Magnetic Force Does NOT Exist!

We've all played with magnets before watching them attract or repel via magnetic force. In this video, I make the bold claim that magnetic force doesn't actually exist. It's an illusion.
________________________________
VIDEO ANNOTATIONS
Noether's Theorem Explained:
• Noether's Theorem Expl...
Relativity & Gravity Series:
• Relativity & Gravity -...
Fit a 6 ft Pole in a 5 ft Shed w/ Science!
• Fit a 6 ft Pole in a 5...
What the HECK are Fields?!?
• What the HECK are Fiel...
What is the Coriolis Effect?
• What is the Coriolis E...
Centrifugal Force Does NOT Exist!!
• Centrifugal Force Does...
________________________________
SCIENCE ASYLUM STUFF
Support us on Patreon:
/ scienceasylum
Advanced Theoretical Physics (eBook):
gumroad.com/l/...
Merchandise:
shop.spreadshir...
More videos at:
/ thescienceasylum
Facebook: / scienceasylum
Twitter: @nicklucid / nicklucid
Instagram: @nicklucid / nicklucid
Google+: www.google.com/...
Main Site: www.scienceasyl...
Vlog: / thenicklucid
________________________________
LINKS TO COMMENTS
________________________________
EXTRA INFO LINKS
MinutePhysics on Magnets:
• MAGNETS: How Do They W...
Veritasium on Magnetism:
• How Special Relativity...
Electricity vs Magnetism:
en.wikipedia.o...
en.wikipedia.o...
en.wikipedia.o...
en.wikipedia.o...
en.wikipedia.o...
en.wikipedia.o...
en.wikipedia.o...
en.wikipedia.o...
Vectors vs Pseudovectors:
mathworld.wolfr...
en.wikipedia.o...
www.quora.com/...
physics.stackex...
________________________________
IMAGE CREDITS
Logo designed by: Ben Sharef
Stock Photos and Clipart
- Wikimedia Commons commons.wikimed...
- Openclipart openclipart.org/
- or I made them myself...
Matrix Meme:
canadianonlineg...
Magetic Field in Thumbnail:
upload.wikimed...

[@ScienceAsylum]

*I've remade this video* and I've given the topic the time it deserves: kzbin.info/www/bejne/f5qao5p_hsaqodE (How Special Relativity Fixed Electromagnetism)

[@smort123]

"given the topic the time it deserves"? Maybe one shouldn't make

[@ScienceAsylum]

@@smort123 Agreed. That's a lesson I had to learn the hard way.

[@rameshthakur3185]

When the charge is stationery Current is moving in wire apply density contraction to electrons Then it should attract it

[@TaigiTWeseFormosanDiplomat]

:)

[@esquare807]

Electricity and magnetism are the two aspects of a single phenomenon, electromagnetism. Electricity does not cause magnetism and magnetism does not cause electricity, but rather special relativity joins them together, just as it joins space and time into spacetime.

[@johntracy72]

Actually there is a barber shop in Austin called Shear Madness.

[@ScienceAsylum]

I found one in Michigan too. Apparently, it’s a very common business name 🤷‍♂️

[@gon4455]

Barber shop for sheep.

[@marcusanderson9042]

@@ScienceAsylum Sheariously?

[@handlebarfox2366]

my favorite are hair salons named Curl Up and Dye

[@aaravsart2030]

@@marcusanderson9042 madlessly?

[@daffidavit]

This channel takes the difficult and makes it "fun and easy' to understand. Nick is a genius and makes science easier to understand. Don't get me wrong, I only understand a portion of this stuff, but it's a lot more than I get from audiobooks on the same subject. He takes what I thought I knew and presents it in such a way where the loopholes of misunderstanding are plugged up. I'm glad there is so much I don't know, now I have a reason to learn it in a new light. Nick makes it fun. He's funny, entertaining, and an excellent professor. I must assume he has a Phd in physics. Yes? No?

[@joshwilliams8863]

As a plasma physicist I was ready to rage on here, but as it turns out you're dead on the money - electric and magnetic forces are coupled. Hence what appears to be an electric force in one frame of reference may manifest as a magnetic force in another frame of reference.

[@ScienceAsylum]

HAHA yeah, the title is definitely click-bait.

[@manessvijay3586]

as you are a plasma physicist just sharing what am experiencing today this november 18th 2019 this speed hum sound frequency vibration fields which am experiencing started 19 years earlier has reached a level of waves and force and force of acceleration waves (just posting the level this has reached for information and knowledge) (posted this 6 days earlier on LinkedIn)

[@SsDiBoi]

Bwahahaha I crack myself up man wow

[@Foggy_Mustard]

@KLJF dielectric expresses itself as force thru pressure mediation. The energy was always there but it is 2 dimensional (imperceptible) that pours out tangible 3 dimensional energy, matter, force, etc. Very similar to sound, or light. Do you think that there is a solid stick of light in flashlight. No; a circuit & battery trigger a specific wavelength frequency that is light. There is other than the physical.

