no such effect in every halfway realistic scenario.
I've won all bets against this effect so far and I've tried it in many different setups. Starting with boiling water against fresh tap water. It only worked once in very shallow insulated bowls without cover, where a lot of the hot water evaporated. Much more than 3%. About 15%. So it wasn't miraculous why this 15% less water froze faster later on. Covering it with plastic wrap disabled that and again the cold water froze faster. My guess is that there is no effect.
Ive tried it too...its pure crap that gets repeated in an echo , less than 0.000001% of people have the sort of mind that actually tests this, and then the truth gets treated as a democracy so if the vast majority of idiots believe it..it MUST be true
dismissing something because you tried it several times is the exact opposite of the scientific process lol
@@seedmole Actually it is exactly the scientific process. Hypothesis => [Loop: Experiment => Evaluation] => Acceptance or Dismissal
This one has failed and looped quite often in every realistic scenario, that I can safely dismiss this hypothesis.
Only when I severely rigged the whole experiment in favor of the hot water it worked. And then it simply worked for a different reason.
Try it yourself! You actually have to put in some cheaty effort to get it to work. And I bet you won't make it the first times.
@@jackmclane1826No
The Mpemba effect can only be observed in the right circumstances. At its core, surface area is the main component allowing this effect to take place. Due to a processed called convection, as hot water is chilled, the warm water in the center of the beaker rises to the top of the beaker creating physical movement. The longer this process goes the more it speeds up at a comparably exponential rate. This causes more and more surface area, of the water, to be exposed. However, many other factors can prevent this exponential-flow-process, such as obstructions or even how the beaker is made. Cold water is slow to start this process of convection due, in part, by the fact the water molecules in the cold water are less disrupted by the cold temperatures. This is only my understanding.
Edit: I also wanted to add. The best way to cool a constantly heated item is by passing hydrogen molecules over its surface area. Factors such as how cold the hydrogen particles are make little difference in cooling the item. The main component is the passing over of the hydrogen Molecules. So in relation the the mpemba effect; As more and more convection takes place, more and more water is exposed to hydrogen molecules.
I had considered this question back in the early 70s. I did an experiment to measure the time it took for hot water at 185degrees F. vs. water at 40degrees F. Both samples were distilled water in the same type of container and the same amount. The results of my experiment was that the cold water froze first.
At 40 degrees f yeah I bet it did freeze first but at 70 or 80 the 185 would freeze first
@@letsuseCommonsense Depends GREATLY on the experimental setup! So much so that it can be surmised that any difference is solely due to the setup.
I'm going with your experiment
The kids pot probably warmed up the freezer before the other kids put their ice cream in, people want to believe that something weird like hot water freezing faster exists because that would show a hole in our basic understanding and that's exciting but I don't believe it's true
@@baseddino when it is supper cold outside like -18 or something. I took hot water from the dispenser and when I tossed n out it turned to snow instantly. Cold water didnt
Next next video:
_Does boiled water boil faster than cold water?_
I love how this video is just like : "well it doesn't exist, or does it? no, it doesn't"
i was eagerly anticipating how the auto CC would interpret Mpemba. dunno if the same word was ever repeated. enthralling
The warm water causes the freezer's thermostat to trigger sooner.
Correct Sir
That is actually a very plausible explanation for the "real world experiments". The freezer's compressor will run full power all the time more or less as soon you put the warm water in. When you put in cold water it will maybe trigger only after a while.
Hot water may not cool faster, but it sounds like through a series of complex conditions it's still likely to freeze faster.
That was my take-away as well: when dealing with perfectly identical samples, there was no mpemba effect. In all other cases one was revealed, and even in the hyper-controlled cases results could occur by adjusting where the thermometer was. So it is likely that there is something about hot water that results in the mpemba effect that isn't the water being hot itself, but is something that is likely to be caused by the higher starting temperature in messy real-world settings.
That's the opposite of the intended message.
no
I've always had the belief that hot water would freeze faster than cold water. I I'm a plumber and I would say every time I've gone to somebody's house where the water line is frozen in the winter time it's 90% of the time the hot side. Sometimes it's both but a majority of the time if it's one of the water lines it's the hot side. I don't know if any of these studies were done on water under pressure if that would change how the water is able to exhaust it's thermal heat versus water that is just at atmospheric conditions. Is there any study done on water in this regard?
I have had the exact same experience at my cabin multiple times. I also figured it had to do with the water pressure becoming lower in the hot water pipe as it cools and so it freezes quicker.
If you're still interested in it, look into the fourth phase of water and/or dr gerald Pollack. That will help give you the answer to how there structure of water is altered during cooling and heating and you should be able to connect the dots.
