How does Cerenkov radiation work?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 окт 2024
- The behavior of matter can constantly amaze people, especially when extreme conditions are involved. In this video, Fermilab’s Dr. Don Lincoln describes what happens when a charged particle travels through a transparent material faster than light travels through that same material. When that happens, blue and violet light is emitted. This light is called Cerenkov light. This video tells you everything you need to know.
Fermilab videos with Dr. Lincoln are the best Fermilab videos.
Dr Lincoln should have his own channel
I also enjoy Nick Lucid over at Science Asylum for the humor as well. :D
The Science Asylum is the best but he doesn't have many subs
That's interesting, because I feel the opposite. I check out his videos maybe once a year, and they all have the same problems. The implication that these subject can be understood in any way without going though the math is simply damaging. There are at least a dozen simplification which can (and do) result in people drawing the wrong conclusions. I'd expect better.
After I watch Dr Lincoln's videos, I almost feel like I understand modern physics. Thanks for posting these videos!
Professor Susskind is even better and actually gives a full mathematical breakdown of virtually every field of physics at a graduate or post-grad level :)
Thanks for using my video in that last demonstration. Would really have appreciated a mention that it is shot at the Penn State Breazeale Nuclear Reactor.
Great video, you deserve credit. Awesome phenomenon, appreciate you sharing it (one way or another).
Found your video: ruclips.net/video/UxQdS0pbpKo/видео.html
more than a year... nice credits they gave you :P
*In a video about radiation*
"On the THIRD HAND..."
Hahahah i see what you did there
😂😂😂🤣🤣
Yeh😂😂😂
gorcrow I dont get it, could you explain?
@@xterminal5997 It's been a while but I cannot leave you without an answer. So well - radiation and mutations. :P
Sheyman thank you
It's spelled both Cherenkov and Cerenkov until you turn the page and read it
@@sonacphotos hAhA i uNdeRsTaNd pHysIcS tOo
@@sonacphotos Sorry that's spelled Scrodinger's Chat
@@AdmiralBob NaH
It's spelled Cherenkov. Period.
@@AdmiralBob it's spelled both "Schrodinger" and "Scrodinger" at the same time until you look it up on Google.
Thank you.
I watched several long lectures about neutrinos and their detection and I only here got perfect explanation how this type of neutrino's detectors work.
And thank you for the detailed explanation of surname pronunciation. I as a russian myself greatly appreciate it.
So it's a Luminal boom? As opposed to a Sonic boom?
TheHue's SciTech basically
Photonic boom!
Photonic boom
It's basically a sonic boom but for light, yes.
That's what I came here to comment 😂
So basically this is the sonic boom effect, except it's not sonic :) So cool! Thanks. (EDIT: Oh yes, as it happens I am a linguist, I would probably prefer Cherenkov, not that it matters :)))
Second that vote!
It’s luminal
What is it. I mean how do mechanical and non-technical transverse way behave exactly the same
Quit it. No, it's not, explained above.
Longish video?! I did not realize it even ended 😅 Petition for even more longish videos please. Your videos are just amazing to understand and grasp the concepts
Thank you! You are a pleasure to listen to and you tend to speak at a level that I understand without pretense or condescension. While I am not a scientist (my collar is as blue as my neck is red!), I enjoy learning how things work. I enjoyed high school physics and now that I am a bit older it it fascinates me to see those lessons applied. Well done! Definitely subscribed👍
Longish video?
Dr Don, please don't give in for the short attention span people - and try to do more longer videos like this,
Thank You!
How does not caring how a guys name is pronounced considered a short attention span
10 minutes is long attention span you think?
Both of you people replying are morons. Mark meant he wants longer videos than this which explains physics concepts in full detail
@@kiyoponnn how do you know this, do you work for the guy or something?
Ian Frost it's just common sense. Obviously he means to say he wants longer, more detailed physics videos.
I had a chance to cross paths with an engineer who worked on the Ice Cube project in Antarctica. He was explaining how the detectors worked, and this video added much needed info to the concept. Thanks, Dr. Don!
