experimental proof of the quantum mechanical Zeeman-effect / Experimenteller Beweis Zeemaneffekt

[@LiborTinka]

I love both the physics AND the music. Good job, man 👌

[@georgeyork8975]

Nice to see this classic experiment. I did something similar in the 1980s with a magnetic field around an argon plasma tube laser I built, I thought I was increasing the efficiency of the lasing until I looked at the specral lines and realized I was doing a zeeman experiment instead. What was nice was it was a way to tune the output for particular wavelengths in the argon laser etc.

[@CrazyLabs]

Beautiful experiment!

[@LiborTinka]

that's so cool - I never knew it's possible to reproduce this experiment this way

[@gerd3136]

Perfekt, wie immer 👍🏼😎!

[@stoppi]

@@gerd3136 danke, Gerd 🙂

[@minhenes]

may be a linear polarizer after the lamp could help to increase the contrast. my colleagues have a commercial zeeman spectrometer for mercury detection in air. It works with the 254 nm UV line from an electrodeless capilary lamp. There is a permanent magnet and electrooptic polariser that is modulated and lock-in dete ction used.

[@minhenes]

Hg Zeeman analyser made by Lumex MULTIFUNCTIONAL MERCURY ANALYZER RA-915M

[@johnfox2483]

Wind more wire on toroidal core. Say - 10 layers. Unfortunately - oxygen is paramagnetic, it may influence flame.

[@anonyme894]

Nett!!! Ich erinnere mich, dass ich eine schöne experimentelle Studie des Zeeman-Effekts in dem Buch „Physique expérimentale“ des Jolidon-Kollektivs gefunden hatte. Wenn Sie es noch einmal mit einer quantitativen Variante versuchen wollen, mit einer Spektrallampe (sie verwendeten eine kleine Cadmium-Spektrallampe in einem Elektromagneten), könnte es sich lohnen, einen Blick darauf zu werfen (das Buch gibt es aber nur auf Französisch, wenn ich mich nicht irre). Sie verwendeten einen Elektromagneten mit bis zu 0,5 T und einen Fabry Perot, ich habe das Gefühl, dass Ihr Aufbau im Grunde genommen fast derselbe sein könnte.

[@stoppi]

@@anonyme894 vielen Dank für die Informationen 😉

[@electronicmt._.3138]

This video sould get +100k views than other random junk garbage free energy videos.!!!!

[@stoppi]

@@electronicmt._.3138 thank's for your kind comment but I believe that it won't happen 😂

[@electronicmt._.3138]

@@stoppi I didn't mean you are making junk video.I mean your videos are great and should get more views than others youtubers's free energy garbage videos!

[@stoppi]

I have unterstood you right... But my videos/projects, in which I invest a lot of work, love and time, won't get 100000 views, not even 2000 😉

[@Darren-f7l]

Unfortunately, there is something that needs to be discounted, the flame will contain at least some ionised components, since these are charged particles travelling in a magnetic field, they will deflect, this will alter the flame, and the optical effects of it, in a much more basic way.

[@computermaster360]

Precisely. But you should be able to see this when looking directly at the flame, and it does not seem to be moving or chaning shape much at 8:01.

[@Muonium1]

No change in interferogram, here's the reason: &@^-{/)@!*>^&($)!&_+#)