Mirrors | Physics with Professor Matt Anderson | M27-02

"The whole purpose of education is to turn mirrors into windows." - Sydney Harris
Love that quote. But we're not that educated (yet), so let's start with the mirrors.
Physics with Professor Matt Anderson

[@PetraKann]

The coating on normal domestic mirrors is applied on the back of the glass. Optical mirrors usually have the front or top surface coated with a thin micro layer of metal like silver

[@fizixx]

I use to work with exotic crystal materials, and most of them we'd put gold electrodes on them, but the gold was evaporated onto the glass. So, sometimes I'd put in a piece of of a glass slide and make gold mirrors and give them to the ladies, lol. It was funny because they were torn between their vanity ("Ooo, I can see myself in a GOLD mirror!") and the $cost$ of the 'golden mirror'. 😄

[@joseminares1361]

Can You reflect a radio Wave with a mirror?

[@sarmadkhan3987]

My teacher my mentor my professor matt my love. 🖤❤🙏🏻 greetings from Pakistan 🇵🇰❤🖤

[@Cutestar6757]

I have a doubt ,if anyone could answer ,,So the particles that radiate out of mirror are not those of original light particle? Their properties would be different?

[@daromaro123]

The metal in the mirror reradiate llight. Does it work the same when the image is reflected in the water surface or in the window pane?

[@SanjayKumar-bl8jq]

Thanks for the video sir 😊

[@dwayneffolkes4947]

Purpose of the glass in strength resolution contrast and body

[@djmips]

The glass keeps it flat and smooth and weighs less than metal typically 3 times less than silver.

[@agussandi1542]

Mirror glass or transparant plastic not a simple, are amazing 👍

[@BrijeshKumar_electrical]

❤

[@raghavgaur4679]

How you are writing 🤯

[@iblesbosuok]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/eYirfqeJg7Crj6M

[@akbarzamani9538]

Please qft

[@Anthony-zc2lm]

Hey mr science guy…the metal is on the other side of the glass…you should know that

[@stephenbrough8132]

Please forgive the nature and length of the following comment - I do enjoy your videos and intend to catch up after falling behind - but there is one thing that has been bothering me in recent years - a sort of "elephant in the room" that never gets explained away, just ignored entirely. (I mean in general - nothing specific to your channel) Re the process you describe here... At what frequency might this process commence, working upwards from, say, 1 Hz, 10 Hz etc, low frequencies where we can physically check that Lenz's law fully describes magnetism, magnetic objects, simply being REPELLED on approach and ATTRACTED on escape? What I mean is... it's almost as if, at low frequencies, we are all fully aware that it's just Lenz's Law when the motion of magnetism (or the change) is opposed - nothing magic happens - we all understand it - (apart from people who make videos about sliding coins down magnetic ramps to determine silver content, then explain it as "diamagnetism" or "paramagnetism" - not Lenz's Law.) ... but at some point ... at super high frequencies beyond our imagination or proper observation, at SOME frequency, it's almost as if we all have to pretend we don't know about Lenz's law, or the basics of electromagnetic induction - and are persuaded to begin describing an entirely different process for no great reason that I can think of as a lay person. Other than, perhaps, that the Lenz's Law explanation requires us to ditch explanations that came well before Lenz's Law was developed, or electromagnetic induction had been discovered and explained. I'm just never sure WHY Lenz's law doesn't explain, say, diffraction better than Huygen's - or WHY we can't utter the word "induction" and instead have to make vague statements that amount to the same thing... such as ... "excites the electrons" ... I'm pretty sure electrons get excited in electromagnetic induction at low frequencies too - but the magnet doesn't get absorbed and doesn't reappear as if by magic ... because I think we'd all SEE it and be truly astonished ... or even a non physical magnetic field wave, I don't think we would ordinarily think of it being ABSORBED by the material and THEN being "re-emitted" ... I think we would normally just say that the current induced had it's own magnetic field opposing the motion or change that brought it about ... Hmmm ... It just twists my melon a bit wondering why the simpler explanation that we can physically demonstrate in the macroscopic world, isn't even mentioned as a possibility. Perhaps I need to think more to figure what I am missing. I frequently ask myself - Why is it so easy to demonstrate in the macroscopic world, real magnetic objects simply BOUNCE OFF conductive surfaces - they don't get absorbed and a new one magics into existence - and same magnetic objects BEND past objects as they reluctantly leave them behind, because they are being ATTRACTED due to Lenz's Law - AKA diffraction. If light really does have a magnetic aspect - and really does have a particle aspect (not that I doubt these facts) - and people aren't just saying that to add intrigue and mystery to a story they want people to be interested in, on the understanding they must never actually SAY, or CONTEMPLATE the possibility photons may be rotating magnetic particles mimicking waves , because that would be heresy - then why not consider that possibility and explain why the more obvious explanation cannot be true - that rotating magnetic particles INDUCE current in surfaces and therefore follow LENZ'S LAW ... bounce off (reflect) on approach ... get "pulled back", attracted, by the magnetism of the current they have induced into material they are leaving behind (diffraction) and at certain angles of approach, have their angle changed towards the normal - then changed back again by the reciprocal process of escaping material they are able to pass through. What am I missing ... (and don't say brains!) When I do quite simple experiments no-one ever even suggests, and no-one even inquires as to the explanation for the odd results I show, of less usual types of "double slit" experiments, hoping to trigger interest, (I tell a lie - one person asked). Particles or not, I think most people do accept that in electromagnetic radiation, there is a changing magnetic field which HAS to be changing perpendicularly to whatever surface it is meant to interact with - say, a receiving antenna - in order to INDUCE current into that material - BUT we are never supposed to use the word "INDUCE" - because - I can only guess - that triggers the idea of "Lenz's Law of induction" and a pretty obvious explanation for why radio signals can change direction after encountering either antenna element "directors", etc or features of the landscape causing the signal to diffract and reach places that should not by rights be able to receive a signal by "line of sight" principle. So it seems to me as a lay observer, that we are compelled / coerced into adhering to the odd convention of pretending this is not induction - even though it clearly is, to my way of thinking at any rate - (which I appreciate doesn't count for much - it's just my interpretation I guess) - and instead we are compelled to say vague alternative phrases like "... excites the electrons" ... "causes them to vibrate in sympathy" ... and all that kind of skirting around the pretty obvious fact - Ok obvious APPEARANCE... that photons are INDUCING current and therefore Lenz's Law of induction applies. (thus explaining why what happens, happens) IN ALL HONESTY, I cannot be certain in my layman conclusions - and I don't even care that much anyhow - I just find it an INTERESTING thing to think about - Because it DOES intrigue me why this fairly obvious line of thinking is never explained away or discussed, by those who, presumably, are aware of this particular pitfall I may be making. By the way, where the heck do I buy one of those white pens that write temporarily on glass? I was sold something completely useless by a large stationery store here in the UK (Rymans) ... in the end i opted for black whiteboard marker pen with a white background - which is tricky unless I go out of my way to buy white clothing lol!

[@abhishekjose2329]

I thought you were Dr Strange teaching about mirror world 😂

[@wasteddemise2286]

❤️