When Veritasium gets it Wrong! - Trial by EXPERIMENT!

  • Added:  2 years ago
  • Veritasiums explanation for the deflection of water bugged me.

    A week or so of experimenting later, I had a simple, reproducible experiment that demonstrated that their explanation was wrong.

    The concept is simple. According to Veritasium, positive ions come out in the water, while negative ones are withheld. This means that in an electrically isolated system, the first water out should be positive, while the reservoir at the top becomes increasingly negatively charged. However ultimately that water must come out too, and when it does, it should be strongly repelled by the charged object. In reality, that doesnt happen, indeed if anything its more strongly attracted, although this is probably due to the last water out moving more slowly. Either way its a pretty clear experiment for showing that the ions do not move back up into the tap as Veritasium suggests.

    Stunningly there is actually some quite recent stuff on this in the literature (last 10 yrs or so), although Im not so sure I believe any of it.

    Y'see showing something to be wrong is usually just the first stage in science.... you then gotta show you know whats going on by proposing a model that works.
    In the week or two of experimenting I did, I got enough clear results to show everything is wrong! I have no coherent explanation that merely explains the obtained results, let alone one that can be used to predict unknowns.

    FYI, the cones at the end are called Taylor cones and are the core of electrospray which got someone a Nobel Prize in chemistry!
    Kinda makes it even more weird that its so hard to come up with a fully coherent explanation of why a stream of water is deflected by a charged object.

    -Simple things don't always have simple explanations!

    Kelvin dropper has to be seen to be believed!
    tvclip.org/video/sArNxGnYhNU/

    Veritasiums video
    tvclip.org/video/jIMihpDmBpY/

    This video was support though Patreon.
    www.patreon.com/Thunderf00t
  • EntertainmentEntertainment
  • Runtime: 8:54
  • veritasium  thunderf00t  5 fun  fun  physics  explained  experiment  water  static  electricity  kelvin  dropper  chemistry  van  der  graaf  generator  electrical  deflection  bend  bending  wrong  right  amazing  science  bitches  it  works  interesting  cool  win  pwn  funny  fail  epic  lol  Derek Muller  derek  muller  dawkins  nature  natural  running  tap  comb  balloon  plastic  Math  Noob  Owned  Robot  Electronics  Technology  positive  negative  Space  Diy  Computer  

Comments: 1 811

  • Tony Flounders
    Tony Flounders 5 days ago

    Hi Thunderfoot.
    You might want to look up a thing called exclusion zone (EZ) water. I saw this on a TED talk and it indicates that water at its surface rearranges its self into sheets of H3O2 which are slightly electrically charged.
    Hope this helps.

  • IndustrialDonut
    IndustrialDonut 7 days ago

    Can we try this with distilled deionized water?

  • Aco
    Aco 17 days ago

    The way that drop oscillates speaks volumes about your point - there's definitely something going on that the other models haven't directly recognized. Could it be possible to measure the charge of the water without affecting the system too greatly?

  • Zac packman
    Zac packman 18 days ago

    whilst veritasum may not get the science fully right they do simplfy alot of stuff for us normal ppls in a intresting and informative way. its not like you havent made mistakes b4 eather :) good work as allwase mate

  • Marconius
    Marconius 23 days ago

    The one thing I definitely want to see is how this behaves with distilled water, that has no ions in it.

  • Connor Watson
    Connor Watson 29 days ago

    Have you tried it with DI water? If it has the same effect then it might be the case that the ions aren't what's causing the bend

  • Mortos DerSoulStealer

    I don't care about the science of it, I'm just glad I can now convince my children I'm a Jedi.

  • Lankey Bastard
    Lankey Bastard Month ago

    I see through your evil plan. By making us all have to pee with your dripping water machine you plan to drive up the cost of water.
    You evil bastard.

  • Joshua Lansell-Kenny

    My mate felt a strong attraction to Thunderf00t charges are definitely involved lol

  • Andre Artus
    Andre Artus 2 months ago

    Has this been run using deionized or distilled water? It would be interesting to have two streams, one normal tap water ion concentrations and another deionized, running at the same flow rate and then comparing the deflection both upstream and downstream. High speed could prove illuminating. Of course for completeness the same should be done with a discharged balloon.

  • Arokace
    Arokace 2 months ago

    I'm not a scientist so I could easily be wrong but could the ions be going to the metal with the sinks tap in Veritasium's video? Either way...why do this to him... There's so many other people who deserve your negative(well technically positive) feedback. Or were you just kind of at the bottom of the bin when you decided this? And ultimately, I think you said something about why scientist didn't say something at the time of his video, well that would probably be because of the majority(if not close to all) of his viewers are probably people who wouldn't know for sure if he is right or wrong.

  • Liber Philosophus
    Liber Philosophus 2 months ago

    I think your model works better. Anions in an aqueous solution will typically be one of the lesser solutes, considering water itself and other cations mixed in. However, "charged" particle interactions are one of the weakest links in the molecular world. It would likewise then be unsurprising to see the interaction become nill at higher velocities. I think the repulsion at the end is explained by Newton's third law.

