I was a chemistry major and feel I had some GREAT professors, but this is by far one of the best demonstration of scientific knowledge I have ever seen!

I feel like he's reading from some book about Sherlock Holmes "The case of the poorly oxygenated candle"

2:35 / 13:44 I enjoy how when he teaches he gets excited and complements the experiment himself "Now look at that. Is that not a very pretty experiment?" I like when teachers are passionate about what they teach. Faraday was one spectacular person to figure out all that he did. This is so cool that his lectures have been recreated for us.

Faraday mentions the smell of a blown-out candle being "nasty." I've always thought it to be rather pleasant. Is this, do you reckon, something to do with the material of a candle then vs. now or simply a matter of opinion? ...Sorry for wording it as such. His language is contagious.

@ericnelson643

7 жыл бұрын

I find it to be strong and unpleasant, too. Just different noses.

@DeepPastry

7 жыл бұрын

Yes and no. Modern candles are usually either bees wax or paraffin wax candles; usually more often the latter. During the industrial revolution of Faraday's time, you'd be much more likely to encounter tallow wax candles. You'll likely of never of come across a tallow candle, like ever. Now, a pork fat candle, while fully functional as a candle, is not what most people would ever consider to be pleasant smelling. Once paraffin became easily produced, tallow in candles went away very quickly.

@NicholasA231

5 жыл бұрын

I'd have to say it's a subjective experience. I quickly replace the jar lid upon extinguishing our scented candles so as to not, in a few moments of smouldering, completely spoil the pleasant fragrance gained by an hour's burning. This, only to have my wife complain, as she is fond of the smell, and looks forward to it. (Though reading DeepPastry's comment, I'm curious to make some and see if my wife changes her mind)

Wonderful series. Love the language, how I wish people still spoke thusly. Thank you Bill and colleagues.

Excellent lectures and demos. I had to pause and "rewind" many times to fully understand, there is a hell of a lot of content and thought here.

I love this series so far - it is if as Michael Faraday had his own KZread-channel I almost wish that Bill had dressed in period-appropriate clothes :) The language is a bit hard to follow, but I think that this is as much about the poetic language, as about the science. However I found that slowing the video speed down just a bit, say to maybe 90%, helped me a lot. There is a browser plugin for that! I highly recommend doing that!

I don't know how this even has 12 dislikes. Engineerguy is so underrated.

I've learned more in the last 10 minutes than my whole year of high school physics class

10:42 If only I could become so grossly incandescent. I think Solaire would like these lectures, lol.

@jamesking2439

6 жыл бұрын

I came looking for a comment like this after hearing that.

Thank you for putting these on youtube. Beautifully narrated.

Okay... I'm addicted. Now I'm of to Lecture 3.

I didn't realize at first that Bill was reading Michael Faraday's lectures. Pretty cool...well done.

I've been teaching biology for the past 17 years and I am teaching chemistry for the first time. I am very excited to try and do these experiments with students. It is amazing how many wonderful opportunities there are to observe the beauty of the world. It is a real shame that so much of science has become obsessed with the idea that going to med school or getting a doctorate is the only thing that matters.

@engineerguyvideo

7 ай бұрын

The book (available for free as a pdf) has some experiments listed at the end.

Wonderfull series!! I think the poetic language used enhances the experience also.

@roidroid

6 жыл бұрын

i feel like i'm learning chemistry from Dr Suess

@MikePulcinellaVideo

3 жыл бұрын

Not to mention Bill’s voice.

Fantastic series. Thank you so much for making this!

Man those demonstrations… ABSOLUTELY BRILLIANT

@joebspixel5a941

Жыл бұрын

😗

So grateful for this resource, thanks dude!

So much fun watching these. Interesting and sweet.

This series is great!

THE SOUND IT MAKES AT 2:08 HAHAHA I LOVE THAT

These are really great. The introduction... distracting. These... superior.

As an old german chemist: Very nice chemistry at work - i missed the blowpipe (first used as scientific instrument from Anton von Swab) for better explanation of oxygen excess ;) - very good lecture!

i realy like these lectures. i always wonderd why a flame has so many colours. and now i understand! keep on going with your video's you guys are awsome!!!⛰👍

Faraday and this video is very superb

Yep that's great !! I love these videos !! This is why Johnny cash wrote the song burns like a "ring"of fire

I love it I wish I was running a lecture. Love your work!

