Electrons, Protons And Neutrons | Standard Model Of Particle Physics

[@Fermion.]

-"I think I lost an electron." -"Are you sure?" -"Yeah, I'm positive."

[@Lystra_Machuca9589]

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣💣💥🤜

[@shardverma4057]

Beware of lightning⚡⚡

[@myaccount1826]

Corona +ve 😂😂 or what ???

[@umrendrapratapsingh6539]

Ö

[@UR_NOT_THAT_GUY_PAL]

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA😐

[@Zproduxion]

I find this video absolutely Fantastic! This is the type of work that should be in schools, making knowledge fun and memorable! Bravo !

[@91TheKW91]

this took my 9th grade science teacher a few weeks to tell us. You explain things much better as well.

[@lopdebif]

This is actually seriously explanative. Thank you for this vid!

[@LoveAndPeaceOccurs]

Thank You, well done. Love & Peace to All

[@McManusscience]

Actually Each Shell does have just two electrons as a maximum. This is due to the Pauli Exclusion principal each shell can have one electron of each spin. The way that the second shell contains 8 electrons is that it is actually 4 "Shells" or orbitals. 2S, 2Px, 2Py, 2Pz Where the x, y, and z denote the orientation of each barbell shaped orbital.

[@avedorena]

@McManusscience Shells refer to energy levels not orbitals. If you've ever heard of the K, L, M, N, O, P, and Q Shells they are simply referring to the 1st-7th energy levels. Orbitals are the result of including the angular momentum of the electrons to their energies. Therefore, you can have more than two electrons per shell. In fact, this sums up to be a maximum of 32 for all known elements.

[@DigitizedSelf]

@happyidiottalk To boil it down: Electron orbitals: Only two electrons. Electron shells: 2n^2 electrons (i.e. 2, 8, 18, 32,...), which is possible since shells are groupings of orbitals. Feel free to ask again - always happy to explain ;-)

[@jonathankim9502]

I learned that force of gravity strong nuclear force weak nuclear force cosmological constant electromagnetic force velocity of light All these are finely tuned... a part of the fine tuning of the universe... Fascinating!

[@Sanngot]

I would love to watch a video that goes in depth about different shapes for electron orbitals (s, p, d and f), hybrid orbitals and molecular orbitals. I learned this stuff in chemistry and I would be able to feel smart while watching it and say things like "I know that" with a big smug grin on my face.

[@WickedFalsehood]

It depends on what you call an orbital. If you define an orbital as a fully defined wave function in space, the answer is two--one with spin up and one with spin down. If you let the z-component of angular momentum vary, then it can run from -L to +L, so you have 2L+1 possible wave functions in space L=0--1 spatial wave function--2 electrons L=1--3 spatial wave functions--6 electrons L=2--5 spatial wave functions--10 electrons

[@discovertogether294]

This is a great video! Years after the production of this video they actually captured the first image of an electron at CERN. A neutrino collided with another particle if I recall

[@holdmybeer]

you always post these great science videos about particle physics but you post them when im too stoned to understand them. LOL :D

[@Rationalific]

Wow! This video is so interesting and makes everything much easier to understand than the other materials that I'd been accustomed to. I love watching these videos!

[@TomHendricksMusea]

1. Positrons and electrons are also waves. 2. When a positron and electron meet they annihilate into pure energy just like destructive interference of two mirror waves. 3. That suggests that positrons and electrons are mirror image waves. 4. That suggests that positive and negative charge are the same waves with this difference; they are mirror images of each other.

[@4orsesheron997]

Those are groups of traveling people, going thru their own conversations and stuff. When they happen upon others, something new happens for each group. How fun! Everyone cruises around the center of a tension, Iike our planets cruise around the sun, etc.

[@sky1zero]

Surely there must be something with in the electron, something smaller. Something giving it force and power. So many questions! Drives me crazy. The possibilities are endless.

[@avedorena]

@37iza83th not entirely right. A molecule is a compound and can be formed by two or more atoms (this includes identical atoms) but it is defined to those held through covalent bonding. Definitions may vary depending on the kinds of studies you're focusing on. Some researchers use the term more loosely than others but I think the aforementioned definition is more or less widely accepted.