Hot water pipes freezing has nothing to do with fictitious effects or pressure. Firstly if you're really a plumber you should understand that pipes don't actually burst when they freeze. Not most of the time anyway. They generally burst when someone turns on a faucet or an appliance that uses water that has a frozen section in it's source somewhere. The pressure difference caused on either side of the frozen slug is what causes the pipe to burst at a weak spot, which is not always where the freeze actually is.
Pipes freeze when it's cold. When it's cold most people turn on the hot water first to let it get hot first and then add cold water to make it comfortable even though doing the opposite is safer and would prevent the occasional scalding. When the hot water pipe bursts the cold never gets turned on as the home owner heads into the basement to find out why there's no hot water.
The hot water pipes tend to freeze before the cold water pipes for the simple reason that pipes don't actually freeze because of the temperature in the basement or outside wall, which is usually not low enough to freeze the water in the pipes. They freeze because of a cold draft hitting the already cold outside surface of the pipes. It may be slight but the heat that transfers from the water through the pipe wall creates a thermal difference around the hot water pipe that will create its own small draft or draw the air currents from an existing draft to it until the imbalance in temperature has gone away. In the houses I've seen inside of the hot water pipe is almost a foot away from the cold pipe. Plenty of space for the standing water in the hot water pipe to create a draft that first cools and then freezes it solid without effecting the cold water pipe.
That may just be because the hot water gets used less. If people turn on the cold water even a little more often, that pipe is less likely to freeze.
in peoples fridges maybe, where the higher heat makes the fridge run more and the coils stay cooler longer to remove the heat maybe, but like you said, it defies physics.
i think people get confused in the throwing boiling water into extremely cold dry air and it dissipates instantly.
cold water doesn't work because it doesn't have the energy to evaporate so quickly.
This is the answer. It's not an experiment about the characteristics of water. It's an experiment about the mechanics of refrigeration and thermostats.
Up Next:
“Does Cold Water Boil Faster Than Hot Water?”
Does a block of ice boil faster than a boiling pot of water?
No because the boiling water "IS ALREADY BOILING"
LOL gordon already laughed at a dumb bitch heating pasta in cold water for over 20 minutes
hopefully this is supposed to be a joke
@@redriot-unbreakable9476 r/whoosh
I remain unconvinced and will continue to fill my ice cube trays with hot water
why not just upload this on veritasium?
What have you to lose from it?
More money to be made. That's why most popular RUclipsrs have multiple channels.
Mike M money is based on a video's watch time / view count, not how many channels the creator has...
He might want to reach audiences only interested in sciencr alone.
Take Numberphile for example, one of Brady Haran's many channels. He created Numberphile2 for "behind the scenes" footage, basically dividing up every topic into 2 videos. More videos = more views = more money
Great job 👏
when this reaches 1 million + i can say i was here before 1000
"Hot water freezes faster than cold wtf"
"ok so in every test we just gonna ignore the freezing part cause freezing is heccin weird."
then what's the point, really?
1. Most precise and reliable variable is temperature
2. Process of freezing is unpredictable
3. Water freezes at 0°
4. Lets see what happens when water is cooled to freezing temperature
5. if for the sake of experiment they assume that it will freeze at 0°, there is no need to wait for all of it to freeze, making end result hard to reproduce
bc temperature is the most controllable variable in this scenario, so they test only the temperature just to observe if there's a difference.
"cause freezing is heccin weird"
yeah i know.
they not testing the actual observation tho.
possibly related but completely different.
@@EdGeLV water is SUPPOSED to freeze at 0°
@@g.ferreira6745 but the questen was not "do hot water cools faster than cold water", but "do it freezes faster". the point is the change in physical state. the whole video is pointless.
though it was not reproducible in the last very controlled experiment, in an open system (outside) hot water can rapidly cools down via evaporation. that don't even mess with thermodynamics.
What's the difference in scope between this channel and Veritasium? Or is it simply that this channel is for videos funded by Google?
I think Sciencium is more direct/faster content (not sure if google motivated it)
Veritasium will remain a hybrid between Science/philosophy and other influences, hence longer
2Veritasium will be similar to Veritasium but include other thoughts, tech, youtube, different format etc vlogging
In essence Sciencium focuses entirely on the knowledge, Veritasium dates back from his PhD about HOW we find truth (misconceptions etc), not just on disseminating knowledge
I wonder if Veritasium will shift further into study of biases/knowledge now that this channel exists, I rather enjoyed his early videos.
This is scripted content, thats why he wants it on a new channel. Read his reactions on his Veritasium facebook post of this channel.
the format
have you got a link? also, what does scripted content mean?
I love how a simple yes or no question is drawn out into a 7 minute video