Thank you for this video as well!! I'd be interested in learning more about the Pauli exclusion principle. Additionally, I wonder how the Schrodinger equation works when we have bonding between different atoms?

Thank you so much!! Finally watching this video after getting busy haha

Hi, I love this channel. This makes learning fun, and I would love to always support your channel sir 🙂❤️✨️ Please keep making more videos like this.

0:21 - A bold claim. I’m listening.

I am happy I found your videos again :)

Thanks , it helped me in revision

Great video!! And I suppose the 4s orbital is closer to the nucleus than the 3d orbital because the shielding effect decreases in order of: s > p > d > f ... etc Which shows that the s orbital is more spread out in the atom compared to the surface area of density of the d, which makes sense if we see the diagrams. Hence This is why the 4s orbitals is closer to nucleus.. These electrons can push against each other and create the flower orbitals as n increases.. which makes sense The difference in the energies is why the electrons fill 4s first. And this effect can be seen clearly in the periodic table between 5th and 6th periods from Zirconium(Zr) and Hafnium(Hf) to Cadmium(Cd) and Mercury(Hg) all having similar sizes due to all the Lanthanides getting their f orbital filled, making the shielding effect go down resulting in decreasing of atomic radius, this is called as Lanthanides contraction which you might know it before.. **If I'm right, then Thank you Sir Hudis, you can keep your money in the drawer..😅😂** By the wayy, I really loveee the jokes created by you in this video!! I would love to learn quantum mechanics from a Professor who is also a comedian 😂.. Also the jokes by AI is fun! This whole lecture was fun.. And by the wayy, I think you need to square the wavefunctions on the m sub l values of those orbitals at 12:46 at the bottom right, means, you need to replace the rainbow donuts and flowers and then call them orbitals.. I think that at m = 0, the solutions are already real, but for other orbitals, it needs to be squared in order to make them real, Some images can be misleading.. Hence, here are some links that have increadible beauty of atomic orbitals and more!! 😄❤️✨️: commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Spherical_harmonics commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sph_harm_table_real_bumpy.gif commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Complex_Spherical_Harmonics_Figure_Table_Complex_Radial_Magnitude.gif commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Real_Spherical_Harmonics_Figure_Table_Complex_Radial_Magnitude.gif And don't forget this amazing one!: www.falstad.com/mathphysics.html the values will be helpful while the orbitals interact with other orbitals in molecules (Molecular Orbital theory) and intuition for passionate lovers like me and etc. Because real life doesn't have imaginary orbitals. Again! I understand this might be too much to cover at once, it's very hard to wrap our heads around the complex world as well! But it's not impossible, and it all comes with practice.. I know you can cover it if you have free time.. But you can consider it for the people who read the comments. Sorry for typing alot though, I usually type this much only for science.. Hope It hasn't annoyed you.😅😅 I wish I can reduce it.. There's alot of learning in this subject.. and I am all here for it!

Yaay, I was really exited for this video! I learnt alot of things from the part 1, mainly because you covered the Schrödinger's equation pretty good. I love your channel and your efforts on making this video 😊 Will always support you. You deserve alots of love, happiness and subscribers!! ❤️✨️ (Thank you soo much for the link btw, I really appreciate it 🙏) But I think you forgot to say that "the probability of finding the electron is when you square the wavefunction" And you also didn't define what the colours meant. But it's alright.

Wonderful visualisations! Now go practice pronouncing Schroedinger 😂.... he wasn't born in Texas....

Yes. This is the video I was really looking for.. And also Yes, the AI voice was surely funny 😂 I'm very grateful to find this video! Thanks alot, Really love this channel. You explain very beautifully ❤️✨️🫶

Great video! The dynamic variations of the equations you decribed definitely clarified any confusion between chosen methods of solving out problems. The ai voices defenitely made me laugh so keep up the good work!

Thank you!! This is an amazing video, I love the visualizations and the AI voice overs are interesting haha

Fascinating! I created a full chip using RSFQ and this presentation has been quite illuminating as to why the flux is quantized. My PhD defense is in a week -- wish me luck!