[@jagmarz]

The reason I ask is that in the video, they made a point of saying "the more electrons an atom has, the further away from the nucleus the outer shells must be". (6:37)

[@7410n0]

No, I believe everything can be understood eventually. However, many laymen don't have the educational background that it takes to learn all the details of these things in a reasonable amount of time and thus it has to be simplified. :)

[@Tapecutter59]

Great series. One minor nit-pick with this one is that only the innermost electron shell has a limit of 2 electrons. The other shells increase the max number according to a specific formula, IIRC the second shell holds a max of 8 electrons.

[@MrKorrazonCold]

"What's detected is the continuous outward momentum of EMR then observed as expanding ripples now dividing from its source and we call this process of change 'charge.' Energy compression input E is inward spherical wave fronts multiplying time dilation at right+angles compressing+4-0-4+-decompressing expanding spheres now dividing gravity from its source. M is the multiplying+/-dividing oscillating wave fronts generating volume of mass dividing C2 into entropy the second law of thermodynamics."

[@gilraen789]

This is an elegant video. Beautiful visually and a very clear explanation of nuclear and molecualr structure.

[@sexybeast619619619]

Very clear and precis detained explanation. Thank you!

[@NeedsEvidence]

@TheLonelyImmortal Don't take the word "layer" verbatim. It is meant as a layman expression for a set four "quantum numbers", and only one of them, the "main quantum number", translates to something you can associate with the electron being more "inward/outward". If you equate only this main quantum number with the word "layer" (differently from what the video does), then you can indeed say that the outer "layers" can hold more electrons.

[@Jellycrusher]

Protons taste sour (ok, it's a bit of simplification) because they are connected with acidity of a solution (and this is what the creators of the clip want to teach). Neutrons and electrons do not change acidity of the solution, so they have no "taste" at all.

[@wbiro]

I would not be surprised if all this is surpassed (meaning representing reality better) by a model of stationary particles bound together to form an atom, and where experimental observations (and seeming 'quantum leaps' of electrons) are all explained differently, and where the nucleus of the atom holds even more ever-smaller surprises... I'm pondering this because there is a lot of absurdity in the present model (things like neutrons holding protons together, and electron 'quantum leaps', and electrons 'orbiting' the nucleus - which to me are erroneous models based on weak explanations of observations)...

[@IamGrimalkin]

Neutrons don't hold protons together, gluons do.

[@Toldasor]

@hotsauce3n the particle that makes acid sour is a hydrogen ion. so a core without electrons. so basically a single proton

[@kalasherikurdi9333]

please help me the suffix ""on"" from (proton , electron, neutron) where does it come?

[@prakhar9473]

It probably just sounds cool

[@walkloud]

Dear honda4004, No, protons can not be changed to have negative electric charge. The electric charge of a proton is a fundamental property of the proton. All protons have exactly one unit of positive charge, whereas all electrons have exactly one unit of negative charge. Regards, André

[@Remedynr]

and that's maybe why it's uncertain of where the electron actually is, it moves in random (always changing) directions around that field section. crazy thoughts right?!

[@asertutorial8443]

Very nice performance. This helped me imagine reality of matter.

[@CupCakeArmy1]

@omgtkseth Strong Nuclear weapons are made with increased amounts of nuclear material. Currently there are two types. "Atomic" and "Hydrogen". Atomic bombs use Uranium(which is the only known naturally occurring fissile atom) and produce energy through fission. Hydrogen bombs explode at first through fission, but the resulting reaction is so hot it starts fusing hydrogen atoms, which creates an even bigger blast through nuclear fusion. H-bombs are usually an order of magnitude stronger.

[@stephenjoseph4972]

I liked it. Videos like this help people like me, the average Joe, form the building blocks to understanding

[@doubleghod]

This is pretty good but why the producer had the audio equipment set to 'reverb' is a mystery to me

[@arizonaviking]

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...' " Isaac Asimov

[@mea852456]

Actually, in most elements this is true, but the maximum that can be held differs for each shell. To determine how many maximum electrons per shell, use the rule 2n^2 where n is the number of the shell starting with the closest to the nucleus as No1, then second closest No2 and so on. I'm saying this because of my ocd about the "hold up to 8 electrons each". I do not contradict you in any way :)

[@wsteven54]

To Maverick, Manganime & James G; I can tell by your comments the purpose of this video went right over your heads. The video is explaining at the fundamental level what MATTER is actually made of... thats's ALL. I am a Chemist. And this is not a Chemistry Video. Your comments actually pertain to Chemistry, which is the study of how the outer most electrons (the valance electrons) of atoms combine to cause chemical reactions and formation of compounds. OK?

