Veritasium: BUSTED!

You can support this channel directly through patreon:
/ thunderf00t
or at my amazon affiliate store:
www.amazon.com/shop/thunderf00t
Wimshurst machine
amzn.to/3orHVNi
gold leaf electroscope
amzn.to/3Hw4OH3
or my other channel: / @voiceofthunder9620

[@ElectroBOOM]

Very good and smart test setups, Thanks for the demonstration!

[@shayan7579]

I bet you got summoned here because he got zapped.

[@coalyboi7939]

Daddy

[@BarriosGroupie]

I post a seven line technical explanation as to why I believe TF isn't quite right with zero upvotes after one day, you post a nice half line comment a few yours ago with already 100 votes. How do I get started in safely electrocuting myself?

[@shayan7579]

@@BarriosGroupie He did make a kind of video Tutorial on that.

[@physicist137]

@@BarriosGroupie I posted a 40 line explanation attributing it to electrostatic induction instead of polarization and thus basically supporting Veritasium's point of view (I put quite some time into it, and I have a physics PhD), and got 1 upvote. Some people are famous, an even a simple smiley would naturally give them lots of attention. Also the famous ones are at the top. Your comment - I couldn't even find it even after scrolling down a lot. I'd hoped for a more substantial comment from ElectroBOOM, but a good answer needs time. Also ElectroBOOM finds the test setup nice - and I agree, nice experiments. I just don't agree with Thunderf00t's conclusions, and about those Mehdi doesn't say anything. Yet. Maybe he'll make a video about that. I'd like that...

[@EEVblog]

Fascinating stuff! Shows the true power of a comprehensive experiment. Well done.

[@pluto8404]

always find it so funny how scientists often get fundamentally simple physics wrongs, but God forbid they question big pharma vaccines.

[@granodiorite9032]

@@pluto8404 yeah ok lol

[@speedingatheist]

@@pluto8404 Name one scientist, not a Twatter/Farcebook/YouTurd 'expert', who questions 'big pharma vaccines'. Keep watching Alex Jones/Joe Rogan.

[@the_kingslayer]

Hi EEVblog!!! I was just watching your videos on mesh/ node circuit analysis for my fundamentals of engineering exam!!!

[@christopherbiomass7155]

@@pluto8404 What do you mean god forbid they question them? They have, and they will continue to. ANY good scientist will question any new vaccine, big pharma or not. The data is presented, which answers the questions. When the data shows the efficacy, then they are accepted. When it doesn't, they are rejected. To bloviate about ANY vaccine being accepted without question is absurd.

[@whatdamath]

Awesome! This video would have been even better if you wore the Victorian era attire and had a pipe. Victorian era hoodie just doesn't have the same weight to it.

[@MugiwaraTed]

Hello wonderful person!

[@aleksitjvladica.]

Hello wonderful Anton, this is person! Smart (comment of yours).

[@JUST2y]

you're my favorite slav

[@PeterParker-rh8yi]

love you Petrov!

[@esoteric404]

Now i know why this video was recommended to me a year after its publication. haha

[@genostellar]

Always good to see you actually running the tests and explaining what's going on and why. Actual science might not seem that exciting to most, but it'll sure teach you a lot more than just showing off a cool trick and stating a believed reason for it that you haven't actually tested.

[@aBusybee]

This is probably your 'nicest' response video. You didn't rip him a new one, you stuck to your knowledge, experience, and focused on the science. Great work.

[@MrDmadness]

I believe it was due to respect for vertasium, real scientists want to know why, even if it disproves their theory, they will accept true experiment results

[@LividImp]

Veritasium wasn't trying to sell snake oil, he just got some details wrong, so no need to get snarky with him. But when Tf00t is taking down charlatans, I'm happy to see him get mean.

[@mrtalos]

I think it's because I think Phil doesn't think Derrick is stupid, he's just wrong. Derrick and veritaseum are incredibly good, with only a handful of duff videos. And of all the veritaseum debunking videos I've seen of late, this is one where I don't want to smack the smug debunker around the face.

[@Pixelplanet5]

well thats because unlike most other videos getting busted here Vertasium wants to get fact checked and is happy if a controversial take fuels a discussion that benefits everyone in the end.

[@CraftyF0X]

@@TubeMeisterJC That is what science should be about. Healthy scepticism toward each other's explanation but with utter respect toward their work. We will have much easier time to succeed together to figure out nature.

[@lassitc]

You get the "Electro Boom" award for getting zapped by static electricity.

[@macaalf8219]

Damn, I was thinking that!

[@neoqueto]

And proving Veritasium wrong. That's now two things they have in common

[@trinidad17]

WHAT??? I smell no exploding capacitors! So better luck next time trying to steal Mehdi's glory.

[@lolaa2200]

And an extra point for doing it with highly flammable solvant around ;c)

[@markb6295]

You know it's all about da boom

[@MajorMLGPro]

Every single time I started to question an idea presented in this video, the immediate next step in the experiment answered. Really awesome stuff.

[@ctwolf]

I think this was done very well, thank you breaking this down with such transparent experiment results and processes. Hugely valuable.

[@unclejoe8310]

You can really see how excited he is too actually disprove something substantial, that is not complete bs like "unlimited energy battery" or "food from co2 out of thin air".

[@Seldomheardabout]

You need fat air my dude.

[@Jesus_Offical]

@@Seldomheardabout He whoud if he was Wrong at all These Tech scams are Getting ridicolus

[@pluto8404]

hydroelectric power plant from thin air, its ingenious my dude.

[@powercage]

Stop stopping idiots from getting scammed!

[@thinkinggrin165]

@@powercage Empathie, compassion and kindness are not your strongest i guess. Everyone can be baited into beeing scamed.

[@StormCrownSr]

I just like how even a decade or so later thunderf00t never forgave and never forgot.

[@BirdBrain1337]

That was my wonder. I watched a single Ve video and this got recommended. Upon a review all I could think was, "why is that one antifeminist guy "debunking" a video from like a decade ago?"

[@EgonFreeman]

@@BirdBrain1337 Fun thing is, thunderf00t isn't antifeminist. He's _anti-stupid,_ and anti-wrong when said "wrong" is scientifically provable. He debunks bad science, and bad logic. He could possibly be a bit more social-savvy while he does it (so that he doesn't get cancelled so much for being an insensitive bastard :D), but I can understand why he might think it's _not_ a requirement.

[@EgonFreeman]

Neither does science, and the problem with science is that it _only_ works if your knowledge is sound - otherwise you'll get predictions that miss reality, sometimes by miles. It might not matter in the day-to-day when this is little more than a curiosity to think about while on the can, but you better know the right answer if you're the one looking for the origins of life - or water on other planets, for that matter. :D

[@BirdBrain1337]

@@EgonFreeman kay? The dude was weirdly obsessed with Anita Sarkessian for a not-antifeminist. And irrespective of all of that, it's still strange that he's put this much work into covering a nearly decade-old video he appears to have already done eight years ago.

