Here we see the master teaching the art of Waterbending.

Sometimes the best experiments generate more questions than they answer--thumbs up!

Didnt expect these results. Interesting.

Genuinly surprised by your findings and impressed by your approach - I am quite excited to make some experiments myself and see your continued findings.

Maybe no answers but a fantastic demonstration of scientific method and having to re-think when your predictions are blown out of the water. Thanks Bruce, from a future Chalky.

Thanks for another great video Yeany. Best thing is that it leaves you wanting to go and explore combinations and scenarios of your own.

Brilliant video, the Veritasium video never did sit right with me and I’m glad you included that idea into consideration.

Another very interesting video Bruce, thank you!

This was a really great video. Thanks making it. You can tell you put a lot into it. Your videos are always good but I liked this one a lot.

Fantastic video! I really thought I knew what was going on before the video and you completely blew that hypothesis out the water - I LOVE that! A few thoughts on potential experiments next time: 1) using dry sand 2) using tiny metal ball bearings, ideally fine enough that they can 'flow' like the same (but conductive) 3 & 4 intro: someone in the comments suggests that the lorentz force may be coming into effect: the moving charge (in the frame of reference of the dropping water the ruler or balloon is moving) is creating a magnetic field, which, if there is a localised charge induced on one side or the other in the falling water, could create a force. To test that:.... 3) water stream going past a magnetic field with no static charge near (I expect would not be deflected - but I got other predictions wrong so good to have a control test) 4) water stream being bent by a static charge on ruler / balloon: then bring in a magnet from a distance and see if that changes the way the water is reacting to the ruler/balloon at all. If the Lorentz force was having a significant impact, one would expect the magnet would disrupt the B field and so have a change on the water behaviour (I really hope I'm wrong and this would show something, as it would be soooo cool to see) 5) This is a long shot, and may show my chemistry is dicey, but to see if the ions are moving from one side of the stream to the others as per 3:41 in the video, could you put in universal indicator. If all the H+ went one side and the OH- went the other, then this should show in the colour of the indicator (orange one side, blue the other), if not it would all stay green. It could be too subtle to see, so perhaps best to use something that would usually be clear, and only show a colour if the ions were being moved around to general a localised H+ or OH- concentration, by memory we had Phenolphthalein in high school. 6) Although it looks awesome, I'm not sure the corn starch in 9:55 would stop the polar molecule from rotating (since A. it's on such a small scale vs the behaviour usually tested with non-Newtonian fluids and B. I think they need to keep this freedom of movement otherwise their specific heat capacity would change, or is that only in gases.... I get distracted) But to try and look at the same thing in a slightly different approach, could you get very finely "crushed" ice? Same idea that the crystal structure should stop the polar molecule rotating. Practically speaking scraping off the white condensate on the inside of a very cold freezer might be the easiest way to get this while minimising the water present. But any next step experiments you do on this I'm sure would be amazing. Keep up the great job and thank you!! :-D

wish we would have teachers like you here in germany :( 😂 keep on, your vids are great 👍

Regarding the vegetable oil: it doesn't matter that the substance isn't polar to begin with. The electric field of what you're holding will polarize the streaming material, and lead to an attraction. The attraction will only stop if the streaming material is very difficult to polarize. I expect no deflection when using table salt. Most molecules that I'm aware of can be polarized to some degree. The protons simply move one way, and the electrons move the other way, in the presence of an electric field. I hope I can try table salt soon.

Bruce, that catch tray got bigger and bigger!!! Amazing results all the same, gets us thinking.

The answer to the viscous liquids being more attracted and the liquids being way more influenced in its course on the top of the stream is probably that they gain more speed over their fall and the viscous liquids arent able to accelerate as quickly as the "normal" liquids, because of their viscousity. And because of the increasing amount of force needed to change the direction of a moving object, while accelerating (vectorial mathematics), this happens. (Sorry for eventual bad english)

Great study ! Thank you

Hey Bruce. I love doing this

Gerald Pollack at university of Washington state. 4th Phased water or h3o2. “Exclusion zone” water sits ‘gelled’ at outer edges of any stream. As soon as a drop forms, the exclusion zone thins out and there’s less polarized charge. He wrote a book about many of the experiments he and his students have discovered to show the 4th phase properties. “The Fourth Phase of Water, Beyond Solid, Liquid, Vapor”. I’m sure Gerald would enjoy meeting with you someday.

