Candle flame is repelled by magnets (and Zeeman follow-up)

Why is a candle flame repelled by magnets? It turns out to be a combination of diamagnetic soot particles and hot gas.
Dr. Faraday on the diamagnetic condition: books.google.com/books?id=Shc...
On Flame and Gases: books.google.com/books?id=D8N...
I should have mentioned in the video that the exhaust from a flame will be oxygen-poor, thus also making it more diamagnetic than normal air. Air is a mixture of nitrogen (diamagnetic) and oxygen (paramagnetic). Removing the oxygen will make the resulting gas more diamagnetic.
/ appliedscience

[@rpg32tamu]

Some flames are actually considered to be a plasma. However, the degree of ionization in most flames is still low compared to other examples of plasma; such as an arc which still have a relatively low degree of ionization. If you apply a high voltage to a flame instead of a magnet you will generate an "ion wind" and have a similar effect to what you are seeing. The wax candle produces more soot than the methanol flame and the soot is easy to ionize in the flame, that is why the effect is more pronounced with the wax candle. Also, some wicks have metal in them which might contribute as well (i'm not sure if this was the case for your candle). If you were to repeat the experiment with a pure hydrogen flame you would see almost no effect, because hydrogen flames produce practically no ions. Flame ionization detectors work on the principal that hydrocarbon flames produce ions in proportion to the number of carbon atoms in the hydrocarbon (which is still an unexplained phenomena funny enough). Even though this effect is almost certainly due to the flame ions, it is still not a completely well understood phenomena and there is still much to learn! Also, there is a good book that explore this topic by Weinberg entitled, "Electrical Aspects of Combustion." (www.amazon.com/Electrical-Aspects-Combustion-Weinberg-Lawton/dp/B0037F75IK/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1531716710&sr=1-1&keywords=electrical+aspects+of+combustion) Thanks for the great video! Hope to see more like this!

[@masonp1314]

Robert Geiger and another amazing thing is that fire is actually magnetic. Which is just insane to think

[@leocurious9919]

Why do you think an arc has a low degree of ionization? Considering the fairly low energy needed to ionize gases I would say its really well ionized. Reaching 2eV via high temperatures is very hard, but a electrode of 10kV can easily rip several electrons out of a atom. Or is this still a low degree because there are still some electrons around the nucleus?

[@rpg32tamu]

When I say the degree of ionization is low I am comparing it to a 'fully ionized' plasma. Degree of ionization is defined as the fraction of molecules in the gas that are ionized. The core of the sun can be considered fully ionized. An arc is nowhere near fully ionized which is why I say it has a relatively low degree of ionization. The reason an arc has a low degree of ionization is because it never actually reaches equilibrium. Typical ionization energies for gas molecules are about 10 eV. However, a gas that is at 1 eV is capable of producing ions because there is a small number of 10 eV electrons available in a gas at 1 eV (which is about 11,000 K). However, an arc does not actually get to such high temperatures because of heat loss mechanisms and therefore has a lower degree of ionization. It is useful to make the comparison between the degree of ionization of different plasmas starting with a flame at the low end, then an arc which is a little higher, then the core of the sun which is much higher. Also, I should recommend that you try putting an arc in the magnetic field and see what happens. You can actually move the arc around more than the flame.

[@randomrandom420]

Robert Geiger thanks for explain! So... Is the fire the coldest plasma we can get? "The "lowest energetic plasma"? My "to read" stack is becoming a monster.

[@davidstrahl928]

This is easily shown by setting a candle into a capacitor and seeing that it splits into two flames parallel to the capacitors axis of symmetry kzbin.info/www/bejne/l2jCaXqZlLGfqJo

[@thethoughtemporium]

Have you considered using schlieren imaging to get a better look at how the air currents are affected by the magnets? Might give a more accurate view of what's going on. Would hopefully see the hot air be suddely affected. Also with actual fire there's a good chance the charges in the ionized gas molecules play a large role. But the just hot air thing is super weird. Great video!

[@edgeeffect]

Thanks to all the people commenting about "Schlieren imaging"... because I haven't a clue what that is.... Something new for me to read up on........ :)

[@youkofoxy]

if my memory self me well, veritasium has a video on it.

[@Kangsteri]

There is nothing weird in peltier effect. Its logical.

[@xjonnyd93x]

That would be pretty dope

[@Mr_c-tm3hu]

Yeah isn't fire-itself a plasma so the ions could be dong more here.

[@TechIngredients]

Although a candle flame (or a methanol flame) is not hot enough to ionize all the particles flowing between the poles of the magnet. There will be a small percentage of these particles that do ionize due to the statistical nature of the thermal distribution. Gas powered MHD generators benefit from this. Potassium has one of the lowest thermal ionization temperatures and is much more available than cesium. It might be interesting to see if seeding the flame with potassium carbonate would enhance the effect. By the way, very nice video!

[@mandernachluca3774]

Quick question, could water vapour play a role in this, since water is a diamagnetic element?

