Chain Fountain Dispute

[@ElectroBOOM]

Thanks to @SteveMould for battling this out with me! Every time I feel I know something a debate like this shatters some of my thoughts and makes me think harder. Make sure to check Steve's first video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/p4Wvg2p8rL2Ii5Y and NOW his second video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/mJTWk2SudttqjqM that is way more convincing! Does it mean I may lose my 10000 cents?! Eh, it is for science so that's fine. But I haven't given up just yet!

[@TheSoundMan1]

You are right on the timing read my comment! Sorry for all the edits I had to keep fixing it!

[@darksector1389]

Loved both explanations but your force analysis seems to be correct compared to Steve's. To mention the upward force against gravitational force is very important. Also your 2D explanation just won the whole debate. It was a genius way of explaining it. As Persians say: kheyli ghashang tozih dadi 😄

[@Mirrikat45]

I love debates like this for this reason. I wish more people would argue with me!

[@bruggetje]

Your both wrong, its the law of inertia. As these chains have the mass it requires to keep moving. Give me the 10000 cents instead, I am so poor I din't had a real lunch for years! :(

[@TheSoundMan1]

@@bruggetje I don't think that is the case inertia would apply in the siphoning effect because the chain is at a higher starting point than the end point that is lower but there has to be some kind of compensation from 0 energy at normal gravity and something moving faster than gravity read my comment hopefully it will make sense.

[@veritasium]

Ngl this is pretty convincing

[@resham9914]

Finally

[@qwertyasdfg4932]

Do a vid too 🤣

[@jagadishk4513]

Do a video on it pretty please

[@GarrettBlackmon]

Just wait, my boy is coming for your magical wind car...

[@sixty502]

Ayy veritasium

[@MrArlenBrazill]

"It's a mechanical problem, so as an electrical engineer I'm over qualified," had me in stitches.

[@Palestine-first]

hhhh me to

[@FelonyVideos]

Its true, though.

[@Palestine-first]

@@FelonyVideos yes %100

[@lyndonthan4350]

...But Whatever !

[@zachxiong2657]

Fucking love this

[@trungvy6221]

when he didn't zap himself, you know he's serious

[@FindLiberty]

He came so close at 13:37 lol

[@PianoMastR64]

I thought for sure he was gonna find a way to zap himself with the battery

[@drumnotdrum9262]

No zap, I thought I’d be disappointed. This was a great video!

[@ShortHax]

Alright ElectroBOOM, I think you’re now ready to fight Veritasium...

[@solchapeau6343]

Veritasium once said that if you sneeze while driving you'd very likely crash your car. Yet that has never happened.

[@paddington1670]

@@solchapeau6343 1 second of unescapable inattention is still one full second that anything can happen. He's not wrong, but the probability doesnt change much in a measurable way, just theoretical.

[@theheadofthetable1734]

@@solchapeau6343 I mean the chances are low but never 0

[@JustinLSly]

What would happen if you did this experiment at 500m meters above sea level, the results would be different because of the gravitational force of earth acting on the chain.

[@mitulsingh473]

lol

[@jeremyzee]

I want to see the behind-the-scenes footage of Medhi running down his hallway as fast as he can

[@fleinze]

1:40 "It's a mechanical problem so as an electrical engineer I'm over qualified" loving it

[@storms13]

I’ve never felt so insulted in my life

[@thegreenxeno9430]

hahahehahehahehahaha

[@061banyon]

Hilarious!

[@Чернобог-ц5ж]

I love the way he says “negligible” so much that I’ve started saying it that way. Feels much better

[@jennidoyle]

"Ignore the friction for now" sounds like engineering

[@RussellTeapot]

Pi equals 3

[@SergioEduP]

@@RussellTeapot close enough for now.

[@BudgiePanic]

@@RussellTeapot I'm gonna approximate 4 = 3.

[@Bob5mith]

It's the spherical cows in a vacuum all over again.

[@Electricz0]

Sounds like physics 101.

[@iain_nakada]

"At home we have a central vacuum system with the hose inside the wall." Wait... what? I think I've just come across something that perplexes me more than the Mould effect.

[@aftokratory]

Yeah same! I have never seen anything like that

[@jamisonw.327]

A lot of upper class houses in the Midwest have something similar. I prefer a regular vacuum personally, but it's nice for quick clean ups. My friend had one growing up.

[@jurivlk5433]

That was common for the first vacuum cleaners like 100 years ago but I never imagined it still would exist in a place other than a museum! I was perplex!

[@drasco61084]

Our house has this haha but it has never worked as far as I know..

[@k7y]

Some of the house in the NA have these and they all connect to a massive vacuum pump in the gurage or the basement. Usually it's just ports installed in the wall where you can attach a massive hose.

[@romulusxyz6722]

I don't know you personally, but I love ya Mehdi. You are one of my favorite humans. I hope you continue to find happiness in educating all of us, because you are damned good at it. Thank you for teaching us, and having a great sense of humor while doing so lol

[@mahmoudgaber5347]

"and since I'm electrical engineer, I'm over qualified" 😂😂

[@FilmFlam-8008]

As a mechanical and electrical engineer with background in both fields, I agree. Mechanical engineers can forget the forest for the trees. If electrical engineers forget, they get shocked into remembering.