Wow the oscillating reaction from the oobleck was amazing! Great video though :)

Great vid

I really like you scientific approach on this effect :) I would say the charging is only on the surface :) i hope i'm right.

Can't wait for this year!

Amazing videos, thanks a lot :)

thanks sir for making this video

Bruce, great video. Can you make one video on the Kelvin water dropper covering the working principle?

Does the air around the liquid have an effect on the results? What would happen in a vacuum?

I love your approach and method! Also, I wonder what you could learn from having the stream of liquid run across wax paper that is attached to an inclined plane. This way the liquid would "fall" slower and yet may still react to the static charge.

I have seen a number of videos on this and none of the explanations are all that satisfying. I agree that it is probably a combination of explanations. I also wonder if Lord Kelvin's Thunderstorm will provide more insight. I have built one and it works pretty well but I need low humidity for maximum effect. ... Which makes me wonder if humidity effects this experiment as well. I think I need to do some SCIENCE!

Oh yourre a genius mate, Thank you, you grilled this good. I think I can help. Higher viscosity increase the effect, experiences a circular field like when something moves in a direction past the earths static charge you see it begins to orbit the earth first and not fall into it, like you see water passing the static of the charged device it attempts to encircle it,.

Great video as always ! (two of my collegues discovered your channel with me today ! ^^ Everyone wants to stop working on they're thesis and do cool experiments !) So many questions !! First, I think the influence of the heigth migth just be because of the kinetic energy that the water accumulate during the fall, the static charges become less and less powerful in comparison to the inertia of the drop. But it's just an hypothesis. isn't vegetable oil very polar ? it's mostly composed of acid and I think they're quite polar. polarity ranking from most to least: Amide > Acid > Alcohol > Amine > Ether > Alkane I think the polarity hypothesis should still be investigated, but the honey is mostly composed of sugars (I think they're non-polar) dissolved in water (polar) but it has a low concentration of water (something around 15% maybe) and we don't see that much of a difference on the experiment... That feeling of mystery is so great !

Very nice video! @10:15 behaves differently than other materials. Any idea why it generates a wave as it falls, but others don't?

The only thing that comes to mind, seeng this fantastic scientific approach to the problem, is that induced polarization of the materials, being them liqud, semi-liquind or solid, is responsible of the phenomenon. The experiment can be due also with little pieces of paper on a table, the rubbed plastic would attract them. So, in principle, no need of polar molecules kind of material: oil stream seems to be the demonstration.

nice, i like it

This is amazing, i cant understand whats going on at all.

Does the movement of the liquids cause any extra effects? Ex- fast stream to a slow stream. I feel like it would have less reaction if it was just in a bow not moving, also really enjoy the videos!

cool !.........interesting

If you did this with some water with an anthocyanin dye in it (say blue butterfly pea tea) would the water change color as it passed through the electric charge?

Consider "water vapor" and "cloud condensation". With cold dry inflow air -- with an amount of positively charged dust particles -- rushing towards a rising updraft of warm moist air going towards a rotating cloud base with negatively charged ions. What kind of interaction is going on and what kind of influence would static electricity have here?

How much does the increased speed of the flow at the latter stages impact the bend, rather than a bleeding affect? Clearly there'll be much less diversion of a faster stream? Maybe test this with higher water pressures through the tap.

Is the water inside the metal sink head feeling the effect inside the pipe?

Could have an effect that the particles (molecules and ions) are moving respect the vinyl or acetate?

If we use a bigger stream of water, it will not become very thin so early and will not divide into droplets. I expect it not to react to the charge. Far from the nozzle water moves too fast. It has too little time to be attracted to the charge. To obtain visible attraction there should be more charged objects along the stream to prolong the influence.