[@sofyanet]

@hellow533 I have pushed the CC-button. after clicking and after it turns red nothing happen - no subtitles!

[@jagmarz]

I'd read that for all neutral atoms (that is, those with a full complement of electrons), the outer electron is more-or-less at the same distance from the center (ie, all atoms are roughly the same size). It's the innermost electrons that get pulled in further by a higher relative positive nuclear charge. Am I wrong?

[@Coovargo]

My brain almost exploded at "Neutrons help hold the protons together." (Hydrogen has no Neutrons. Period. At it's a stable element.) I turned this off at, "There are approximately as many Neutrons as there are protons in each element". There is not a SINGLE Element on the periodic table that has the same number of Neutrons as Protons. Now I have to UNLEARN everything this video told me about quarks, just in case.

[@MALCOLMACDOO]

I was taught two electrons shared the first shell and eight in all the other shells.Sometimes an electron gets lost from the outer shell and so becomes a positively charged ion. A proton is basically a neutron that has lost a bit of its charge when the electron goes into orbit around its nucleus. Am I wrong?

[@sofyanet]

@hellow533 I have pushed the CC-button. after clicking and after it turns red nothing happing - no subtitles!

[@mavericklim]

Actually the video is right. What he refers to as 'layers' are actually the Atomic Orbitals which hold 2 electrons of opposite spins by Pauli Exclusion Principle. Thus for example the P-Orbital would only be able to hold Px(2) Py(2) Pz(2) and the D-orbital Dxy2 Dxz2 Dyz2 Dx^2-y^2(2) and Dz^2(2) The spdf are angular momentum quantum shells, not atomic orbitals.

[@Grandunifiedcelery]

If grand unification occurs, quarks could transform into leptons.This transformation would allow proton decay.

[@glenjerbocahtengil8652]

+Prajñāpāramitāhṛdaya konthol mambu...

[@hfyaer]

If grand unification occurs, all this semantic will be thrown to the trash bin and particle will be called by their parametric numbers.

[@grantmaybe]

Is there any data behind the motion and colors within the visual representation, or is it more of just an aesthetic thing to pair with the explanation?

[@MassiveDestructionSP]

+Grant Noyes Purely aesthetic

[@bzimm18]

This is probably the only chemistry lesson that I've understood.

[@LukeJF89]

Electrons, Protons And Nutri-grain. Thank you.

[@tacticalplanner]

@hotsauce3n Yep. Sour things, such as lemons and vinegar, have a low pH, which means that they have a large number of free roaming hydrogen ions, basically lone protons.

[@KorAllRBare]

I would add - The whole universe is ENERGY, "Kinetic" and "Potential" Energy, and to understand how Energy represents both "NEAR-Vacuum" and particles, we need to understand how kinetic energy is stored and or converted to Potential energy.. If we define E with two dimensions PE and KE we can refer to the following model where PE is implied by height and KE by width "----" In this model we imply we have a near vacuum as in a high ratio of unstored energy ** continued in next comment **

[@GuitarMannnnnn]

Man I love these videos.... "nucleauuuss..."

[@jonsnider9194]

VERY well constructed video. Now lets see 'em do one on multiple dimensions! (As our seeming environs are spinning off like a really big 3-d un-virtual fractal)

[@jonsnider9194]

(fractals)

[@Aki1011001]

The charge of the proton is positive so we gave it a gold shell... because it's positive... It makes sense!

[@cowgoesmoo2]

Really there isn't anything but strings, so I find it interesting about all the electric shells atoms protons, neutrons and everything has, even though there is nothing inside each shell except more shells.

[@MelkorHimself]

A neutron walks into a bar and asks how much it would be for a glass of water. The bartender says, "For you it's no charge."

[@mrink2847]

Wow

[@jamesanonymous2343]

Basically water is not chargeable whether neutron or oldetron.

