Making a &#!$%ing Button
Tour of My New House!!!
Ntropy Acum 20 ore
I love your videos, and after having seen Steve's video, it seems like your explanation makes more sense, so I'm siding with you in this dispute.
HypeVoid Soul
HypeVoid Soul Acum 20 ore
I feel in his every video that everytime he turns on something, he is gonna get shocked 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
A Hafiz91
A Hafiz91 Acum 20 ore
Nikola Tesla will not be a well known scientist if this guy was born at the same age.
Justin Bygrave
Justin Bygrave Acum 20 ore
Also Mehdi, in regards to 35:48, look up the smartflower. It'd a solar panel that is shaped like a sunflower, that follows the movement of the sun to give you maximum energy absorption.
Anime Club
Anime Club Acum 20 ore
He forgot to read 'Don't try this at home' warning
Reyner Javelosa
Reyner Javelosa Acum 21 oră
its momentum like how a whip works
MiddleStream Acum 21 oră
3:07 "Here we have F*CK" 😂😂😂
Harsha Gali
Harsha Gali Acum 21 oră
Quick question isn't the 2d test not accurate?. With the normal experiment, you have gravity as a constant and giving it acceleration. There is no way humans can provide the same force with the same consistency.
Roy Balan
Roy Balan Acum 21 oră
1:25 hahahahahahaha
DriveByBodyPiercing Acum 21 oră
Guys Fire is way too dangerous we need to cook our food with friction, we have to ban fire forever - Tomass Neanderthallison
Justin Bygrave
Justin Bygrave Acum 21 oră
Why does Mehdi's thumbnail look like Sid from Ice Age?!?! 🤣😂😆
2xAA Acum 21 oră
Good arguments. Just concerned with the practical 3d experiments, each 3d experiment here is being given a head start, pulling (or whipping) the chain up to begin with. The Mould effect should be a self-rising effect, right? Steve's demonstrations typically start by pulling the chain over the edge without pulling up to begin with.
Roy Balan
Roy Balan Acum 21 oră
RedSon 72
RedSon 72 Acum 21 oră
Morten Fjord Christensen
Morten Fjord Christensen Acum 21 oră
You're both wrong but have some parts right! :D It is indeed the built up momemtum from gravity that gets it lifted vertically out of the bowl (this also happens for other chains, though not as far). The reason it goes so far for the ball chain is that it takes more energy/force it it to change direction / unit time. When speed increases, so that the unit time decreases, since the angular velocity remains constant, the radius of curvature is forced to increase. Other chains have a higher constant angular velocity (takes less force to bend) which means their mould effect is less / not there.
Cameron Oliver
Cameron Oliver Acum 21 oră
This has already been settled. You can't get higher authority than Cambridge physicists. Anyone can be wrong, but this is a very basic and simple problem for them. There are more difficult problems in undergrad interviews.
Nikos Mouratidis
Nikos Mouratidis Acum 21 oră
Well, I don't understand how one would think that the floor test demonstrates the "Mould Effect". When testing on the floor, the top of the arc, the point where the direction of the chain changes, does not move further from the end of the chain but closer to it! What Mehdi shows in the floor test is NOT the "Mould Effect". If you want to demonstrate the effect on the floor, you also have to add a constraint that simulates the lip of the bowl / glass!