What kind of interaction would a statically charged PVC tube's end points have on smoke or water vapor?

Sir please solve my doubt sir- which is how the insulator losses and gains the electrons when it is tightly bonded with the nucleus to become charge

It seems all materials attract because they are all neutral. Also, your vinyl isn't intrinsically polar, but you can still induce a dipole or charge. That's why a no polar balloon can attract nonpolar hair

I don't expect this to get read, but vegetable oil as triglycerides may not nonpolar enough to avoid responding to an external charge. When I did this test, I used charcoal lighter fluid, although I would have preferred to use hexane. Either way, it did not respond to a charged balloon. I would suggest trying this.

Also consider that if a rotating column of air with positively charged dust particles reaches a cloud base with negatively charged ions and there is an increase in mass due to an increase in speed of angular momentum, would a funnel cloud develop with this situation?

It seems to me that the reason for the stream of water bending more at the top than at the bottom is that the water is travelling faster at the bottom so the force from the charge is acting on any given section for less time time and it acquires less impulse.

The reason for the water not deflecting at a distance from the source may be its speed. Speedily moving water deflects less. Like it has gained enough escape velocity.

Bruce do you have a Newton cradle?

I think the charge made in the plastic, doesn't afect charges in the fluid but it alteres the atoms moving in the fluid, maybe the movement of the atoms in the fluid is altered by the charge made in the plastic

Is it getting its charge from the device it's running out of? It does appear to lose it when the stream breaks.

Can you lift an almost horizontal stream of water? Where does the energy for moving all this water come from?

Bruce yeany the legend. No mortal soul will ever reach his level of scientific powers.

Just to chip in. Molecules with no net dipole moment, such as hexane, are not deflected by static charge. Vegatable oil is not a very good substitute for this as the molecules of fat are polar. Along these lines it might be worthwhile to experiment with solvents of different dielectric constants. Especially glycerol being polar yet very viscous might prove interesting.

Try charging the water with an inducer ring as is used with Lord Kelvin's Rain drop generator.

But why doesn't it move against the strip if the water isn't running out of the tap? if you try taking the strip near a the top of a glass of water shouldn't it show the same effect? Edit: Nevermind seems like you adressed a lot more then i expected. Very cool video.

Could the charge actually be contained in the container at the top? And when drops form, the link to the container is broken, so the charge dissipates, and the droplets no longer hold a charge.

static electricity got me here, but after three years, why am not still getting answer why/how water bends toward negative or positive charges?

Can a static charge be generated in water via particulates rubbing together, such as in highly silty waters in areas of intense wave action? I could have sworn I read about this phenomenon -- is the fact that lightning does occasionally strike the water evidence for such buildup of charge? As ocean levels rise, is it likely there will be an increasing amount of cloud to water strikes? As a result, could it be that larger sections of Earth's surface (via water surface) could be charged at any one time, than was previously the case? I know I'm just a regular person, but I'm trying to understand something about impact craters. Scientists love to go meteorite hunting in deserts or the Arctic, because that's where you can easily find nice, fresh pieces for analizing. But the major impacts are mostly either in bodies of water, or where water used to be. I have a suspect rock that was pulled from a crater discovered in a construction cut. Yes, unlikely to be a meteorite. But just humor me a moment, because if it is, it's stucture (one clear attachment point, two somewhat resorbed "siblings") and high salt content speaks of a thing built like a handgrenade made of blobs that had to have blown off a larger piece, that had to have blown off a much more massive piece. The way the thin melted rock on the surface has been applied with black fusion crust like chat that fla kn es off, suggests that if it is a meteorite, it may have passed through our atmosphere at least 1x before the final melt episode prior to crashing. Could an increase in Earth's surface and atmospheric charge attract meteors that would otherwise pass harmlessly through our atmosphere like the recent 800 foot one did? Could such fluctuating charge be the reason for another famous asteroid changing course 3 times (wavy course) as it passed by?