[@BirdBrain1337]

@Josh_728 my man, that statement says far more about the lazy hacks who built a career crying over Sarkessian than it does about her. And that you think "shadowbanning" in KZbin comments is a thing says more about what you do on the internet than anything else.

[@vanhetgoor]

Veritasium is always smiling like he is selling a second hand car to you. Yes, the car was owned by an old lady that only used the car on Sundays to go to Church. Yes, there is a genuine trustworthy smile that has to give you some confidence. Problem is, I've seen that smile before.

[@ezdeezytube]

I see that smile by all the (((media heads))) trying to sell the myth of Einstein

[@RockPolitics]

I don't know how I missed this video for a year, but this is brilliant! More than a little difficult to argue with. When someone starts with a conclusion, it's not hard to skew the experiment to generate the desired outcome. You did the polar opposite - pun intended.

[@saura_]

youtube algo .... strange same for me

[@baslatz_]

😂 same for me just got recommended recently.

[@janstenvall2224]

As a physicist I appreciate that you break down the issue into objectively testable tasks. It is scientifically honest. Kudos.

[@Letaunt]

A phycisist complimenting a chemist? What is this? We must be in the future. I feel dizzy.

[@tehdusto]

Physicists and chemists can always agree on the pursuit of truth 💪

[@dansands8140]

Why would a physicist listen to this clown? I'm only here because Veritasium is almost as annoying as thunderfoot.

[@SaltpeterTaffy]

@@dansands8140 If you're hatewatching both sides of this argument, you might be wasting your time.

[@amarissimus29]

This is 2022. Scientific doesn't mean testable, reproducible and falsifiable anymore. It just means clickable. Which is why Varitasium wins in this game, where style trumps substance. That's not to say Veritasium isn't scientific. It's just pop-science, which doesn't really have to predict anything other than unique views. Thunderf00t gets tedious because he repeats himself and goes over the same point from many angles, which is indeed more scientific but sadly and inevitably less popular. Pretty soon he will be the only one left posting videos longer than 30 seconds. Make way for Science.

[@OdiumTV]

my chemistry teacher got really mad back in the day about the claim that it wasn't because of water's polarization, demonstrated it with the purified water from the lab tap and graced the classroom with a 15min rant about false chemistry facts from the web😂

[@killaken2000]

to me it's not so much that he's wrong but that he asserts it so confidently and authoritatively while also being wrong.

[@FalkFlak]

I think its fantastic when teachers take content from the internet an integrate it into the lessons. That way you can spark the interest of pupils more easily. In Germany most teachers don't even know the internet exists. :D

[@derp8575]

@@user-io4sr7vg1v Dumbing down the masses.

[@OdiumTV]

@@FalkFlak haha, fun fact: deutscher lehrer kommt halt auf die lehrkraft an, he probably had enough of people saying he's wrong because this or that video

[@OdiumTV]

@@killaken2000 agree, it's kind of surreal as well

[@manupatet]

This video left me with more questions than answers, many thanks for that, Subbed!

[@Paul-rs4gd]

When I was doing Nuffield Physics at school (about 45 years ago), the teacher set us a challenge to find something that was attracted by positive and negative charges. We were meant to fail, but I found the water stream from the tap was attracted independently of the charge. The teacher told me rather gruffly that it didn't count. So much for scientific method !

[@alcoholfree6381]

The “scientific method” is way over rated. Guys like Thunderf00t have made it their religion.

[@Paul-rs4gd]

@@alcoholfree6381 Science is very different from religion. A scientist can hold beliefs, but unlike religion these beliefs are constantly tested, and open to revision when observations are in conflict with beliefs.

[@Campernicus]

@@alcoholfree6381 how much lead paint did you eat

[@plank3543]

@@Paul-rs4gd but even the most devote man of science needs to hold to a belief that what can be observed is true

[@rabenfedersonnenhut]

​@plank3543 Obviously, you can go back and claim nothing as counting as provable reality, but thats not sensible. Yes you need to make a cut somewhere, but doing that at a logical point and using reason to work from there is what makes the scientific method superior in comparison to people accepting magic as an answer to feel giddy and justified instead if working their mind out a bit. There is no real discussion with equally worthwhile sides of an argument here.

[@verlausterhippie]

I rly enjoyed the more relaxed approach on this video. Then again the guy doesn't try to scam people with shitty products, so the regular busted vibe wouldnt have felt right

[@tonywilson4713]

I wouldn't call this a busted video because he keeps pointing out where the Veritasium video was right. Its more like he's a more comprehensive explanation of what's going on with electrostatics and various fluids.

[@trinidad17]

@@tonywilson4713 The Veritasium channel is prone to being the YT version of those "science factz" claims that circulated from time to time, even before the internet, which tried to explain something was ACTUALLLY SOMETHING ELSE THAN WHAT YOU HAVE THOUGHT!!!! Which tried to be technically correct, and sounded they could be plausible, but in the end weren't practically true. An example is "fact" about the coriolis effect for example, which has real impact on a global level, but no measurable impact in the direction water spins in your toilet bowl as those "SIENZE FACS" always claim, or the one that claims MAGENTA DOESN'T EXIST which is just plain lack understanding of how colors work, as it isn't just that pure wavelengths are the only possible things to create the perception of color. But don't get me wrong, those "technically could be correct" but actually are utterly stupid claims are still utterly stupid and actually just plain old misinformation.

[@TechySeven]

@@tonywilson4713 There may very well be some folks who support one or the other, who happen to be Against those who support the opposing party for some reason... However I don't think it's really necessary to go on some sort of defensive-spree here. Derrick is pretty great, and Phil is generally a pretty decent person as well. And most of us, as far as I'm aware, are just Science Enthusiasts who've learned from Both of them. Phil classifies this as a "Busted" vid simply because that's what it still was in principle, a simple "You're wrong about _blank_, and here's why". He did point out how Derrick was partly correct too, but the point was that he was also wrong, and Phil wasn't snubbing him or being smug about it.

[@nineball039]

@@trinidad17 Toilet bowls are not a good example as the water jets are angled by design by the manufacturer to wash the sides of the bowl.

[@tonywilson4713]

@@TechySeven As others have said this is nothing like many of his other busted videos, which is why I don't think its really a busted video.

[@YounesLayachi]

Best kind of debunking, where the goal is to find out what's actually happening, instead of proving the other side wrong. Kudos :D

[@matthewwilliams9200]

if only schools taught this critical thinking you wouldnt have schools pushing hyperloops and waterseers using idiology

[@chucknorris3984]

@@matthewwilliams9200 IDIOLOGY as in IDIOTOLOGY? I don't know if that was supposed to be a known mistake or not, but it sure makes a new term to define the unquestionable, untestable, undeniable "science" forced in the faces of everyone these days than the simple overused "ideology". Although spiritual religion itself has caused more than enough death, destruction and the lack of progression in true science over the years anyway too.