[@halonothing1]

I was thinking the same thing. I've done experiments where I've uccessfully been able to conduct electricity through a flame due to this effect. Keep in mind too that he's using an oxy-acetylene torch, at least in the previous video, which will be quite a bit hotter than a candle or methanol flame.

[@TechIngredients]

Did you try the potassium seeding technique? Gas driven MHD generators have been built over the past few decades, some producing ten's of kW. Almost invariably, they seed the flame with potassium even though some are approaching 3,000K. Once you have even a little conductivity in a moving gas through a magnetic field, you have Lorenz forces and you're home free. We're building something like this, so I don't want to monopolize the discussion.

[@mandernachluca3774]

+ Tech Ingredients How about these hybride rocket engines wich use a similar layout the MHD generators to basically accelerate the hot gases with a magnetic field? Is the additional weight and complexity worth the thrust gain or is it total nonsense?

[@ZegaracRobert]

Flame is ionised gas, any electrically conductive medium that moves charge interacts with magnetic field, Faraday says so... And flame is moving up magnetic perpendicular magnetic field will deflect it 90 deg means obstruction to the natural flame propagation/flow I thought that you have been beating around the bush but watched the video all the way I am pretty surprised that you did not mention that...

[@Muonium1]

This is the best fundamental science channel in existence anywhere. I wish this series would continue! The fundamental physics effects on luminous gasses and spectra are so much more interesting than just the magnet designs alone! A correction at 3:50, you aren't experimenting with the "smoke" here (ie. diamagnetic carbon/soot particles) but rather the *paraffin vapor* , this was established by Faraday in his experiments on a candle flame in the 19th century at the Royal Institution whereby he relit the candle by igniting the flammable paraffin vapor trail in air some distance away from the wick. Also I don't see anyone else having mentioned it yet, but Derek Muller demonstrated this exact same thing with the vapor in 2012 but with *electric* fields at a museum in Paris where the French call the experiment "le papillon". kzbin.info/www/bejne/l2jCaXqZlLGfqJo

[@pamersiel]

Trying to speak more precisely, it is not paraffin vapor too. It is paraffin mist.

[@Muonium1]

That is correct. If one looks very closely at the thing immediately after blowing the candle out you can see a clear region just above the hot wick where the invisible true paraffin vapor is present and a millimeter or so above that is where the white mist begins to appear. I suspect the method of electric charge accumulation on the mist droplets (as proven by this and Muller's demonstration) is not thermal in nature as Tech Ingredients here surmises the flame ionization itself is, since the wick producing the vapor/mist is barely glowing incandescent red and the Draper point is only ~500-600C, but rather that the mechanism of charge accumulation involves some kind of vapor condensation charging, perhaps somehow related to triboelectric charging. There is so much interesting undiscovered physics lying just below the surface of our everyday mundane experiences.

[@IDoNotLikeHandlesOnYT]

I always thought the relighting effect was due to incomplete combustion products (soot, carbon monoxide, etc.) in the smoke, rather than vaporized or atomized paraffin.

[@PlasmaHH]

I like your sophisticated contactor for switching the magnet.

[@gabor99]

It's realy painful to watch him arcing the contacts.

[@zetacon4]

I also noted that. I had a good laugh about that. It is called expedience.

[@axeman2638]

the coils moving as the current switches on and off is interesting as well

[@joels2923]

You can make a Schlieren imaging setup to see the flow of the hot air more easily. You may even be able to get away with simply shining a flashlight on it and observing the shadow if the index of refraction of the hot air is sufficiently different than the ambient air.

[@VKRenato]

Great video thanks. You should try with smoke in the bubble.

[@afourthfool]

Yeah, maybe the bubble is rotating faster.

[@harunlisic]

Anything a man could think of to say "It's not that, it's something else..", you've put that "Something else" in the video and proved it wrong. Well done

[@ThisOldTony]

You may have overlooked the impact of the Krasnow Effect: super cool video and its localized effect on spacetime.

[@asherdie]

You can't make videos while watching others, get back to work.

[@liamswick9622]

+This Old Tony what is the Krasnow Effect I looked it up and all I could find was physcoligy stuff

[@Yonatan24]

His last name

[@xabaer]

Very good comment, old tony!

[@infinitepower6780]

What if you suspended a piece of Dry Ice above the electromagnet poles? It might be easier to see the C02 stream flowing down.

[@skuzlebut82]

New Applied Science video means this had been a great weekend!

[@BienestarMutuo]

For understand what magnetism is, read milesmathis.com/

[@Tom-ll3tk]

You put your gas bubble in the very center of your magnet, where the field is uniform. If you want to produce a force on the bubble you should put it at the edge of the pole where the field is inhomogenous.

[@davekni]

Yes, I second your comment. Was thinking exactly the same thing. This other video using 50mm sphere magnets shows field measurements enough to guestimate gradient of field squared: kzbin.info/www/bejne/momVg2eeh6aMg8U For that video, I'm estimating about 1.0T to 0.7T over 1cm distance. If I'm calculating correctly, that makes a force just over half of the buoyancy force of hot air, based on air relative permeability being 0.37PPM above 1.