Cameron Oliver
Cameron Oliver Acum 21 oră
You spend a lot of time saying why Steve is wrong but don't even give your own explanation! You say that the time to go around the loop is constant and I wanted the whole video for you to say why and you just didn't. You only have a small part of an explanation and even that is wrong. Here is why you are wrong: 1. You say that the chain takes the same amount of time to be accelerated around the loop, but if you look at the Mould effect working, the turning happens just at the top of the fountain, it is relatively straight before that. 2. Not only did you not explain why the time should be constant, your experiment clearly shows that it is not true, and you draw a false conclusion from it. Clearly the higher drop height takes longer. 3. You don't give any explanation as to where the extra force is coming from to push up the chain. If it's not coming from the lever effect, it has to come from somewhere. 4. You claim the Mould effect works for a normal chain but in your floor test the turning point of the chain moves backwards, not forwards, it just doesn't move backwards as fast as the point the chain is being pulled from, but if you drew a beaker there on the floor you would see that it doesn't make it over the beaker. 5. The same is true when you say the Mould effect works with the bead chain when it can't push against any surface, the Mould effect is not happening there, the point of turning is still moving backwards in absolute terms, even though there is a slight Mould effect from ground friction with the point the chain is being picked up. 6. Again, when you do your fish wire test, the point of turning moves downwards, not upwards, that is not the Mould effect. The reason is would stay in the same place is the effect of chains moving through their shapes that Steve explains in his video. 7. Your 'hose Mould' effect is a completely different effect. This only happens when the hose is about to run out, because the previous equilibrium is broken by there being less weight for the hose to drag but the same force/speed pulling it forward, so it overshoots. The Mould effect happens when the chain is not about to run out. 8. You say that a normal chain should still work as a lever, and that is true, but the effect is small since each link can only leverage its own weight when being lifted, as it can freely love around the next link. With the bead chain, there is a minimum curvature that the chain can go through, and when the chain is being lifted quickly, this is being pinched, meaning it puts a large force downwards to avoid the curvature, so the difference is that the force can be transferred between links. 9. You said on your comment of Steve's video that you are insure of the bullet on the block being real because of energy. When the bullet hits on the edge, that part of the block moves more easily than when it hits the middle, meaning it is as if it's hitting something lighter, which means more energy is transferred to the block, because the bullet will go in less far giving less energy to breaking bonds in the block, or if they are rigid, it will bounce off with less kinetic energy.
jakilah moulien
jakilah moulien Acum 21 oră
this explanation was so clear!
I.R.Mäd Acum 21 oră
Nice, I've got the same ringtone as you. 👍😂
STS Acum 21 oră
I'm neither an electrical engineer nor a mechanical engineer, so I'm more qualified than both. It is the same mechanical phenomenon as when waving whiplash. A wave that moves from one end to the other. In a whiplash, the energy moves from one side to the other and one end is static. In these cases the top of the wave appears to be static for the observer. It is the starting side that moves / falls. There is a difference in observation not the phenomenon. Why is the chain rising? Or you can put it this way, why the wave gets bigger. The answer is the same as a whiplash. If you create the wave and keep one side static, the same wave goes through the whole whip. Because whip narrows and the weight becomes less but the energy is the same so the height of the wave increases. Here is something else. It's not just one end moving in som of these cases but the speed increasing. So you add more energy. If we continue whit whip analogy. It is not just that you create the wave but you continue to move your arm and make the wave bigger.
Ruhaib Acum 21 oră
Came back here after seeing this legendary creation in Vsauce3's Harry Potter video 😂
atrumluminarium Acum 21 oră
This definitely disproves Steve's video with the 2D example I can't really see a way to argue against those. The explanation is also very simple and neat which I like.
Mark R
Mark R Acum 21 oră
I believe you win the argument, perhaps you should ask Steve to join the 10k cents on a string and get him to deliver it/them personally from a helicopter. 😂👍
Sep Acum 21 oră
Perfectly Cut Scream 1:05
Goat Sinker
Goat Sinker Acum 21 oră
Why do you use conventional current flow, not electron current flow?
afshin a b
afshin a b Acum 21 oră
یه نفر یکی از کلیپای چرت و پرت برام فرستاد حالا من که ۴ سال دانشگاه رفتم میدونستم که از نظر علمی این غیرممکنه ولی ایقدر تعداد این ویدیو ها تو اینترنت زیاد بود که دیگه داشتم به خودم شک میکردم تا این که این ویدیو از کانالت دیدم. ممنون 👏👏👍
The Working Bench
The Working Bench Acum 21 oră
your videos are educational and fun to watch. I like your sense of humor keep flowing the videos and the funny actions.
Jai Acum 21 oră
Mehdi blink twice if you want me to call child services
wangdydu Acum 21 oră
So who wins at last? Kiwico wins.
Muhammad Faizan Ali
Muhammad Faizan Ali Acum 21 oră
To those ROpost recommended this in 2021 hit like.
Pauly Rush
Pauly Rush Acum 21 oră
I can't believe no one's noticed this effect before. I noticed it like 40 years ago so its actually the Rush effect.