As a kid my dad took me into the small research reactor at Cornell University to see the "blue light" at the bottom of a deep pool. Very cool to see! I was looking right at a nuclear reactor core with no protection but for the water, and seeing the radiation, sort of.
Done that as a student during my PhD, first year. I'll remember it all my life. To me it was the same level of my first total solar eclipse.
Such vertigo... although vertigo when you stand on top of the pool is kind of normal, call of the void is pretty strong up here, and as deadly as on the edge of any cliff...
Little big story after that:
At that time the terrorist counter measures were getting stronger and stronger, thus not anybody could enter the nuclear reactor anymore, even students.
Most of us were just "using" the reactor. We didn't need to go inside. Builders drilled holes in that reactor for a reason. Those let the neutrons out, not the people in, it's not rocket science but still makes pretty fireworks.
So yeah, organized visit inside were a thing, allowing to see Cerenkov effect "live". But those visits were not exactly the kind you could advertise. Thus eventually, the boss had to take the decision: no more visits (officially). That felt during my second year, thus i was both super glad i decided to register soon and super lucky to be picked among the every visit candidates.
I understand the decision of closing it, i agree it had to be tacken. I also know a few exceptions to such rules doesn't break their effect. The idea is that people realize there is a strong security, so that they don't get funny ideas. "It's not enough to convert a PhD student to be able to enter the reactor and do shit, so let's give up". End ot the story, safety works.
If there are a few exceptions, it still works perfectly fine. It would be way too dangerous to take all these risks and fail miserably at the end just because the exceptionnal visit allows for more controls.
Anyway... As soon as i knew the rule was in place, i HAD to break it. Not for myself: i already had the chance to see it. But for my colleagues.
Understand me: if you learn about the next solar eclipse, but government forbid the area because too many people freaks out or get blind... what would you do?
Obviously, still get there. Bring your kids and friends. Leave at home that crazy aunt who was considering using that time to recharge her energy stones. Give the others the appropriate eye protections.
So, nuclear reactor visits... during my second year, we had this big international course i registered to. Most of my colleagues and myself were fellow PhD students working in similar super-cool big ass facilities (nuclear reasearch reactors, synchrotrons, you name it), sharing experience and lecture over "the science of super-cool big ass facilities" (not the actual title, but close enough, i don't think it mentioned the science part).
I went to the head of the "communication" team of the facility. Let her know honestly what i was aiming for. She was a great person willing to share the knowledge and the enthusiasm, thus i knew she would be an ally. She had the perfect solution. She made a suggestion for us to visit "not the reactor, but experiment setup #11, over the hundred one of them, because #11 is totally cool and not often visited, and this has nothing to do with the fact that it's the only one which actually needs to be inside the reactor. Oh, and while we are at it, we can let them have a look at the pool."
Nobody's was fooled obviously. Everybody just played along.
After the visit, some of my colleagues were actually crying while thanking me for the "organisation". Never been so proud.
Also, turned out experiment #11 was indeed totally cool.
They were the guys working with the "cool neutrons"... litterally. Neutrons which were coolled... by gravity... ever seen a parabolic beam of particules coming out of a nuclear reactor where some of them are going "fast than light", but still twenty meters away some others are just falling down like a lob tennis ball, and you catch them before they bounce? That level of cool. Unfortunately were not allowed to put our hand under it, i would have love to "feel the mass" of a neutron beam, i'm not quite sure how much unsafe that would have been (cool neutrons are chilled man, not every thing nuclear is dangerous).
Physic just awesome. I wish more people could see it.
Big thumbs up to your dad. Bringing the kids to places were they are absolutely notsupposed to be... is a must ;-)
Ah, one of the rare occasions being a gen-x was cool, used to just say I was a student doing research and walked in... Whatever guard there was really didn't want to hear an explanation....
I have to say, this channel is one of the very few science channels I truly trust. There is no oversimplifications. Everything is fairly detailed and well explained, and there is explanation of raw data that lead us to conclusions.
I always prefer being told why and how we invented scientific theories than just being what they are and what they say.
Fermilab, you are flower in grass field that is science on RUclips.
