You are not ordinary. You are extra ordinary ! Brivity and exactness of your lectures make me jealous out of my control. You are indeed a role model to teachers of india. A big salute to you!
Excellent presentation. I first heard about this idea 50 years ago but never really understood it. Now I understand it. I'll recommend this to my friends. Thanks.
I'd like to believe in this explanation, but with the same principle of length contraction, from the lab point-of-view, the negative charge density should increase whenever the electrons are moving in the wire, causing non-zero net electric field around the wire.
u were the ONLY one who explained the details; all other videos ( i may have seen the top 7 or 8 on youtube) they just copied from text books. They didn't understand what they were saying The key starts from 7:00 which was missing in other presentation many thx from Palestine
You gave me my life back..... I am a 12th student knowing a bit about special relativistic theory....In class 11 it was very easy to feel the mechanical physics .. But In class 12 I was unable to find the relation between the electric field and the magnetic field..... Now this topic is also clear to me...... I get back my grip in physics again..,. Thank you so much sir🔥🔥🔥🔥
The only way you can teach so well is when even including you are also enjoying , sir has passion and joy to teach as clearly as possible and he said we live for this. Thanks sir
When calculating the vector tidal gravitational acceleration at a three axis gravimeter station on Earth, it is necessary to use "time of flight" methods. The sun and moon positions from JPL ephemeris for the time when the signal began - working backwards for speed of light and gravity - must be used. Luckily JPL Horizon automatically corrects for what the observer sees. If you derive the special relativity relations, they are including a fixed speed of light constraint. So rather than "contractions" and extra visualizations, just use "time of flight". I do not like the term "retarded potential". But it means "use the field values from sources when they would have been emitted based on time of arrival and a fixed speed of propagation. And keep track of speed in the media. Now there are many analog to digital converters (ADCs ) at Mega and Giga Samples Per Second (Msps, Gsps) that allow time of flight detectors and data gathering. Many "time of flight cameras" now. The radar equation, much of interferometric and correlation methods where the detectable element is moving at the speed of light and gravity is well understood and sometimes affordable now. Gravitational correlation imaging uses natural changes in the gravitational potential that propagate at "the speed of light and gravity" and can be detected by changes in the local gradient of the potential with gravimeters and gravity gradiometers and other detectors - to look inside Earth, Sun, Moon, oceans, atmospheres and fields. Those methods are "gravitational time of flight methods" You really need to get off the blackboard and put your symbolic equations into formats that can be globally shared and verified by computer. The 5 Billion humans using the Internet now, many 10s of millions can follow your logic, but they mostly would rather use it, and let the computer step through the symbolic manipulations and calculations. There is no glory in doing things by hand. Let the computer do it and then Billions can follow and use what you create. Richard Collins, The Internet Foundation (23 Jul 2023 was the 25th Anniversary of the Internet Foundation)
I can see clearly see that you are really enjoying explaining this. Even the topic was not hard it was confusing at times for me. Especially the part why the Einsteins velocity addition rule getting sign changed for V negative. I spent hrs complicating things inorder to find why the sign became positive only to find in your video that it was just your normal relative velocity rule.
You turned off the fan to eliminate the noise,,,, thanks to bear this pain,,,, my friend this is the first completely explained video of this concept, Thanks Again
Thank you for this explanation of an old notion. I probably should not say this, but this relativistic explanation may also explain the details of the Crook radiometer action.
@@jacobvandijk6525 I'm past my age as a blackboard learner, but not past my interest in physics, especially planetary motion, quantum physics and Einstein's Relativity. Standard derivation or not, it really did seem to me surprising how lucidly and naturally the lecturer paved the way to the Lorentz Force by sheer algebraic operations employing the L-F Contraction. How I wish to see Q - mechanics getting reconciled with S. & G. Relativity. But that I think is still a far cry. And, when that happens, that too will become a "standard derivation" in no time. What do you say? I won't tell you my grandfatherly age, ha, ha! '
@@soumitralahiri9393 Well, we can shake hands then. But I wouldn't call the fusion of relativity and quantumphysics 'standard'. Physics at the extremes (like the origin of the universe and fundamental particles) is quite speculative in my opinion.
This was the best explanation I ever saw about anything such complicated got everything clear although not in JEE advanced syllabus but still was interested to know this ….