ViY Acum 21 oră
At this rate, he has to have gained lightning/electricity resistance
Schnaps Acum 21 oră
so its more like a whip
stupid guy
stupid guy Acum 21 oră
لطفا زیرنویس فارسی اضافه کن
lamcho00 Acum 21 oră
I'm still not convinced. The floor tests would be convincing if the surface had very low drag on the chain. Otherwise you are just getting the Mould effect because of friction with the floor. In the final test, dropping the cord with lead weights, you are initially accelerating it downwards, thus creating a force imbalance. Seems Steve is rigging it with cups and plates, while you are rigging the experiments by using initial downward acceleration or ground friction. After watching both videos, I'm more confused on the topic than ever. Maybe if you could recreate your floor experiments but on a frictionless surface (like air-hockey table) could prove you right.
Leo Jackouski
Leo Jackouski Acum 21 oră
You have to impart that initial upward velocity and position of momentum at 16:00 because there is no mechanism in this ball chain example to force the chain to go up and build height, rather than reduce in height. Over the course of the test the height of the fountain decreases, like it does in your spaced horizontal tests, as there are losses and no opposing upward accelerating forces.
Racextreme Gaming
Racextreme Gaming Acum 21 oră
You sound like my physics teacher
Brandon Hines
Brandon Hines Acum 22 ore
Explain to me why i died laughing at 5:06
Sanada Biege
Sanada Biege Acum 22 ore
The answer is Mehdi
Shanjaq Acum 22 ore
*whip physics?
مهدی رضایی
مهدی رضایی Acum 22 ore
مهدی چی میشد یه زیر نویس فارسی میزاشتی؟
Ruben Villegas
Ruben Villegas Acum 22 ore
I haven't tested it, but wouldn't this be easily proven by describing the system with differential equations and look at the step response in the s - domain? The dynamics of the chain just looks to me like a classic overshooting step response settling over time. The chain's speed or momentum being too high and mechanical forces trying to dampen it to a target position. Or I could be talking out of my ass. Again, I haven't tested this. Either way I have to go with Team Mehdi on this one.
Arijit Roy
Arijit Roy Acum 22 ore
I have seen both videos (from mehdi and from steve as well) and i think mehdi is right. He proved his explanation really well. I think that there should be mehdi's constant. BTW lots of love from India.
Owais Ali
Owais Ali Acum 22 ore
Mehdi's law
Tom Armstrong
Tom Armstrong Acum 22 ore
Electrical engineer is over qualified for this? Okay
Neeraj Suman
Neeraj Suman Acum 22 ore
Is he Indian
Muntz Acum 22 ore
I think someone owes you 100 Canadian dollars. And yes, I’ve already seen Steve’s video.
ethzero Acum 22 ore
11:45 #NeyGLIDGEable
Joonas Hannila
Joonas Hannila Acum 22 ore
You're both wrong! It's obviously magic!
Vishal Babu
Vishal Babu Acum 22 ore
7:55 omg
Cry More
Cry More Acum 22 ore
if you watch 3:22 to 3:59 backwards, it looks like some weird found footage. Except this one is hilarious if you know the context/backstory xD
Jam Tavana
Jam Tavana Acum 22 ore
جناب مهندس پرژن درست است نه پرشین. شما که در بیرون از ایران زندگی می کنید باید این را از انگلیسی زبانان شنیده باشید.
Kolop315 Acum 22 ore
I am very confident that you are more right than Steve on this one.
Kabir Acum 22 ore
Soon we gonna see MEHDI CONSTANT 😏
Sairaj Fogueri
Sairaj Fogueri Acum 22 ore
Hello ... Indian here
Aditya Arambam
Aditya Arambam Acum 22 ore
Guys This isn't related to the video but What kinda motor do i use for a car wiper? And what control module would run the motor? (For a project, not for replacing car parts)
Vincent GR
Vincent GR Acum 22 ore
A man who explodes things is always right. Case closed.