I grew up near Fermilab and got to take tours of it as one of my dad’s friends worked there on their computer systems! Only when I grew up did I discover that it was a world-renowned scientific facility! and...only today did I discover that Fermilab had a youtube channel! Subscribed immediately! 😁 This video is so informative; especially the visuals!
Videos with Dr. Lincoln are the best! Yay
cit. "The council is satisfied"
Completely normal effect, can happen with minimum radiation
The air is glowing!
@@postvideo97 Not great but not horrifying. Just like a chest x-ray. Nothing to worry about, comrade.
@@LaserBlowFish good thing we have az5 button
I came here to find your comment!
@@postvideo97 You're delusional. RBMK reactors CANNOT explode.
I really appreciate your Cerenkov Cherenkov explanation. Thank you.
From now, I'm Cerenkov team as well!
Grapheme "č" is used in Slovak, Slovene and Czech alphabet and is pronounced "tʃ" like "ch" in "choke". Черенков = Čerenkov = Cherenkov
Čau
And Serbian too.
Malay always uses the letter C as a 'ch' as in 'choke', although I like the accent marker in Serbian and Czech.
Are you talking about choka chola?
Ты верн. Ч=СН
It's so satifying when you understand exactly how those giant detectors are intended to work. That's a detail which has irked me for quite a while. Thank you!
Excellent video!
By the way, the letter "Č" is an actual letter in many of the Slavic languages that use the Latin script (for example, in Serbian language which uses both the Latin and the Cyrillic scripts). It's the same letter as the letter "Ч" in the Cyrillic script and it is pronounced - I am sure you have already guessed - as "CH" in English language.
thus the second spelling is the proper English transliteration.
ч
ч
Красива
@@Aochso да
I’m not American, but I subscribed. Your explanation is quick and clear. Thank you!
Dr. Don, If you were the only thing on the entire internet, I would call the internet a complete success! Thank you for being awesome!
Cerenkov Light is a favorite visual for me. Thank you Mr. Lincoln.
5:20 Even if it's not supposed to be, that is a great animation to represent the Doppler Effect!
The fundamentals of the Doppler effect and supersonic shockwaves are all properties of wave mechanics. In the same way that waves on the beach, traffic on the roadways, and data on the internet all show the same behaviors. They are all descriptions of large amounts of smaller units, at higher energy, passing through a crowded medium.
@@LogicalNiko Bazinga.
MY MAN YOU HELPED ME SO MUCH WITH MY RESEARCH. THANKS A LOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I enjoyed this video but, like a lot of others, I really want to hear the full explanation of how Čerenkov radiation is caused. Was actually just thinking about that this morning and was really pleased to see this video pop up. More please!
A full explanation, like Dr. Lincoln said, is quite complicated. You are going to need a graduate text on electrodynamics.
@@tuele4302 But he did a great job on introducing the concept of light slowing down in a refractive medium, without describing every complexity. A similar approach (if possible) with this topic would be appreciated.
The reason light slows down in a medium is because of the interaction between the incoming photon and the electrons in the atoms of the medium. Together, they all add up to a composite wave that, as a whole, moves at a slower speed, even though there are intermediate force carriers and virtual particles at work at the regular speed of "light" aka information. We only see the sum. Now I'm only an armchair physicist, so disclaimers and all that, but if you think about it, what you have is a shock cone, like a sonic boom, but imagine that the air is loosely filled (not packed solid) with ping pong balls tied together with springs that want to vibrate at a certain resonance, based on how dense they are, and the jet making the sonic boom comes in and stirs them up. The initial sonic boom will knock them back with a very powerful explosive force, but they will soon spring back after the dissipate their energy to their neighbors. Now, what would that sound like if you were listening to the chorus of them all vibrating at once? A certain resonant frequency would prevail, and that just so happens to be blue. I think Sixty Symbols did an episode on Cerenkov radiation as well, plus you have a search box up there in your browser if you really want to know. ;)
I appreciate the level of explanation Don Lincoln provides. It is mature and not excessive. By contrast most other sources over-simplify and s very misleading analogies and even words. Their goal is to give some people a 'feeling' of understanding. The abusive Higgs Boson early years were a particularly gross example. In short, I trust Don Lincoln to not mislead me with excessively simplified talks. And, most importantly, he tends to emphasize that he is leaving out math and higher level but more accurate explanations. Fermi has a solid trustworthy spokesperson. Please don't loose him in the lower level clutter.