[@Sonex1542]

FORGET IT. TINDER FOOT HAS BECOME A DOUCHE WHO JUST BITCHES AND MOANS ABOUT ELON. TODAY HES GOT MENSTRAL CRAMPS AND IS GOING AFTER VERITASIUM. MUST HAVE LOST EMPLOYMENT, WHO TAKES THIS CLOWN SERIOUS.

[@imwithstupid086]

@@Sonex1542 And who would take *you* seriously here?

[@lassesaikkonen501]

@@chucknorris3984 I think he meant ideology but I am not certain.

[@Galileosays]

Very nice demonstration. I liked especially the isolated water in the tiny tube. No charge escape possible, showing that only the molecular dipole counts. One might even think of a measurement method to determine the dipole of molecules in the dipole state.

[@walterengler5709]

I really do appreciate how you keep coming back to items over time to reinforce and show how such things are true.

[@No-uc6fg]

You can see the passion he has, the sheer joy of finding out what the actual process is.

[@elijahmiller912]

its called "arrogance". Phil is everything wrong with society. Paid by musk to make anti-musk videos to boost car sales. Hides real truth just like all "scientists". Phil is human

[@ETBrooD]

@@elijahmiller912 Aren't you a special snowflake

[@8o86]

probably a little high too

[@-TriP-]

@@elijahmiller912 "paid by Musk to make anti-Musk videos" LMAO... you're a meme, dude. Are you sure you're real?

[@007Strings007]

@@N1c0T1n3__ linus said something about thunderf00tcan can I get a link, i like to hear / read what he said

[@PaulTheSkeptic]

Here's what's cool about this. This is science. He's not busting pseudoscience. He's busting someone who accepts the scientific method and understands how it works. Which is why I'll bet dollars to donuts Veritasium is going to accept it. He's going to say "Yep. Can't argue with the science." and admit his mistake. That's how science works and it's beautiful. A pseudoscientist would never admit defeat. But a scientist must.

[@thomasbecker9676]

I dunno, you might be giving Veritasium too much credit.

[@carly09et]

This has one major experimental diffrence as Veritasium had an earthed metal tap which change the fluid to have an induced change, Phil did not test this. :(

[@janzacharias3680]

If he doesn't accept it, he should change his name to something like Egomanium. But i know he will, he is one of the few KZbinrs that actually have big brain energy

[@danquaylesitsspeltpotatoe8307]

"busting someone who accepts the scientific method and understands how it works. " Maybe some vague idea! They think science is googling the first answer!🤦‍♂️🤣 But they dont practice real science and they are really dumb!

[@danquaylesitsspeltpotatoe8307]

@@carly09et So your argument actually destroys veritasiums claims even more!

[@onarandomnote25]

I love this so much, you have demonstrated the scientific method and scientific philosophy beautifully. This is what I love about the field and what makes me passionate about becoming a scientist some day. Keep up the good work and love to see people working constructively to keep us all honest :)

[@katebirch1207]

You really give me the vibe of the really cool village weirdo in a story that is actually a scientist but nobody know it because *fantasy* or something and actually ends up being integral to the hero learning something that helps them defeat the big bad evil guy. And I think that's pretty cool :) Thanks for the video, info and entertainment!

[@CogitoBcn]

Yes, is Doc from Back to the Future. 😂

[@EvanOfTheDarkness]

I think Derek at Veritassium often works "backwards", he wants to demonstrate some principle in physics, and thinks up an experiment to do so. But that's a dangerous thing to do because you start out with big bias, on what do you *want* the experiment to do, and you blind yourself for other explanations.

[@LordZordid]

It reminds me on how Jan Hendrik Schön got away with his fraud for a long time. By figuring out the results he wanted and then faking the results to match it.

[@EvanOfTheDarkness]

@@LordZordid Here though the results are correct, just the explanation is wrong. Most likely because Derek isn't really an expert at an of this, he just likes to show people cool stuff, and often gets the details wrong. Still, he wasn't _completely_ wrong, the effect he described _does_ happen, its just that the deflection of the stream is due to a different effect. Still, he should've been more diligent with his research into that video.

[@khalidacosta7133]

But that's how I passed my Chemistry practical A-level... with a perfect 100% score... I just figured out the end result.

[@xxportalxx.]

@@EvanOfTheDarkness honestly if he just didn't approach his explanations with such a cocky aura of complete authority and certainty it wouldn't be as much of an issue

[@EvanOfTheDarkness]

​@@xxportalxx. I agree on that, I think one should have a really solid understanding of something, before trying to explain it in a simplified manner (lest you risk making a fool of yourself).

[@RickDekkard]

Finally someone address this. For me the worst part of Derek explanation is that is not an explanation at all, he said that the polar nature of water molecules is not responsible of this effect but never explain why not. The usual explanation is a combined response of polar molecules (and water is relatively intense with a electric permittivity around 80) and disolved ions, and of course, why he did not test his hypothesis with ultra pure water? Thanks for your contribution.

[@SianaGearz]

Why Derek didn't test? You can not. Water is fundamentally present both in molecular (predominant by like 10 odd orders of magnitude) and in ionic (H3O+ and OH-) form, even if all you have to start with is chemically pure water. It keeps spontaneously dissociating and recombining, existing in equilibrium state. Though i do think Derek's postulate was scandalous. And negative ions go where? Why them in particular, why there? Why charged cup+water stream experiment also works with a HDPE bottle as a source? If you keep removing water from the bottle, when is the remaining negative enough that this just cannot keep happening? Well it doesn't seem to. And when you have filled up a cup of water, from your tap, it is electropositive? Well doesn't seem so either. Shite craftsmanship from him.

[@griffinhunter3206]

@@SianaGearz are you saying that dionized water doesn't exist? or rather that dionized water would not be significantly dionized to count? I am having a bit of trouble understanding your comment

[@coatsmcgoats4719]

If I understand your question right, I think it has to do with water being very slightly magnetic. All elements are magnetic, and ones we know on earth as being magnetic are the strongest magnetic examples. Iron, nickel, and cobalt are very magnetic. Because magnetism aligns electrons up in a dipole, charging ions will make this a confusing experiment because you have 2 charges constantly fighting for dominance. Because other forces such as gravity are at play the water emulates buoyancy with its charge, aligning like a magnet. The item inducing a charge will always try to create equilibrium in a changing environment (rather the particles within).

[@SianaGearz]

@@griffinhunter3206 "deonised water" is like so many things a misnomer. It's a water from which salts were removed, not the fundamental water ions.

[@jerry2357]

@@SianaGearz But in pure water, the concentration of H+ and OH- ions is about 1E-7 mol/L, very low indeed. In contrast, hard water would have a concentration of calcium carbonate of over 1.2E-3 mol/L, i.e. 4 orders of magnitude higher, and the charge on each ion is twice those of H+ or OH-. So a test comparing hard water with deionised water would easily be able to show if there was a difference due to the concentration of ions present.