Nice video and presentation. The theory in this video discuss an open circuit condition with an arbitrary voltage source in order to make a point. The negative electron and positive ions density in the wire is balanced, which is defined by the generator or battery and not an arbitrary density that can be defined by TSR. TSR is not physics but a mind game, a good tool to train our problem solving skill before we face the real world.
That's all well and good, but what about a stream of electrons in free space with NO "conductor" to be "relative to" (as in a CRT)??? How does magnetism evolve from Special Relativity in that case?
Sir, please make some video on crystal structure and lattice, Xray diffraction....... I am a little weak in solid state physics...... And thank you for your nuclear physics lectures.....
I was wondering the same... Then I realized that he used the expression of λ = λ°/√(1- v²/c²) written in the center of board. The λtotal term before coming back to board had λ° in it. Hope it helps. 😀
As presented it appears that the force -quB acting on the charge q ( with B as calculated by the Biot-Savart method for an infinitely long wire carrying a current ) is EXACTLY the same as would be found using coulombic force combined with special relativity. From previous studies I was under the impression that the correspondence between the two ways of calculating this force is only strictly valid if terms involving (u/c)^2 and (v/c)^2 and higher powers were neglected, yet no approximations were explicitly pointed out. Sure, in almost all practical cases the inclusion of such terms makes a difference that would be far below measuring capability and anyway if concerned about the very small error one would need to take account of the finite radius of any real wire. Am I mistaken in the impression I expressed or was some very small amount of approximation somehow slipped in to the presented derivation?
Thank you sir. Not sure if you can see my comment but may I ask why do we use two different velocity when do the Length contraction? Shouldn’t the velocity in the gamma factor always be the velocity between two frames which will be u?
Einstein was far ahead of his time. I never fully grasped the concept of gravity, let alone electromagnetism. With significant effort, it's possible to prove everything from the perspective of a relative frame of reference. However, what we observe in our own frame (on Earth) is what truly matters. Consider this theorem: A cat has nine tails. Proof: No cat has eight tails. A cat has one more tail than no cat. Therefore, a cat has nine tails.😂
Can you make a Video, similar to this one, to illustrate the relationship of the Kinetic Axis at 90 degrees to the Electric Axis which is at 90 degrees from the Magnetic Axis. There are also Low Frequency Kinetic Coupling of Inertial Tensor transformations to the Electric Kinetic Axis that is not well conveyed in Textbooks.
Rotation would allow for particle to move in opposite directions without passing each other. A system would always have a set of particles the were relatively rotational.
Further to my own comment of about 35 minutes ago the following thought has occurred to me. : In the course of the presented derivation numerous square roots were involved and by simple but rather long and tedious algebraic work these were simplified without making approximations. Possibly in the other derivations I have seen these square roots or their reciprocals were expanded by the binomial theorem with only the first few terms retained but perhaps the neglected terms would have cancelled out anyway if they had been retained.
You might enjoy "Quantum enhanced non-interferometric quantitative phase imaging" by Giuseppe Ortolano and others. Most of the "quantum" communication methods can be adapted to gravitational and electromagnetic time of flight imaging arrays. I recommend ALL groups doing sensitive "quantum" detection run their experiments for many days then check if they can pick up the vector sun moon acceleration signal. Its is very precise, easy to measure and works underground and under the ocean as or more precisely than GPS/GNSS. Richard Collins, The Internet Foundation
Even though energy transfer in a wire takes place at a very high speed ( near the speed of light ) the actual speed of electrons will be very low ( drift speed of electrons ). The speed of +ve ions which move in the opposite direction will also be still lesser. So, now for an observer moving in the rest frame of the +ve charge, his relative speed with the electrons will also be very low. Hence at these low speeds how can we apply the relativity principle for getting length contraction between the electrons? If such is the situation how can we say that magnetism arises out of Relativity? This question has been bothering me since long time. Please clarify. Thanks. ..... You are a wonderful teacher and your teaching is marvelous.
I agree with you. Moreover, with the same length contraction principle, why doesn't negative charge density increase while the electrons are moving, from the lab point of view?
Although the electron drift velocity is very much less than c so that gamma differs only by an extremely small amount from unity there are, nevertheless, very many electrons involved so the overall effect of the motion of the electrons is not negligibly small.
What if the charge moves at right angles to a current carrying wire? It feels a force parallel to the wire without there being a differential length contraction of the charges in the wire. Furthermore, a linear array of charges cannot apply a force on an outside charge that is purely tangential.
