Ions, Atoms & Elements - The Building Blocks of the Universe

[@jagunakinshegun2771]

This guy is a fantastic educator. I’m 64 years old and he’s getting me excited about science/maths again. I’m getting a in your bone understanding of wish list subjects I had for decades when I watch his videos

[@saftheartist6137]

Agreed

[@aboalighazali9597]

I am 61 I feel refreshing .

[@dariushmilani6760]

Great content. The explanations that you give are questions that I've had about periodic table.👍👍

[@WilliamLind-f1g]

Thanks

[@MathAndScience]

Thank you!!

[@knowthyself1729]

Excellent Lecture. Thank you.

[@LudwigSpiegel]

Wonderful lecture!

[@leetakamiya]

Are you sure you lost an electron? Atom: I’m positive

[@softshells]

Always enjoy your lessons 👏👏 - I took Chem years ago, but your lessons pretty much keep my basics fresh! Thanks for your time ❤

[@Jeenyuhs_jay]

"At 4:10, you said an isotope is a different number of electrons. I think you meant neutrons.

[@MathAndScience]

Doh. Yes!

[@brianalesher]

yes...I am no way a chemistry wiz but I caught that too.

[@MCLee-q5s]

best teacher i have ever met so far😊

[@saftheartist6137]

Agreed

[@seditt5146]

So.... wtf is up with his views? He sub botted or something? He got 1.4 mil subs but cant barely break 10-20k views on a good day? Mostly a few hundred to couple thousand. Im confused.

[@saftheartist6137]

@ the algorithm sometimes catches his videos, but that doesn’t matter as much. He has loyal subscribers, due to the quality of his teaching and consistency over a long period of time.

[@seditt5146]

@saftheartist6137 I get that in many cases but that aint what we are looking at here. The difference between 1.5 million and 1.5 thousand is staggering. This is no way shenanigans is not taking place here. I agree he makes good teaching content which is all the more reason why the numbers do not add up at all.

[@graham2105]

Great Video..thankyou

[@nakshatratells]

Thanx for making everything clear...

[@oluwatosinawoyele2392]

1:40 I love this. You are smart

[@Somaake5]

Thank you very much. I learned a bit more today.

[@motherof3pearls]

So fun! I am just remembering how much fun I had solving basic chem equations involving periodic table and filling in the electron table with my children when I was homeschooling them. You were definitely an appropriated source. I hope these videos will still be available when my children are married with their own children. I'm sure you will be a remarkable source for them when the roles will be reversed and they are sitting at the helm helping to educating their children! Thank you, and for the record, I tune in for myself now, as a way to insure brain health and neuro plasticity. 🤗❤️

[@geoffreywilliams9324]

I like this presentation . .

[@zahariachirica5466]

I am 66 and I find the educator being exceptionally good!😍

[@wisdomandmotivation51]

Thank you sir.

[@vasantphadke4694]

sir, very nice explaination indeed . Please tell me why there are 12 Neutrons in sodium and not 11 ??????

[@margaretneanover3385]

Very nice ..I was wondering about the double negative making a positive when the proton said pos and neutron neutral or negative..even a double position making a positive. It's funny how the image signals why it's debated

[@maxezz9]

Can charged particles through a magnetic flux density field excite the neutrons on metallic surfaces?

[@silverstarvn]

Wow, thanks.

[@MarkPoullos-v4f]

I really admire these presentations. He does a fantastic job. However I now have more questions than answers. If neutrons have no charge, why do they exist in the first place what purpose could they possibly serve the atom? If the strong nuclear force has a met affect at short distances; does this mean that all the neighboring protons have an effect on each other or the nucleus as a whole? If you knock out a proton from the nucleus of any atom, will this not stabilize the entire structure? I could go on, but I won’t. Thank you.

[@AmeliaMinecraft-e7m]

Some of the questions like why do we have neutrons, what purpose do they serve can only be answered by the creator God himself! Similarly we could ask, why do we have charges at all (on protons and electrons), why didn't just have neutral protons and electrons? Only the maker knows.

[@MarkPoullos-v4f]

@ Thank you! Wow the creator is going to get an earful when I see him . 😂

[@JohnCrandell]

So electricity being the "flow" of electrons through a conductor is chemistry? But it is governed by the EM forces? Also, with the like forces repeling and differing attracting, the Strong Force keeps the protons/neutrons together, but this does not apply to the electron here? This is where quantum physics comes to play, with the electron cloud only being allowed to have certain energy levels/standing waves...so because the electron cant loose energy analog, it only can get down to the lowest energy level and no closer. This is where Plank was with the UV catastrophe....ok, I think I answered one of my own questions. Thanks for making me think and letting me ramble here. Chemistry feels pretty intuitive when it comes to the main group items. I suspect, based on my question about electrity, the metals in the middle are going to be fun.