[@EnthalpyAndEntropy]

@@FilmFlam-8008 chemical engineer here. You're not wrong.

[@Sarghe420]

“But i have more subscribers”

[@transfo47]

@@FilmFlam-8008 Most MechEs would agree.

[@Talishar]

@@FilmFlam-8008 I feel that MechEs are probably all forest and less about the specific trees. They get inundated with so much general, broad knowledge that much of the specialized stuff is pushed off to engineering specializations or to technical electives in grad school.

[@danielbruin]

Practical demonstrations instead of formulas, LOVE IT!

[@SherinFunmes]

He is a different kind

[@BartiX-on4wn]

I might be wrong, but it seems like it's your first comment on your channel (you have never commented from this channel before)

[@astronichols1900]

@@BartiX-on4wn I might be wrong, but it seems like shorts are short pants (pants that have been made shorter)

[@BartiX-on4wn]

@@astronichols1900 I might be wrong, but it seems like you've beaten me (you used a good argument)

[@ukmaxi]

I mean, you need both ultimately.

[@TimeBucks]

you've explained this well.

[@KevinDSaputra]

I hope Mehdi win

[@Sheikrisvan1991]

Well trained

[@Rivalerouse]

palonsinger

[@BoneyMalone]

I don't care about the chains, that "central vacuuming system" is insane, I've never even heard of one before. Definitely adding to my build list

[@faokie]

It's way better than the one in my house. I've got pipes in the wall and a big central pump, but they only provide suction. The hose is external and I have to lug the entire thing all over the house. I used it for a while when I first moved in but now I've gone back to using a normal vacuum.

[@guyonearth]

These used to be fairly common. They've been around for many years. Very common in industry, especially woodworking.

[@tier3rd375]

Central vacuum systems are nothing new. They're seen more in commercial buildings than residential homes. If you want a home with central vacuuming, you're better off having it installed during construction as it can be a pretty pricey upgrade to tear open the drywall and run pipes for it.

[@ThisNameWasntTaken]

how does this thing work? does it just constantly suck?... like me in life...

[@JensAndree]

@@ThisNameWasntTaken There are many different versions. The cheapest "central vacuum cleaner" (as they're called here in Scandinavia where these were almost standard in every house built in the 80's) you turned on with a switch (like a lamp). Others have a simple microswitch in the lid/hatch, or just some pins in the lid that lets the electronics know it's been opened. There are also wireless variants that via radio signals to start the vacuum, either automatic or manually. Today they aren't common because they are much more expensive to install than buying a standard vacuum cleaner, and when they break many just buy a new much cheaper vacuum cleaner instead of repairing the central one. Industrial variants are way beefier with 3-phase motors and frequency control so that several hoses can be active at the same time. For home usage though it's not worth the installation cost, although modern ones with HEPA filters doesn't require an outlet hole to be drilled in an exterior wall to let the air out since they sufficiently clean the air to be let back into the house. Fun fact: many kids toys got "disappeared" when they were playing next to these wall outlets and curiosity made them lifting the lid... Anything close to these outlets and was small enough vanished - and mum/dad had to go on a retrieval mission in the big bag of dust and nasties... ;)

[@thecoolring6431]

12:44 "Loud noise means much banging" ~Electroboom 2021

[@ujjwal2473]

oww senpai that hurts :/

[@parthgulati4675]

😂😂😂😂

[@Oscar4u69]

can confirm

[@IllusiveChristie]

We saw this once happen on a tanker. The winch mechanism broke, and the anchor dropped so fast that the chain was whipping on the deck. The chain is massive and had so much weight it tore pieces of metal off around the hole where it normally comes out.

[@doaimanariroll5121]

Mehdi- proud owner of 10,000 Canadian cents and discovered the Mehdi constant.

[@douglasparkinson4123]

Mehdi Constant. We capitalise both the name and the word constant.

[@harleyspeedthrust4013]

4:43 could have just said "at home, we have a glory hole" On a serious note though this explanation does make sense. The 2D test was also brilliant

[@AmityPost]

Yeah but, his demonstrations only work without gravity. The shocking effect of the fountain is that it goes against gravity. His don't.... So there must be something more to it. Steve has an explanation. Electroboom has a test that only works without gravity. 😕

[@harleyspeedthrust4013]

@@AmityPost yeah I saw Steve's response not too long ago. I am on team Steve now - his explanation does make sense and the distinction between the fountain rising and the fountain falling is a very important one

[@NickSklias]

Mehdi: "it's not gonna be a funny video" The video: literally oozing with hilarity

[@bernds6587]

came for the dispute, stayed for the central vacuum system. Didn't know you can make it self-retract nowadays. Saw a few several years ago where you still had to carry around the hose, and plug it in.