[@DukeEllision329]

we got a clown over here ☝️

[@joemcd.3710]

Absolutely correct. While special relativity forced us to change much of our views of physics, Maxwell's equations needed no change whatsoever. They were already relativisticly correct. What I tell my students is that magnetism is merely the relativistic correction of the electric force.

[@arthurreitz9540]

Now I understand why Maxwell's equations are in contradiction with Newton's physic.

[@alext9067]

You're a teacher and you spelled relativistically incorrectly?

[@joemcd.3710]

@@alext9067Guilty as charged. My only defense is that the extra syllable is rarely pronounced even by native speakers.

[@99bits46]

How did Maxwell know about relativity before 1900?

[@risvegliato]

@@99bits46 He didn't! But he realised electric and magnetic forces were manifestations of the same phenomenon.

[@seankelly1291]

Wow, I’m both confused and enlightened simultaneously. My brain hurts but I like it.

[@ecapers7231]

I still don't really get magnetism. Everywhere I look for an explanation seems to define magnetism in terms of itself. And why do they say that electric and magnetic waves are perpendicular to each other if they're actually one in the same? I'm sorry for not getting this well, but I have such a hard time visualizing what's responsible for what, and how.

[@ScienceAsylum]

Working with and thinking about a "magnetic field" is just easier than reality. We do the same thing with the Coriolis effect and the Centrifugal force. Neither of those things are real, but they're easier to work with. Reality can be down-right impossible to deal with sometimes. When it comes to light waves (electric and magnetic waves), those are waves in the values of the "fields" ...and "fields" are /completely/ made up, so don't try to read into that too much. A deep understanding of light requires quantum physics, but a deep understanding usually unnecessary to make predictions about what light will do... so we use forces and fields instead because they're easier.

[@afalco54]

When I sit on a train ny speed relative to the train is 0, but you at the station see me moving fast. Using this argument speed does not exists as it is zero relative to the train.

[@TeodorAngelov]

He uses the same example to show that kinetic energy does not exist in all frames in another video. Anyway, speed is not a force.

[@AstralTraveler]

The main problem is, that most of you confuse static fields with electromagnetic induction. Electromagnet is NOT a pernament magnet - and they have slightly different properties. In the case of static fields, magnetic and electric forces are NOT just different aspects of a single force - they are 2 completely different forces, produced in different ways and affecting different materials. If you don't believe me, then check, if a compass needle will be affected by static electric charge - I've checked it by myself and it didn't. But static charge will affect a needle, which is made of tin foil (which won't be affected by magnetic fields). Both electrostatic and magnetostatic fields have such properties, as dimensional size and magnitude, so both fields are physically real. Magnetic domains can be observed under microscope, while electrons have mass - both are absolutely objective...

[@sidewaysfcs0718]

as a chemist working on molecular magnets, i can assure you no one really "gets" magnetism at the fundamental level. no theory actually explains the fundamental root of magnetism, all of quantum mechanics and quantum field theory is pure mathematics and some conventions. Like the direction of magnetic moment, or angular momentum, totally arbitrarily chosen. Spin itself is also not fundamentally known, all we know is that electrons carry instrinsic angular momentum, how is this actually happening? No one knows. Some cannot be known.

[@GordyDhatt]

I totally love how -- whether it was deliberately or inadvertently -- you managed to insert the Wilhelm Scream (TWICE -- 0:30 & 3:00)!! You're one of my absolute favorites!

[@ScienceAsylum]

A part of me misses this time in my YT history. I was able to just mess around and let loose.

[@Badgerheist]

I've been searching for a video like this for a couple years now. You nailed it! Thanks for presenting it in such an accessible format.

[@ScienceAsylum]

Glad you liked it!

[@borgholable]

great channel please keep it up and slow down so we can understand the fuck is happening

[@mumtaz5239]

"it's okay to be a little crazy" I liked that one

[@Anghelnicolae]

Man, you can take any subject on the planet and make it interesting. That's a gift.

[@NajaNigricolis55]

This channel is gold. Keep it up.

[@ScienceAsylum]

Thanks!

[@Jjunior130]

This channel makes science great again.

[@destinyovbiebo8988]

Nice one!

[@Greg_Chase]