Interesting very clear explanation of the principles involved. The presentation gives the impression that other elements can't be used to achieve cooling to the same degree?

Thank you, I will study this after I got done with my exams!

Great series, just keep making them 🦾🫡

is it maybe possible if you can add this lecture series in a playlist together? it would be much easier to follow it all together

Great work!! Thank you for making this video series

❤

Pause, let your viewers absorb the content.

You need to slow.....down! Yes, this is youtube, but I can hardly keep up with pausing the video. Slow down!

Would you please make an clip on extracting the triplet of u d and s quarks from the Hadron's quartet all by geometry ? did you saw any thing like this ?

First!

@慕容忘情

@murongwangqing

At 10:27 u did NOT Explain how did u Derive & WHAT r all those numbers /degrees w/n da Bracket

I am a student from Nepal pursuing my undergraduate degree in Physics. Is there any physic(quantum mechanics textbook) that you particularly suggest to enlarge my knowledge on quantum physics.

This is amazing timing!

Around 4:20 (!) you say that those 3 matrices J1, J2, and J3 are a basis for any real 3x3 skew-symmetric matrix. But all 3 of those matrices have all zeros along the diagonal. So, how can any linear combination of J1, J2, J3 ever add up to be a skew-symmetric matrix with non-zero values along the diagonal? (you said earlier that such matrices exist, just with the restriction that the diagonal numbers have to add to zero)

Oh yeah I got exactly the same answer as the first student, even the thought process, haha

The first argument given for the impact of the rain on the kinetic energy of the cart isn't really relevant to the problem. Statement 1 is true regardless of whether the car is moving or not, its true that kinetic energy is being converted into potential energy but the kinetic energy is from the rain itself not the cart. Also if we consider a moving cart being filled with hail or snow for instance, all answers to the problem remain the same but no change in gravitation potential happens for any hail/snow once it settles in the cart.

I just simplified to a disk, if you heat a metal disc, the middle doesn't pop out or crumple, so the ID will expand by the same factor as everything else

I got the answer right and even gave a very similar explanation you offered. Should I go to uni?

My first job in high school was in a machine shop, every machinist knows this, there are a lot of assemblies that require parts to be heated or cooled prior to assembly to allow an interference fit. The question I always follow up with is if you drill a hole in a steel plate and heat it, does the hole get larger or smaller? If there's a temperature difference involved it will get smaller, as it pushes into the hole, away from the unexpanded metal.

When I was thinking about the solution, I remembered molecular physics. The temperature is a measure of the speed of the molecules. When the speed is big, the distance between then increase (i think because of the collision may be?). As metals have a crystal structure, all the constraints in the inner circle of the structure will stretch increasing the length of the circumference => the D of the hole will increase.

I had this in high school, when some of my classmates didn't understand it completely i came with my own explanation which i'm still pretty proud of: If you take a square of 3x3 and take out the middle square, you end up with a square ring. If you were to scale the 8 other squares, assuming the corners and sides of the squares stay connected, the middle empty square should scale along. If you were to divide the ring up into infinitely small squares, it behaves the same.

There is a better answer. Take a point on the inner circumference. In an expansion each point (molecule, what have you) sees all others moving away from it. However the directions away from a point on the circumference and still in the metal all point outwards from the center of the circle. Meaning the radius of the hole gets bigger as the washer expands.

My 7th grade students know this.

Had a highschool science experiment that touched on this but the teacher didn't have a clue and neither did I until today. Thank you

It never occurred to me to think about this, I always thought it's obvious that it gets bigger. Expansion is linear in all direction. If I had to explain it, I would say: just think about what would happen to a wire loop, or even simpler, what happens to a wire loop that was bent into the shape of a square. it is obvious that all sides get longer.

Does the liner expansion apply in the vertical direction to the cut bolt?