[@PowerElectronic]

"Its a mechanical problem, so as an electrical engineer I an overqualified..." lol

[@charlesh6519]

I work with some electrical engineers that have this mentality!

[@mcboat3467]

@@charlesh6519 true

[@hellzaid]

Damn , that hurts

[@charlesh6519]

@@hellzaid Ist not all of you engineereds that are that way, just some!

[@thewills8607]

It's the whip effect! Its like when you swing a towel slowly forward and pull back really hard, your best friend gets a massive shock from behind. The force is whipping it up and the weight is adding hight to the wip. Add waight to the first ball see if it goes higher faster, boom

[@randomstuff6786]

the most impressive thing here was discovering a "central vacuum" system existed lol

[@MrMattumbo]

Yeah I'd like to see a whole video just about that!

[@urbannanni5864]

My friend has one in his house. The suction motor and fan exhaust are downstairs, along with a huge dust container and filter system. The only thing you hear is the sound of air rushing in to the tool. There's also a special plugin for electric power to the beater bar in the tool. When you're done, unplug the electronics and you're done.

[@pungskum]

What? It is supercommon here in Sweden

[@sapincher]

@@pungskum Never heard of it at all here, USA

[@tomhsia4354]

@@sapincher I've seen it a lot up North in Canada.

[@miamijefe7793]

Each ball has it's own gravity force with accumulates causing a chain reaction

[@ojonasar]

I’m with you on this one. The chain in the cup is being lifted up by the failing chain, therefore it has momentum. It then has to transition from upwards, to sideways and then to downward, in an arc.

[@markrichards5630]

I'm with you on this one. Funny that Mehdi mentions "infinite acceleration" because this is kind of the reason. If things could change their acceleration infinitely fast then the chain wouldn't need the loop to transition through all the different vectors of the momentum. I've always thought everyone was over-thinking this. Shouldn't there be a relationship between the mass of each link (and therefor its momentum) and the height of the chain? And wouldn't testing different masses and loop heights provide the proof? Or would the higher mass of a heavier links cancel out its greater momentum (and therefore any height increase in the loop ) against gravity?

[@SteveMould]

Brilliant video as always, though I'm sad you didn't shock yourself. Couldn't you have stuck the chain into the mains or something?! I have a thought about the horizontal experiment you do with the spaced out rows of chain (this is copy/paste from my reply to you in the comments on my video!): I don't believe you demonstrate the chain fountain here. The arc never gets "higher" than where it started 10:17 (I put "higher" in speech marks because the experiment is horizontal, but you know what I mean - "higher" means "to the right" in the case of your experiment). Yes, the loop gets longer when measured from the top of the pile (because the top of the pile moves to the left, but that's just how chains behave, once you're in steady state the chain will just flow through whatever shape it has. The fact that the peak of the loop actually moves "down" (to the left) in your experiment is probably due to friction and due to the fact that you don't start in steady state. The same is true for the experiment you do off the whiteboard 15:56. You lift it up before pulling it down. It's already up to speed by the time you let go and so almost steady state - the chain then just flows through the loop you gave it. It doesn't rise any higher than that. I would be convinced that I was wrong if you could show, with spaced out beads, the fountain rising after you let go.

[@ElectroBOOM]

Sticking chain in outlet would mess with space-time continuum! You say "the chain will just flow through whatever shape it has" like it is much different than the Mould effect. But the Mould effect is just that, conservation of momentum and that's why the chain tends not to change shape. In my 2D test the fact that the loop is getting larger should be proof enough, and perhaps I could convince you the chain would rise "higher" if I could run faster! In my test friction is always against the motion of the chain in any direction. And I'm pretty sure my last white board test would start to rise on its own too if I had a much longer chain and higher drop AND a way to make sure those pesky strings don't tangle! Even in my 2D tests the chain lifted itself off the ground if you look closely. Eh... maybe we should revisit this with a bunch of new tests!!

[@JjMn1000]

Hi Steve

[@Sosigfsa]

@@JjMn1000 ok

[@youronlygamer9069]

Hahaha science legends intheir fields..😆😆😆

[@demonking1101]

ever wonder how a war between tesla and edition was.....

[@droussel7359]

I love those "science fights"! I can show those to my kids and tell them that's how things are supposed to be done.

[@markpostgate2551]

"two gentlemen having a civilized scientific disagreement... to the death!" That line is brilliant! I got tears in my eyes now.

[@PunknDestroy]

I've seen heavy rope do this looping thing when boats drop anchor. always thought it was cool.

[@danb4376]

Also on chain falls or manual overhead rool up doors. Once you get the chain moving fast it’s easy to observe the effect.

[@bojassem12]

I first watched Steve's explanation and thought it was the correct one. I thought that there's no way that Mehdi can disprove him. After watching this I stand corrected. Great debate guys! Would love to see a third video with the bet settled

[@FinBoyXD]

You should go watch steves video now if you havent already. I watched them in this order as well and after every video I've been persuaded.

[@User0000000000000004]

I never thought Steve's explanation made any sense because it sounds like a scam. It doesn't make any sense at all. Never has. Publishing a paper doesn't make someone right.