OK, what about a charge moving perpendicularly to a current wire? The charge will experience a force sideways, can this be predicted by Special Relativity as well?
If you have a wire with no current and have a charge located a distance x from the wire, there will be no force on the charge because the wire is neutral (the charge density of electrons and "holes" are equal). Now have a current flowing in the wire. From the point of view of the stationary charge, the electrons will be moving. Because of this there should be length contraction, and hence the charge density of the electrons should increase. Hence there should be a force on the stationary charge. But everyone knows this shouldn't happen. Can anyone tell me why?
Before considering length contraction consider the velocity transformations as the particle's velocity (“u”) is zero; the moving frame velocities in the plus and minus (“v+” and “v-“) are equal {note see equations at time 7:02}. As a consequence, the charge densities and length contractions will be equal with no resulting electric field or force.
@@jkbrennan1586 I don't think you answered his question. He is considering the real case where only the electrons move. In this case their density should increase while the positive charge density does not. So why is there not a force on the stationary charge?
But in a typical wire, there exists a motion of electrons but no net motion of positively charged nuclei. Assuming this, for a charged particle at rest, shouldn't this same length contraction occur in the moving electrons and stationary protons creating a magnetic force on the stationary charged particle?
We know that charge is invariant quantity but here we see that in the 1st case total charge density is zero but 2nd case some amount of negative charge density is present..then how this condition is preserved ?
Dear Sir, I wonder why, from the lab point of view, the negative charge density does not increase since the electrons are moving with respect to the viewer.
that is not the point (explaining current). It is a thought experiment about (charge, current), (time, space), and (E, B). Regarding your question: 1) Avogadro's number 2) Include the relativity of simultaneity (i.e., the charge can be denser because "now" depends on distance, so Lorentz contraction is not the only consideration).
You are not ordinary. You are extra ordinary ! Brivity and exactness of your lectures make me jealous out of my control. You are indeed a role model to teachers of india. A big salute to you!
This is what i was searching for 2 years and now finally you have shown it. I am super happy.
2 years...!!!
You should have studied feynman lectures on physics
@@somanathpanigrahi9988 I was in class 11 2 years ago
And Veritasium also made a video on this topic if u want u can also watch that
@@shivangigaureichandra2136 yes i know but that one was having no formulation
There are several 1960s textbooks on this very topic,
This video is needed for the world!
This was simply fantastic. What a great work...
Thank you so much.
Regards from Spain 🇪🇸!
Ola Como Estas
Excellent presentation. I first heard about this idea 50 years ago but never really understood it. Now I understand it. I'll recommend this to my friends. Thanks.
One of the best and most detailed explanation I have seen anywhere on this topic.
Finally a complete explanation of why the magnetic field is in fact the electric field seen from a different frame of refference.. !!!
I'd like to believe in this explanation, but with the same principle of length contraction, from the lab point-of-view, the negative charge density should increase whenever the electrons are moving in the wire, causing non-zero net electric field around the wire.
u were the ONLY one who explained the details; all other videos ( i may have seen the top 7 or 8 on youtube) they just copied from text books. They didn't understand what they were saying
The key starts from 7:00 which was missing in other presentation
many thx from Palestine
Tbh, it was one of the most beautiful thing I saw today ❤️
And ofc the conclusion literally amazed me 🎉🎉
Your teaching style is very unique. Great sir
You gave me my life back..... I am a 12th student knowing a bit about special relativistic theory....In class 11 it was very easy to feel the mechanical physics .. But In class 12 I was unable to find the relation between the electric field and the magnetic field..... Now this topic is also clear to me...... I get back my grip in physics again..,. Thank you so much sir🔥🔥🔥🔥
The only way you can teach so well is when even including you are also enjoying , sir has passion and joy to teach as clearly as possible and he said we live for this. Thanks sir
When calculating the vector tidal gravitational acceleration at a three axis gravimeter station on Earth, it is necessary to use "time of flight" methods. The sun and moon positions from JPL ephemeris for the time when the signal began - working backwards for speed of light and gravity - must be used. Luckily JPL Horizon automatically corrects for what the observer sees. If you derive the special relativity relations, they are including a fixed speed of light constraint. So rather than "contractions" and extra visualizations, just use "time of flight". I do not like the term "retarded potential". But it means "use the field values from sources when they would have been emitted based on time of arrival and a fixed speed of propagation. And keep track of speed in the media. Now there are many analog to digital converters (ADCs ) at Mega and Giga Samples Per Second (Msps, Gsps) that allow time of flight detectors and data gathering. Many "time of flight cameras" now. The radar equation, much of interferometric and correlation methods where the detectable element is moving at the speed of light and gravity is well understood and sometimes affordable now.