[@mahditr5023]

I love your monotone voice describing high-end scientific things. Hey guys I got a electron microscope or hey guys I did some amazing optic things and now this lovely magnetic show

[@gloverelaxis]

It's not monotone at all! In the spirit of this channel I feel I should produce a spectrograph clearly showing fundamental pitch variation but I am too lazy.

[@samykamkar]

Great tests! Very interesting. Love the EM setup.

[@montaelkins2816]

Great work! Love the way you continue to build experiments to test your hypotheses and show your negative result; most people remove those but they are educational as well

[@hrtlsbstrd]

Great work as always! As a cognitive neuroscientist, it’s refreshing to see tangible experiments on basic physical processes like this 👌

[@KevinMcIntyreinSPACE]

You need to play with schlieren photography to capture the hot airstreem deflection.

[@sef2273]

Kevin McIntyre right

[@officialspaceefrain]

+1! great suggestion.

[@solarfluxman8810]

That would probably show what's happening even better than the infrared camera setup. Great idea Kevin!

[@SixTough]

I mean the guy just did like 20 experiments though

[@SixTough]

Wei Zhao how many experiments did you publish though?

[@EugeneKhutoryansky]

Nice experiments. I was hoping that you would have a resolution to this question at the end of the video.

[@garethdean6382]

This is why I love this channel, just the documentation of investigation, exploring all the 'what about's Never change.

[@pixelspring]

It was me that posted the original comment on your first video. Firstly , I love that you took interest and built this rig to test what I mentioned. What I neglected to say in my original comment was that a portion of all flames are plasmas. Ie , former covalent bonds(or ionic depending upon what is burning) have been broken to form new bonds ( commonly oxides of course) . New molecules are forming in the oxidation process and in that process there will be a statistical population of free ions. .. it is these hot free ions that have too much energy to be able yet to form a new covalent bond with oxygen.. essentially this occurring once the process is in steady state runaway .. ie excess heat is present from other oxidations which I believe directly breaks other bonds, directly freeing atoms from their former electronic balance into an ionic state. Hot gases, less dense, rise in air and create a stream of free ions .. so the flame essentially acts as a free air electric current stream between your electro magnets. The rest is obvious and I expect I need not say more. Interestingly a candle flame in zero g burns as a sphere! .. no vectored gravitational field to create the differentiated bouancy force. Love your channel btw. Brilliant return to the original experiment with the sodium in the vial! Great work as always! PS. An interesting experiment might be burning different materials and seeing if you can get different materials to deflect in different directions.. some materials might create different populations of positive or negative ion streams... Although my guess is most will be positive.. seeking to bond with negative oxygen's ? .. but I'm totally guessing here. :)

[@rowlandcrew]

Hey Ben, one Tesla and one nano coulomb in the candle plasma will make one nano Newton of force at about 1 meter/sec. about the speed of the flame moving. I did not calculate the likely mass of plasma (very small), maybe you could put a pair of electrodes in the plasma and run some current through the plasma without the magnet to estimate the conductivity for a coulomb estimate.

[@DaFinkingOrk]

Is a flame made of plasma? Because if it is, plasma is electrically conducting and effected magnetically. So that could be another cause, if my assumptions are correct?

[@kwinvdv]

RedButtonProductions I was thinking this as well, however I did a quick search of this and found a couple posts saying that the ion density in a flame is quite low. Also there shouldn't be a net flow of ions/charge, since as far as I know that starting and end products of a flame are neutral. Therefore the net Lorenz force on the ions should be zero. Unless the magnetic field would separate the positively and negatively charged ions.

[@fedas15]

I think flame is a plasma. Veritasium has a very good video titled "What's In A Candle Flame?" you should check it out. They run an electric current through a candle flame.

[@mikeguitar9769]

The ion density might be low compared to high energy plasma, but it's still high enough to have measurable conductivity with an ohm meter. Some flame sensors work this way. Given that, it still seems possible there might be some Lorenz force. It doesn't require much force to deflect a bit of hot gas/plasma. So, while the Lorenz force might not be as strong as a magnet falling through a copper pipe, a magnet is also much heavier.

[@Prophes0r]

+Fedas Veritasium is pretty frequently wrong. Either in their assumptions, or their explanation. It is a consequence of them "dumbing things down" to make them Pop-Science. That said, candle flames are not plasma. They DO have some ions. And the flame DOES kind of act like a plasma. But they don't really have enough ions to be the REASON that candle flames act like a plasma. There are other reasons that these types of soot-heavy low-temp flames act kind of like a plasma.

[@mikeguitar9769]

The question at hand is whether the Lorenz force could be deflecting the flame.