[@bojassem12]

@@User0000000000000004 you should watch the rest of the videos buddy

[@BadvisionStudios]

"it's a mechanical problem, so as an electrical engineer, I'm overqualified" SOLID BURN!! 😂

[@mitsos306ify]

As an electrical engineer, I totally agree!!!

[@Rig0r_M0rtis]

As a mechanical engineer I don't see any reasonable application of this effect. So sure, keep it.

[@cyancoyote7366]

As a technician, I have to think a bit harder about it than engineers, but I'll find a way to make the effect useful in the real world!

[@SimoWill75]

When I first saw this effect I imagined it was a stationary wave. Similar to when you flick a wave down a rope, except instead of the wave travelling down the rope, the wave is stationary and the chain travelled around the wave.

[@dkosmari]

It's similar in nature, yes. Same thing with whips. The inertia of the medium is intrinsically related to the existence of the waves.

[@TrapperAaron]

This is by far a better explanation. Anyone who has ever been to a rodeo has seen these forces in spectacular effect. Or even better is video of hot rolled steel wire manufacturing. Dudes are whipping steel rods thru dies going 40mph.

[@Nimajneb78]

In each of the examples on the floor, there was a friction capable of helping each chain reach the Mould effect. The answer may fall under fluid dynamics. If my theory is correct, it would be similar to racing cars running in a line. In a group, they cut the air more effectively. All the cars in a line can move faster and more efficiently through the air resistance. They create their own onvelope of air and all cars in the line benifit. In contrast, if a car tries to leave the line, there is air flow trying to force it back into line. Anyone who has tried to pass a big rig on the freeway has felt the air the truck is pushing their car. In the case of the ball chain, the shape and speed of the chain allow it to slip through the air like cars Drafting each other. It is why the chain can fall faster than other objects at terminal velocity. When the chain is moving slower, it has less of an effect on each ball. The arch is much smaller if present at all. Cars need to be doing around 70mph to do a proper draft. The faster the chain gets moving, the greater the difference there is between the outside force of the resting air and the air inside the envelope that the motion of the chain has created. If my thought on this are true, it should not work if done in a vacuum. Additional testing could be done on more aerodynamic, fluid chains to see if a greater effect is seen or, if an adjustment to the aerodynamics of the existing success could give a more efficient/higher arch. The surface in the cup is not firm enough for the force in the cup to have an effect. All the balls role all over the place in the cup. Their is no firm push that I see. Oddities in air or a brief change in the speed of the chain caused by imperfections in the ball chain could be the cause for why there is sometimes a second loop or a less linear line. Imperfect flow causes a dirting up of the flow of air causing brief deceleration that is then overcome by gravitational flow. Just some thoughts.

[@TheRealZplif]

8:03 is it just me or does that explain why steve broke his chain at the higher try in his video?

[@debakroy1842]

you might be right. I think so too

[@fabienherry6690]

Actually it's funny because i think both explanation might be kinda true . The conservation of momentum and balancing of force might be the reason why an thing like that could occur and the leverage effect is what allow for change and friction to be ignored . I guess only if we CAN ignore friction we can have an answer

[@wrex509]

This was the same thought I had. The greater the drop the longer gravity has to affect it, the higher force pulling through the chain, but also the greater velocity, throwing the chain up and thus higher it goes before curling back down.

[@spifariffic]

My jaw dropped when your 2D tests worked on basically everything... explain THAT, Cambridge! I do think the propagating wave theory that Atomic Shrimp talked about has some merit and deserves further exploration as well. I'd love to see your take on that

[@No-uc6fg]

1:07 She's grown so much. It feels like it was yesterday when electrocute was a toddler. Time flies, man. Where did my last 10 years go.

[@MohsinExperiments]

You are going towards self actualisation.

[@mattsains]

The vacuum hose convinced me, it looks exactly like momentum

[@leerman22]

It looks like a standing whip wave. All momentum in more ideal conditions (less friction).

[@nightjaronthegate]

The explanation is very simple and everyone seems to have missed it. The only forces that need to be considered are gravity and the tension in the chain. To work well the phenomenon requires a chain without stiffness that is nearly frictionless in motion but lumpy enough to prevent transmitting tension through the pile in the beaker. The fountain effect is then an inevitable result of the chain falling. The speed of the moving part of the chain is the same throughout its length except where it is starting to rise and unwinding from the pile. As it starts to fall it accelerates and the tension pulling the chain in the beaker is the weight of the falling chain below the level of the pile. This means that before it reaches the floor the force pulling the chain upwards out of the beaker is many times more than the weight of chain being pulled, so it accelerates upwards very rapidly and cannot change direction quickly enough to avoid rising above the rim. The only forces acting on the chain as it rises are gravity and tension, which acts along the chain. The tension is much greater than gravity and only acts downwards on the part of the chain that has passed the peak. The idea of the beaker and chain pile providing a force to push the chain upwards is obvious nonsense. All it does is stop the chain falling through the bottom; a stationary body does not accelerate another body upwards except in bouncing. When the other types of chain fail to produce fountains it is because the resistances to motion slow them down too much.