[@7410n0]

This is a video for laymen; the science is simplified for their better understanding ;)

[@extreem573]

I was thinking the exact same thing, would be strange though. cannot really vision something like that, but according to him; kinda yes. Maybe the force can be blocked of by nearby atoms. if this is the case the electrons only interact with nearby atoms. you can see this as simple light wave being blocked of by a object. light isn't passing through that object and leaves a shadow behind. i only thinking this though not sure if this is the case.

[@Sigmaairav]

For 2009 era cgi this was great. and now we have the standard model and higgs boson confirmed and stuff, and in the future even more discoveries await as the new particle colliders are constructed and put online. man...its 2020 and really the only good news is science news. At least we have that

[@AnaiylahPrincess]

It’s kind of hard to ignore the patterns in the proton and neutron g-factor modulo (an inherently 2-dimensional analysis) in the data near the bottom of the triforce.fyi solution. They do seem to behave just like the particles themselves.

[@Sigmath_Bits]

Who's the voice of these presentations? He's Awsome!

[@TomHendricksMusea]

Diagram of Orbits Inside a Proton and Neutron. This is based on the premise that both protons and neutrons are made up of combinations of electrons and positrons (anti electrons). This diagram suggests that a singularity made of photons, created electron and positron pairs in the Big Bang. Then those electrons and positrons in turn created the fundamental particles. PROTON: Consists of three shells that from inside out contain positron / electron / positron NEUTRON: Consists of four shells that from inside out contain: positron / electron / positron / electron. Questions and Answers: Q. Why are protons and neutrons so much larger than the electrons that are orbiting the nucleus? A. Because protons and neutrons contain mostly space in the center with three orbiting waves in the case of protons, and four orbiting waves in the case of neutrons. That is also why neutrons with an added electron, are slightly larger than protons. Q. Why do protons have a positive charge equal to an electron? A. The proton has a positron, electron, and positron. The two inner shells are opposite charge and balance each other. That leaves the outer positron with a charge exactly equal to and opposite to an electron orbiting the nucleus. Q. Why does a neutron have no charge? A. The neutron has four shells of a positron, electron, positron, and outer electron. The charge of the two electrons balance the charge of the two positrons and leave the neutron with a neutral charge. Q. Why are protons always accompanied by neutrons in the nucleus. A. The outer shells of the proton and neutron are opposite charge and different wavelengths, so they can coexist in the nucleus. Had the nucleus been all protons, their outer shell with its positive charge positron would keep them apart. Had the nucleus been all neutrons their outer shell with its negative charge electron would keep them apart. Q. Why don't the electrons and positrons annihilate each other? A Free electrons and positrons annihilate each other and become pure energy photons: but electrons and protons do not annihilate each other. Why the difference? It may be because in the first case the electron and positron are mirror image waves of each other and destructive interference applies as it does with mirror image sound waves etc. But in the second case when the positrons and electrons are in separate nucleus shells with different wavelengths this does not apply. Orbiting electrons and protons cannot annihilate. And the protons inner shells of opposite charged particles cannot annihilate either. Remember that the wavelength of an electron changes with velocity, and electrons do not have fixed wavelengths. The same applies to the positron. Q. What holds the protons and neutrons together in the nucleus? A. The opposite charge particle in their outer shell. For protons it's a positron in the outer shell, for neutrons it's an electron. Q. Why are protons so stable, virtually immortal, and neutrons last about 10 minutes when outside the nucleus? A. This is unclear, but something about the proton's three shells of positron, electron, and positron, that was manufactured in the Big Bang's extremely high temperatures, is extraordinarily stable. Neutrons are not and there are instances such as electron capture or beta plus decay, where an electron and proton combine to make a neutron, or vice versa the neutron decays into an electron and proton. Q. Does this challenge the quark theory? A. Yes. Q What other questions can this model solve. A. This can solve where the missing anti matter is. It is there in the atom's nucleus. The positrons in the proton and neutron are the missing anti matter. They have been in the atom all along. Q. Can photons, or light make mass? A. Yes. Photons can make electron positron pairs in pair conversion. Furthermore ultra high energy gamma ray photons, can create proton and anti protons.

[@HowRandomIsRandom]

Each orbital can hold only 2 electron. It is the second 'shell' (consisting of 4 orbitals namely 2s, 2px, 2py, 2pz) that holds 8 electrons.