[@tomclanys]

Always delivering super high quality content. Thanks for every single informative and interesting video Ben :)

[@peterkimball3323]

For years I've been saying that a candle flame has to be a influenced by magnetism or maybe be some kind of toroidal magnetic field effect, like what you see on the surface of the sun. But its always a passing thought. I finally looked it up and I'm so glad I found your video!! Thanks

[@manjeetgodara2225]

Maybe you can try Schlieren Imaging with magnets to see the effect better.

[@cwoj100]

try using a schlieren setup to film the hot air

[@gregbrockway4452]

This is the first video of yours that I've watched, absolutely amazing! Instant sub and notification, going to go binge some more.

[@drewbransby4600]

I love your experiments, literally the best channel for those.

[@Emerson1]

plasma in the flame is probably also responding to the magnetic field

[@Emerson1]

and great video btw. thx and keep up the good work !

[@thomasmarquart]

Yes, my thought exactly. stuff becomes ionized, thus you have free charged particles that react to magnetic field.

[@longshot789]

My favorite mad scientist

[@sonyp180]

Love your videos! Keep up the good work. Its amazing what everyone can learn on youtube.

[@Hyraethian]

Thank you for building this and testing these things.

[@xPROxSNIPExMW2xPOWER]

Do you still work for googleX I feel like you do

[@AppliedScience]

I work for Verily, which grew out of Google X. I design medical device prototypes to keep people healthy and lower the cost of healthcare.

[@xPROxSNIPExMW2xPOWER]

Applied Science can do another Q&A video. Seems like it’s been forever

[@jcims]

I don't know why I'm about to share this. About three years ago I worked for Google on the security team. It didn't work out for family/relocation reasons, but during our (amazing) orientation I met an incredible young dude (i'm old) that was there on an internship. This kid was fusion reactor in the basement type smart, and among our various conversations it turns out we were both fans of your channel. Anyway, a couple months later we met for lunch in Mountain View at that cafeteria where they have bbq, pulled pork and the like, and you and a buddy walked in and had a seat. Keep in mind I was 42 years old at the time, and he and I were like little fan girls...'go say hi'...'no you!'..'no! you do it'. I don't know what is creepier, us walking up to you then or me telling you about it now, but we chickened out. I haven't talked to the kid in a while, but I checked his twitter recently and he was in Antarctica. I guess maybe I'm sharing this because I wanted you to know that your seemingly tireless search to mine the depths of nature to learn new things and, importantly, share them with the world is appreciated by young and old(ish?) alike. This video is a perfect example of that...you take a quick sidebar (that probably took a couple hours of your time) to unambiguously confirm one effect while simultaneously exploring various dimensions of another that seems to be near some frontier of unexplored phenomenon. All this while being super transparent about your methods/successes/non-successes/etc. It's super cool and inspirational and I know I speak for many when I say that it's appreciated. So just a quick pause to say thank you for sharing your pursuits with the rest of us.

[@WilliamDye-willdye]

Applied Science : Cool! I'm a research engineer working on similar instruments, though we target the animal & plant markets instead of humans. Your channel reminds me of work - lots of creative thinking to figure out what experiment is worth running next. The measurements don't scare me nearly as much as the implicit decisions of what to NOT measure whenever we decide what to measure.

[@RandyJames22]

According to their website, they're really good at comparing the size of objects to M&M's®... And probably a lot of other important, life-saving projects.

[@jort93z]

Could that possibly be because of the Senfleben-Beenakker effect and the varying thermal conductivity and viscosity of the gases based on the magnetic field strength? Just an idea.

[@pamersiel]

OMG. Yet another obscure effect added into the mess. But according to the original paper, the effect reaches saturation at 7-15T (under atmospheric pressure) and when saturated decreases heat conductivity by 0.5% and viscosity by 1%. Not too much.

[@jort93z]

hmm, true. But it could be part of why. Maybe there is something making the effect stronger here. Maybe the effect is stronger at a higher temperature, or the mix of gases makes the effect stronger, i don't think anybody has tested that. Or maybe this change in heat conductivity and viscosity in some places causes the flame to draw its oxygen from somewhere else a lot more rapidly. Theres not much known about that effect as far as i know. Just thought I'd throw that idea in there as well.

[@1stplace40]

Interesting I do a lot of fire walking before I walk I increase my vibration ie my magnetic field as a result I feel very little heat on the Fire when I walk across. I believe you nailed it, the reason I can do that is because of magnetism Thank you brother keep up the great work

[@idiotwithasolderingiron]

This is a hell of a rabbit hole can't wait to see where it goes love the videos keep up the good work

[@qevvy]

The smoke from an extinguished candle (mostly) isn't smoke, it's paraffin vapour...

[@azz2]

I think it's a mixture. If you look at a wick just as it's blown out you will see an ember glowing on the wick for a second or two

[@MarkTillotson]

Not just vapour, the visible component is a "smoke" of recondensed paraffin liquid - or would that be called paraffin steam? Maybe an experiment with liquid paraffin is worth checking?

[@ortusdux]

Exactly. A good way to demonstrate this is to use a lighter to ignite the gaseous wax. You can actually relight a candle from a foot away.