[@nightjaronthegate]

@Jessica💋 Sweety Hotgirl - Vlogs No, I got it wrong! The chain needs limited flexibility so that it can't change direction very quickly, otherwise it doesn't rise above the rim. If it has no stiffness it only need to have very small length of chain changing direction at any time so the weight of the falling chain can produce very high acceleration. It needs some springiness as it approaches its maximum "bentness." That makes it push back like a pole vault pole, and this effect operates both in the beaker and in the fountain. It is like bouncing. The potential energy of the falling chain is not all converted to kinetic energy; some is transferred to the parts of the chain that are being bent, and then used to kick the chain upwards and over the rim.

[@jakelancaster5889]

This makes so much more sense especially with the ground experiment

[@2S1L3NT]

YOU WIN! And I personally think you won the right to rename this: "the Boom effect" 🤣

[@Corbald]

I think you've got it, Medhi, You got my vote.

[@alialiei249]

He is mehdiiiiiii Not medhi🙄

[@TheFloatingSheep]

@@alialiei249 HE BIT, HE GOD DAMN BIT

[@Corbald]

@@alialiei249 No one else I have _ever known,_ in my entire life, has shared that name. Forgive me, oh Mighty Intellect, for not knowing how to spell it, as I shall forgive you for using absolutely zero grammar.

[@alialiei249]

@@Corbald nevermind bro, you right

[@unclebirdman]

Any slight rise gained by the chain from rest is amplified by the increasing speed of chain falling.

[@jayneethereal4014]

I'm so dead at the cutoff scream of him dumping boxes on his daughter lmao

[@IBWatchinUrVids]

Electrocute's piano skills are becoming very, very good!

[@MrCavityMan]

As much as I care about the physics, I'm so much more delighted by the reasonable, rational and friendly way that you two have conducted the debate.

[@davidjohnston4240]

"It's made of friction" - Sounds like the management at the place I work.

[@keglito]

Bro be careful your boss doesn't read this😂

[@monad_tcp]

wait, isn't that the purpose of management ? to create friction and stop changes ?

[@thefoe76]

2D test was game changer, good work.

[@cameroncolfack7623]

"as an electrical engineer I am overqualified" Had my dying xD

[@nitinkantsharma2694]

5:34 I like how Mehdi hits his head so hard that it made a sound like a dead ping pong ball

[@Zareen668]

👁️👄👁️

[@Brack_86]

Your own floor test doesn't support your ideas. Notice that the arc "descends" toward the direction you run instead of increasing in/maintaining a constant "height". You could say that some of this is due to the friction of scraping against the floor, but I think it's more likely that the arc existing at all in the 'bottomless/bounceless' floor tests is due to friction. Also, the initial vacuum tie-in seems too far removed and its diagram is closer to an example of the snapback effect with suction acting as additional tension on the hollow rope.

[@Porglit]

12:43 "Loud noise means much banging" Truer words have never been spoken. For real, though, I think your explanation makes WAY more sense.

[@roshanmohamed7292]

13:05 " 2 D floor Trick " Haaah... You got me there buddy 🤣

[@ashwanishahrawat4607]

1:05 I watched it twelve time, The reaction was exactly what i needed to start my day at work.

[@diggoran]

The perfectly cut scream makes it so satisfying

[@DrR1pper]

The lever arm explanation also helps explain why a falling chain will fall faster than a free-falling object.

[@char747]

Gotta love someone doing actual science and getting actual data.

[@RobertHamon]

Mehdi's constant. Coming soon to a (good) science book near you!

[@thunderturbine8860]

*this

[@thedoeverything418]

69th like

[@nathanielsantana403]

A mechanical principal from an eletrical engineer

[@movin3148]

But thing is that time constant changes with the acceleration, so itll be mehdis constant only on earth 😂

[@robspiretechnologies3819]

This is pretty convincing, my intuition and understanding goes with Mehdi, being a mechanical engineer myself, he has convinced my not so mechanical brain. I think the mould effect has more in common with a typical whip. If the chain keeps on accelerating (without breaking) it can even produce a sonic boom just like we see in a whip.

[@InitialDreadly]

I don't think the sonic boom would happen. Whips are designed to do so by tapering to a thinner point at the end. If it were that easy to produce the boom, the whip would not exist and people would just use regular ropes. You are on the right train of thought tho, just need to take a few more variables into account.

[@221b-l3t]

Non supersonic whips have been around for thousands of years. You forget the primary use is not sound but to beat the shit out of someone. Cat of nine tails has knots at the end, so it gets thicker and I doubt it goes supersonic. But it does the job in two dozen or less.

[@asadabdulqaabir4006]

@@InitialDreadly and how about a wet towel? For thousands of years people have been bullied with that in baths. And the sonic boom produced by a pouch sling? The rope in a sling literally has a knot at the end in order to work. So, no, there are more things than whips out there capable of crack.