Evey mass generates a graviitational field. An element of that gravity is electrostatic. The part closest water moves slower past the charged mass than the furthest water. The same effect occurs if you put an object very close or even put it in the flow. It orbits around the stationary object because water sticks to stuff. Water only needs to be moving vs some thing it is pasaing to store opposing charges.

what caused the the corn starch to oscillate like that? was almost as if the static was creating an oscillating eddy current

That was a nice effect with the corn starch and water. I wonder if the drops of water when breaking away from the stream act as little electrophori imparting a charge on the above stream? Here's a few other crumbs or points to ponder. Static Electricity Defies Simple Explanation www.sciencemag.org/news/2014/05/static-electricity-defies-simple-explanation

I wonder what the relationship is between this demonstration and the Kelvin water dropper (see Walter Lewin's 8.02x lecture 15).

Induction of charge on liquid molecules before it responds to static charge materials . ( try this in Vacuum )

I wonder if it would work with pitch?

Please the next time try with differents spouts also.

👍

it seems that the static charge is slowing the water down, if one side runs faster then it will bend, eddicurents ?

Think back to when we would "load" a balloon with a static charge and then place the balloon against the wall. The balloon would "stick" to the wall. Same principle is working here, whatever it may be.

You can create a molecular vortex with this. Try pumping this as plasma through a vacuum past 6 charge emitters faced in a spiral. Nothing might happen.

11:18 hahaha my fav part Duh !! glue response, cuz its glue it sticks to thing right :)

I just don't buy the dual charged molecule theory. It's my understanding that a water molecule should be neutral or slightly negative but it cannot be positive. However, I reckon hydronium (H3O+) ions are always present in water to some extent by the colliding molecules breaking an atom from the O2 and from the hydrogen also to create an odd number of atoms for each so that for every hydronium ion, a negative oxygen exists and/or bonds to form another negative ion such as HO-. This is my best guess but I can't help but also suspect ionization of the air is playing a part since viscosity is so relevant as opposed to chemical make-up. That being said, if I understand correctly, even neutral substances contain some amount of ions if exposed to the atmosphere.

Bruce can you do a live stream rigth now please please?

How about liquid nitrogen or liquid oxygen? Or smoke / other gases?

Do you have a Patreon account? I'd love to donate money or send you a microphone so your vocal audio is more clear in your classroom recordings

It seems the slower the material moves through, the more time it's path has to get deflected

Bruce I need to ask you something tell me please With the Magnus effect can I use red party cups? TELL ME BRUCE please?

I wish to have you as my physics professor, but i'm in italy 😭😭

🌷🌹🌷🌹

The soap looked more responsive to positive charge and the chocolate looked more responsive to negative charge than the other.

Bruce needs to do a live streams

Mercury, Gallium, Gasoline? Try those.

Ops I'm here late I was trying to catch a hummingbird

Physics is broken, it doesn't work like the way that Science tries to teach us. You explained the hydrogen atom and why it's attracted to the static charge but then you show two separate streams of water and they cross paths when the static charge is introduced between the two! Opposites attract and two waters shouldn't, the static charge should have tried to bring them together but they should have repelled each other after the charged area. I know exactly what is going on and why but you first have to forget particle physics and rethink everything. Someone in the past got it perfectly correct but everyone else has misunderstood what he meant and a lot of the scientific knowledge that we are taught today is based on the incorrect understanding of this one little mistake. This is why quantum mechanics makes no sense whatsoever! I wish that my Science teacher at school was half as good as you! Had this been the case, had I learned only one thing, that would have been to try everything and never stop questioning so that you never stop learning. You really need a wireless microphone to get your voice nice and clear without echo.. I have the perfect explanation which will not only explain what you are seeing there, but it would also explain everything else. The perfect theory of everything but the book is still in progress.

Ugh. Bruce you ought to know better than to say "just a theory". You mean "just a hypothesis"

Better than vsauce

Bruce do you have a Newton cradle?