[@MrTurboturbine]

You need to cool your electromagnet with liquid nitrogen for maximum power

[@JGnLAU8OAWF6]

Liquid helium is waay better.

[@MarkTillotson]

Except that cryogenic temperatures might make the magnet core brittle unless its specially formulated - although the prospect of superconducting windings is alluring, liquid helium might allow that, but not easy to achieve!

[@TarisRedwing]

Man you videos are so relaxing. I wish you made videos more often :D

[@hhaxden]

I would really like to see the effect of changing the orientation of the magnetic field relative to the motion of the candle flame. It might help give an idea of how significant the effect of Faraday's law type of forces are in comparison to the purely magnetic effects.

[@KallePihlajasaari]

Hmm, just tilting the magnet arrangement 30 degrees and checking might spark some ideas.

[@SafetyLucas]

The 'smoke' from a freshly blown out candle isn't carbon, it's paraffin vapors condensing in air.

[@fromjesse]

Well, part true, part not. It is true that there is a lot of paraffin mist. But when you first blow out the candle, often times the carbonized part will continue to burn with a small flameless ember as the carbon burns partially. So during the time that there is the little ember burning, there will also be carbon monoxide and possible carbon dioxide.

[@subigirlawd_7307]

I love science ❤

[@username4441]

ok..

[@justus1995]

Friend of mine works for Siemens, maintaining MRIs, one really interesting effect he told me about is that their magnetic fields can be strong enough to mess with your short term memory if you move fast enough in its vicinity

[@nickthorpe7567]

Incredible! Love videos like this of you just exploring with curiosity!

[@joeldufour3714]

Why not construct a partial toroid core magnet (I.e C shaped and put the target in the gap)? you might be able to build a higher field setup that way. The construction of your current setup seems pretty lossy.

[@solarfluxman8810]

While it's true that his magnetic circuit is longer than it needs to be (extra magnetic reluctance), it is also true that the magnetic domains within the iron core, align when energized, and add to the total flux.

[@ardenthebibliophile]

He's using a hemholz coil design. The field is plenty strong.

[@Basement-Science]

You can more than compensate for the non-ideal core shape by applying just slightly more current, or adding more turns while using the same current. A toroidal core will just reduce the Stray Field, which is the magnetic field that runs outside the core, through the air. This field is going to be very small already though.

[@TheLightningStalker]

If you use a permanent magnet be careful not to get it too hot.

[@electronicsNmore]

Very cool demonstrations!

[@user-cv5wo3ji8s]

Обалденный опыт ! Я даже не задумывался над этим !

[@evilcanofdrpepper]

Maybe the higher energy particles of hot air having electrons spinning faster and reacting with magnets stronger. You could also try this backwards with a doughnut shaped cup of liquid nitrogen exhausting out to the side and put paper on the bottom and see if the current of cold Air is any less reactive, maybe all the air is similarly responsive to magnets however it might be easiest to see it in hot air/ a flame. also what about using a gas and a corresponding wavelength of light that it absorbs to see the effect, also try polarizing the light, and if you think about the reaction there are electrons being transferred and maybe that gives each individual reaction a magnetic impulse that is usually random and canceling it's self out. I would be interested to see you hook the magnet up with a super sensitive current detection method and testing if you have the magnet on and you pass a Bunsen burner flame through does it effect the strength of the magnetic field at all? And what about different flames, like a pure H + 2O = H2O flame and have 2 cheap glass eye dropper tips releasing the gases almost straight up and as close to each other as you can and set it up so that you can turn the system 360 degrees or at least 180 degrees so you can see if one gas being on one side makes a difference, you want to aim for something like laminar flow with the 2 gasses on either side of a wall or at least not mixed.

[@gleaseriviera6722]

right. its like a hyperbolic demonstration of constant action and interaction? also what about Brownian motion of the particles in the air reacting to the strong magnetic field?

[@Xeno_Bardock]

Because we live in Electric Universe. Everything is electromagnetic in nature.

[@MarkTillotson]

Except everything which isn't...

[@trevorh6438]

@@MarkTillotson prove it. Thunderbolts Project

[@crimsonhalo13]

I just tried this with a tealight and two hard disk magnets. It works! So cool. :)

[@FullModernAlchemist]

Great video as always! I’m looking forward to the next one.

[@unlokia]

You are incredible. God bless you and thank you! :) Matthew.

[@ElectraFlarefire]

I really need to remember to thumbs-up your video more. They are nearly always so interesting.

[@chance1986]

The Zeeman effect is probably active here. But the Lorentz force also acts on the charged particles in the flame. Tricky to separate the two effects, but you've done a good job trying to isolate the various effects.

[@yannicmeyer421]

Awesome series of experiments, that was pretty fun !

[@ThePolysyllabist]

Absolutely fascinating. Wonderful experiments. Great job.