[@holydoggo7925]

Mould effect is like when you whip a rope, like in the cowboy's movie.

[@javanpannadi]

Exactly

[@TechyBen]

Yeah, knew this could not be leverage as I've seen the trick done with rope.

[@Ismael900G]

I think that only happens if you give the rope an initial whip, let's say an initial "wave" to keep going through the rope, but in Mould's video at 1:09 he just drops one end of the chain (he doesn't whip it or give any initial extra force) and "out of nowhere" the chain starts to raise up. Maybe gravity and/or some other forces involved end up creating the wave as the chain is droping out, idk. But I don't think it's exactly the same as whiping a rope (like when you have the rope extended on the floor and whip it vertically and you can see the wave traveling through) Please excuse my english, not my first language

[@Father.Osiris]

@@Ismael900G the "whip" action is the force of gravity pulling the end downward. That's why it also works when you pull the chain on a flat surface. When you do the trick with rope the amount of energy your arm puts into it correlates to the height of the loop, whereas the chain increases the size of the loop as more of it is pulled out. That's also why doing it higher up makes a bigger loop because the more chain that can be in free fall, the more mass it has to build up energy.

[@AlekseyOrekhov42]

Huge +1. In this video, they use a motor to rotate a loop of rope going the opposite direction of the wave and it looks very similar kzbin.info/www/bejne/eIS2lpaggLere6c

[@aidenwood3800]

Watched Mould's video and thought okay this is right, then I watched this and totally switched my point of view Boom is definitely right here.

[@endlessblog4163]

The 2D tests are really excellent. It seems like it would be really helpful to vary acceleration, both in terms of measuring the time constant and the 'height' of the effect. Also to show whether the height of the effect is related to how many layers of separated 'coil' have been lifted.

[@Geovideo333]

It is my firm belief that these two guys teamed with the Smarter Every Day guy could solve any physics problem on the earth, or nearby. That would be a show everyone would watch

[@Foobar_The_Fat_Penguin]

I go with Mehdi. He's obviously The Chosen One™, as evidenced by the unibrow.

[@tommyhaumi]

And the subscriber count

[@dinamosflams]

him: "TASTE THE POWER OF KIWIKO!" his daughter: "ÆUGH!"

[@oswaldhomolka]

"Honey, it's 4pm, time for your kiwico ad" "Yes father"

[@Circuit_Whisperer]

Shouldn't we be calling it the "Whip Effect"? I noticed the chain is constantly trying to whip when you used the link chain instead of the ball chain on the floor.

[@danb4376]

I agree. The whole reason that an actual whip works is because of this whip effect.

[@anamebanane7431]

This is how people normally whip things like chains ,i think the only reason people call it "the mould effect" is because he was the first big youtuber to make a video about it.

[@nicholascopsey4807]

Ya, I don't like it when someone decides to name an established effect after themselves because they talked about it to the public.

[@utterfuckwit84]

@@nicholascopsey4807 he didn't name it after himself though. check your facts before getting upset

[@kaikart123]

Agree, because this is not constrained to chains. Any rope like thing that is heavy enough could do this.

[@jungleberry933]

the "chain's wieght" taht u created using fishing line use are potentially very heavy as compared to that chain balls ....talking of 5 inches only they would probably wiegh more and hence the upward momentum isnt strong enough on the edge anyway to form loop

[@thinkdunson]

13:18 is anyone else cracking up laughing about nothing other than imagining Mehdi running like a madman down his hallway and his family standing idly by, like yup, that's Mehdi.

[@gocry6088]

This reminds me of a toy I had when I was a kid called the "String Thing" It essentially does this perpetually with a loop of rainbow sting with a really similar arch shape.

[@stuartfieldhouse5134]

Awesome demonstration of ideas and how to prove a theory. I will be using this video in my science teaching.

[@AmityPost]

I think Steve is right. You are confusing the effect of inertia/momentum/waves with the mould effect. Nobody is shocked by the 2D floor demo. That's the same as making a wave in a garden hose to unkink it without walking 20 feet to where the kink is. The strange new thing is that it actually lifts up over time instead of reducing over time. I think your flat table demonstration where the chain rose up above the table without the lip disproves your theory about acceleration over time, and proves Steve's theory instead. But, if I were you I would try using a foam table and see if it still works or if it works a lot less. Any reactionary force from the table should be a lot less if it's foam, so if the chain still rises as high that must not be the reason. Ps: drop the chain, don't throw it. Your spaced out chain won't rise off the surface by itself. You lifted it and it slowly went back down. That proves that you can make a wave in a chain, but not that the spaced out chain rises. It falls slowly from a higher start. That isn't the same thing. You have a lot of good points, but I think they are wrong and Steve is right.

[@DeusExAstra]

Exactly

[@solsporian]

In the floor tests with non lever chains the curve doesn't rise in relation to the starting point, it falls

[@CMDRunematti]

you can SEE in Steve's video of the "normal chain" that it DOES rise...