So it's a bit like a sonic boom, but it's not braking the sound barrier, but the "light barrier"? That's so cool.
Fotonic boom
It's exactly like a sonic boom. An object traveling through a medium faster than the speed of waves in that medium.
I was thinking the same thing. The photon cone reminds me of the sonic cone.
The trick is to create a sonic boom in space.
@@mr.h4267 ...but you can't make a sonic boom in space.
Don you do such a great job explaining natural phenomena so clearly. Thank you. I use to work at ORNL and have seen the blue glow when we had water shielded operating reactors. There all gone except for HFIR. Again, thank you .
As a Russian I can confirm Cherenkóv's name starts with the same sound as the word "chair" does. Cherenkóv.
Yes and no, it does start with the phoneme "Ch" as you rightly say, but the proper spelling is Cerenkov. This is called Romanization for a reason, you are ignoring Latin. if you want to convey the sound "Cherenkov" you should spell it "Cerenkov". The "Ch" makes no sense for someone who speaks Latin based or heavily Latin influenced languages, for example in Italian the name Celentano (pronounced Chelentano), in Romanian you have the word sky "Cer" (Cher), the bread Ciabatta (Chiabatta), etc. these phonemes are Latin, it makes perfect sense that they don't make sense to a Russian, but trust me as a Latin languages speaker, if you want to say "Cherenkov" spell it "Cerenkov".
@@eleSDSU Thank you for the insight. Although, I am not an expert, online romanization tools return "Chyeryenkov".
mr. Don Lincoln,
i enjoy listening to you.
you make people love physics. like your elaborated explanations.
The visual aids in this particular episode are _excellent_ , and props for including the real Russian spelling!
BTW, a "real linguist" would tell you that the first and third transliterations are fine (the third using the Czech--that is, čech--letter for the sound), but that the second one, the one apparently used by physicists, could be confusing because the Latin letter "c" is sometimes used to transliterate a different Russian letter (namely "ц" which sounds like "ts").
The best description of Cerenkov light I have seen, there are some awful ones on the YT.
You, my friend are awesome... I'm just a normal person, but i love your videos
Thank you for the video at the end, it was just what I was looking for!
The Doc is back!
Thank you, Dr Lincoln! I really enjoy your videos. I wish they were longer.
Real is Cherenkov. Because if it's Cherenkov then it's sound more like Черенков. If it's Cerenkov then sound like Церенков or Серенков these is not correct i think 🤔 i don't have good English knowledge. What i know is ch - ч, sh - ш, sch - щ, zh - ж.
Yes, the same way you call Chekhov, but in other way proper Celentano is Челентано (Chelentano) than in should be Келентано (Целентано).
That would be Tjerenkov if transliterated into Danish. I just checked the Wikipedia (tjekkede Wikipediaen) and it checks out.
I studied Russian years ago, spent three months in Moscow in 1972, and you’re absolutely right; it’s Cherenkov. I have to say that in my humble opinion, the Cyrillic alphabet is better than ours! 🐻🇬🇧
Maybe the name was written like the Czech author Karel Čapek? So Russian and Czech way of writing was mixed up. I very often see Karel Čapek written Karel Capek, but never Karel Chapek, although his name is pronounced with a 'Ch'.
@@typograf62 no Tj = Ć, that's a tad softer than č (Ch)
The video doesn't do the glow around the reactor justice. Truly one of the most beautiful things you can see.
Cerenkov light is like a subatomic sonic boom, but with light?
one can say that, but without boom :)
Quantum boom?
@@filipgren6091 Yes with boom. The "boom" is luminal instead of sonic.
@@seattleitefpv so, boom, onomatopoeia: 'loud, deep, resonant sound', refers also to light in other meanings than a metaphor?