[@Walter-Montalvo]

Very grateful for such a thorough experiment and explanation. For any inquisitive mind, your teaching methodology is pure fuel. We are very fortunate to have you. Patreon support in place. :)

[@matthewbeddow3278]

A fascinating experiment which shows there is more going on than at first meets the eye. Thank you for the great video and all the effort put into those experiments.👍🙏

[@WarpedPerception]

That spark gets under my skin every time, Good to see your face once in a while, love how you got so pissed about this being wrong that you had to get in front of the camera and demonstrate. this Experiment was beyond cool! I spotted that Wimshurst machine, I have one just like it! freakin loved seeing this experiment!!

[@TheCrimier]

what would happen if you get zapped by a machine like that ?

[@Raggandrist]

@@TheCrimier instant boner for life. It’s actually pretty bad, he must have a tiny piece to have handled it so well.

[@WarpedPerception]

@@TheCrimier it will wake you up that's for sure, other than that not too much, I have been shocked a few times, it's very high voltage but very low amperage.

[@Raggandrist]

@@WarpedPerception it’ll wake any man up. Couldn’t agree more. I hope he learns to accept and live with his condition. 🙏

[@mikeg4972]

It's on my shopping list.

[@caiohomar1540]

Good video. On a side note, this made me realize how "informative enternainment" like Veritasium is easy to forgive some hand-waving and misconceptions because of how it's presented, whereas in a debunking video I take a much more critical and skeptical approach, doubting each claim and demanding proof. This was interesting, thank you.

[@GetMoGaming]

Yeah, that's a great point, I think everyone does that.

[@Ubya_]

we subconsciusly think that the information we get from "informative enternainment" is true, because they are "teaching" us new things, we assume they know something we don't, but when you look at a debunking videos the point of view is shifted, you "know" or at least now have doubt that what they are teaching you is false, you now assume that they don't know either

[@revimfadli4666]

Sounds like debunking videos aren't immune either

[@andreasbjerreovergaard4641]

It has a 90s name "infotainment"* kinda came with computer games i think

[@caiohomar1540]

@@andreasbjerreovergaard4641 I think you mean "edutainment", like Beakman's World, it was coined in the '50s by Walt Disney... "Infotainment" is like Buzzfeed or Oprah...

[@Tordvergar]

That is one of the BEST pieces of experimental physics I've seen in a long, long time!!

[@stevenmchale1967]

This was brilliant, reminded me of The Royal Institute Christmas lectures. Love the way, when you push the charge into them, that the watet droplets repel each other after the laminar flow breaks down as they all have the same charge.

[@artjomkorolev222]

Normally Im a silent viewer, but I have to comment on this video. This video is very well structured: from hypothesis -> explaining basic, but important stuff -> explaining experiment results -> conclusion I indeed enjoyed every second of the video. Keep it up with the great work, Thunder!

[@shazmosushi]

This is a good Thunderf00t video, unlike his nonsensical SpaceX "takedowns".

[@Lorismatano]

​@@shazmosushi shut up

[@astropythagorean]

Another positive is that an average person could replicate several of these experiments for a rather low monetary investment. Avoid the experiments that aren't using just water unless you are already familiar with the hazards of these chemicals and are equipped to handle them safely. For example, acetonitrile produces cyanide when inhaled, absorbed through the skin, or ignited (it ignites very easily).

[@Anduril919]

@@shazmosushiElon Musk fan spotted. Jeez - give it up!

[@timasmerkelis6775]

Everybody gangsta until thunderfoot pulls out the Victorian time gold leaf electroscope

[@zagyex]

:D

[@halo3guyy]

I love Veritasium and I’ve been subscribed to him for as long as I can remember but you were my first ever subscriber and have watched every single video since the very beginning 2007ish and when this video popped up on my screen boy did my ears prick. You are by far my favourite KZbinr and one of the greatest scientific minds out there. The world needs more people like you Thunderf00t

[@kittenisageek]

My first thought when watching the Veritasium video was "there shouldn't be enough ion separation to bend the stream." Certainly there is some ionic charge separation. You can exploit that fact to make a spark generator from dripping water. However, unless you were running a rigged setup, ion separation by itself couldn't be the only mechanism for the amount of deflection we saw.

[@ianmangham4570]

Ikr 🤣

[@leopoldo3884]

first thought was "aint no way ions are doing all that" basically the same but not as big brain

[@lomiification]

You'd expect that the drop spark generator would also be more effective if you bent the stream first too. Another easy to test thing by the time between sparks

[@HereticalKitsune]

As much as I enjoy busting pseudo science, this here was a lot more satisfying. Experiments, a calmer tone overall, very nice!

[@everythinghate666]

so how did you bust the heliocentric model?

[@MickHaggs]

I think that's mostly because Veritasium isn't a scummy con-man trying to bilk dollars out of the gullible. Derek just said something that TF thought was wrong and so set out to find the answer.

[@johnfrian]

I dislike Elon as much as anyone over here, but it was nice to have a video that wasn't 15 extra minutes of news, interviews and showcases where Elon is overpromising something.

[@HereticalKitsune]

@@johnfrian Exactly, aye.

[@HereticalKitsune]

@@everythinghate666 Magic.

[@emmanueloverrated]

That was a **very** interesting experiment, demonstration and a good laboratory protocol without being too pretentious (some scientists seem to like to be as hermetic as possible) . Beside the fact you are busting a star of YT, alone this could be used to teach how to do science at school, better, in the society in general. Thank you very much. There are not enough videos like these on youtube, sadly.

[@Lucien86]

The thing is that real scientists do get things wrong. Any real scientist will admit it, some a lot more easily than others.. Even Einstein sometimes got things wrong...

[@psibug565]

@@b.jellis He wasn’t using the Electroscope in the later experiment.

[@Kujo174]

I don't know what you are aiming at with regards to being "hermetic", but proper protective gear and safety measures are a foundation of every scientist and there is good reason for that. TF unfortunately failed this with his handling of the solvents. Example: DCM (dichloromethane) as used here is not only low-boiling and highly flammable, it evaporates insanely fast and, like all halogenated solvents, is thought to cause cancer. Not something you want in your lungs. Same goes for chloroform and tetrahydrofurane. n-hexane isn't harmless either and can cause damage to organs. But I agree with the rest of your comment. Good stuff from TF!

[@Lucien86]

@@Kujo174 'hemitic' - hermit like. Nothing to do with protective gear.

[@emmanueloverrated]

@@Kujo174 you are right. My chemistry classes were several years ago now. I forgot about security. Indeed, TF should lead by the example. But for the hermetic part, there is a trend at the university level, in research especially, to speak complicated to say things that anyone could understand with an introduction to the matter. I have a grade myself, I hated this gibberish. It's human anxiety at its best.