[@Tapecutter59]

No, the "taste" of a sub-atomic particle is no more real that the "colour", it's a different terminology that simply uses familiar words to tag unfamiliar properties. There is no everyday analogy for these properties so non-mathematical language fails to adequately describe them.

[@mps6531]

What about electron which quirk does it have

[@DigitizedSelf]

@happyidiottalk Hm, it depends on what you call "layers" - there can only be two electrons in each orbital (each with opposite spin due to the Pauli Principle), but each of these orbitals are arranged in electron 'shells', which you might simply think of as groupings of orbitals. So, the 'layer' from the vid refers to orbits, whereas your 'layer' refers to shells... IMO the shells are a simplification and kinda outdated; although they might be useful for classification purposes.

[@neutralpresident4361]

I do not have a favorite subatomic particle or a least favorite. If I did have a favorite subatomic particle, it would be the neutron because it has a neutral charge.

[@frederickarthurvanderspuy6618]

this is still a simplification (Quarks: up, down. charm, strange. top, bottom. :google) [though atleast we can begin to think about it and fill in missing information sets in a narrative which has atleast gone to end{though not, electrons are missing(..all those asking about electrons have obviously never done periodic data table interpretation and chem101, and that's the boring and easily money viable and applicable parts!!!!boring!!!!)}], so it can still be expanded to include muon's and leptons. {also the difficulty in presentation is assisted as perhaps those who drew up the original quark model, like Dirac with all those names, are not in the same practicality-observable_zone as what the quantum dudes were in}. I saw a wonderful electron travel model on a National Geographic once, why is it so hard to find on youtube in a summative vid as this. As an aside, the Strong, and Weak forces, these are clearly by the quark gluon mechanistic model, are we saying these interactions generate a Field, which we call the Strong Force(one of the 4 along with gravity, and Electromagnetic Force...probably on which Entanglement Phenomena is based on as it has infinite distance and maintains contact with that once touched.), the Vid made a mistake, which is a common Knowledge Field LogicPhilo mistake which shows imperfect knowledge. IF ONE reads on-line, they have it that certain-phenomena are based on [Electro-]Weak Force (~can only be explained thereby), but here the SPEAKER, moves from the view-point that the Electrons Generate the Weak Force, ?-HOW, we need a mechanism of how this is done, or clearly we may be Misappropriating [knowledgefactoidmeme]Variables simply within a Knowledge-Build-Model-Way_of causality.....I would like a clear explanation,, else how to undo those nutter?s who posit that this is an Electric Only Universe (and that Gravity is one of its ancillaries)

[@TN6625]

Interesting depiction of subatomic particles by showing their 'fuzziness'. Not clear what you mean by protons are 'sour'. Didn't realize you have to go to the next video to see the fractional values of quark charges.

[@McAlpineLV]

Where did all these complex rules come from?

[@MBLobster]

yeah I caught that one too. plus the max number of electrons per shell is twice the square of the shell #.

[@naptaker_]

Really cool and informative, but kill the echo and music.

[@LBNANY]

Is reality fundamentally one concept differentiated in time and space? Not 1 & 0s but just something alternating position in a field of spacetime?

[@LBNANY]

Can that one function give rise to progressively more complex structures?

[@DrummingSpain]

The video is misleading at 6:35 because while its true that the first orbital holds 2 electrons, the subsequent orbitals hold up to 8 electrons each.

[@derwall2005]

einstien invented the skip. newton invented double glazzing pythageros invented bin liners terry wogan invented the internet, we salute you great gentelmen of the mindness.

[@Remedynr]

it think it means that the shell is a force (field) that has all the possible electron orbitals around it

[@honda4004]

so as stan meyer made a water injector with a uv laser light guide it would by a prism /rainbow inject energy in to all these atom particles and when he funnel pressured the water/steam down the cone kv vortex (black hole theory) dc b+ it would strip off the electrons and squish the pos proton in central guide still being catastrophically cascading to the engine chamber that the neutrons would intercept the proton and the air would statically implode no spark as neutron decays appreciate reply

[@jackson_mcgrath]

What did you mean by the "taste" of a proton being sour?

[@josesalas430]

My god this has to be the most Important discovery yet.