Magnetism exists. Don't use relativity to disenfranchise a real force. Centrifugal force is not a force, agree. Magnetism is. Magnets polarize the virtual particle field (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_particle#Manifestations). You're at the International Space Station. On a spacewalk. In your left hand you have bar magnet #1. In your right hand you have bar magnet #2. You move your hands to get the magnets near each other but not touching. Then *CRACK* the two magnets slam together (huge neodymium bar magnets, thus the slam). Do magnets work in space? If they did not, no space vehicle would every work in space. So it's empty space. How did magnet #2 'know' that magnet #1 was even there? THE VIRTUAL PARTICLE FIELD was polarized by the magnets. Virtual particles acted to communicate the magnetic attraction from each magnet. Michael Faraday knew this back in the year 1831-ish. He fixed a magnet to a disk. He spun the disk. Electricity flowed. That surprised him (and would surprise 98% of people who think they know what 'cutting magnetic field lines' means). This magnet was a round disk, with N pointing up, S pointing down. Faraday spent a fair amount of time ruminating on that. He already knew that a FIXED magnet (not spinning with the metal disk) placed over the rotating disk would produce electric current. He did not know why he could physically ATTACH THE MAGNET to the rotating disk and still get electric current. He originally believed "since the magnet is rotating with the disk, it cannot be cutting the disk with its lines of force - why is electrical current flowing?" 98% of people who think they know what 'cutting magnetic field lines' means would tell you 'that wouldn't work' yes it does. Faraday dealt with it almost 200 years ago. And there are videos on youtube that actually show this "magnet attached to homopolar generator disk still produces electric current" Faraday finally concluded "the magnetic field must be in the air in the immediate vicinity of the magnet and does not move when the magnet rotates. The magnetic field doesn't rotate, so it still cuts the disk with its lines of force, and produces current." This actually makes sense. Let's change the magnet -- now it is a rounded collection of small magnets, alternating poles facing up - N, S, then N, then S, N, S, N........etc. A colleciton of small magnets shaped into a disk. Now if you spin the magnet (collection) THE MAGNETIC FIELD *WILL MOVE* with the magnet (collection) because the virtual particle field is being polarized by different poles. Okay let's go back to the original magnet -- a round disk, with N pointing up, S pointing down. Here's what the virtual particle field in the immediate vicinity of the original magnet sees: ONE MAGNETIC POLE facing upward. Either N or S. If you spin the magnet, the virtual particle field still sees the same thing. ONE MAGNETIC POLE facing upward. Either N or S. Here's a simple concrete example. You have a round ice cream cone. You lick from the top and spin the cone around. "The cone is spinning. But it tastes like chocolate regardless of whether I spin it or not." The cone is the disk magnet, and you were the Virtual particle field. . . .

[@dukenukem9770]

I never thought of the impact of length contraction on the observation of charge neutrality of a live wire. Interestingly, the length contraction argument applies in the wire rest frame as well. It must be that the electrons in the current naturally space space themselves out in a way that exactly compensates for the length contraction an observer in the wire's rest frame would measure in order to preserve charge neutrality in the wire rest frame. Thus, only in the rest frame of the wire (or in an inertial frame moving perpendicularly to the wire) does the wire appear to be charge neutral. In any other inertial frame, the length contractions of the wire and the electron current would be different. This would result in observations of non-neutral linear charge densities... Cool stuff! Thanks for sharing!

[@albertbatfinder5240]

Why do these science educator guys always have to be play the zany madman? It’s been done to death. I was on raised pop science by Professor Julius Sumner Miller in the early 1960s. Everyone just keeps on following the same meme. New approach, Mr Propeller Head!

[@MrJaneHolliday]

This channel is pure gold.

[@3darkmount953]

Maybe pletinum

[@aasyjepale5210]

@@3darkmount953 or even sepphire, or diemond!

[@nathanneiman]

Wrong! Absolutely, totally, completely wrong! The wire "can" exert electrical force because it is polarized, and the space around the wire has an electric potential! Every atom in the wire experiences an electrical potential difference. This is proven by placing a test charge around the polarized wire! Special Relativity doesn't work to solve electrical engineering problems because inevitably leads to insurmountable paradoxes!

[@dangiscongrataway2365]

Unacceptable nick! You didn't sound crazy in the last seconds of the video. UNSUBSCRIBED!!!

[@KnowBuddiesLP]

+Daniel Skiba It's the ones that don't sound crazy you really have to worry about!

[@ScienceAsylum]

+KnowBuddies LP You took the words right out of my mouth ;-)

[@KnowBuddiesLP]

+The Science Asylum Got your back buddy! I think.. maybe that was an insult, either way ;)

[@matejebach5487]

Of course that magnetisam is inseparable from electric current and electric current is inseparable from magnetism, it is thing from elementary school. But that you trying to explain me that two magnets close to each other on dynamometer will show me zero - there is no real force - because of some relative coordinate system and laws of relativity, sorry but don't bullsh.. me. Because someone can't resolve issues of astrophysical theories now you must deny simple and proved laws of physics. Or find mistake in that logic or abandon that theories which are obvious faulty.

[@davidhand9721]

Please, please tell me how this explains the force exerted between two particles with spin

[@karlisbanis2442]

You have got to be kidding me. I am sure there are better explanations. Ones that require neither relativity, nor virtual particles. Both of these explanations are contradictions to each other yet they are both viewed as true. Duality plagues the world I suppose.

[@biswanathdutta4219]

This channel ought to have millions of views!

[@ScienceAsylum]

+Biswanath Dutta Thanks!

[@luckystarlmao420]

Monsoon: and i took that personally

[@Altorin]

I love the screaming mind blown clone

[@selvarajp4816]

That's what the thing with special relativity , Electric and magnetic fields are different only when viewed from different frames of reference...

[@storm14k]

This might be the first channel I support via patreon just because the content is so good and yet the subsciber count seems low.