[@schoobydooby]

This was not only a very interesting breakdown of the phenomena, but it also helped me understand a lot of concepts of electrostatics I wasn't completely sure about before.

[@haroldhawaiki]

Very interesting, great demonstration... informative and clear... Thank You!

[@charlesthoreson4162]

Seeing you evolve on this site over the years has been remarkable. Your dedication to science and scientific literacy is commendable and I look forward to what you help bring to the future.

[@EverythingCameFromNothing]

@today was a good day Unless you want Islamic propoganda, don’t bother clicking on this guys link 🤦🏻‍♂️

[@J0SHUAKANE]

I wish his ability to mix audio would evolve🙉

[@fernandogajo8800]

Dude, thunderfoot is awesome! This slowly growing community is a staple of fun, educational and provocative content. (In a really minor note, I recommend some humility cause being right so many times, might make one believe he is immune to error, so, just, don't forget that and recognise when you ever make a mistake and this should be a perfect science Chanel/community. Rock on, Thunderfoot!) Edit: and just as I post my comment, Thunderfoot dies from stupidity!!? Heuaheuaheuhauehwuhwuwu priceless! Please! Safety first!

[@iwantitpaintedblack]

he kinda always gave me tinfoil hat vibes

[@fask69]

lmao you should know who thunderf00t actually is first kzbin.info/www/bejne/rF7RqpJ4lpl-ldk

[@Isolanporzellator]

I remember watching Veritasiums video on this and being somewhat baffled, because I had actually observed this bending effect with acetone in the lab before and afaik there aren't a lot of ions floating around in acetone. This provides quite a lot more insight into the phenomenon.

[@BarriosGroupie]

The effect is down to the movement of electrons which are far lighter than any ions/molecules, noting that the electrical conductivity of copper is only x 200 that of acetone. So I don't think Thunderf00t is right in saying the effect is down to the movement of polar molecules, nor is Veritasium when claiming it's down to movement of ions. It's just basic, classical electrostatics where the internal electric field inside any conductor is maintained at exactly zero for applied external static electric fields, giving rise to a varying surface electron charge density on the liquid.

[@vaibhavbv3409]

Bigger insight is to not trust Veritasium completely.

[@dlevi67]

@@BarriosGroupie Movement of which electrons (in acetone _or_ in water)? Obviously a polar molecule is such because of the movement of electrons (which are statistically more likely to be close to the more electronegative atoms in the molecule), but water or acetone have no free electrons.

[@BarriosGroupie]

@@dlevi67 Movement of electrons in both, which is related to how easily electrons can be exchanged between adjacent molecules and hence contribute to the overall electrical conductivity of the liquid. The electrical conductivity of Hexane is 1x10-5 ps/m, Acetone 2x10+7 ps/m, pure-water 5x10+3 ps/m, copper 5x10+7 ps/m; which matches TF's observation that Acetone and pure-water were effected but not Hexane with its relatively poor electrical conductivity by at least 8 orders of magnitude. Interestingly, I'd expect Hexane to eventually start bending if TF waited long enough, which is related its charge dissipation time constant of ~100 seconds.

[@dlevi67]

@@BarriosGroupie Except that both dichlomethane and THF are not particularly conductive... yet they "move" (if Galileo pardons my borrowing of his words).

[@jeffcard3623]

You could simply run the experiment with deionized water instead. Great job as usual, Thunderf00t!

[@dodokgp]

A very well constructed and substantiated experimental work this is! Well done. The observations do indicate that it is the dipole moment of the molecule that is responsible for the bending. Especially when you compares DI water with other polar and non-polar solvents.

[@gregoryhouse3421]

As a physicist, Veritasium's video also really bothered me when I first watched it. I watched your first video on it years ago, and I thought you made good arguments. This one is just beautiful. Thank you for sharing your carefully and thoughtfully laid out experiments!

[@shazmosushi]

It's surprising that a well-informed guy like Thundef00t can be correct here (as best I can tell), but still chooses to be so incredibly intellectually dishonest when it comes to his SpaceX coverage.

[@papalegba6759]

veritasium's downwind faster than the wind video is also utterly fraudulent.

[@supermanX745]

​@@shazmosushi tbh, Thunderf00t has made claims in other video's which were sometimes just wrong. i really agree with criticism on Veritassium, but maybe both these guys are a bit in the same category.

[@bojangles8572]

@@shazmosushi Could you explain what claims he made that are intellectually dishonest? Anything specifically you care to refute? Or are you just going to make vague claims? Please, I would love to hear your well thought out explanation about his intellectual dishonesty. Make claim with no proof, Elon would be proud of you!

[@phalanger1]

@@shazmosushi This guy just has a personal vendetta against anything Musk related that takes precedence over any of his scientific aspirations every time it comes up. Its cringy and one of the reasons I only accidentally stumble upon this channel anymore instead of by habit.

[@halcyons88]

I imagine veritasium will respond to this video much better than the frivolous lawsuits and threats that most of the busted videos subjects usually respond with.

[@onradioactivewaves]

Legend has it that he's still unspooling his 2 lightyear +2 meters long superconducting wire.

[@ericstoverink6579]

I doubt it. The last veritasium video i watched was of him arrogantly quizzing normal people on the street, with advanced science questions that most people would never have known without specifically studying them, just so he could show off that he was the smartest guy there. I've avoided that prick's channel ever since.

[@theultimatereductionist7592]

@@ericstoverink6579 Oh really? Veritasium does that shit? I'll have to check to confirm. He should not do that. Nobody should.

[@shannonhill3356]

You’ve never seen him respond to a critical video before, have you?? 😂😂

[@rayfan9876]

@@theultimatereductionist7592 He doesn't really. The one time he did it definitely wasn't for the sake of "owning the masses" or laughing at them.

[@wootle]

Excellent video as always. Effective clear demonstrations of hard science. Whats great also is that Thunderf00t doesn't get sucked into bashing. He uses science as a kind comeback! Hero!

[@irradiatedturtle]

First video of yours that I’ve seen and really enjoyed it. At first I thought it was going to be a sort of “meme” video because the intro was like a mad scientist who has lost his credibility in a superhero movie lol, but I was pleasantly surprised! (Though a supervillain-like bust video would also be very entertaining). I’m definitely subscribing!

[@darksydefill]

Thunderf00t's one of the few original youtuber's who withstood the test of time.

[@michaelb9290]

Agreed

[@masont8829]

Yes very good

[@graxxor]

You kidding. He looks about 60.

[@hadronoftheseus8829]

@@graxxor This is the most clueless comment I've seen in a long, long time.

[@Safronella]

Never heard of him before

[@ugabuga2586]

I've been subscribed to your channel for over 6 years and this has got to be one of the most satisfying videos you've ever made. Thank you Thunderf00t!

[@PittsburghSonido]

I’ve been subbed since before I was born. And I have to say, this is the best video he’s ever made.

[@PaulTheSkeptic]

@You have to know What is this? Are you proselytizing on this video?