[@AdvosArt]

Thanks for the info, now I'm gonna let my friends punch me in the face for being too smart

[@lmooij]

Not saying that mate. Just saying that lessons in this matter could be made a bit more intersting by visualisations, these kind of short movies. And not just some bummer of a teacher with a huge beard, speaking as monotone as possible.. It made me just want to run away from class. Genuine enthousiamse is a motivator! Took em up!

[@Susanmugen]

2:00 Protons taste sour. Like vinegar and lemonade. Weird off-the-wall bizzarro statements like this make this funnier while drunk or high.

[@StevieRevbo]

"...too small to be seen by any imaginable instrument of observation" so it's all just theory then

[@manybodyphysics4370]

No, it is not. Although it is incredibly hard to observe quarks and gluons, we can observe the consequences of them existing. And actually, without that theory, Quantum Chromodynamics, we would not be able to explain most of Nuclear and Particle physics :)

[@toffeeskill]

Helium: omg i've lost an electron Hydrogen: you sure u aint misplaced it? Helium: I'm positive!!

[@KevinKurzsartdisplay]

I remember when I once watched these videos when I was a little kid, I was 11 or something, I never watched it since then, I’m 20 now and I came here to review my past

[@MatthewBendyna]

Sometimes I wonder: maybe it's possible for something with very similar properties that would qualify as living to exist in another universe that has formed a radically different version of chemistry quite unlike the elements we are used to dealing with. Life and intelligence are, ultimately, information, so I don't think it matters what language that information is expressed with.

[@jackson_mcgrath]

That makes sense, thanks!

[@KevinKurzsartdisplay]

These quarks moving around look cute

[@walkloud]

Dear Coovargo, I share your feeling that this presentation was of poor quality. But let me say the intent of the information was correct. Recall that Helium-4, the second most common element in the universe, has 2 protons and 2 neutrons. The bigger nuclei have more neutrons than protons because the electric charge of the proton disfavors adding more protons. The attraction between protons and neutrons helps hold a bunch of protons together in the nucleus. [continued on next reply].

[@Alphqwe]

Is there any way to get this set of videos used in every six grad class in the U.S. Of A.?

[@njb444]

If I remember my chemistry from last year, acidity is the result of excess H+ ions (protons) in a solution. These ions try to take electrons from anything they can, and when it strips electrons from your tongue, it creates the sensation of a sour taste.

[@sidewaysfcs0718]

no it is not. do not confuse orbital with shell, superior shells have more orbitals, but any individual orbital has maximum 2 electrons , this is basic chemistry 101.

[@Thelivingwordthesword]

I am tired of negative attraction, in my mind I am the energy clouds of orion in my mind we all exist in my body I will unite the three cores to become the ALL PROTON IT WILL BE CENTERED IN MY HEART AS THE CHAKRAS ARE OPEN ON THOSE WHO ARE READY THEY SHALL COME TOGETHER TO CREATE THE ALL SPARK LET IT COMMENCE.

[@skipunkrich]

the problem here is just with definitions, not the physics. What the video calls a "shell" you might call a "subshell" or "suborbital". Pauli exclusion principle just says (for an atom) that no two electrons can have the same 4 quantum numbers.

[@shivakumarv301]

What is the meaning of mass and energy in terms of quantum physics?

[@JulesSch1]

What this video tells you about there only being 2 electrons per shell circling the neutrons and protons is totally incorrect. In an atom with 20 electrons (which is the element calcium, Ca) the first 2 electrons are located in the 1st shell, the next 8 in shell #2, the following 8 in shell #3 and the remaining 2 electrons are located in shell #4. Also electron shells have sublevels.

[@Eddiethepizzaboy]

The electrons orbit the nucleus of the atom, the orbits are strange and the electrons move around unpredictably. The easiest orbit to visualize is the s-orbit, its a sphere in 3d round the nucleus. The electron is anywhere inside that sphere most of the time. There are also p and d orbitals, look them up, they look pretty sweet. There are f orbitals too but i dont know anything about them, sorry.

[@ijansk]

Are those shells that represent both protons and neutrons real? If so, what are they made of?

[@cowgoesmoo2]

@DigitizedSelf Which... Includes me. Of course, I don't really understand much in depth about this.

[@TekCroach]

Is it really a photograph of atom or just an indirect (via tunneling effect) representation of atom?

[@amrutvani2]

Wow nice succinct presentation backed with excellent animation. I loved that. Harish