[@khadijaayman2916]

My physics teacher always told me that there are 3 sisters , magnetic energy, electric energy and motion energy once u have 2 of them u can get the other like as u said in wire the electrons move and current passes so that's electric and motion together they give magnetic while motion and magnetic will give electric like in dynamo and electric and magnetic will give motion like in motor

[@mivsherdesdemona4471]

me, writing my bachelor on magnetic effects, sees the title of this video: well, thats unfortunate

[@johnbatchler8551]

who is the bonehead who wrote up this topic???? then explain why and how electricity works?

[@ManyHeavens42]

Did anybody Notice this Guy's Magnetic Personality, he's Encourageable . You don't see too many of those.

[@aroncanapa5796]

Channel should be named "everything you know is wrong"

[@taloskriti]

I really like your persona and your pretending craziness. You are pretending very well... or are you?

[@ThePmfan]

Still can't find a straight answer for example of how a N pole repels, through empty space, another N pole. Does it bend space like gravity? How can it just push the like pole away?

[@ScienceAsylum]

This video might help: *What the HECK are Magnets?* kzbin.info/www/bejne/jpTdfoWpntZso80

[@GUYANESEGT]

you're insane. this is madness..MADNESS. *starts to laugh hysterically*

[@ManyHeavens42]

Don't say that word the government doesn't want you to say inertia inertia you know so

[@rinwesley3092]

Oh for Pete's sakes. I Can't believe it has taken so many years for someone to finally explain how electromagnetism works. I've been confused for so long. This video has made a sub out of me.

[@ScienceAsylum]

Welcome!

[@ScienceAsylum]

And Richard Feynman explained it this way (in the Feynman Lectures) long before Veritasium :-)

[@firdacz]

And could you give me the explanation (why is the wire trully neutral and the electrons not denser thanks to length contraction) or point me somewhere where I can get more info? Thx

[@ScienceAsylum]

[Property 1] Charge is conserved (doesn't change in a closed system). [Property 2] Charge is invariant (the same in all frames of reference). Let's say our system is a wire and a battery. At first, they're not connected, so no current is flowing. At this time, both the wire and the battery are neutral (no net charge). After we connect the wire to the battery, the current begins to flow quickly reaching a steady drift speed. The wire-battery system was neutral before and, by conservation of charge, must be neutral after. Even though the electrons are now moving, they will redistribute themselves to maintain zero net charge. If we shift to the reference frame where the electrons are sitting still and the nuclei are moving, a similar thing happens. Originally, both look like they're moving, so they're both Lorentz contracted (and still no net charge because charge is invariant). When you connect the battery, the electrons are brought to rest creating a charge density in that section of wire. That's a problem since charge is conserved. The net charge for the whole circuit must remain zero, so the other side of the circuit must have the opposite charge density to balance it out. The reason the diagram is misleading when you ask question like this is because the diagram doesn't show the entire system. That little section of wire has a charge density, but the entire circuit's charge density is not uniform.

[@firdacz]

Thx. I have already realized the other half - if electrons are stationary in the "upper" wire, they have to move at almost the double speed of the protons/atoms int he "lower" wire. That makes negative charge there, because those electrons in "lower" wire are shrinked (closer than protons/atoms are). I was wondering about the wire's frame. I will try to reword your explanation: "The wire-battery system was neutral before and, by conservation of charge, must be neutral after." So, electrons cannot pop into existence from nowhere, so they will maintain their distance even if accelerated by the battery. The battery creates a pressure in one direction, like a water pump. Some "energy" of that pump have to fight the length contraction produced by relativistic effect - can we say that? It produces "lower pressure", but that gets equalized eventually (making the wire neutral again, same "pressure" everywhere). P.S.: Lower pressure on one side of the battery and higher pressure on the other side. That travels through the wire to eventually cancel out.... correct?

[@missywalker1223]

You are why what's online can't be trusted! Quit!

[@GaganpreetSingh-ft1xi]

If the charge is stationary then electrons are moving with respect to the charge. Why don't it attracts or repells the stationary charge ?

[@kayokochanny5490]

Same question here! :/ Do you have an answer?

[@ojasdighe991]

The length contraction for electrons is negligible because of their shorter lengths so the change in length is not so prominent however in case of protons the same is not true hence wire becomes positively charged.

[@biswajitbaruah8974]

Aaaaaaaa😂😂😂😂😂

[@nihalelmoujaddid8166]

3:20 you re welcome

[@mattcrouch8984]

you just missed a fantastic sponsor setup. Thats brilliant! yes.... and so is the sponsor of this episode .

[@ScienceAsylum]

At the time, the channel was too small to get any sponsors. You're right though. Would have been a great transition.

[@aquastudio2001]

Great video! Didn't know about special relativity until now but I don't think I am at that level of physics so this is a good reference video for my future physics studies. Keep rolling!

[@ScienceAsylum]

I recently remade this video. You should show that one instead: kzbin.info/www/bejne/f5qao5p_hsaqodE

[@rossfriedman6570]

Can you do a video on electroweak force?

[@ravithejakandalam449]

Hey i got a doubt.You made me clear that special theory of relativity creates magnetic force in current carrying wire.But what about permanent magnets.?where do they get magnetic force from..?That little part in beginning of video is not sufficient explaination for me.Can anyone help.?