[@LaughingMan171]

Yeah, I noticed this as well

[@robmckennie4203]

i saw this in steve's actual post too, i don't understand why neither of them noticed this

[@aidanpryde7720]

@@LaughingMan171 same

[@onerandombruh]

@@robmckennie4203 I thought that it wasn't that much of a relevant thing to consider, maybe its inertia, gravity or whatever going on there does not actually makes any difference in the end.

[@Ithirahad]

Yeah, the rising thing happened in every single test, visibly... just not with enough force to self-sustain above the rim of the containing vessel. If you do this test with any sort of string or chain off of a straight edge with no rim to recontact, you will always get a standing wave of some sort, even if it's too small to be noticed.

[@sammy_1_1]

1:07 love that perfectly cut scream

[@fabian6124]

I you two are observing two different phenomenons. Your chain doesnt constantly increase in hight while falling or in your 2d test, while in Steves tests it increases in hight. It might be that both of you are right and there are multiple forces ton be observed here. If force 1 is higher then force 2, the arch can rise. If force 2 is higher then force 1 the arch falls. In you tests you decrease friction between the layers, so force 1 (the "mold force") is minimal to prove him wrong. But to still see that arc, you minimise the force 2, so the initial arc falls slowly enougth to still be observed.

[@camelcaseco]

"compared to this chain which looks like its *made* of friction" i love this quite a lot

[@Hizenhawer]

I must say your explanation sounds way more general and therefore better :P

[@GaryTsnail]

I watched the other video first, and I have to say I was thinking similar to how you described it. It makes more sense this way.

[@standudinski]

whips display the same effect, momentum seems like a reasonable explanation for it

[@chrisdonnell7200]

I think whips are somewhat different because you stop pulling rather than continously pull, which is what makes the whip have to flip directions

[@jaredl2239]

I totally agree. It seems to act like a really long whip. If you watch the end of his "2d test" you can even see the last bit of the chain behave like a whip rather than strictly following the curve of the rest of the chain.

[@joshlasalle123]

YES! Before you even got into the video too much I was already thinking it’s caused by momentum

[@patback9708]

"Well it's a mechanical problem, so, as an Electrical Engineer, I am over qualified." I have to remember this one lol

[@WJS774]

Also, you can _literally see and hear_ that the effect _is_ happening with the regular linked chain; we can see that it's rising above the rim of the container (just barely), and we can _hear_ it because as it does this, the rattling noise drops off.

[@AmityPost]

But... Its still hitting the edge even at the end. It's not rising over time, it's just speeding up like how driving over a bumpy road at high speed makes it smooth out.

[@WJS774]

@@AmityPost That's an absurd analogy. Cars have _suspension_ that evens things out.

[@codemiesterbeats]

I agree that the effect is happening but it seems to be diminished, probably because of friction but possibly other reasons I am not currently seeing.

[@stevenwilliams7410]

Exactly, momentum is the key, the faster it moves, the higher the loop created!

[@TaranovskiAlex]

we definitely need SmarterEveryDay here with a take on whip mechanics)

[@jonhattanrai]

He would (should) explain it with snatch blocks.

[@adambier2415]

I was thinking the same.

[@TaranovskiAlex]

@@jonhattanrai SNATCH BLOCK!!!!!

[@ElizabethSwims]

Suppose you are both right and that is why the ball chain goes higher. Momentum and leverage. Like a glider is good at staying in the air, but a gas plane is better because it uses more.

[@HarnaiDigital]

Your name sounds to similar too Elizabeth Swan from POTC.

[@seneca983]

Is there evidence that leverage contributes? I could be the case but it's not obvious to me.

[@DenjiW]

The first link in the chain is the key. Think of the *"spaghettification" effect:* if you move closer to a *black hole* feet first, your feet will be stretched before your head because gravity is stronger the closer you are to the black hole (your feet go faster in relation to your head). In the Mould Effect the same is happening: The first link is exposed to acceleration *longer* than the rest of the links which causes it to PULL the link behind it. It's a very SMALL difference in velocity, but link after link there's an *accumulation* of acceleration pulling the links that are resting on a surface. This "link pulling link" relation is also the explanation for why a chain seems to fall faster than gravity can pull it. The reason is "spaghettification" for that as well, link pulling link. Why do they go up? The links resting on a surface are a little bit lower in comparison to the links that are being *recently* pulled, which implies that the accumulated acceleration goes in the direction to those links that are being recently pulled. The table test might imply that there's no such a difference in height, but in actuality the difference is created as a consequence of the links "bouncing" from the edge of the surface. In the 2D test there's a "Mould curve" previously prepared. In that curve, there are links pulling the links behind them in a preset direction. The curve continues to occur and it even increases its size because of the acceleration difference accumulated link after link, and because of the preset curve itself: the faster you run, the bigger the curve. The increase in size of the curve is proportional to that accumulated acceleration difference link after link. The curve stops growing when the first link hits the ground, because that first link can no longer pull the link behind it. The second link behind the first link then becomes the first link (and so on), therefore implying that a maximum rate of acceleration has been reached link after link. How can you test to know for sure? Try the 2D test using a machine that pulls the chain at a constant speed. The preset curve should decrease and disappear.