[@AmeliaMinecraft-e7m]

There is a very thin line between physics and chemistry. Actually chemistry can be described as a branch of physics!

[@AmeliaMinecraft-e7m]

The strong nuclear force keeps protons and neutrons together but this does not apply to electrons? Well, electrons are not together, actually electrons are repelling each other and are each apart from the other.

[@TheBreamer999]

A bit of a side question. So NaCl is salt, what energy/process moved to combine these two separate elements to form a stable, physical 'thing' that we dig out of the earth?

[@Habesha-JO3]

I assume high pressure and temperature in the earth's upper mantle/oceanic crest caused the bond between the two elements. Hence; oceans are salty as they are deep, and lakes are not salty since they mostly exist in the earth's upper/continental crest.

[@mensaswede4028]

The Chlorine electron cloud is much more stable with one less electron, and Sodium’s electron cloud is much more stable with one more electron. So as soon as Na and Cl are brought in proximity to each other, one electron naturally moves from the Na atom to the Cl atom. Once that happens the Na ion (+) and the Cl ion (-) are attracted to each other forming NaCl salt. So, to answer your questions, it happens all on its own. Just like an apple falling to the Earth from a tree.

[@TheBreamer999]

@@mensaswede4028 So could you do this in a lab? Assuming the Sodium is stable enough to start the process with the Chlorine gas and see this happening in real time?

[@TheBreamer999]

I just asked ChatGpt and the short answer is yes but it's somewhat dangerous :)

[@mensaswede4028]

@@TheBreamer999 As the other person said, yes you can do it in a lab. Just bring the two elements in contact with each other and you will turn Sodium metal and Chlorine gas into table salt and it will happen all by itself. It’s very dangerous because the reaction releases a lot of energy and it would likely explode if there were any appreciable quantities of the elements.

[@SixStringsAndBeyond]

Thank you for these videos. Are the tshirts available yet? 😅

[@SpotterVideo]

Dr. Roger Penrose has suggested instead of trying to create a particle called the "graviton" to explain gravity, why not try to describe subatomic particles in terms of spatial curvature, as in the twist in a piece of real thread. What if we add one extra spatial dimension to the "Twistor Theory" of Sir Roger Penrose? It can be "chiral" by having either Right-hand or Left-hand twist. It can be "Quantized", based on the number of twist cycles. If Physicists describe electrons as point particles with no volume, where is the mass of the particle? Can one extra spatial dimension produce a geometric explanation of the 1/2 spin of electrons? The following is an extension of the old Kaluza-Klein theory. Can a twisted 3D 4D soliton containing one extra spatial dimension help solve some of the current problems in Particle Physics? What do the Twistors of Roger Penrose and the Geometric Unity of Eric Weinstein and the exploration of one extra spatial dimension by Lisa Randall and the "Belt Trick" of Paul Dirac have in common? Is the following idea a “Quantized” model related to the “Vortex Theory” proposed by Maxwell and others during the 19th century? Is the best explanation of the current data a form of “Twistor Theory” first proposed by Sir Roger Penrose during 1967? During recent years Dr. Peter Woit has explored Twistor Theory as a possible solution to help explain the current Standard Model. Has the concept of the “Aether” been resurrected from the dead and relabeled as the “Higgs Field”? In Spinors it takes two complete turns to get down the "rabbit hole" (Alpha Funnel 3D--->4D) to produce one twist cycle (1 Quantum unit). Can both Matter and Energy be described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature? (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Mass= 1/Length, with each twist cycle of the 4D Hypertube proportional to Planck’s Constant. In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) If quarks have not been isolated and gluons have not been isolated, how do we know they are not parts of the same thing? The tentacles of an octopus and the body of an octopus are parts of the same creature. Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. Are these the “Flux Tubes” being described by many Physicists today? When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. The "Color Force" is a consequence of the XYZ orientation entanglement of the twisted tubules. The two twisted tubule entanglement of Mesons is not stable and unwinds. It takes the entanglement of three twisted tubules to produce the stable proton. The term “entanglement” in this case is analogous to three twisted ropes being wrapped around each other in a way which causes all of the ropes to move if someone pulls one of the ropes. Does the phenomenon of “Asymptotic Freedom” provide evidence that this concept is the correct interpretation of the experimental data now available? Can the phenomenon of "Supercoiling" help explain the "Multiple Generations" of particles in the Standard Model? The conversion of twist to writhe cycles is well understood in the structure of DNA molecules. Can the conversion of twist to writhe cycles and vice-versa help explain "neutrino oscillations"? Within this model neutrinos are a small, twisted torus produced when a tube becomes overtwisted and breaks producing the small, closed loop of twisted tube (neutrino), and a twisted tube open on each end, which is shorter than the original. (Beta Decay) Within this subatomic model gravity is produced by a very small higher dimensional curvature imbalance within atoms, which causes all atoms to be attracted to all other atoms. This extremely weak attraction reveals the very small scale of the curvature imbalance. This produces the curvature of spacetime on a larger scale like the solar system which is required to counterbalance this small imbalance in the individual atoms.