This is an interesting question. I had fun thinking it over, so I think it's a great question to challenge understanding. However, after some thought I think it's quite a confusing one which hides some subtleties around (hidden) assumptions. In particular, I think the answer that energy is lost via heat and to gravitational potential is at best hand wavy, but at worst wrong. The way I approached reconciling this is to consider a simpler problem where I can remove certain variables. Let’s consider an *empty* train cart moving along at some initial velocity. We’ll assume that the interior of the cart is frictionless. We then gently place a marble inside the cart and release it. We can think of the marble like a drop of water, but by placing it on in the cart we can remove any concerns about gravitational potential. Since the cart’s interior is frictionless, the marble will stay still (w.r.t. to a stationary outside observer). The marble will eventually hit the back of the cart. Doing a simple elastic collision calculation, you can see that the marble will gain velocity, the cart will lose velocity and the marble will start moving in the direction of the cart (but slightly faster). At this stage we have conserved both momentum and energy. When the marble hits the other side of the cart, the same calculation shows that the marble stops and the cart goes back to its initial velocity. This behaviour will continue indefinitely, i.e. the cart’s speed will oscillate. This means that to the outside observer, the average speed of both the cart and the marble has gone down. However, we have avoided the energy loss problem. Now, going back to the original problem, how can we scale this? We can imagine that the rain is like dropping in many marbles into the cart. If we drop in many marbles then we would have a complex and rapid interchange of momentum between each marble (rain drop) and the cart. This would mean that, without additional assumptions about how the individual particles interact, the cart’s velocity would still vary. Furthermore, the particles would move around a lot inside the car. There would however be no energy loss. In reality, what I think this would mean is that the water in the cart would slosh back and forth (if you average out all the collisions across many particles). The cart’s speed would then oscillate based on this sloshing. I think this is a much more accurate answer. Of course, in the real world we would actually lose energy, but that's beyond the scope of our model. IMO the problems with chalking this just down to heat and potential energy are as follows. Generally speaking, energy loss implies hidden assumptions about interactions and physics which are beyond the scope of our model. For example, let’s consider the heat argument. Heat is just a measure of the average kinetic energy of molecules in a substance. The motion is effectively random, i.e. heat displays no preference of direction in which the particles move. This means there’s no net movement of the liquid due to heat. Thus we’re cheating by saying there’s heat loss as our model says nothing about how the physics of transferring heat energy. In reality this would happen, e.g. via convection to the air. In fact, since we claimed momentum was conserved, we have actually ruled out convection in our model. Radiation is also out of scope of our model. Discussing heat is way more complex than just friction, and we’ve assumed no friction. I could also make a similar critique of the gravitation potential argument, but this is already a long response :)

It gets larger: this is how you get tight fitting washers onto shafts. If you already know the answer it's much easier to come up with a reason, 😀.

My dad, who just is handy with tools, just intuitively thought it would get bigger. Metal expands, so it gets looser. He kinda pictured the whole thing getting bigger proportionately, however.

The logic that it would get smaller is that the washer expanding to be wider would might push the center in if the outside didn't expand enough. But to me the easiest logic is that if the metal is expanding, the inside is expanding, therefore the circumference of the inner circle is increasing. Greater circumference, bigger circle.

Thanks you, you are amazing!

There is a subtle point here: are we defining the momentum of the cart to include the water that is inside? If so, then momentum is conserved and the cart has the same momentum before and after the rain is inside. If not, then the cart will impose momentum onto the rain water and will have a different momentum such that the momentum of the whole system is conserved (horizontally). Either way, the velocity of the cart will decrease, the cart has to apply a force onto the water to accelerate the water up to the speed of the cart, and so there will be an equal and opposite force applied by the water which slows the cart down (this is also equivalent to conservation of momentum of the whole system). The kinetic energy of the cart must also decrease, the cart is doing work on the water, so the water must also do work on the cart to slow it down. But here is another subtlety, if we are considering the water inside the cart, and the cart to be one system, then the kinetic energy of the water car system cannot change, as nothing is doing work on the water cart system.

The voice microphone sounds like it's exploded already.

Exploding capacitors can be a serious health risk.

voltage went back up to the set voltage of the power supply since there was no load any longer. correct?