@joebspixel5a941

Жыл бұрын

Love your lecture!

Great lecture!!

I love this so much :)

This opens my eyes to the fact that candles are cool. My uncle showed me the trick of lighting candle vapor now I know the science behind that.

Bill! Love this series. Absolutely fascinating. Where do we find the superbly stylish goggles/eye protection you wore in this? They're fantastic!

@engineerguyvideo

7 жыл бұрын

+naota3k they were laying around the studio. They are so retro I love them.

@naota3k

7 жыл бұрын

Me too! I'll scour the interwebs!

Fabulous!

Thanks for this. I was reading the original book and was getting frustrated there werent more pictures.

A question regarding the paper you used to demonstrate where the hottest regions of the flame is present, how does the dark ring show us a temperature gradient? I'm assuming that the paper begins to burn and it begins in the hottest regions i.e. the outer ring.

Why dislike this?! omg

@dragonskunkstudio7582

7 жыл бұрын

He takes on this god damn condescending teacher tone with this series. It's all teacher language that drives me crazy. I like his other videos when he says this is how it works vs you should know that this is how it works, that is fucking annoying. Answers your question?

@STOG01

7 жыл бұрын

Did you watch the first video to understand the context and why he uses the language?) One ought to know )

@dragonskunkstudio7582

7 жыл бұрын

Andreev Andrei Yes! I did and it doesn't change a thing, I still want nothing to do with it.

@tntiscool54

7 жыл бұрын

+Dragon Skunk with all due respect "teacher language" is just a tone. and as you know he is not trying be be your version of that. He is using Faradays Own writing to teach this topic. The other version of this has what you may want in mind. :)

@dragonskunkstudio7582

7 жыл бұрын

Tntiscool54 He made a choice to do this instead of using his own appealing way of teaching, I have no choice except to ignore it.

Great. on to the next part

Just perfect

I'm looking forward to the lectures of The Chemical History of the Crack Pipe next

Thank you .

10:20 Does this mean that if wicks had carbon or charcoal in them or if the heat of the flame passes through charcoal it would eliminate soot? (I burn candles and am trying to totally eliminate or minimize soot and particulate matter. )

6:12 that one guy from trailer park boys. That’s all I’ll say lol

Great lecture. Only 1 problem. I LOVE the smell of a blown out candle! :-). Cant wait to watch all of these and know stuff!

@SpeakShibboleth

5 жыл бұрын

If you went back in time to Faraday's day, you wouldn't. Tallow candles, made of pork fat, were pretty smelly.

Love it 💕

Holy guacamole this videos are awesome as usual. How many things You can learn from a candle. Tank You for making those.

Michael Faraday sure likes talking about vapor

So since it is vapor/02 mixture that creates the flame that means where these two don't exist there is no flame. So flames on candles are hollow.

You had me at candle...

"... I shall not have this brightness." I feel you, buddy. Me too.

If you haven't noticed yet, the English sounds like this because these are Michael Faraday's words.

So, are the particles in the luminous flames atomic or molecular size? Or, in the flame are they grouping together to make bigger particles which then glow? (And is that grouping a physical process or a chemical process?)

@ericnelson643

7 жыл бұрын

You are asking the right questions! They are molecules until the heat of combustion breaks the bonds which make light. Wax has the formula C20H42. It's combustion produces A LOT of carbon dioxide and water!

I wonder how many takes it took to get through the tongue-twister "wax in a glass flask."

I love it

Oh, how I wish to be so incandescent. PRAISE THE SUN!

I tried doing what you did at 3:35 at home, but the result is always a solid black circle instead of a ring. I also tried holding the paper in different distances from the flame, yet the result is also the same. Does anyone have any ideas what I might have done wrong?

@engineerguyvideo

6 жыл бұрын

+Scarlet Castle I don't recall the details of doing this, but a guess might be that you need a larger flame.