[@gloverelaxis]

god i love this channel. what a treasure it is

[@Yossus]

This is really cool! I only recently noticed this effect in a classroom demo - we use flames to induce sparks between arcing horns connected to a high voltage transformer. A fascinating investigation, thank you!

[@Yossus]

Now that I think about it, it's more that an electric field apparently also repels flames. That seems to have to do with the ions in the flame though, I think. But maybe it's also connected to your effect!

[@realcygnus]

One of thE Best channels around imo

[@jamesmcginn6291]

Excellent demonstration. And I really appreciate the level-headed reasoning that follows. I think it's the gaseous H2O in the flame that is causing the difference and that mostly has to do with the fact that gaseous H2O is highly polar while vaporous H2O is not. Surrounding the flame there is H2O in the atmosphere but it is not gaseous, it is liquid nanodroplets that are so small they appear to be gaseous. (This appearance fools a lot of people, including whole paradigms, like meteorology.) And here is the thing. Gaseous H2O is dramatically more di-electric than is vaporous H2O. This has to do with 1) the fact that vaporous H2O maintains hydrogen bonds between the various H2O molecules and gaseous H2O does not and 2) hydrogen bonds neutralize H2O polarity. There are potentially two sources of polarity activated gaseous H2O in the flame. Firstly there is the H2O that is a result of combustion and, secondly, there may also be gaseous H2O that is a result of vaporous H2O infiltrating the flame from outside and becoming gaseous due to the heat. For more details on why and how the polarity of H2O is variable and not a constant (which has long been mistakenly assumed by science) watch and study this: Pauling's Omission kzbin.info/www/bejne/n3q0hKiYjK-YhMk James McGinn

[@jamesmcginn6291]

Correction: Above I stated: Gaseous H2O is dramatically more di-electric than is vaporous H2O. I meant to say: Gaseous H2O is dramatically more diamagnetic than is vaporous H2O.

[@guillaumep.6534]

very interesting going through your thinking process and experiments. thank you for your videos and dedications to understanding (exploring home) physics.

[@irasoltis7590]

You videos are simply the best and I'm looking forward the video on magnetics. I have a few challenge projects for you: 1. Make an powerful electret 2. Make an LED from scratch 3. Make a tin sulfide thin film solar cell w/ sputtering or evaporation Thank you for your great explanations. You have taught me so much. There are so many cool phenomena I might never have known without your videos.

[@joeybushagour2612]

So cool! Great work as always Ben!

[@EngineerNick]

Brilliant as always :) Keen for your magnetics video.. the magnet in this one is awesome!

[@BakamonNO]

Nice setup and demonstration

[@alexbryer7892]

This is a question that someone posed a few years back during an undergrad course, which sparked (pun intended) a lot of interesting debate about this exact question -- so it was very cool to see this video pop up and you did a great job as usual testing hypotheses. I believe it is due to paramagnetic Oxygen molecules being organized, or aligned, inside of the magnetic field. Any flow of gas through the space, in your present cases: hot gas flowing upwards, will hence be deflected around the organized gas molecules. This can explain what you observed, the candle-smoke in particular providing a visual which seems to match such an explanation. I see others have mentioned that ionization and formation of plasma during combustion is the cause of the deflection, but ionization at candle temperatures is unlikely and I don't think such a small population of ions can account for the dramatic effects in cases where a flame is used; not to mention the flame will still have a net neutral charge.

[@LimitlessResearch]

Great setup! A few comments have already mentioned it, but the candle flame is a form of plasma which contains ions. Ions are deflected by magnetism.

[@midsummerstation3345]

Limitless Research ions are also attracted by magnets

[@mduvigneaud]

Awesome Ben! Fascinating! I want to know more! :D

[@Tech_Planet]

This a pretty incredible discovery, so many experiments to do with this!

[@skuzlebut82]

Those are some nice electromagnets. You can see the coils contracting when you connect them.

[@jordangipson1125]

Im excited for the video on magnetics! Great vid, Ben! I know this probably wouldn’t happen, but if you, Cody from Codys Lab, NightHawkInLight, Thought Emporium, Destin from Smarter Everyday, and The Action Lab could do one massive collaboration project, I think that would be awesome for us brainy types and may break KZbin! It would be really cool to see what so many great minds would come up with! Keep it up, man!

[@HMV101]

Although many old-time cinema projectionists were unaware of it, the light from a DC carbon arc was invariably stabilised by a magnetic field created either by a series connected coil situated behind the concave mirror employed (just a 4 or 5 turns were sufficient) or a single-turn loop around the flame area of the positive carbon. In the absence of either system, the flame would splutter and dance about uncontrollably resulting in reduced illumination and severe flickering of the screen image. This occasionally occurred with the latter system when an open circuit in the single turn loop developed due to the long-term effects of the high temperatures involved. (Unless he had experienced such a situation before, this non-visible fault could result in the projectionist suffering a near mental breakdown🤪).