Gravitational correlation imaging uses natural changes in the gravitational potential that propagate at "the speed of light and gravity" and can be detected by changes in the local gradient of the potential with gravimeters and gravity gradiometers and other detectors - to look inside Earth, Sun, Moon, oceans, atmospheres and fields. Those methods are "gravitational time of flight methods"
You really need to get off the blackboard and put your symbolic equations into formats that can be globally shared and verified by computer. The 5 Billion humans using the Internet now, many 10s of millions can follow your logic, but they mostly would rather use it, and let the computer step through the symbolic manipulations and calculations. There is no glory in doing things by hand. Let the computer do it and then Billions can follow and use what you create.
Richard Collins, The Internet Foundation (23 Jul 2023 was the 25th Anniversary of the Internet Foundation)
So helpful! I have seen different versions of this before but this is by far the easiest to follow. Thank you.
Beautifully explained. Thanks a lot.
Wow, you are such a great teacher. I could follow your logic very easily, even the more complicated math stuff.
Thank you very much for this video. Probably If this channel had existed when I was younger I would have studied physics instead of engineering
I can see clearly see that you are really enjoying explaining this. Even the topic was not hard it was confusing at times for me. Especially the part why the Einsteins velocity addition rule getting sign changed for V negative. I spent hrs complicating things inorder to find why the sign became positive only to find in your video that it was just your normal relative velocity rule.
You, my friend, are an awesome teacher. Thank so much for this astonishing explanation
Can you do your next video on gravitational lensing
This is best channel about Physics! Thank you very much! Amazing!
Excellent video ! Bravo !
Brilliant. Bravo
What happened to the term 1/sqrt{1-v^2/c^2} in the minute 22:28? Nice explanation, kind regards!
It's correct
lamda zero/sqrt[1-v^2/c^2] = lamda
Amazing explanation .keep it up. now my concept is clear. please upload video lecture on the field tensor and how the field transforms.
Thanks Sir for coming back
i miss you alot ❤️❤️❤️
Amazing work! Precise and clear.
Thank you, sir,
This will help me to prepare my research paper.
And
You are a very good teacher!
You turned off the fan to eliminate the noise,,,, thanks to bear this pain,,,, my friend this is the first completely explained video of this concept, Thanks Again
This is super awesome, thank you
Thanks a lot...
What a beautiful things explained by you,sir....
Excellent presentation! You got me as viewer!
Thankyou❤❤❤❤ awesome explanation
Great lecture. You're a blessing
Thank you for this explanation of an old notion.
I probably should not say this, but this relativistic explanation may also explain the details of the Crook radiometer action.
This is a REVELATION! Thank you.
Haha, for you, yes.
@@jacobvandijk6525
And for you --------- NO?
@@soumitralahiri9393 I'm "a bit" older than you, I think. This is a standard derivation.
@@jacobvandijk6525
I'm past my age as a blackboard learner, but not past my interest in physics, especially planetary motion, quantum physics and Einstein's Relativity.
Standard derivation or not, it really did seem to me surprising how lucidly and naturally the lecturer paved the way to the Lorentz Force by sheer algebraic operations employing the L-F Contraction.
How I wish to see Q - mechanics getting reconciled with S. & G. Relativity. But that I think is still a far cry. And, when that happens, that too will become a "standard derivation" in no time. What do you say?
I won't tell you my grandfatherly age, ha, ha!
'
@@soumitralahiri9393 Well, we can shake hands then. But I wouldn't call the fusion of relativity and quantumphysics 'standard'. Physics at the extremes (like the origin of the universe and fundamental particles) is quite speculative in my opinion.
Fantabulous
This was the best explanation I ever saw about anything such complicated got everything clear although not in JEE advanced syllabus but still was interested to know this ….
Brilliant !!!
Thank you so much for this explaination!!!! i used this to pass my physics exam! my dad showed me this video
Excellent💯👍👏
thank you, beautiful explaining
A gem of a video 👏
Thank you sir....
Impressive
Very very good👍👍👍
A lot of thanks... Sir... ❤
Fantastic lecture..loved it
Really really good explanation.