[@bunnykiller]

soooo, basically an atom cant reach +-5 charge, it can only go as high as 4+-? Fe (-5) isnt possible?

[@mikev4621]

Vanadium can go to 5 I think

[@michaelk3582]

At the end of the video you have Cobalt written with 27 protons in 32 neutrons. But earlier you said you can never change the amount of protons and neutrons they will always be the same. All of this made sense until you got to this point.

[@lucientjinasjoe1578]

In our perception, you don't know what build your building blocks if I only looking at the progress in cell biology there is a lot to discover

[@frankroper3274]

I thought electrons were negatively charged. I didn't know there were positively charged electrons.

[@JohnCrandell]

Electrons are negative. You add a negative value and it is subtraction. Taking away (subtracting) a negative leaves the positive (proton) as the dominant charge. Thing of it like in language, a double negative. I didn't not have Turkey this morning.

[@frankroper3274]

@@JohnCrandell Oh...he meant inside the atom structure. When he said positive and negative electrons I knew I was missing something.

[@terencenxumalo1159]

interesting

[@bikemedic13]

Sorry but I found the lesson quite dull. Did he explain why in nature Na would always be + ions and Cl - ions? I may have missed that bit.

[@sureshakella4263]

Yes he did. He was clear for beginners

[@thelastaustralian7583]

Is exposure of EMF creating changes to Humans Atoms ? And if so what they are . That you understand .best

[@AmeliaMinecraft-e7m]

Your question should be, is exposure to EMF causing changes to atoms? Remember the atoms that make up humans are the same atoms in the periodic table (Carbon, Hydrogen, Copper, Iron, etc), nothing different.

[@thelastaustralian7583]

@@AmeliaMinecraft-e7m thank you Amelia ! My Field is generational behavioral sciences over thirty Years .The frequency is the focus . As it became 4g in 2014 .It started creating, cascading biological effect !.Specially with Children through Puberty and under....over

[@onradioactivewaves]

To answer the thumbnail, an anion is a negatively charged ion.

[@stephensmith60]

Wow! I don't understand all I know! Must be a negative!

[@drwilliams-singh]

Ok

[@sotecluxan4221]

!!!

[@BennyMawufemor]

I😊😊😊m

[@drumtwo4seven]

An atom that has gained or lost an electron ⚛️ leaving in with a n either positive charge or negative charge. +/-⚡

[@antoniescargo1529]

Natrium, not sodium.

[@terryr2990]

Na

[@AmeliaMinecraft-e7m]

It's a matter of the language used. Yusuf in Arabic is the same Joseph in English.

[@SimonMcGrath-x2x]

An ion is something u use to get creases out ur clothes, that's right isn't it?

[@powermed5033]

😊

[@TabletMini]

I find it strange that the neutrons don't do anything. I am having difficulty believing the neutrons were created into this world for no use

[@bretts6861]

There are a lot of holes in our current understanding of the atom. Electron theory itself is very sketchy. First, it went from them being planets, revolving around the sun, and now it’s an electron cloud. Another school believes electrons are simply waves from the protons.

[@rahulduhan5163]

Ever heard bout isotopes?

[@MathAndScience]

I didn’t go into it into this video, but they have a super important use. Neutrons don’t have any charge, but they do produce the strong nuclear force in the nucleus along with the protons. Basically you have to have that force in order to hold the nucleus together against the positive charges trying to repel. Without neutrons, we wouldn’t have any atoms at all because the nucleus would not be stable.

[@dadsonworldwide3238]

Alignments in language is really cool developments in its own right. Neutrality & ground play large roles in dictating phase change states across all platforms and avenues. Centering drilling tapping step by step as he mentioned mind eye looking through vs. a stochastic approach outside looking in you see +/- ground ♻️ recycling orbit is about the only single line of measure thought experiment that you can congruently follow across all scales of reality . Rough draft representative. We would always be xyz dialectical vision grounded by planetary nature or vacuum of space seeing +/- fine tuned variation in most situations. Input/output good & bad eqautions reflecting this from our history . So in concert with language, we state misalignment as if "in motion ionization. Static object with movement . Word etymology tells the story with or without math.

[@dadsonworldwide3238]

If proper number & named wasn't speaking good chemistry these large language models wouldn't find such low hanging fruit always there but no one connected the dots on. Neutron plays enough role to aid in checking ourselves. Already having the recipe there

[@NazakatAli-s1p]

Not good so

[@MyTwoCentsWorth199]

May I suggest that we add consciousness to the mix? Isn't that the cosmic stem cell?