[@SiavashFahimi]

Hi, thank you for the great video! Another explanation to consider is based on science of plasma and quantum electrodynamics. Although a candle flame does not reach a temperature to create enough ions to be considered a plasma, it still produces some free electrons that will have the highest temperature which causes other gas molecules glow in a yellow-red color. These ions are extremely responsive to magnetic fields and could be guides with a magnetic field which in result will guide the flame. This property is used to create a magnetic chamber for a fusion reactor that could handle extreme temperatures. One way to experiment this is to measure how many ions are created in a candle flame and then calculate what is the minimum magnetic force required to affect amount of hot gas in the flame. Same calculation should happen for carbon due to its magnetic response and then the sum of the two calculations should match the minimum magnetic field strength applied to move the flame in reality.

[@zetacon4]

I am fascinated by your data. Please keep reporting on this area of research. I beleive there is much to learn in the topic of magnetism and how substances react to it. Thank you for your patience in gathering information in this area.

[@trevorh6438]

You seem to be a bit late to the party, but welcome to the Electric Universe.

[@zetacon4]

@@trevorh6438 , Thank you for your kind words. I have no means of determining if I am "late" to this party, but I fully endorse the Electric Universe scientific understanding. Managing energy that constantly surrounds all of us and can be used freely, has been one of my passions for years. Your two electromagnets are lovely and they reminded me of other experimental work that has been conducted with a high degree of success. I wish you the very best as you gain more experience and understanding of how electromagnetism can be of service to mankind.

[@trevorh6438]

@@zetacon4 You seem to have mistaken me for someone else. This is not my video, I'm just a passing commenter. Please direct your kind words to the one worthy to receive them. As to the party of which i was referring, it was in regards to the up and coming scientific thought of a unified theory for the universe under plasma physics and electromagnetism. You're certainly not late there, but we are all of us late compared to Tesla.

[@zetacon4]

@@trevorh6438, I discovered my mistake of claiming the equipment and so forth were yours later on. I should have edited my comment. Again, thank you for being so kind to me. I don't know the name of the person doing the experiments in this video. I apologize for my mix-up.

[@trevorh6438]

@@zetacon4 No worries. The name of the channel appears to be Applied Science, and I suppose that moniker is good enough for attribution.

[@ducatidragon916]

back in college days i used magnetic fields to affect an argon laser i built to study the zeeman effect and the possibility of tuning and increasing the power in this laser.i found that there was indeed and increase in a particular spectral lines etc. This is was done in 1980's and of course i started to get into the free electron laser and soft xray designs etc. published some findings and went to go work at LLL labs but they had a long hiring freeze which prevented me from going to work there etc....Oh well such is life .... Nice videos keep up the good work!

[@jason1440]

Great use of the scientific method. Good job.

[@GrayGhosting]

Perhaps the flame is not deflected but rather extinguished between the poles due to oxygen deprivation in the column of heated gas as the paramagnetic O2 is pulled from the flame and concentrated on the magnet poles. Likewise the diamagnetic C2 and other combustible diamagnetic compounds are repelled from the poles: thus separating the combustion components. Interesting video!

[@aidinjavadi3622]

very well made and explained! insightful and entertaining too!

[@walterbunn280]

This is pretty interesting and kinda touches on somethings I've been curious about for a bit. The fact that they're diamagnetic is good to know. This makes the lightsaber i've been poking at much more possible. I need an AC signal to do it. not just a DC signal, which will launch/deflect the flame.

[@MrKago1]

I had a physics professor who told us about a flame speaker he had when he was younger. it used high temp electrodes in a propane flame. the alternating charges between the electrode effects the temperature of the flame, pushing air, generating sound. he said it was shockingly loud and clear.

[@00Skyfox]

Fascinating! You should try this with a hydrogen flame so the exhaust is pure water vapor, no carbon at all.

[@tiemx2039]

scientist in the truest sense, your videos are an inspiration

[@RichardKCollins]