This is extraordinary.
Thank you sir!such a clear cut session👏👏👏❤❤❤
You are really really really awesome sir
Very good thanks mind blowing
Sir pls upload NET/GATE related concepts. This lecture is extraordinary
why at 14:18 the λtot is (λ+) - (λ-)? shouldn't it be (λ+) + (λ-) instead?
As far as I understood, the λ+ and λ- here are absolute values. The algebraic density of negative charge should be -(λ-).
Nice video and presentation.
The theory in this video discuss an open circuit condition with an arbitrary voltage source in order to make a point.
The negative electron and positive ions density in the wire is balanced, which is defined by the generator or battery and not an arbitrary density that can be defined by TSR.
TSR is not physics but a mind game, a good tool to train our problem solving skill before we face the real world.
Good one
I really enjoyed this.
Amazing sir
why threre still is a force when particle is moving perpendicular to the wire?????
Excellent
That's all well and good, but what about a stream of electrons in free space with NO "conductor" to be "relative to" (as in a CRT)??? How does magnetism evolve from Special Relativity in that case?
Very smart teacher
Sir, please make some video on crystal structure and lattice, Xray diffraction....... I am a little weak in solid state physics......
And thank you for your nuclear physics lectures.....
Thank you sir for this video
Mind blown.
Excellent. I have a doubt in 23:27 .
How does the E' field comes from lambda/2 pi eps0 x ?
Ok. I got it. It comes from the E field due to a linear charge distribution.
You are an amazing teacher!
Wt happened to a term on the denominator of expression for lambda total.. It is not there when u went back to the board . Pls reply...
I was wondering the same...
Then I realized that he used the expression of λ = λ°/√(1- v²/c²) written in the center of board.
The λtotal term before coming back to board had λ° in it.
Hope it helps. 😀
@@_Dinesh_Rathod ooh.. Thanks❤️
Few people noticed. I was looking for this coment to see if there was an answer.
Very good
As presented it appears that the force -quB acting on the charge q ( with B as calculated by the Biot-Savart method for an infinitely long wire carrying a current ) is EXACTLY the same as would be found using coulombic force combined with special relativity. From previous studies I was under the impression that the correspondence between the two ways of calculating this force is only strictly valid if terms involving (u/c)^2 and (v/c)^2 and higher powers were neglected, yet no approximations were explicitly pointed out. Sure, in almost all practical cases the inclusion of such terms makes a difference that would be far below measuring capability and anyway if concerned about the very small error one would need to take account of the finite radius of any real wire.
Am I mistaken in the impression I expressed or was some very small amount of approximation somehow slipped in to the presented derivation?
From where did u get that eqn for lambda??.. Btw ur cls is awesome 🥰💜
Shouldn't ∆l+ be equal to ∆l√(1+v^2/c^2). The length ∆l+ should be more than ∆l, right?
Thank you sir. Not sure if you can see my comment but may I ask why do we use two different velocity when do the Length contraction? Shouldn’t the velocity in the gamma factor always be the velocity between two frames which will be u?
What about effect of current on bar magnets placed near to the wire? How can we explain that?
Einstein was far ahead of his time. I never fully grasped the concept of gravity, let alone electromagnetism. With significant effort, it's possible to prove everything from the perspective of a relative frame of reference. However, what we observe in our own frame (on Earth) is what truly matters.
Consider this theorem: A cat has nine tails.
Proof: No cat has eight tails. A cat has one more tail than no cat. Therefore, a cat has nine tails.😂
Can you make a Video, similar to this one, to illustrate the relationship of the Kinetic Axis at 90 degrees to the Electric Axis which is at 90 degrees from the Magnetic Axis. There are also Low Frequency Kinetic Coupling of Inertial Tensor transformations to the Electric Kinetic Axis that is not well conveyed in Textbooks.
Fantastic
Thank you sir
So when's the quantum physics discussions coming. Very excited.
Rotation would allow for particle to move in opposite directions without passing each other. A system would always have a set of particles the were relatively rotational.
Further to my own comment of about 35 minutes ago the following thought has occurred to me. : In the course of the presented derivation numerous square roots were involved and by simple but rather long and tedious algebraic work these were simplified without making approximations. Possibly in the other derivations I have seen these square roots or their reciprocals were expanded by the binomial theorem with only the first few terms retained but perhaps the neglected terms would have cancelled out anyway if they had been retained.