@@filipgren6091 So if you really want to get pedantic, a boom is a sudden and intense burst of acoustic waves that overwhelms the senses. The OP's analogy was just that -- an analogy. There is no sonic boom per se because the waves involved here are not sound waves, but the blue glow is the equivalent phenomenon for light, i.e. electromagnetic waves.
This will be the biggest YT channel because, you know, Dr. Don is here.
So do physics books have Capters?
The English representation of the Cyrillic 'ч' is 'ch'. Sometimes, you may find it represented as 'tch' as in 'Tchaikovsky'.
The physics books are simply wrong.
and Tchaikovsky is also wrong. because when you listen to the russian pronounciation, you'll hear that it should be written "Tchikovsky", without the 'a'
Tcherenkov
great video! i love how you explain things in general but also in detail. for example i couldn’t figure out what spin is on wikipedia due to their warning, but your explanation on the fermion v boson video explained it perfectly! than you and keep it up doctor!
The effect was quite awesome when the overhead lights were switched off in the cooling ponds of the (magnox) power station, at which I was employed. The blue light was brightest around the skips of newly discharged fuel, fading as the activity reduced over time. The pond water was demineralised water dosed with sodium hydroxide.
I once have been given a guided tour through the FRM I in Munich while it was still in operation. The glow around the core was one of the most beautiful things I have seen in physics. Swimming pool reactors are quite a sight to see.
I'm learning english and fisics with these videos, thanks
It's been too long since you dropped some science bombs on us. Thanks again for the wonderful videos, and please keep up the amazing work of helping lazy lay-scientists like myself understand the real thing a bit better.
One of the best videos that i have ever seen.
I did not understood why there is light emitted only when the electron is moving faster than the light (in the current medium). Even if the electron is moving slowly, it should still interact with the protons and move those around, why no light is emitted?
@ScienceNinjaDude Still it is not clear, what happen for example if an electron moving at 0.9c in the vacuum pass near a unique molecule of water, is some photon emitted as we are to some extent in water now?
I guess the answer is "it is a lot of complicated formulae, but in the end it works this way"
Based on Maxwell's laws, a charged particle will emit electro-magnetic radiation when it accelerates.
@@pifdemestre7066 if the charged particle was going slower than the speed of light in the medium you don't get what is shown at around 5:51, the circles would instead be inside one another and you just get regular non-cherenkov radiation. Only when the particles go faster you generate the coherent wavefront (spheres lined up), the cone, which acts like a sonic boom for light.
For the same reason it wouldn't work for a single molecule of water, you need a lot of molecules all radiating together to get the strong, measurable blue light.
That is what Lincoln was supposed to explain, instead of spending time on the irrelevant spelling of the scientist's name.
It's like the bow wave of a ship or the sonic boom of a plane travelling faster than the speed of sound. When the plane goes slower than the speed of sound, no more shock wave.
thanks a lot, sir lots of love from Pakistan keep uploading such informative videos
I didn't see video (because it's not there) but I can assure you one thing: It's a completely normal
phenomenon, can happen with minimum radiation...
Your video doesn't do the Cerenkov radiation justice. I saw the reactor many times while working in radiation hardness testing back in the 80's...That deep mysterious blue glow always gave me goose bumps every time I saw it!
As a not linguist, I'd like to say that Cerenkov is probably the worst way you could spell it in English
Its ok.
Lincoln reminds me of Sheldon Cooper (BBT). Dear Dr. Lincoln, you should have a chat and debate with Sean Carroll on this Podcast, I would love to hear you two talking about physics. That would definitely get you the likes and subscriptions you ask for. Might vote for sure.
She was totally the bomb...
I just got vaporized by that bomb of a dad joke. 😂
probably one of the purest things i've ever seen is how pleased he was with himself after that joke
69 likes on comment *Nice*
The reason why girls called scientists pervert is that 😂😂😂
As a linguist, how you spell the Soviet physicist’s name simply depends on your audience. Here in the states, the phoneme is romanised to "ch", whereas in languages derived from Common Slavic, the Cyrillic character or the Č is better understood. Physics gives us knowledge of our world, language helps us codify and share that knowledge. One without the other precludes learning these interesting concepts from intelligent people like yourself. Thanks for sharing!!!