[@recklssabndon]

ALL WE WANT IS A MEDHI UPDATE VIDEO ON THIS PLZZZZZ

[@iwenttogoogleheadquartersa1397]

It’s always incredible to see how his daughter has grown up over the last few years.

[@pmku]

I remember the time when she was toddler. Damn time passes quickly

[@thedoeverything418]

yup me too back in the ol' 2016 (its not really that long ago tbh)

[@MaxCE]

@@thedoeverything418 2016 is 5 years ago. 5 years is a long time

[@maxinecantspeak]

Today I learned that "central vacuum cleaners" are a thing.

[@HelloKittyFanMan.]

Uhhh... today you should have also learned that since that's the real term for them, it doesn't belong with quotes around it.

[@maxinecantspeak]

@@HelloKittyFanMan. I do not care.

[@HelloKittyFanMan.]

@@maxinecantspeak: Then why did you bother with the extra work to make it less sensible in the first place?

[@maxinecantspeak]

@@HelloKittyFanMan. At this point I'm just gonna keep doing it to "piss" you off.

[@HelloKittyFanMan.]

@@maxinecantspeak: At this point, you look really silly assuming I was "pissed off" just because I was actually just _curious_ instead. Silly people sometimes make the mistake of thinking different things are "the same." Interesting that you aren't even capable of answering the simple question, so you'd rather be butt-hurt over it for no good reason instead. 😅

[@nathansealey6270]

Interesting, & I side with yourself. And as each action has an equal & oppersite reaction wouldn’t the rise upwards be a result of its descent, as the hight of it bow is also in relation to the speed of its descent. (ie the faster it falls/ or is pulled the further it moves in the opposite direction).

[@ashkebora7262]

I agree with you for the vacuum hose. It has a _hard-set_ point at which it will see any force trying to pull it TOWARD the wall instead of parallel to the wall. The wall holds that point in place even if the vacuum pulls really hard. I think the assumed reaction for a perfectly soft body would be that the increasing force on the chain would leave more force pulling down than up, which you'd think would pull the top of the arch down, but... it's not a solid body. The height of the chain, IMO, represents how much energy of the chain is _currently_ kinetic energy. What is literally happening is energy (potential energy in the mass, in this case) is going from a higher state to a lower state. The total energy DOES NOT change, since it is caused by the mass of the chain itself, so no one has to add energy for this to happen. It only happens _while the chain is moving._ OK, so ... that only explains where the energy comes from to raise the chain higher. I think you're also correct on why the chain rises. The links DO NOT see the pulling force in a downward direction _until they're after the apex._ Before that, they're seeing an _upward_ pull. By the time new links hit the apex, if the chain is accelerating, that new link will raise higher simply because it's going faster. Though the paper Mould cited also cites leverage from the raising chain. This very well could be the mechanism with which the effect appears so pronounced: The _pulling_ force can more efficiently be converted in to an upwards velocity on takeoff. The energy is still all kinetic sourced from what's pulling, but it _could be_ that leverage helps it get up. Otherwise, I just think a ball chain is simply an excellent chain for controlling losses from bumping the rim, air drag, etc.

[@Er404ChannelNotFound]

From the moment I saw the effect I realized it's basically a whipping effect, which seems to match with your explanation.

[@nickytats39]

This is definitely due to momentum the string simply falls faster than the weight of it holding down I dont think shape as any factor as long as the material is string like. It's about the weight height and starting position, literally the same effect as a whip

[@johnremizeztomilloso158]

0:12 It's officially cannon it really becomes a fricking Mehdi ringtone!

[@onerandombruh]

Where can I download it?

[@johnremizeztomilloso158]

@@onerandombruh Dunno? Just search on KZbin titled electroboom build finish music but it's extended to 20 minutes! By MrChiken10

[@nijoeli]

@@onerandombruh Search "ringtone" on the ElectroBOOM's subreddit, there are a couple of post with download links :)

[@johnremizeztomilloso158]

@@nijoeli Thank you for replying him!

[@frankieaglio4674]

Pretty sure I saw the other type of chain rise out of the beaker in Steve’s video 🤔

[@miserirken]

>"you can't see this effect in other chains" >inmediately shows it does happen with other chains i was getting mad af at that moment in the video

[@daPsychoNinja]

if you listen closely you can hear the regular chain leave the surface of the beaker but because of the forces you mentioned it quickly gets slammed back to the rim of the beaker.

[@elowenminer7748]

i just want to say at the speeds the chain is being pulled, there is in fact a radius limit. at the low speeds that you showed at the beginning the bars that connect the balls can recede fully into the orbs. with the hose example, the hose could be thought of as pushing against the hole in the wall as well. the 2d test only shows the tendency of chains to follow the path they start on. would you get the same results without the leading loop of the chain?

[@woody442]

"Loud noise means much banging" - The Mehdi-Effect aka simple mechanics done by an electric engineer. I still believe in your explanation!