Please give me some insight into the kind of lighting setup that you have used, it helps me a lot in incorporating in my channel. Thank you
Mind blown
You might enjoy "Quantum enhanced non-interferometric quantitative phase imaging" by Giuseppe Ortolano and others. Most of the "quantum" communication methods can be adapted to gravitational and electromagnetic time of flight imaging arrays. I recommend ALL groups doing sensitive "quantum" detection run their experiments for many days then check if they can pick up the vector sun moon acceleration signal. Its is very precise, easy to measure and works underground and under the ocean as or more precisely than GPS/GNSS. Richard Collins, The Internet Foundation
Thanks sir 😊🙏🙏
Wow just beautiful
Awesome
understood....thnx sir❤️....
Can u also pls start INPHO solution series (especially 2008 to 2015) .... it will be very useful 🙏
Even though energy transfer in a wire takes place at a very high speed ( near the speed of light ) the actual speed of electrons will be very low ( drift speed of electrons ). The speed of +ve ions which move in the opposite direction will also be still lesser. So, now for an observer moving in the rest frame of the +ve charge, his relative speed with the electrons will also be very low. Hence at these low speeds how can we apply the relativity principle for getting length contraction between the electrons? If such is the situation how can we say that magnetism arises out of Relativity? This question has been bothering me since long time. Please clarify. Thanks. ..... You are a wonderful teacher and your teaching is marvelous.
I agree with you. Moreover, with the same length contraction principle, why doesn't negative charge density increase while the electrons are moving, from the lab point of view?
Although the electron drift velocity is very much less than c so that gamma differs only by an extremely small amount from unity there are, nevertheless, very many electrons involved so the overall effect of the motion of the electrons is not negligibly small.
What if the charge moves at right angles to a current carrying wire? It feels a force parallel to the wire without there being a differential length contraction of the charges in the wire. Furthermore, a linear array of charges cannot apply a force on an outside charge that is purely tangential.
OK, what about a charge moving perpendicularly to a current wire? The charge will experience a force sideways, can this be predicted by Special Relativity as well?
If you have a wire with no current and have a charge located a distance x from the wire, there will be no force on the charge because the wire is neutral (the charge density of electrons and "holes" are equal). Now have a current flowing in the wire. From the point of view of the stationary charge, the electrons will be moving. Because of this there should be length contraction, and hence the charge density of the electrons should increase. Hence there should be a force on the stationary charge. But everyone knows this shouldn't happen. Can anyone tell me why?
Before considering length contraction consider the velocity transformations as the particle's velocity (“u”) is zero; the moving frame velocities in the plus and minus (“v+” and “v-“) are equal {note see equations at time 7:02}. As a consequence, the charge densities and length contractions will be equal with no resulting electric field or force.
@@jkbrennan1586 I don't think you answered his question. He is considering the real case where only the electrons move. In this case their density should increase while the positive charge density does not. So why is there not a force on the stationary charge?
But in a typical wire, there exists a motion of electrons but no net motion of positively charged nuclei. Assuming this, for a charged particle at rest, shouldn't this same length contraction occur in the moving electrons and stationary protons creating a magnetic force on the stationary charged particle?
Can you describe permanent magnate ?
How can say that speed increase of -ve charge means length contraction ?
We know that charge is invariant quantity but here we see that in the 1st case total charge density is zero but 2nd case some amount of negative charge density is present..then how this condition is preserved ?
It arises not due to increase in charge, but due to length contraction the "density" changes
@@FortheLoveofPhysics Hi,why at 14:18 the λtot is (λ+) - (λ-)? shouldn't it be (λ+) + (λ-) instead?
How in the lab frame, there could be a magnetic force if the total current perceived is zero?
Dear Sir, I wonder why, from the lab point of view, the negative charge density does not increase since the electrons are moving with respect to the viewer.
Thank you sir
Sir, Is there any pdf of this content?
Can we use special theory of relativity here??
Bcz in general moving charge in wire have velocity in the range of milimeter. Can you explain this plz
that is not the point (explaining current). It is a thought experiment about (charge, current), (time, space), and (E, B).
Regarding your question: 1) Avogadro's number 2) Include the relativity of simultaneity (i.e., the charge can be denser because "now" depends on distance, so Lorentz contraction is not the only consideration).
Sir make a video on space time geometry,
Can you do next video about scalar and vector field