“Physics is everything” I love the way he says it!
As a college physics major, it makes me cringe. It is obvious self-aggrandizement, which has no place in the study of any of the science.
fantastic as usual, keep up the great work Don.
I remember hearing about light taking an incredibly long time to make its way out of the Sun. I guess that would be an extreme case of light slowing down in a medium. The Sun is also full of ionized particles. Does that mean the Sun emits a huge amount of Cerenkov radiation?
The Sun's inner region, the radiative zone, is an incredibly dense volume of plasma. A photon generated by a fusion event in the Sun's core ping-pongs around the radiative zone in what is a 'random walk' This is why light from the center of the Sun takes hundreds of thousands of years to escape to the convective zone.
Water, air and even solid matter are no more substantial than vacuum compared to the radiative zone.
Right, that plasma is opaque (if I understand correctly), so Cerenkov radiation doesn't really apply.
I didn’t realize photons in the sun’s core take so long to leave.
yep, photons don't get a chance to travel very far. per solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/interior.shtml
"The radiative zone extends outward from the outer edge of the core to the interface layer or tachocline at the base of the convection zone (from 25% of the distance to the surface to 70% of that distance). The radiative zone is characterized by the method of energy transport - radiation. The energy generated in the core is carried by light (photons) that bounces from particle to particle through the radiative zone.
Although the photons travel at the speed of light, they bounce so many times through this dense material that an individual photon takes about a million years to finally reach the interface layer. The density drops from 20 g/cm³ (about the density of gold) down to only 0.2 g/cm³ (less than the density of water) from the bottom to the top of the radiative zone. The temperature falls from 7,000,000° C to about 2,000,000° C over the same distance."
Well, from what I've just learned in this video, Cerenkov radiation happens in a non-conductive medium. Unfortunately, the sun is a giant ball of blazing plasma, and plasma is technically conductive (it's a literal soup of charged particles). So my guess is that, no, the Sun's inner region does not emit Cerenkov radiation
Thank you for having done this video. Could you make one when you explain deeper and mathematically it ?
so it’s possible to travel faster than light but not faster than light in a vacuum, i think i get it now
I used to have this thought of a charged particle like electron (hypothetically) traveling faster than light, would it result in a 'photonic boom'? and today i found the answer. Loving this channel.
It's like a sonic boom, only with light instead of shock waves.
Very cool to see my Advanced Test Reactor at INL used in the video 👍
Pleas, do not tell people that light moves slower in water. It PROPAGATES slower, but MOVES at the same speed. The observable slower speed is due to interactions in optical medium, but at molecular level the speed is always the same. I'm sure you know that, so pleas say such things.
Faster than light but not faster than speed of light 😁
So like plinko, except every interaction is at the same energy?
No, a photon in water actually moves slower. This is due to Lorentz forces. It’s frequency doesn’t change, but it’s speed most certainly does.
Dr. Don your videos are fentastic..... Thank you....
*fantastic
I'd love to see animations of the NON-cerenkov case (slower than the speed of light). Because it's not clear to me why you wouldn't get radiation in that case as well.
The animation doesn't show it, but wherever the circles intersect, there's destructive interference. So in the non-cherenkov case, you'd have all the circles overlapping and interfearing with each other's emissions and no radiation would be produced.
@@SpaghettiToaster This is incorrect. The mechanism for Cherenkov is constructive interference. Where the rings overlap is constructive, not destructive. It also acts like a phased array emitter in the sense that it creates a coherent emission.
If there was constructive interference where the rings meet, everything would be radiating light at all times, since the circles always overlap whenever chared particles move in a dielectric medium.
@@SpaghettiToaster It is correct that there would be destructive interference, but your explanation to why is wrong.
When waves are represented by circles, you usually put the ring = wave top. Then to find a wave bottom, you have to go out ½ wavelength from the wave top ring.
It's hard to imagine with this simple visualisation, that's clearly not optimized to show destructive interference.
