JJ Thomson and the discovery of the electron

In this video I review, with the physics explained, how JJ Thomson discovered the electron
I briefly review the history prior and also discuss electric fields, magnetic fields and circular motion and how they all contribute to JJ Thomson's discovery
Like what I do? Support by buying me a coffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/physicshigh
Subscribe - / physicshigh
For on going support, support me at Patreon: www.patreon.com/physicshigh
LIKE and SHARE with your peers. And please add a COMMENT to let me know I have helped you.
Physics High is committed to producing content that teaches physics concepts at a level a high schooler can understand.
See www.physicshigh.com for all my videos and other resources.
As well as this I produce a podcast series called Deep Impact - interviews with science communicators as to what they do, what drives them to communicate their craft
You will find these on the channel and also on podcast sites such as Spotify, Apple and Google podcasts
👥 Social
---------------------------------------------------------
Follow me on
facebook: @physicshigh
twitter: @physicshigh
Instagram: @physicshigh

[@josephthomson2469]

Hey, that was me. Wow

[@prasaddhokale3256]

🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻😂

[@FelonyVideos]

Dad? Is that really you? I KNEW you would come back! Why did you leave us like that? 😢

[@glenmartin2437]

I enjoyed your video. Thank you. It is nice to get back to basics. I have spent over 60 years studying chemistry, electronics, physics and engineering, etc.

[@jrb_sland5066]

Some glaring errors in the narration. At 20:30, he says "the fact that the cathode ray could NOT be deflected by an electric field means that ..." which is NOT true - he could deflect his beam with either an electric or a magnetic field. Maybe just a slip of the tongue, but someone should have caught this during editing. VERY confusing to the naive student !

[@benjaminmoshref1601]

Yeah I noticed it...so what's the correct reason why he excluded the possibility of its charge being 1800 times bigger than the proton one? Was the charge of the proton known at the time?

[@carlhitchon1009]

I looked into that. The way Hertz's experiment was setup, the electric field was ineffective because the vacuum was not sufficient. This caused ionization of the gas which discharges the plates providing the elective field.

[@maxwellgordon4]

Philip Lenard was very vehemently upset to be called a French man

[@roldy1584]

I think it might have done you better service to have explained the differences between then Practicing physicists interpretations and the theoreticians. I had to stop watching when I saw the way you defined voltage, I like the video though. I think itd be really interesting to see a video contrasting the differing views of physicists and electricians then, physicists today and electrical engineers today. It would appear to me that everyone's living in different realities.

[@cardboardhero9950]

Awesome video but why did JJ Thompson think that the mass was 1800 times smaller? Isn't it possible to have been some combination of the two factors? eg - the mass being 3600 times smaller while the charge was twice as much?

[@artificiallift9110]

Great video! Really helpful

[@sciencewithsrinu732]

Really wonderfull sir .the way you teach and applying logics to provide High beam level of teaching .thanks for sharing

[@obengpatricia4561]

✨✨✨

[@manipulativer]

It is EMR and not a particle. photon is an effect not a product

[@m3rvat]

so i have question the two metals in the experiment the negative and positive charged is depending on electrons so how was it known before the discovery of electron ?and how to tell which is which ?

[@robertbatista50]

That is an excellent question. That is a question that I have also asked. I haven’t seen anyone go through the whole history with just the polarity of the charges.

[@m3rvat]

@@robertbatista50 yeah i know was really puzzled by it now i know haha

[@ernestoterrazas3480]

Congratulations clear and super interesting explanation. thank you for shearing your big knowledge

[@oskarvomhimmel6936]

NEGATIVE Indeed...The experiment's conclusions...🤦 IF the "electrons" actually "separated" from the atom, and were indeed of a "negative" charge There would be NO CONTACT with the "negative plate"...and no actual "ray" to deflect...the "Electrons" would pile up on the "positive metal plate" according to the polarity doctrine...The Magnetic Field moves in both directions by the way...The visible ray is not much different than a laser beam, which is the "piping" of a concentration of atoms revolving within said mag. field "pipe" and "squeezed" away by their own concentrated pressure, which actually expands outwards the farther away it gets...If there were an actual tendency to separate electrons from atoms, any beam of light, such as that of a laser, or the one in the tube, would fall like a stream of water from a hose.

[@SailorGerry]

Another amazing thing: in the early 1930's, it was determined that electrons have spin. Now how in hell, was THAT discovered?

[@Rami-p5i]

Great video. But i have a question, maybe the there is a combination of ratiosnthat generate 1800 maybe 900 and 0.5 or anytbing elae

[@Rafael_Francisco]

Why in 19:50 the only two options are keep the mass equal in both or keep the charge equal in both? Why couldn't he suppose, for example a charge 45 times greater and a mass 40 times smaller keeping the 1800 total ratio?

[@jrb_sland5066]

See my answer to Cardboard Hero two comments above.

[@dallasrieck7753]

please no "sir"... you are supporting conceit when you do that

[@dallasrieck7753]

how about "others" not "other scientist", we are all scientist,😉. ie : remove the conceit

[@phononify]

In sum a nice video -- but Lenard was not a french man ;) Hehehe ... :)

[@DanielinLaTuna]

Very well done presentation. Thanks for sharing

[@deveshteam]

Great Work!

[@theofficialbeaneater]

beans

[@bertrc2569]

Bit puzzled about 'negatively charged particle'. Positive and negative were coined by Franklin as an excess (+) or deficit (−) of electric fluid. I.e a mass, so more mass on one side than the other. This was a guess anyway by him, no real evidence. So some doubtful assumptions are being carried a long way. But a wave/particle is singular, so how can there be an excess or deficit?

[@johaanthomas]

Wow

[@HikingWithRiley]

Excellent video, but why is Thomson's name misspelled as "Thomspon" on the title page? Just seeing if anyone would catch it?

[@vitofolgado3713]

Sorry, but that's how you spell Thomson. It's kinda weird but it is what it is.

[@NtenyeGrace]

Hi 👋

[@arixhighlights6147]

Hhhhhhh

[@vishalmaurya-yr7wy]

Love you sir really from the core ofy heart .What a nice and simple explanation you gave😊

[@captainjackson18]

This chapter's for which age or grade in particular?

[@PhysicsHigh]

I teach this to our year 12

[@captainjackson18]

@@PhysicsHigh ok

[@earthstewardude]

I bought a bunch of particles with my charge card.

[@billallen275]

Awesome, thank you! I needed that he discovered the mass but I wasn't sure how. It always astounds me as an amateur scientist and experimenter, how accurate they could get with what seemed like so crude of instrumentation. It wasn't really because it let them do the work, but developing the experiment and equipment and such a young field is amazing to me.

[@naveensingh5787]

the electron source was metal plates or ionisation of gas taken in the tube?

[@kamranshabeer1157]

Great....it is joyful

[@Jossepi33]

why thank you

[@aekkasitpongsuwan4290]

😍😍

[@ashalekshmi3403]

Greatest video

[@imtiazali9779]

Very interested ❤

[@kxm_alex1021]

Ty for the help 🥰🥰

[@kxm_alex1021]

It really help me so so so so so much 🥰🥰🥰

[@dr.ankitbirla3901]

Hello from which country you belong

[@zendoc49]

if your accent isn't so nauseating the way you say here, its the best darn expose of electron discovery worth some award of sorts. Thank you a million times.