[@darkexcalibur87]

Yes you are right, spontaneous magnetism in metals wasn't addressed. It comes from something completely different and I do feel like the video is misleading in this sense.

[@garethb1961]

The electrons in the atoms are moving, making each atom like a magnet.

[@darkexcalibur87]

@@garethb1961 This is true, but spin angular momentum is still being ignored, and that has a big contribution as well.

[@declankruppa8300]

The spin of the unpaired electrons, which give magnetism in permanent magnets, is also an effect of special relativity.

[@mathmachine4266]

0:29 you're right. I'm gonna open up a hair salon and call it "AAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!"

[@davidbooth3285]

I'm off to Shear-Madness for a hair cut and I'm completely bald! Oh and science is brilliant!!

[@zatar123]

So, magnetic force isn't a thing and electric force isn't a thing but electromagnetic force is a thing because when you combine them then one form or the other shows up in all frames. Yes, No, Maybe?

[@ScienceAsylum]

Exactly! 🤓

[@paulg444]

That's it youve crossed the line !!

[@cynthialausuting]

Hello, what do you do for a living? @thescienceasylum

[@ScienceAsylum]

University physics teacher

[@twistedyogert]

So instead of calling it a force I'll call it an effect.

[@3darkmount953]

Nice thinking man...

[@frehleyukito]

if that effect produces a torque, it becomes a real force

[@shayanmoosavi9139]

@@frehleyukito so you say if I apply a force along a door ( θ=0 or π ) my force doesn't exist ? Because that doesn't produce a torque.

[@adamrspears1981]

I was understanding that there are no "forces"....but rather "interactions".

[@ScienceAsylum]

On a quantum level, "interactions" is definitely a much better word choice.

[@adamrspears1981]

@@ScienceAsylum THANKS!!! Please keep posting these videos. As a lover of science, I enjoy them. But I have read quite a few others' comments that imply that science isn't necessarily their cup of tea, but none-the-less they are craving your videos for the knowledge & understanding! So thanks again, & PLEASE keep posting them!!! 🤓

[@virtualuniverse4861]

I like your approach to the unification of forces... then defining forces... then defining the entities that define forces (and the forces we are based upon, where we can call something 'alive' or 'evolving' in a defined forward time).

[@SBIMNTSI]

How can it be possible that magnetic field exists , but not the magnetic force ? Respected Sir . Can you Please explain the origin of magnetic field too?

[@ScienceAsylum]

It's not really the magnetic field either. It's the electromagnetic field that can transmit an electromagnetic force. We only treat electric and magnetic fields separately for convenience. They're really one thing together.

[@SBIMNTSI]

@@ScienceAsylum Thankyou very much Sir

[@mesosjar]

Nice job on explaining about electromagnetism Nick.You deserve more recognition. Keep up the good work:-)

[@ScienceAsylum]

+Moses Thevaraj Thanks!

[@jacobvandijk6525]

After 0:08: Fortunately it is NOT science. It's nature! Science only tries to describe nature. Know your place, sir!

[@MANOJTIWARI-ni8jr]

is this same for electric force

[@ScienceAsylum]

Yes. You have to combine them to make it a real force.

[@jesusdiazzz6369]

@@ScienceAsylum combine what?

[@fabienpaillusson7390]

How does showing the covariance of the electromagnetic force show that there is no magnetic force? Answer: IT DOESN'T...unless you live in an asylum ;) . It is easy to see that the proposed argument doesn't work in at least four ways: (0) The first one relates to the logical mistake of the argument. Even when changing frame of reference as operated in the video, the force on the particle does not disappear; it has still the same magnitude and direction: it is just its mathematical expression (and the interpretation we might infer from it) that has changed, but the force is still there in the Newtonian sense of the term. (1) If you have two particles moving with DIFFERENT velocities relative to a current-carrying wire, then there doesn't exist any frame of reference in which the magnetic force disappears for both particles. And that's precisely this fact that is used to operationally define a real magnetic field. (2) The thought experiment of (1) demonstrates something crucial: if there exists a frame of reference in which only a magnetostatic field is present (like the one with the neutral wire and a current), then there doesn't exist any galilean frame of reference in which there is no magnetic field (for a particular test object the magnetic force on it could be zero but not the magnetic field). This is due to the fact that the quantity E^2-B^2 is a relativistic invariant and therefore, if it is negative in one frame of reference, it remains negative in all other frames in spite of the appearance of electric field components arising from the covariance of the electromagnetic field. (3) Looking at elementary particles for the last 90 years or so has shown that besides having an intrinsic mass and charge, they also carry an intrinsic magnetic dipole related in a simple way to their spin quantum number. As far current knowledge is concerned, there doesn't exist any frame of reference where elementary particles actually lose one of their intrinsic properties; ergo there doesn't exist a single frame of reference in which any chunk of matter would not create a magnetic field.