A better one would use gray for background, then white for top and black for bottom.
But as a guideline, if you cannot draw a line which always has a top ring nearby, there is no constructive interference.
If there is no clear constructive interference, it could be only destructive or a mixture of constructive + destructive interference. This usually result in waves too weak to detect.
in the thought experiment why does the photon slow down (interacting with the particles that make up the new medium?) and why doesn't the electron slow down (wouldn't it also interact with the protons and electrons making up the medium, even if it doesn't directly hit anything?). later in the video you did mention in detectors the particle can slow down to below the speed of light, but why is it better at keeping its speed up better than a photon? also, is cerenkov radiation always blue? what determines the exact wavelength that we see? (it's kinda pretty)
3.6 rontgen. Not good, not terrible
There's graphite on the ground!
@@buckmeintheash6923 is delusional, get him to the infirmary.
@@buckmeintheash6923 don't be silly. RBMK reactors don't explode comrade.
Hellstorm Cerberus You didn’t see graphite.
YOU DIDEENT!!
*roentgen
Thank you for this and many other awesome videos. If I may, I have a question. Why the electron isn't slowing down as it enters the water as the light does?
You never said why it is blue or purple. I assume it is something with excitation.
I wonder if that is why Dr. Manhattan is blue in the watchmen?
It's probably because the wavelength is compressed, as you can see in the part where the light is represented as circles.
It's kind of the same thing as a sound moving towards you, you hear its sound in a higher pitch because the sound waves are more compressed
Maybe because the outer electrons in the fluid release blue light.
I get that a charged particle moving through dielectric medium will disturb the electrons in the dielectric medium thus giving off light, but I don’t understand why it only happens when the charged particle moves faster than the speed on light in the medium. Why doesn’t the charged particle cause the dielectric medium to give off light at any speed? The cone of light would become wider and the flux would be reduced as the particle looses energy. Does the light flux abruptly end when the particle slows down to below the speed of light? The analogy with a sonic boom doesn’t make sense to me.
- The video is getting longish...
- Already over ? :(
Hi.. are you know how that connect between fractal and molecular structure?
We want the exact detailed mechanisms!
People should watch video from this Fermilab because it is presented by the real Dr who understand the topic and explain it very previcely, but not some random youtuber.
Transliterations of names tend to be personal and it's disrespectful to not use the named individual's preference, barring technical limitations. In this case, he lists himself on his own English language papers and lectures as "Pavel A. Čerenkov" but that was a pain to typeset before Unicode. Interestingly, the Nobel committee lists him as "Pavel A. Cherenkov" which seems like the best alternative to the accent since it captures the meaning of the accented version rather than just discarding it. I'd be surprised if they hadn't asked him his preference before presenting him his Nobel prize. My name has either an accented 'ċ' or 'ch' in it and I rather dislike it when its spelled with a 'c' but I also have a completely different English spelling that doesn't contain the c at all for when I actually want people to pronounce my name correctly.
that was a weird little interlude, tbh
I'm not really a linguist but I'm very familiar with transliteration systems for Russian. 'Cerenkov' is not a possible transliteration in any standardised system ever used in English; also, it's just not true that the physics community uses mostly the 'Cerenkov' spelling; for example, a search in the APS physics journals at prola.aps.org reveals 108 hits for 'Cherenkov effect' and only 27 for 'Cerenkov effect', so 'Cherenkov' is used 4 times more often. Similar results are found by a search on arxiv.org (Cherenkov 5 times as common as Cerenkov). Čerenkov is the transcription according to the so-called scientific transcription (which is used officially, e.g., in Italy) and is also the same as the transcription in several national systems (Czech, Slovak, Slovene, Croatian...). `Cerenkov' in an English-language context doesn't really make sense.
A small correction: 'Cerenkov' (no diacritics, no h) is actually used in one official transliteration system, namely in the Romanian transliteration of Russian.