[@thetalantonx]

Incredibly well done defeat-in-depth. Subscribed.

[@esoteric404]

brilliant experiment! love how rudimentary the set up is

[@mikkohernborg5291]

I have said this on a couple of Veritasium's videos - he has a good presentation with high production value, but often it seems he draws the wrong conclusion or leaves out information. Which is a bad (but unfortunately common) thing for a science communicator to do. Criticism and communication improves both sides of an issue, which is why it’s such a shame that KZbin suppresses both subjects and discussion on certain topics, and of certain types. I wish that all science could have as free interplay as this, and even drama channels or Internet Blood Sports - because even if there isn’t much positive takeaway from the events themselves (bar the entertainment), it shows people outside the scope of conflict how petty and small-minded it is to get involved in those kinds of fights

[@AlkisGD]

Yeah. I'm no scientist, but I can fact check and Kyle Hill, a science communicator I follow, has confidently given completely bogus answers to physics questions. For example, every time I see someone ask him how the universe can be ~13bn years old but ~90bn light years across, he never mentions that space itself expands faster than light. He's even said that the observable universe is ~13bn light years across and that the larger figure is the unobservable universe, which doesn't even make sense: how would we know? How would the information reach us if light hasn't reached us? (Which, I assume, is why the actual size of the universe is unknown.) I get that no one can be correct all the time, but I wish science communicators, more than anyone, paid attention and addressed their past mistakes, because _confidently_ giving wildly inaccurate answers is the opposite of what any teacher should do.

[@nickfifteen]

@@AlkisGD One thing I miss on KZbin are Annotations, which allowed users to throw in revisions to their video ex post facto where you can't miss it... But without them, maybe the video producer acknowledged their error and added in a revision in the comments or the description... but those aren't so easily recognized or even noticed. I wish there was a way to revise a mistake in a video after having uploaded it.

[@SMPKarma]

@@AlkisGD which is why Tf00t is great - he's a science communicator who is an actual scientist as well, which means that he really knows what he's talking about almost all the time. Science communication is very important, so it's extra sad when popular ones get things wrong. Especially when to someone who doesn't know that it's wrong, it will seem plausibly correct and they won't think to fact check it, and only someone who already knows what the correct fact/interpretation/mechanism/we is, will catch the error.

[@Kolvorok]

Being slick and confident is usually the communication trait of a business person rather than a scientist… which is usually full of caveats, limitations and clarifying assumptions…

[@AlkisGD]

@@nickfifteen - These days KZbin allows you to edit the video itself. Kyle probably hasn't noticed the corrections yet, otherwise I'd like to think he'd have edited the videos. After all, he regularly edits/removes/censors sections that contain offensive troll spam in the chat, so he doesn't just abandon stream VODs.

[@YESHTOFU]

Thunderf00t is the type of dude you'd read about in your science textbook. Loved the Chem 1 nostalgia vibes.

[@TheZombieSaints]

@today reported for spam

[@willj4243]

@@TheZombieSaints Bots don't give a shit.

[@ibazulic]

Amazing video! Nice hypothesis, tests, explanation, everything. Pure science at its best. Kudos!

[@mikael4751]

This was very fascinating! Thanks Thunderf00t!

[@torfinnjohnsrud793]

It's a peer review in video form! This is the thunderfoot content I subscribe for. Pure science and scientific method, so that anyone can perform and/or test. This is the exact kind of discussion that advances human knowledge. While making a "busted" video on veritasium seems harsh and like lumping I'm in with the frauds, anyone who watches this video can see that it's not disrespectful at all.

[@timng9104]

quite a scary reviewer if he actually did the experiments to bebunk your manuscript XD we should have more of such peer reviewers :)

[@SianaGearz]

It doesn't actually ever happen that peer review includes a reproduction or refuting experiments. This video took him several years of latent preparation, because he didn't have the tools at hand, and if he did, it would still take a while to collect the thoughts and congeal them into a conclusive experimental setup. Reviews are often done after work in like an hour to weed out the large pile of obvious horse shit that gets submitted to magazines. Generally toilet papers smell, they aren't clear in formulating the premise, they make obvious mathematical mistakes, they miss or misrepresent necessary prior work, their experimental setup isn't fit to prove what they are trying to prove, p-hacking, p-ignorance, deviation being swept under the rug, experimental results do not support the conclusion and so on. As such Derek's original video isn't even fit to be a toilet paper based on basic formal criteria, because he just postulates that something is true without even attempting to prove it.

[@TheRealBoof]

Er.. This video was not an example of the scientific method nor the peer review system. If this video were sent to a journal for publication, it wouldn't even make it past the front door -- something I'm sure Thunderf00t, as a scientist, knows well. Don't get me wrong, I love this video and love seeing a scientist contribute to a discussion in which he is moderately experienced in, but don't mistake the scientific process as a simple one. This video was 30 minutes long; oftentimes it takes more than 30 minutes for a scientist to even begin to understand what is written in a scientific paper in their field.

[@jekker1000]

@@TheRealBoof woot? How is this not how the scientific method works? He showed various hypotheses, set up indicator and rules and showed what "model output" should be expected for which hypothesis and input. that is how scientific modelling and testing hypothesis works. Also, just because this video is 30 minutes long does not mean it took 30 minutes to do. It rather looks like it took hours upon hours of preparation and postprocessing. Sure, it would probably not make it into a paper because everything said is already common knowledge but hypothetically seeing veritassium's vid as a "submission" then thunderf00ts vid would be one of the most elaborate peer reviews i have ever seen

[@Cau_No]

@@TheRealBoof This video is the equivalent of writing down your findings of seven years in a 30-page paper. It only does not count as peer review, because there is not scientific journal that accepts videos (yet?). But maybe he could write a paper on this, with the necessary form and calculations, and send it in.

[@trailblazingfive]

Shows you the qualitative difference between a scientist, and a science communicator; really enjoyed the investigative process

[@tonywilson4713]

Actually Derek Muller (Veratasium) has a BA in Applied Science from Queens University in Ontario. So unlike many Science Communicators he actually does at least have a technical qualification. I wouldn't call this a busted video because he keeps pointing out where the Veritasium video was right. Its more like he's a more comprehensive explanation of what's going on with electrostatics and various fluids.

[@maidhall1699]

@@tonywilson4713 BA holders are hardly scientists

[@Mwstmrlnd]

@@maidhall1699 He has a Ph.D. in Physics Education Research from the University of Sydney, he didn't just stop at the BA. Not sure why the previous commenter refrained from mentioning that. He's literally written a thesis on how to improve the way we explain science to the public

[@trailblazingfive]

@@Mwstmrlnd shame he hasn't read it; or maybe it became outdated after he started shilling for tech startups on KZbin

[@gonzaloayalaibarre]

Nah, it's got more to do with the content creation style of both channels. And don't get me wrong, Derek wouldn't be half as good as thunderf00t in his own game, but he's a capable guy.