[@ScienceAsylum]

You make some good points, but there are some problems: (0) The force on the particle doesn't necessarily have the same magnitude in every frame of reference. Force isn't a spacetime invariant. All you can really say is that the force on the particle is always non-zero in every frame of reference. (1,2,3) You are correct that, because the wire is made of both negative and positive charges moving relative to each other, the magnetic FIELD never goes away. However, the magnetic FORCE does... which is the point I was trying to make in this video. The proton experiences the magnetic FORCE in one frame (the one in which it is moving), but it experiences NO magnetic FORCE in the other frame (the one in which it isn't moving). Stationary charges can't experience a magnetic FORCE no matter how strong the magnetic FIELD is. Because of point (0), we know there's a force on the particle. Because of point (1,2,3), we know it can't be a magnetic force. Therefore, we must conclude it is only an electric force. The ultimate conclusion of the video is that while magnetic force doesn't really exist and electric force doesn't really exist, the ELECTRO-MAGNETIC force does exist. The point is that you can't think of electric force and magnetic force as two separate things when you're trying to understand the fundamental nature of the universe.

[@fabienpaillusson7390]

You are right that force is not lorentz invariant but I reckon it is galilean invariant which is what I meant (otherwise there is some factor gamma involved). Points (2) and (3) were solely about the magnetic field alone and not the magnetic force you are right. However they meant something regarding the concept of magnetic force. That it is enough to bring a particle with a non zero velocity to witness a "magnetic force" on it. No matter the frame in which you are. In particular, thought experiment (1) considers two charges in relative motion with respect to the wire but with different relative velocities. In such a case it is impossible to find a frame where the magnetic force "disappears" for both particles; this is totally different from inertial forces for example where a global change of coordinates makes the force disappear for all particles. It is all the more different that here the change of frame is galilean...so nothing to do with fictitious forces in the Newtonian sense. And again from an operational point of view, the force does not disappear in the sense that the acceleration the charge will be subject to will always be the same in every galilean frame...which again is different from fictitious forces. I think we both know quite well the underlying physical theories, we just disagree on what it means for a force to "exist". The general expression (in galilean relativity) for the force on a point charge is q(E + v x B) for any frame of reference with measurable electric field E and magnetic field B. The fact that in a specific frame the force will be solely expressible in term of electric force or magnetic force does not mean that neither exist (to me at least) but on the contrary that it is impossible to find two galilean frames that agree about their non-existence. So it is more the fact that they do not appear in certain very specific conditions (two frames of reference among an infinity) that is fictitious and not the other way around.

[@ScienceAsylum]

We might disagree on what makes a force "real." That's a matter of philosophy. In my experience, the most important keys to understanding the universe are the things that don't change... the things that are always there no matter what... so I try to put emphasis on that.

[@rapture9125]

As a carpenter who is trying to learn about electronics and forces, I have to say, I think that you nailed it. We need these types of videos for everyone to think on. Thanks buddy....

[@Adya820]

This is completely wrong. This implies that the electric field converts into a magnetic field just by changing the reference frame , and this is wrong. Both fields exist simultaneously in both frames, only one is stronger than the other depending on the reference frame. One field can have an intensity of 0 in some of the reference frames, but it still exists. It is not that when you look at a electric field in another reference frame it looks like magnetic field!

[@ScienceAsylum]

What this video implies is that they're not separate things. They're really just one thing: The electromagnetic field.

[@Adya820]

I totally agree. Maybe then the video should be called "Magnetic Force Does NOT Exist but Electromagnetic Force Do exist"

[@macronencer]

I love this fact. "Electromagnets only work because of Special Relativity" is something I discovered a couple of years back (can't remember where, it may have been Veritasium?) and it's my favourite thing to blow people's minds with :)

[@ScienceAsylum]

Yes, Veritasium did a collaboration with MinutePhysics on it.

[@Respraysloth]

Quantum field theorist here. Here's a pretty fun fact: if you try to write down a sensible quantum theory that conserves electric charge and works with special relativity, you automatically recover all of the equations for electromagnetism! You don't have to mention electrons or Faraday's Law or anything, but the Maxwell's equations still magically pop out! Thought I'd share that.

[@Respraysloth]

Quantum field theorist here. Here's a pretty fun fact: if you try to write down a sensible quantum theory that conserves electric charge and works with special relativity, you automatically recover all of the equations for electromagnetism! You don't have to mention electrons or Faraday's Law or anything, but the Maxwell's equations still magically pop out! Thought I'd share that.

[@ScienceAsylum]

Accurate.

[@RESTLINXXX]

"Magnetic force depends on motion and motion is relative" wow that's the simplest way to put it,congrats!

[@muhammedalthaf_phy1866]

Hello science asylum please do a video on relativity and length contraction and mathematics side

[@ScienceAsylum]

Why do the math when the spacetime diagram is easier? kzbin.info/www/bejne/fJW6foBslr2jj6c

[@JamshadAhmad]

Its Wednesday my dudes, 2:59!!!!!

[@LemBidi]

on, I'm not angry neither confused. all I do is Happy!! because i don't believe forces!!

[@KnowBuddiesLP]

+Lem Bidi The Force is what gives a Jedi his power. It's an energy field created by all living things. It surrounds us and penetrates us. It binds the galaxy together.