Guy Attrill
Guy Attrill Acum 22 ore
luckily being from canada and britain there wont be a recount as they will accept the result of the vote
Khola Acum 22 ore
Thank you rectalfier
The_R0bot Acum 22 ore
you're hella correct homie
Jude Whitehouse
Jude Whitehouse Acum 22 ore
"But I was able to pull my foot out fast". 😆😆😆
Dailyday Acum 22 ore
we should use mehdi's constant as our fundamental time unit
JDM Jesus
JDM Jesus Acum 22 ore
I'm with you, it has to be momentum. Just like cracking a whip. Part way through the vid I was thinking if you could get data to show the height of the loop was proportional to the velocity of the chain then that would prove it (momentum=M x V), but you did that with the black links at different heights! Point proven. And as you mentioned, I think the fact that the ball chain can rotate has a lot to do with it. It helps eliminate a lot of the resistance/inertia. Excellent work, for an electrical engineer... ;)
Marco Schippers
Marco Schippers Acum 22 ore
It is settled, Mehdi you are right! Make good use of that lunch money
BOSS Δ.M.V Acum 22 ore
Never watch electroboom's vids while holding your phone with single hand cause at 3:03 I dropped my phone flat on the floor
Hardik Minocha
Hardik Minocha Acum 23 ore
@ElectroBOOM, first of all, I'm team electronic engineers as well, so HIGH FIVE! . My question is, did the physicists or Mr Mould take into account the fact, that every link proves to be a slouch, or acts like a slack in the "pile" of chain which is being pulled out of the "container'? it may be possible, that chains with a really specific ratio of slack per link and mass per unit length of the chains, that decides how easily the chains are able to lift themselves up in a giant arc "over" the lip. My theory is on a similar line to yours, but I think, there's just one more thing that would make it feel complete. The effect is triggered when we pull down on the section of the chain outside the container. So, as the pieces or links of the chain which are at rest are actually "tugged" on to wake up and get moving, it causes an impulse on that link, thus, not really a continous "pulling" on the chain link, rather it kicks it into action, and so on and so forth. This theory also accounts for the fact, that there's only so much impulse a chain falling under the force of gravity can provide to lift a certain mass. Hence, heavier chain links, or longer chain links(not enough inertia) would lead to a smaller arc. On a side note, I've looked at the design of the ball chains, and there seems to be a link that's free to move inside the ball. Maybe that too adds up to the impulse per link? I think this is a solid thought as well.
Supot Sae-Eung
Supot Sae-Eung Acum 23 ore
is not it was the same force with whip effect ???
anthony jacobs
anthony jacobs Acum 23 ore
This reminds me off an slinky toy (long flexible metal spring) . I had a large one and at the top of the stair it went slow and low and at the bottom fast and higher. Seeing that last piece off chain fly over would suggest it could repeat it self in multiple cups. As long that last piece of chain will fly over the edge off the next cup. So I am thinking why can a slinky walk stairs? So it would work with chain, rope, springs
ghoststomper Acum 23 ore
watched both videos, cant help but think fluid dynamics are at play as well here. Would be interesting to see what would happen in a vacuum and micro gravity
okkar myo
okkar myo Acum 23 ore
"It tastes wrong" is the only way to describe a scientific explanation you don't think is right
Ibnuz Zaki
Ibnuz Zaki Acum 23 ore
Well who's gonna read it but it works like a whip
rewolff2 Acum 23 ore
Mehdi, one small thing. Stuff can practically have infinite accelleration. Think of a hammer hitting an anvil. With chains you'd get that effect when for instance you'd put lead weights on a flexible string like a fishing line.... The line moves at a (close to constant) speed and suddenly jerks up the weight going from standstill to moving in almost no time. Of course, the line will stretch a bit and the force will not be infiinte. But you can quite accurately predict what's going on by setting that time to zero, and assuming a certain delta-V across zero time.
Joshua Godinho
Joshua Godinho Acum 23 ore
To test the lever problem, maybe you could try dropping a rope with a weight at its end.
Warmine 05
Warmine 05 Acum 23 ore
When I hadn't watched this video (had seen Steve´s) I thought for sure that Steve´s version would be the correct and Mehdi would have some ridiculous explanation with obvious flaws/hole, but after having seen the video I am TEAM MEHDI!!!
Mr LongSchlong
Mr LongSchlong Acum 23 ore
Isn't this effect also present with whips?
Claes Wikberg
Claes Wikberg Acum 23 ore
you both make valid points and i'm all up for naming a constant after you. But if it where just the fact that there a loss of energy with the chain hitting the edge of the container, then the plastic ball chain with rope should exibit the same behaviour as the bathroom chain !?! also your 2d test doesn't cause an increase of "height" over time, now this might be down to friction of the ground or a lack of running speed (you not being able to match gravity). Perhaps you can build a winch with the same acceleration as gravity just to see if there is indeed a rise, and not just a constant arc?