Out Of Sight – From Quarks To Molecules – VIDEO

Out Of Sight - From Quarks To Molecules
by



http://www.facebook.com/ScienceReason … Complexity (Chapter 3): From Quarks To Molecules


Please SUBSCRIBE to Science & Reason:
http://www.youtube.com/Best0fScience
http://www.youtube.com/ScienceTV
http://www.youtube.com/FFreeThinker

QUARKS-NEUCLEONS

There are two kinds of quarks (physicists call them flavors of quarks) that are found in normal matter These quarks are the UP quark and the DOWN quark. A proton is formed from two up quarks and one down quark while its slightly heavier cousin, the neutron, is formed from two down quarks and one up quark.

The red, green, and blue colors of the quarks represent a property that attracts them to one another … it is this color-charge property of the quarks that holds them together in a proton or neutron.

NUCLEUS

These protons and neutrons can then combine to form the nucleus of each element in the periodic table. One proton in the nucleus makes hydrogen, two form helium, 6 carbon, 8 oxygen, 79 is gold and 92 uranium.

Neutrons help hold the protons together. Because of their electric charge, protons would repel each other more strongly if neutrons were not present, and the heavier elements would come apart. There are approximately as many neutrons in each element as there are protons.

ELECTRON SHELLS

Atoms are formed when the positively charged protons in the nucleus capture negative electrons. Neutral atoms have captured one negative electron for each positive proton in the nucleus.

So Hydrogen has one electron to go with its one proton, Helium two electrons, Carbon has 6, Oxygen 8, Gold has 79 and Uranium 92.

There are nearly 90 stable elements. The largest of them can contain close to 800 fundamental particles, joined in a complex but stable structure. But electrons cannot just gather around in a crowd. Once again the strange, wonderful world of the tiny has some idiosyncrasies.

Electrons arrange themselves in shells inside an atom like the layers of an onionand only two electrons can fit per layer. So, the more electrons an atom has, the further away from the nucleus the outer shells must beand that means these electrons are more loosely held.

It is this difference in how tightly electrons are held in each different kind of atom that determines the chemical properties of that element. This accounts for the ability of metals to conduct electricity, the aloofness of noble gases, and the formation of molecules.

MOLECULES

It turns out that protons in two or more different nuclei can sometimes capture (and fight over) the same electron. And when that happens, atoms of different elements are joined together to form molecules.

This oxygen molecule is sharing two of its electrons with two hydrogen atoms this is how a water molecule is formed. Some molecules can be quite large and complicated. Carbon, hydrogen and oxygen join together to form some of the most important large molecules.

Amino acids are molecules that are necessary for carbon-based life, and recently, it was discovered that amino acids form naturally and spontaneously in the vast gas clouds of outer space. Since these molecules are precursors of life, it is important to know how abundant and universal they have turned out to be.

Somewhere about here, our measurement of simplicity starts to edge toward the complex. At the level of complex molecules, existence is pretty reliable.

Molecules such as adenine are too large and heavy for the uncertainty principle to enter into their description and Quantum Mechanical oddities are rarely encountered at this level. But every adenine molecule is still identical with and interchangeable with every other. There isn’t sufficient complexity to generate uniqueness.

And a movie of even a complex molecule forming looks equally plausible running both forward and backwards. So reversibility still indicates simplicity.

The Cassiopeia Project – making science simple!

The Cassiopeia Project is an effort to make high quality science videos available to everyone. If you can visualize it, then understanding is not far behind.

http://www.cassiopeiaproject.com
.

Video Source
Video Keyword – molecular
Video Title – Out Of Sight – From Quarks To Molecules
More News and Resources [cetsEmbedRSS id=’https://twitrss.me/twitter_search_to_rss/?term=out+of+sight+from+quarks+to+molecules+video’ itemcount=’20’ itemauthor=’1′ itemdate=’1′ itemcontent=’1′]
[cetsEmbedRSS id=’https://queryfeed.net/tw?q=out+of+sight+from+quarks+to+molecules+video’ itemcount=’20’ itemauthor=’1′ itemdate=’1′ itemcontent=’1′]
[cetsEmbedRSS id=’https://www.reddit.com/search.rss?q=out+of+sight+from+quarks+to+molecules+video&sort=new’ itemcount=’20’ itemauthor=’1′ itemdate=’1′ itemcontent=’1′]
[cetsEmbedRSS id=’http://www.bing.com/search?q=out+of+sight+from+quarks+to+molecules+video&format=rss’ itemcount=’20’ itemauthor=’1′ itemdate=’1′ itemcontent=’1′]
[cetsEmbedRSS id=’http://rss.indeed.com/rss?q=out+of+sight+from+quarks+to+molecules+video’ itemcount=’20’ itemauthor=’1′ itemdate=’1′ itemcontent=’1′]
[cetsEmbedRSS id=’https://queryfeed.net/plus?q=out+of+sight+from+quarks+to+molecules+video’ itemcount=’20’ itemauthor=’1′ itemdate=’1′ itemcontent=’1′]


Comments

  1. too much reverb on the voice over..

  2. @eah2119 Not true. X-ray diffraction and various ingenious kinds of electron spectroscopy allow one to visualize atoms. We are able to see in the Angstrom scale (10^-10 m)!

  3. @AcanLord even considering the bible to be true, jesus didn't create anything except some serious problems with the roman authorities….