[@LemBidi]

Lol dude, I'm a non-newtonian person, so I just believed the Spacetime and those Relativities occur

[@eiriklade93]

Woaaaaaaah, why didn't my electrical engineering teacher tell me this :@ THANK YOU

[@ScienceAsylum]

You're welcome!

[@ManyHeavens42]

Keep on Pretending Tensor ?

[@sankimalu]

What was my patreon password again...

[@kshitiztiwari8227]

The Fast Fast got me🤣🤣🤣

[@trenzinhodaalegria8012]

So what you mean is that it actually should be only "electric force", not "magnetic force" as electric charges and movement are fundamental to it's existence and the magnetic force is only a point of view of the electric force.

[@ScienceAsylum]

Yes... or better yet, it should just be called the "electromagnetic force." Sometimes that looks electric. Sometimes that looks magnetic.

[@ricomajestic]

No! Only an electromagnetic force exists. Whether you see an electric or magnetic force only, depends on your frame of reference.

[@alwayscurious413]

I'm going for a yes on this one. My reckoning is that if we could stop everything from moving everywhere and we had a stationary electric charge, then it would have a stationary electric field surrounding it? There would be nothing magnetic going on because nothing is moving? As an analogy to this I say that I can point my finger into the air and hold it there and people can see my stationary finger pointing ; If I make a rotation motion with my finger then I immediately can define clockwise to an observer and similarly I must thereby define anticlockwise too this is a kin to there being no such thing as a magnetic monopole. I'm trying to avoid relativity if I can too as I don't think it should be needed to resolve any of this?

[@biasbias539]

Nick why permanent magnet which is electrically neutral gets attracted to electromagnet (in which magnetism is caused by length contraction thereby altering charge density)

[@ScienceAsylum]

What the HECK are Magnets? kzbin.info/www/bejne/jpTdfoWpntZso80

[@panvi3181]

WHo; elsE is awtching in twenthy ninteen ??? >.> XD LMAO

[@floydbraido2426]

Not the rubber ducky.

[@caledelith]

Okay... so magnetic forces aren't real... what about magnetic fields?? I tried watching the other video that is linked at around 1:39 but I just don't get it. There are magnetic fields? How do they work then? What do they even do?! :p

[@ScienceAsylum]

Fields (like magnetic fields) aren't a real thing. They're just a thing we use on paper to make calculations easier to understand. You can make the same predictions with real things like energy and what we call "potential," but the calculations are harder to do.

[@caledelith]

Right... so people who say that animals hunt based on magnetic fields/force (e.g. foxes who dive for mice) are completely wrong??

[@ScienceAsylum]

Caledelith Well, the point I was trying to make in the video was that electric force and magnetic force don't exist as separate things. There's just an electromagnetic force... and that's real :-)

[@caledelith]

+The Science Asylum Ohh alright hahaha. Thank you!!

[@AnnaelleD]

I don't want to scare you but what if fields were real? Think about it: when you read my words, you catch the idea I want to express to you. Then this idea is an information I transfered to you. Is there something that can be identified as an idea? Not the letters, not the screen, something that *is* the idea? No, nothing. Does the idea exists? Of course it is, but what it is, we don't know. What about fields? Couldn't they be informations, ideas, too? As you see, information doesn't need any physical things to be. But it needs something to catch it and to make it become real (like our brain)...And it needs something to create it at first. Now, you have these questions: who create these informations which create our universe? where are these informations? Are they located? And how does something (what?) access it? Abstraction is a beautiful tool, but it can lose you because nothing is real in an abstract world. Is our whole universe just an abstraction? So many questions... but interesting ones, isn't it? (Please excuse my english)

[@slam_down]

What the heck is a tensor?

[@ScienceAsylum]

Maybe one day.

[@singhamaninder5836]

I love this guy!!

[@3darkmount953]

Are you a girl that you love that guy?

[@croakmcgloak3568]

When i came in this video i thought this guy was gonna be all kinda crazy. But when he explained himself i knew where he was coming from, nice vid!

[@danielbrian8387]

You totally got me! I was thinking, since I’m all about perspectives, that you had found a new way of looking at things. Little did I know you were speaking about semantics! Love it! Most people don’t differentiate between, or don’t understand there is a difference in term, between magnetic and electromagnetic force, but you described it succinctly! Great video!

[@ckimsey77]

"difference between magnetic and electromagnetic force".... these are one in the same, you cant have moving charges or electricity without magnetism, they go together, thus the term electromagnetism. See how both are combined into one word/thing? Thats for a reason, like space-time as being one entity. Research underlying subjects before you blindly fall into flawed ideas as cold facts. Meant as advice not an insult im just trying to help bro

[@danielbrian8387]

@@ckimsey77 Appreciate it! But That’s pretty much exactly what he, and I in my comment, said. A matter of semantics. 😁

[@danielbrian8387]

@@ckimsey77 It’s similar to calling all small space objects ‘debris’. While the field differentiates between ‘debris’ and ‘micro meteorites’. They are both technically “debris”, but they are separated by term so there’s no confusion. Like the James Webb telescope: They have said it will definitely be hit with “debris” (an article said this), it was misleading because there isn’t any man made debris at the L2 point. They were referring to the micrometeorites that would hit it.