@ScienceNinjaDude well, not all textbooks :) For example, I have near at hand Physics, 2nd ed. by Tipler which uses 'Čerenkov'; Classical electrodynamics 2nd ed by Jackson uses Cherenkov. No big deal, anyway :)
BTW in Russian Cherenkov has the word stress on the last syllable, not on the second: chee-ren-KOFF but yeah, whatever :)
Sorry. The Nobel Committee transliterate his name to "Pavel Tjerenkov".
sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavel_Tjerenkov
Just like Chernobyl is transliterated to Tjernobyl. Ukrainian name but that's how we transliterate the cyrillic letter Ч.
And an Italian would pronounce Cherenkov as Kerenkov instead of Cerenkov.
A great video Don!
Thank you very much Dr. Lincoln, but don't forget Uli's good-bye cake at 2:30 P.M.!
I find this radiation beautiful and facinating. It would be interesting to learn the best types of material for this kind of radiation.
This reminds me of the shockwave cone of sound that is created and follows an aircraft traveling faster than the speed of sound.
Thank you for your humble presentation. It allows even a simpleton like me not to feel intimidated. And by the end of the video, I felt I learned something. I am still waiting for the video to explain why only superluminal particle velocity causes light emission. You touched on the jostling of the atoms caused by the electron. This happens all the time in the photoelectric effect and those electrons are not at superluminal velocity. And by the way, if water slows down light, why does the electron get special treatment and keep its speed up?
Don's hair is on point in this video!!!
Great explanation, Don!
Good video to watch before watching Chernobyl!
Ha ha! Absolutely! Just what I was thinking. I was aware of Cherenkov radiation but had to do some revision, so here I am. I’m just binge-watching Chernobyl for the second time. What a blast! (No pun intended!)
Well explained and great graphics. Thank you.
"Marie Curie was the bomb!"
Einstein: Hold my beer.
didn’t einstein steal most of his work from other scienticians? including the relativity equation, which is the only thing he’s famous for?
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@lucasc5622 no, and wrong, but other than that sure whatevah
Would the cone pattern be referred to as a bow shock in particle physics Dr Lincoln? And another great video, thank you so much for sharing these topics, you really have expanded my understanding of physics in general.
Watching this video after the Chernobyl HBO series :P
They did such an amazing job on that.
People's on the bridge love that light
@@jamesp4521 More like garbage job. Literally nothing in this crap of the series was correct besides the fact reactor existed then malfunctioned...
It's spelled Cernobyl in the physics books
@@KuK137 That's just ridiculous. It had a civilian accurate explanation and rolled events into condensed versions to make it suitable for t.v. For all intents and purposes it got the story the right, especially where it mattered in the realm of soviet corruption.
Cherenkov is the correct pronunciation. You said it right the first time.
completely normal effect, can happen with minimal radiation
If the particle going through water has different mass and/or charge, will the Cerenkov light stay blue?
You didn't see graphite. YOU DIDN'T, BECAUSE IT'S NOT THERE!
Shut up loser
A ginormous video. Thanks!
'Speed of light' is REALLY misleading... It should be uncoupled from light.
should be called speed of causality
Fermilab's youtube channel seems to have higher resolution green screening than most broadcast TV news networks. More perplexing than quantum action angles.
And that transition at 9:21
Ikr very good green screen
RUclips Algorithm in 2018:
RUclips Algorithm in early 2019:
RUclips Algorithm this week: oK YALL GOTTA SEE THIS-
i hate comments like this
An excellent explanation.
shoutout to all my foes who actually get the č in Cerenkov
What if - in theory - you had a device, mechanism, or circumstance where this process could be reversed? Forcing a particle to absorb light energy - would this cause it to speed up? What would the limit of that speed be?
Half of this video is asides and tangents - it's really hard to follow.
Very clear and succinct video. I would like to add two corrections:
1) it's pronounced "ChirinKOV', at least if you are using correct Russian pronunciation. [Pavel Alekseyevich Cherenkov (Russian: Па́вел Алексе́евич Черенко́в [ˈpavʲɪɫ ɐlʲɪˈksʲeɪvʲɪtɕ tɕɪrʲɪnˈkof],] Wiki is you friend.
2) Mathematics is everything. Physics is just an application,