    But as we know that it isn't, we don't have to bother about what other peoples imaginary friends do or don't do…

  4. Baby Jesus Ide like to thank you right now for creating all the quarks in the Universe

  5. who the heck would dislike the vedio

  6. @FOOFlGHTERS who is kent hovid fans

  7. @eah2119 You obviously never watched Quincy who would bust out his electron tunnelling microscope at the drop of a hat.

  8. @eah2119
    We can't see sounds either.
    But we can detect them through ways other than just looking at them with out eyes.

  9. @liquidminds
    Jesus will make anything you want. Fictional beings will do whatever you like if you have a pen. =D

  10. @persaudchris
    What makes you think science will never provide an explaination for that?

  11. @xamire

    They arent designs.
    They are formations.

    Furthermore, its completely retarded to suggest a man from
    the bronze age on a tiny forgetable planet in a mediocre galaxy in some far flung part of the cosmos created the entire universe.

    Also, You are using the word Accident wrong.
    the word Accident implies a inteligent cause having
    mistakening done something.

    Nature can`t make mistakes, everything it does is inevitable
    according to the laws of physics.

  12. @xamire

    so let me get this straight.
    you think i want to be a god?
    and yet my God is nature?

    That makes no fucking sense.

  13. @xamire

    Hence my name? wtf are you talking about?

    And yes you are flat out wrong.
    Pascals wager is simply a example of Intellectual cowardice.
    By the way. did you know if you are right about Zeus
    you have nothing to lose but if you are wrong you have everything to lose?

    If you roll your eyes at that, then you now know why i roll my eyes at you.

    And yes, Nature does have selective powers.
    they are called selection pressures. they filter out what can and what can`t be.

  14. @xamire

    Accident is the wrong word.

  15. Thank you creepy plastic people..

  16. @Orlando2914

    Would you like me to?
    i know several who i could ask right now.

  17. @Orlando2914 to be clear, which comment are you refering to?

  18. @delaisla777 pardon?

  19. @delaisla777 Prick?

  20. can we break a nutron?

  21. @gvektor why the fuck exactly is everyone responding to my response
    i gave to a fundie in the comments section?

    let me guess. you dident read that far back?

  22. @gvektor Well actualy i have a better reason why accident is the wrong word.

    Accident is the wrong word because it implies An inteligent Agent Mistakenly
    doing something, or somehow involutarily being involved.
    However their is no evidence that any Inteligence was ever involved with
    any system in the universe anywhere outside of man made constructs.

  23. couldnt they find a way to explain it so that i could understand?

  24. This info is just flat-out wrong. It states that there can be only two electrons in each shell around the nucleus. The first shell has two, yes, but the second accomodates EIGHT, the third EIGHTEEN, and so on. This is not a minor error. In my view it invalidates any value in this video.

  25. Is god made of quarks?
    Can any religious answer that?
    If not, what is god created of?
    And what created god?

  26. @sgrouge Chuck Norris is the answer to all of your questions.

  27. THIS IS AWESOME!

  28. @AcanLord jesus isnt god

  29. @921milanista i Agree.

  30. @sgrouge thats why hes worthy of all praise, if god was created from quarks then we would be just like him and hes not worthy of anything. quarks is how god created this world and theres so many things that scientists will never prove or achieve and they blame it on "mother nature". things like how its impossible to reach exactly the speed of light or zero kelvin
    science can only get you so far

  31. @befuturenow im sorry but i think i know what you mean n i wanna correct you, the first energy level has one shell which can accomodate 2 electrons, but the 2nd energy level can accomodate 8 n so on n so forth, each energy level grea1ter than one has more than one shell
    hope that helped!

  32. @devil238 People are bound to simple things , because the person themselves can only understand simple things.
    While some of these things are whimsical in nature you have to think about the origin of the comment.

  33. I you guys can't help talking about religion, probably because you are too stupid to understand physics, just mind that Jesus wasn't born yet but the quarks were already there! 😉

  34. Imagine if God was born of the big bang. God was the big bang. Science and Religion are intertwined. Rational on both sides need to centre on what they want to achieve. It seems some scientist's want to get into the realm of religion and some God believers want to get into science. Well it doesn't work. You are like children. Can't you have a bit of both? Agree that you disagree. Saves a lot of trouble.

  35. 4:48 the molecule looks kind of like a teddy bear.

  36. @REHTE1 which god?

  37. LOL The quarks song :3

  38. Guise no one knows how the universe was created so why the faack are you all arguing about it? We might find out eventually but there's no point in getting all fussy about it when we're probably all wrong.

  39. I can assure you that jesus was actually made up of these things…….

  40. thank you very much for this video. i found very hard to understand particle physics, but after watching this video, im having better understanding in these area now. once again thank you.

  41. Get your shit out of here

  42. nu-cle-us

  43. As long as you keep parroting that nonesense, it is you for whom there is no escape from your slavery to a large collection of very bad and very thoroughly discredited ideas. If you believe you already understand everything worth understanding about the world, you will never learn anything about the real world except that it keeps disappointing your faith based expectations of it.

  44. Actually, There are the same amount of protons as electrons but the protons and neutrons e.g. the atomic number can be very different meaning protons and neutrons can have and do have completely different amounts.

  45. You said that proton attraction and collision is stopped by neutrons coming in their way….but what subatomic particle stops the attraction and collision of electrons in the orbit??

  46. Great video. Only thing I can advise is to use smoothing groups for your 3d models! That will stop the polygons from showing like that.

  47. cool

  48. cool

  49. He doesn't deserve those subs

  50. that ending though

Comments are closed.