[@db5837]

Good example of how semantics and relativity causes confusion. Sorry, magnets can exert a measurable force in the practical sense of the word. You can always argue that a punch hitting your face causes the force you feel, but you can also argue that it is your face hitting the fist that has exerted the force (the fist has been assaulted by your face).

[@AstralTraveler]

Besides both: electrostatic and magnetostatic fields have a dimensional size, which can be measured - so they are physically objective...

[@GeorgeRapko]

Click bait bullshit.

[@RODOLFO.M.S]

🙏🏼🇧🇷👍 Newly Subscribed...please make a video that doesn't exist on KZbin. A video showing the electrons in the Joules Thief circuit. Thank you very much.

[@deepga9961]

Well! why is it that opposite charges attract? Why is it that opposite poles attract???

[@ScienceAsylum]

I don't think we don't know "why." We just observe it as a rule of the universe.

[@AstralTraveler]

Every differential wants to be nullified - electric charge is no different. But when it comes to magnets... Well, they just are magnets... :)

[@GALACTICSAVANT1o1]

please do a collab with minute physics or veritasium or both please do it

[@ScienceAsylum]

A collab with Veritasium almost happened once, but then he got really busy with another project. I'm sure if I had a good idea, he'd be game.

[@GALACTICSAVANT1o1]

@@ScienceAsylum oh its ok But i can't belive that a youtuber like you with so many subscriber will reply to me i just recently founded you and commented and you replied i cannot belive i like your videos a lot cause i want to be a astronmer and you are helping me a lot at this time btw i am just 13

[@dannythemedic]

MIND BLOWN! next video, you would show me how I dont exist!

[@peterw1534]

These videos are too short. Just when I feel like I'm getting it, the video abruptly ends. Good though

[@ScienceAsylum]

I agree. That's why I've been making my recent videos a little longer.

[@grantmitchell6738]

0:46 you lost me

[@MrCuddlyable3]

Bold? No, just showing off some knowledge of Maxwell's classical electromagnetism with no interest in educating anyone properly with the necessary calculus.

[@Howie47]

"A force only really exist if it exists from every point of view." LOL What's your definition of "really exist" and "point of view". Aren't you just making a rhetorical argument? One might say with your argument. The material universe of the Earthlings doesn't exist because we can't see it."

[@three6nine992]

The way magnets push and pull on each other IS magic, science is just a framework to study and understand magic....😊

[@nathanaelcard]

☝🏻🤓 As a matter of fact, there's a barbershop quartet musical called Shear Madness #greatminds

[@zakirhussain-js9ku]

QFT explains forces using standard model particles. Magnetic force does exist. I think magnetic poles are surrounded by some kind of quantum particles oriented in opposite direction for opposite poles. Due to opposite orientation these particles interfere destructively reducing particle density in the space b/w the poles. Lower density space exerts a pull force on the surrounding higher density space which moves the magnetic poles inward. Due to same orientation in like poles the quantum particles interfere constructively increasing density in the space b/w like poles . Higher density space exerts a push force on surrounding space which move like poles away from each other. Space b/w poles behaves like earth's atmosphere where lower pressure region pulls air inward & higher pressure pushes the air outward. Shape of force lines b/w magnetic poles clearly exhibit pull & push force where force lines for like charges are pushed outwards & for opposite poles pulled inward.

[@darthrevan3342]

Actualy, have you done some quantique physic? So how do you call in english the force that I learned udner the name of force atomique faible et force atomique fort? Or Force nucléaire forte et faible? ACtually the proton is attracted by the electron and vice-versa, thank to the electromagnetic force. HAHA ! Here is the force. Gotcha ! Ha I haven't finished watching the vidéo... G dammit !

[@nitindhiman4600]

but how a single moving charge create magnatic feield

[@ScienceAsylum]

What the HECK are Magnets? kzbin.info/www/bejne/jpTdfoWpntZso80

[@TheWorldBelow360]

AHA! It was just tHEn tHAt I knew tHAt I HAd HAd to HAve HEard tHAt before! And now again I am laughing hysterically and can’t get up off the floor!

[@JasenRaser]

Super conductors have atoms that slow down and arrange properly. Motion creates resistance in an electrical circuit. AC takes path of least resistance. Nano tubes should deliver tons of AC current and only be a fraction of the size of your typical non ferrous conductors. STEEL wires are tougher than aluminum.

[@SanalMG]

Too short and very fast...I didn't understand. Watched twice. I have many questions.

[@JuliusUnique]

so if I understand it correctly, magnetic force is only an illusion if the eletric force it not and vice versa which basically means electromagnetic force is not an illusion and calling it "magnetic force" is just a different way of looking at it

[@zakmatew]

This does not explain magnetism in the slightest. Just another mainstream-attached description lacking explanatory power.If magnetism was so easy to explain the mystery would not exist.

[@freesaxon6835]

Ayslum is the right word..... Magnetic, gravitational force does exist, but not as we know it Jim