Not sure if this will help. My first thought was the Lorentz force, with electrons and ions being affected. But someone started estimates of the conductivity and forces involved and they seemed a bit low for a fairly dramatic effect. I googled [ magnetic effect on oxygen in air ] and found oxygen enrichment with magnetic gradients. The density of the flame should be lower, perhaps in relation to its velocity. Could it be the magnet is attracting the oxygen into the region between the poles and forcing the non magnetic and lower density flame out of the way? One reason progress in controlling plasmas and flames with fields is slow, it the multiple sensors and simultaneous careful measurements needed. You have been methodical and creative in separating out the various possibilities. Your sodium vapor, Faraday effect confirmation deserves more time and applause. The Schlieren method suggestion was good. There are a LOT of aeronomy technologies now. If you use permanent magnets, and move them in a controlled manner, you might be able to sort out some of what is happening. But that would produce motion of the air. If you use permanent magnets and a small modulating coil, a sensitive detector could perhaps see the modulation in the density of the air above the flame. Schlieren could probably see that.There are so many ways to go. Seeding with sodium or potassium will introduce conducting species. I do not envy you doing this without several supporting groups to keep notes and do the research to help you. You google for a few hours or a few days, but some of these problems people have spent their lives at and they still are not sure - mostly because of the lack of experiments on some things. And the lack of tools and instruments to sort things out. If you put a magnetically permeable (ferrite?, cobalt iron?) material near the flame, and permanent magnet moving behind a wall, to change the field near the flame you could modulate the magnetic field without disturbing the air by movements. You need to calculate and measure the actual magnetic field, measure the speed and composition of the flame. measure the temperature distribution of the flame, be careful eventuallly about tracking the humidity and atmospheric pressure. I suppose you could have a jet of just air, and inject electrons and ions by laser ionization or electrical ionization. With different gases you could control how much energy you put into them and know their ionization to begin to understand gas/ion flows, and the effects of diamagnetic forces and magnetic forces - remembering that the magnetic force is mostly dB/dt and Grad B related. You are good with correlating signals, so modulating "something" is your fastest route to getting measurements. And getting measurements is the fastest way to control. You are doing a good thing, but videos only attract attention and document images that humans can see. But progress comes when you start using tools to record, and Quantify, the things we cannot see. That thermal camera was excellent. You just need to count the pixels and intensities, form a hypothesis about what is happening, and try to model and predict, then test.

[@davesextraneousinformation9807]

I love a mystery! I propose setting up a Schleren (sp?) camera and flow gasses in the air, through the gap. You would free the gas flow from any restrictions of a bubble that way. Differing density from air might mess things up but perhaps heating or cooling the stream could counter that. Now my simple idea just got complicated.

[@IncroyablesExperiences]

So clever while trying hypothesis, it changes from KZbin "science", great !! :)

[@stemtuber]

Nice. I was skeptical following the first video, but find the metallic sodium absorption modulation to be a compelling demonstration of the Zeeman effect. BTW, diamagnetism/paramagnetism require a field gradient to be manifest. So by placing the bubbles in the center of the poles where the field is most uniform, you have minimized any effect you might observe.

[@zyxzevn]

Nice finding of the diamagnetism. And testing of paramagnetism. This effect is also caused by the magnetic braking effect caused by eddy-currents in plasma. The magnetic field brakes the plasma. Just like a magnet dropping in the copper tube.

[@DanieleGiorgino]

Really cool demo.

[@jaybingham3711]

You, sir, are hereby bestowed a great big, heartfelt South Park...NIIICCCEEEEE

[@TRX450RVlogger]

Wow! The Semen Effect is cool!

[@weswest8666]

This was recommended to me, very cool!

[@allensmith9062]

Hey, my understanding of this is that a flame is a "partial plasma" as only a small percentage of the gas is ionized. It stands to reason that when in motion through a magnetic field there will be deflection. This effect is used to confine plasma in fusion reactors.

[@Craigdna]

Brilliant work. I wonder if fires can be fueled more on days when our field strength is greater. Helps in understanding solar flares in a laboratory. That is a huge difference. Thank you for all of your efforts and troubleshooting.

[@pauljs75]

The hot air is moving with a convection current. So because any charge it carries is moving, it also has an electrical current. (Albeit it's very weak.) This is likely why the magnet affects it. Also seemingly mundane stuff like this may have use in some applications. Might allow more efficient operation of jet engines by better isolating heat and limiting heat transfer in the burners.

[@andreassilva5643]

Interesting! Just saw this video, so I went into the kitchen and grabbed a small lighter torch we use for lighting grills and such, and a neodymium magnet that came with a ferrocell I bought online. Sure enough, with the lighter braced against the edge of the counter and the magnet pressed hard against the counter top (the lighter’s end is metal so it’s tough to keep them from clamping together without clamping them in anything mechanical), there is a small but unambiguous outward push on the flame as the magnet is slowly slid toward it. i never knew that.

[@gigglysamentz2021]

Well played, good science !

[@KimKim565]

I have a theory(warning: I have a tendency to be right. It tends to annoy people). The flame is a chemical reaction occuring, which is inhibited(on the molecular level) by a magnetic field. It makes sense to me that this would also affect the miscibility of hot and cold air, to a certain degree. I dont know many chemical reactions, but I’m thinking a quick and easy test could be something with a colorchange, for example KMnO4(aq) and NaOH(aq) in a slim chamber between your magnets there, and see if there is a delay in colorchange where the field is stronger. As always an interesting video, this channel is golden 👌

Nice experiment!

[@Contango1000]

Love this stuff!!! As a sceptic to just about anything, including Descartes, I love these experiments. We only did so many in school, and some of them actually blew my mind off. Especially Young´s double slit experiment. My first thought on any result from this video was far from anything presented, but it was also what I wanted clear off the table from get-go. Air temperature. Please do many more experiments on this. My intuition tells me it has nothing to do with air temp! What about a macro scale magnetic Casimir effect? Warped space due to energy density, invisible (as always) gravitons. Einstein's unified field theory. You get the point. Do more research please. Love your channel :-)