[@anglomandingo666]

Your content is fast becoming one of my favourite digests. Thank you for your sber logic. I am grateful that I am able to access your analysis.

[@hellothere3163]

Best video on the channel. Excellent experiment!

[@sterhax]

“No, no, noooo that can’t be right” was definitely my first response as well but couldn’t figure out why. Thanks for doing the homework!

[@Patmccalk]

Lmao my reaction was the exact opposite, “yes! Yesss! Yesssss!”

[@blank888]

So this is you? kzbin.info/www/bejne/jH6WpourZqmkasU

[@the_hanged_clown]

@You have to know 🤢🤮

[@blank888]

@You have to know Shush bot

[@nickfifteen]

For me it's also like, veritasium did A wrong, not that veritasium is THE wrong... if that makes sense. Nothing wrong in being wrong, as long as you're willing to admit it and correct yourself. It's when you're always wrong because your very premise is wrong, that's when there's a serious problem.

[@IncendiaHL]

We finally know why Thunderf00t has been growing his hair for the last 10 years!! He's been frantically rubbing polyethylene on it all these years!

[@skaruts]

Didn't he always have long hair? I could swear I've seen him with long hair before 2010.

[@jaybingham3711]

It's decidedly now a variable of this experiment. Along with the formulation of his shampoo. But not conditioner. Pretty sure he passes on that. 😋

[@fonephix7222]

Very well explained! Love your work!

[@SekiberiusWelkesh]

This is probably one of my favorite video's you've ever made, it's informative, educational and entertaining. Seeing experiments done live is so much more awe inspiring than reading about them on paper.

[@zenaku666]

As a fan of yours for well over 10 years I am so happy to finally see you get back to this! Very well done, it was great seeing the process in action.

[@supersonicgamerguru]

It's interesting with the charged water putting the container near the laminar transition, you can see the laminar portion is attracted while the droplets get repelled. It's just really cool how it bends one way and then back the other right after each other.

[@eM7RON]

This is amazing. Well done!

[@EnigMK3]

I love seeing you comprehensively demonstrate the tools used in an experiment beforehand.

[@Tester-sh1mn]

I really would Ike to see more of the other KZbin Scientist BUSTED videos, it would be a great thing to have “peer reviewed” science videos as we continue to learn from and about the universe!

[@DmitriyLaktyushkin]

That's the thing, they are popular youtube scientists because they are good at what they do. Major errors like this are probably rare. And alpha phoenix already did a video on how long it takes to light up a lightbulb.

[@tatsuuuuuu]

27:20 you slay me I totally saw that coming but am so glad you kept it in the video. ElectroBOOM would approve!

[@abidurrahman531]

Love the detailed experiment

[@Apostelija]

Wow this was amazing! I was a little worried as I remembered the original busted video being somewhat abrasive (or as we would call it in Finland "a cock measuring contest"). You very thoroughly demonstrate that the dipolar nature of the liquid is mostly responsible for the attraction. I already suspected as much as I do this experiment with high school students using both polar and non polar solvents, and so I couldn't fully accept Dereks explanation as he didn't include non polar solvents in his model. Coincidentally we had also noticed that there was not much difference between different polar solvents, maybe with 1-pentanol we only had a slight bending of the stream, if memory serves me correctly. But in my opinion your experiments with charging the stream puts this finally to the bed! Unless this turns to another multi part youtube science "feud". Looking forward to Veritasiums response.

[@luciusmagn]

Ah, love to see our finnish brethren with their amazing sayings like "cock measuring contests"

[@marshaul]

In English we call it a "dick measuring context". At least in American, anyway. Nice BOC avatar btw.

[@matthewyabsley]

@@marshaul - English people would generally say a pissing contest. Still cock related, I guess.

[@Calvito-]

@@matthewyabsley And Karl Pilkington would say: "Kick your height contest".

[@cedric7751]

I was happy to see that he dropped his usually highly sarcastic tone for this video. I didn't mind his tone when he was debunking people who lie on purpose to sell shitty products to gullible people but I sure would have been turned of if he kept it for this one. Veritasium is explaining (or trying to explain) scientific phenomenon and just like any other scientists, he can make mistakes, misinterpret results or have biased results due to confusion factors and this is exactly why peer reviews is one of the fundamentals of science. Thunderfoot acted like how any scientific would (or at least, should) do. He reproduced the experiment and pointed out the flaws in Veritasium's own experiment.

[@MrJayColes]

Hey Phil, just a tip when it comes to lighting for these videos; back lighting liquids is generally the better way to go. Thank for the awesome video.

[@funkyfresh1013]

@Todd Starbuck And only for a minute

[@rantnhnaketon]

@@funkyfresh1013 tbh he asked for it 😂

[@jamesgoddard8375]

Absolutely fascinating! cracking experiment

[@j.jarvis7460]

Ahah 27:21 Wow! I love this! You clearly put a lot into this video and explained it in thorough manner in which even I could understand.

[@Xgya2000]

That was awesome. Getting to understand the actual process, a step by step way to demonstrate the claims and then attempt to disprove them. All of it a TON of work you put up for us, and we're all very much grateful for it.

[@DaxSudo]

This is why I love this channel. As a fellow nuclear technician now software engineer. I agree you need to be in dark lighting and have a bond villain mood theme set in order to debunk these claims. 10 out of 10. LETS DO AN EXPERIMENT.

[@donquixoteupinhere]

😂

[@Siyuan_Li]

I believe there exist some organic salts which can actually dissolve into hexanes and definitely dioxane, so observing whether the water bending occurs in their presence may be interesting (although these salts often have dipoles in and of themselves which will probably confound the results)

[@shlokgupta9353]

Hats off to you Sir. I now understand the role and responsibility of a researcher

[@Raz.C]

re - 3:05 As a chemist, I would ALSO have been suspect upon hearing Derrick's explanation here. The presence of OH- and H+ ions in water is represented by the dissociation constant of water and is so vanishingly small that it lacks the power to affect such large volumes of water. From memory, the value is 1x10e-14 Even if those droplets are 1/10th of a CC of water each, there still aren't enough H+ or OH- ions to be able to move the greater mass of neutral/ non-dissociated H2O molecules. But that's what happens when you ask a non-chemist to try to peer into the mysteries of the universe. They invariably get it wrong...

[@sontapaa11jokulainen94]

Yeah.

[@nunyabisnass1141]

I thought he was talking about water softening minerals. Either way the point still stands. Theres actually a lot off, things in the vertasium archive.

[@Raz.C]

@@nunyabisnass1141 At first, that's what I thought, too (actually, I was thinking about water hardening minerals, specifically group II metals). But then he specifically referenced hydroxide ions and protons. And the thing about these specific ions is that they are constant. So they aren't only present in water droplets, they are present in any volume of water. and always in the same concentration. So if Derrick's explanation were correct, then the dissociation constant of water would have provided enough ions so that the ionic attraction present in a glass of water would cause it to be attracted to a magnet; Any glass of water would always behave as a ferromagnetic fluid.