@Jensaw101

6 жыл бұрын

The effect, I gather, is due to the flame being comprised of a core of combustible vapor (heated into a vapor by the surrounding combustion), that then travels until it contacts the oxygen necessary to combust. Due to this, one would expect (as is shown in the video) that the heat of a candle is generated at the edges of the flame and not it's center. That said, if you are seeing a black dot, rather than a circle, then it implies that combustion is happening too close to the center of your candle. The distance between the edge of the flame (where the heat is produced) and the paper that would make up the center of the ring is small enough that the heat at the edge of the flame darkens the paper at the center. As engineerguy suggests, this might be due to your flame being too small. No point on the edge of a thin flame would be very far from the center. Additionally, the air in the room might be too disruptive. If a window is open, or a fan is blowing, then the air surrounding the candle might be moving too much. Rather than a core of combustible vapor forming in the center of the flame (keeping the surrounding air out by displacement), the vapor is pushed out of the way by the movement of surrounding air. In which case the interface where the vapor and the oxygen meet may not form a circular cross-section.

it smells great

Am I the only person who loves the smell of a blown out candle?

I like it

now I feel dumb... but this is awesome

The video glitches in places. It's annoying and stops you from seeing what's going on. Other than that this series is very good so far!

Wax into a gas flask, has a ring to it

❤️

I wish you had said "....between the twixt..." :)

Video had no problems for me.

@engineerguyvideo

7 жыл бұрын

Thx. I think it is being resolved.

WOWWWW

i love the lecture, but i wonder how accurate it is in light of modern knowledge. I would say that hotter flame in the Bunsen burner seems to burn less brightly, not because of the lack of solid particles in the flame, but because much of the light given off is in higher energy spectrum that we cannot observe.

@garretmh

6 жыл бұрын

Both are true aren't they? The higher energy of the hotter flame is possible because the particles and oxygen are already mixed and available to burn. But if solid particles in the flame must be broken first the energy is lowered making the flame is visible and brilliant. Perhaps the more complex concepts of light will be covered later in the series.

This is amazing but I don't understand French

Slammin.

THIS is the guy to have riding shotgun in your bugout van... he's like McGuyver, but smart.

Y’all actually like this sh- anyways I’m only here for hw

Trying to take notes from the lectures - not able to draw candles properly. Sigh*

FIRST (3/6)

Nasty smell when a candle is extinguished? I love that smell

Step 1: Collect wax vapor as candle burns Step 2: Let vapor condense back into candle to make new candle. Use flame to boil water also. Step 3: ????? Step 4: Profit!!!!

@jeffreygalle

6 жыл бұрын

xygomorphic44 after all, matter is neither created nor destroyed

either im lagging or this video is bugged...

"fresh air" I'm not sure I've heard that term before. I assume it's an antiquated term for something I would be familiar with

@BelgianSquirrel

4 ай бұрын

Indeed! "oxygen" maybe 😉

🤩❤️💕💙

19th Century TED Talk.

While I enjoy the old style of this lecture it is quite hard to follow, not because of the language used but rather the way it is delivered. It feel like you are reading from a script and as such loses its rhythm and pacing and comes across as rushed. It feels as though there is a disconnect from your actions and what you are saying as there is not enough pause for the audience to process what you have said and correlate that with what you have shown to prove that point. It is rather unfortunate.

@kennethflorek8532

7 жыл бұрын

James Coyle. I would expect, from how much is packed into each sentence, that the original lectures had a far slower pace. I imagine the people of the day would have felt gypped with 14 minutes of lecture. Maybe it was 30 minutes or an hour. However 10 minutes is probably too long an attention span for today.

@Swarm509

5 жыл бұрын

Years later but you can slow down youtube videos, this may help you if this is going too fast. Also we have the ability to stop and reply sections... or the whole thing. Something not so easy during a lecture.

🤩❤️💙💚💛🧡

not fresh air,oxigen,oxigen,oxigen!

@engineerguyvideo

7 жыл бұрын

+Mr. Sarvy indeed! Listen to the commentary at this point ....

@petercarroll7956

7 жыл бұрын

oxygen

@jamesarmstrong5593

7 жыл бұрын

I'm pretty sure this lecture was made before they would have used "oxygen" in normal writing

Talk normal

I love it

❤️

@joebspixel5a941

Жыл бұрын

❤️

I love it