[@MadChemistVEVO]

There are 10^-7 moles per liter of H+, and thr same amount of OH-, in a water of pH 7. But even if you had a crazy high concentration of ions, say 1 mole per liter of Ca2+ (rock hard water haha) it'd still be 1 mole of Ca2+ vs 55 moles of water and that alone should raise an eyebrow regarding veritasiums explanation.

[@physicist137]

Check the conductivity of distilled, bi-distilled, tri-distilled water - very low, but still enough for the minuscule charges that need to be moved around. But that's what happens when a non-physicist tries to peer into the mysteries of high-voltage physics.

[@LoserDestiny]

Thunderf00t at the start of the video: Years before I didn't have the resources, but now I'm going in with a better kit! Thunderf00t 5 minutes into the video: Well, most of these tools are Victorian Era. :D

[@WrensthavAviovus]

Using simple machines that do one or two things to help power or reduce variables should be a standard of doing tests of demonstrable properties.

[@tgeliot]

And nary a vent hood in sight . . .

[@madacsg]

The Science was sponsored by Kings, Queens and other most richest people in Victorian Era! ⚡

[@Relkond]

@Jason Tan it’s not that it’s expensive per se it’s that getting the plutonium needed to produce 2.42 gigawatts of power, so that you can retrieve authentic Victorian era equipment requires convincing governments that the overall procedure has merit.

[@cursetheroad]

I'm sure it takes time to make a time machine and generate enough power to fuel it in order to go back to such era.

[@Eduard_Kolesnikov]

You have done an incredible job. I like your explanation a lot. Thank you for the video you have done. It's a huge help to the community.

[@imnotaspoon151]

Awesome demonstration.

[@victarionmagne3723]

Honestly love these type of experiment based videos, altough they take a lot of time to make its worth the wait for me

[@peterhofer8998]

It is somehow soothing to see that precision in thinking, asking, acting and concluding once again. Thank you for this video.

[@ultrametric9317]

Thanks for this!! Who knew electrostatics was so much fun? Gives me a new love of the Laplace equation :)

[@kaeto]

I have to say, bravo on this video. This is one of the best experimental proofs I've ever seen. Absolutely fantastically done, this is what youtube should be.

[@cdanea]

I have followed Thunderf00t for more than a decade. Through ups and downs, always admiring his excitement and scientific rigor. Every once in a while - as was the case today - I am also reminded that in part my fascination is also due to the fact that he has a massively massive neck-to-head ratio.

[@karadan100]

I get the feeling he's like Ned Flanders under that top.

[@RichardBaran]

Perfect scientist look!

[@lifeisstr4nge]

to support the massive brain, expanding in his skull

[@zioqqr4262]

wym massive, that ratio is 1:1

[@Puleczech]

@@zioqqr4262 lol

[@Mausy5043]

It doesn't happen a lot that I watch a 30+ minute video on KZbin completely from beginning to the end and without skipping. This was very interesting. Love the hands-on figuring things out and love it that you didn't cut the footage where you lost a life. Very instructive indeed. Thanks!

[@joaocerceau5810]

One interestering step to experiment would be adding the charge to the super pure and salty water, water molecules themselves are bad charge carriers, and dissolved salt is good. Great video.

[@huggerme]

Thank you for the thoughtful video!

[@mrlint0]

Phil just had an electroboom moment.

[@manatoa1]

Phil's childlike love of science is really endearing.

[@tabularasa0606]

Children have great curiosity, which gets indoctrinated away. You need that curiosity to do great science or great art.

[@Woodburnworks]

Ive been subscribed to yu since i was like 15, i just wanna say over the past 7 years or so you've provided so much great content and I've enjoyed your videos so much, especially when you release ones like these which make me question other KZbinrs i blindly followed. You never fail to explain clearly what your argument is and you provide whatever evidence you're capable of producing. Hope i can be even a fraction of as smart as you are one day.

[@Woodburnworks]

I beleive i actually found your channel when watching your videos on religion and that sort of thing, need to rewatch those sometime. I cant seem to remember literally any of them anymore.

[@NLBoots]

I love this kind of stuff, thanks so much!

[@Kombivar]

I didn't bought the Veritasium concept either as it was during my higher chemistry course when I saw it for a first time and being fresh to the idea of polar molecule I thought that something was wrong - could I explain it back then - NO CHANCE! - thanks a million Thunderf00t for another journey into chemistry and physics and another "now I know" sensation. By the way, Google for some reason finally recognises Thunderf00t and the first page is covered with your channel, twitter and even Wikipedia page about you Phil. I'd like to know why google changed its attitude towards you and why on earth it took them so freaking long. All the best Phil!

[@Jimmy_Jones]

1M subs would do it

[@dmdx86]

He stopped making videos about people like Anita Sarkeesian and her cohorts.

[@nubie1100]

@Darren Dupre . Can't say no to the woke... they cry and stamp their feet and tell you how offended they are.. but your not allowed to tell them how many fuks you give

[@jimmyb1451]

@@dmdx86 There's probably truth to that. "people" like Stark skeezian attract the kind of "people" who will report anyone who doesn't agree with their twisted sensibilities and as we know, mass reporting can force changes to the machine learning algorithm. I guess we may have finally observed the threshold of their attention span?

[@LordZordid]

More than likely after his research was featured on the front page of the Science journal Google would just look anti-science if they kept censoring him.

[@nyannyan123456]

The amount of work Phil puts in his videos is remarkable.

[@kummer45]

This man is a nuclear physicist. I can't expect less. His work is a devotion to science. This individual stands for science. I have deep respect for his work and the work of scientists who devoted their ENTIRE life in search for the truth.

[@SMPKarma]

@@kummer45 nuclear physicist who got published in Nature for his work in chemistry (twice!), no less. I think his PhD is in chemistry? But he knows (and does) stuff in a lot of fields, sort of like a polymath lol. Which is extra cool in my eyes, because I'm also a chemist with a deep interest in quantum physics and such, altho definitely not on the same level.

[@justice5150]

Just want to say thanks for being such a passionate and effective science educator and a positive influence on the nowhere generation (a.k.a. us youngin's)

[@mortal465]

Christ, what a defeatist mentality to have. Nowhere generation, christ...

[@raptorjesus3396]

Very good presentation, thank you for your efforts!

[@richardbrown8409]

Well done! I actually did a similar experiment in 1978. I have a very old antique Wimshurst generator that I repaired (I found it in the trash). I made an electroscope out of aluminum foil, paper clip, and an old coffee jar. Gold leaf spectroscopes are far too delicate. An aluminum electroscope can be easily fixed if the strips separate too violently. Veritasium videos quite often annoy me.

[@shazmosushi]

This kind of Thunderf00t video is far more intellectually honest than his terrible SpaceX Busted video series.