  • what else is on
    what else is on 3 months ago

    That's not the only video in which Derek attempts to replace others' misconceptions with his own. That's why I got sick of watching his stuff. I'm just discovering your channel though and I can't fault your accuracy or logic at all so far. You can have my cancelled Veritasium subscription.

  • Silver Night
    Silver Night 3 months ago

    Didn't he say that "some" of the water would go back up into the original container. Couldn't some of the water fly off the other way?

  • Phteve
    Phteve 3 months ago

    He's on Bill Nye's show.
    Bill Nye's show is on Netflix.
    Netflix has 7 letter.
    _______ ---> N-O-T-R-E-A-L is also seven letters.

    Therefore, not a real scientist.

    TRUMP 2020

  • The Kaveman
    The Kaveman 3 months ago

    More to be done on this

  • U.N. Owen
    U.N. Owen 3 months ago +1

    +Thunderf00t: Again, I don't know WHO these people are, but, I'm pretty certain Veratasium, is pronounced 'VER+uh+TAY+ZEE+um, NOT 'VER+uh+TAYT+EE++um' (where are you getting that 2nd 't' from? There IS NONE)

  • Erlend Ellingsen
    Erlend Ellingsen 3 months ago +1

    Uhm... Veritasium is actually correct. Do this with larger objects over larger amount of time, and touch the pipe... you will get a small electric shock. Obviously this does not happen if you have an plastic pipe.


    When I've been doing sports, I somehow often gets electrically charged (like the cup). When i first enter the shower its all fine and i can touch the metal piping, but after a min or so i get small but unpleasant electrical shock when I touch the piping.

  • Joost Ringoot
    Joost Ringoot 3 months ago

    An explanation that is in my opinion consistent with both your experiments and the experiments of veritassium, is this:
    Water is an equilibrium of ions.
    The negative object attracts the positive ions and repulses the negative ions. Some negative ions escape via the drops at the bottom and some dispose their charge at the conductive metal tap of veritassiums experiment, some just stay at the tap.
    The result is a slightly positively charged waterbeam that is sufficiently charged to pull the water towards the negatively charged object.

  • pedzsan
    pedzsan 3 months ago

    I like you method of presenting your experiments with a healthy dose of self doubt.

  • Artem Zhuravski
    Artem Zhuravski 4 months ago

    Well he is kinda wrong not totaly

  • Ben Snash
    Ben Snash 4 months ago

    Perhaps when veritasium said that the polar nature of water would only cause it to flip and not move because there would be equal attraction and repulsion is wrong, perhaps since the molecule's positive side is turned towards the cup it means as its close to the cup than the negative side the attraction force would be marginally greater than the repulsion force. Intuition tells me that it wouldn't produce enough of a difference to cause that much change in the flow but it's a thought

  • Crooks and Crafts
    Crooks and Crafts 4 months ago

    +Thunderf00t If the stream of water is indeed neutral, then shouldn't it be attracted by either positive or negatively charged objects? Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Veritasium's video show that one charge repelled the water, while the other attracted it? If so, then how could the stream be neutral?

  • Jelle Bootsma
    Jelle Bootsma 4 months ago

    At least have the respect to pronounce his name correctly...

  • Auke Mebel
    Auke Mebel 4 months ago

    Why don't you go away from all the stuff to do with Ion's and try it with de_Ionized water and see if it works with that.

  • Guy Stokes
    Guy Stokes 4 months ago

    if you did kelvins experiment with a molten metal say, and let it cool before the spark gap quenches, should it not be creating a type of mono poled magnet if Kelvin is correct in what is going on? or am I wrong to think that would be the case?

  • Hiccup Zain
    Hiccup Zain 4 months ago

    when I watched Veritasoum video I honestly wanted him to perform the same experiment hut with distilled water (because it has less to no ions dissolved) But he didn't

    So plz can you do a distilled water test, it will be pretty strong evidence

  • Clorox Bleach
    Clorox Bleach 4 months ago

    That faucet is metal... Yours is some plastic, would that have anything to do with it?

  • Steven Baal
    Steven Baal 4 months ago

    Another version would be to use distilled water which should not deflect at all, due to no ions if V was right. This would have been easy with the apparatus used.

  • Oggy Oggy AKA British Mapping

    The video showed a cool experiment, why would we need to know how it would work or why it would work?With this principle we could make machines that could even be useful for us!

  • 猫我蜜糖
    猫我蜜糖 4 months ago

    Vsauce and Veritasiums.. not that good most of the time. But they have a great image in a lot of people's eyes, just not mine.

  • casey obrien
    casey obrien 4 months ago

    The mic on your camera is better than the one you are using for most of the vid

  • TiagoTiago
    TiagoTiago 4 months ago

    How about testing the effects of high voltage DC fields on water to get a clearer effect?

  • Scott Williams
    Scott Williams 4 months ago

    No veritasium was right, if you used deionised water then there would be no deflection

  • seasong
    seasong 4 months ago

    So it works with destilled water?

  • Franco Buzzetti
    Franco Buzzetti 4 months ago

    can you expand on this like you didnt with coulomb explosions? thank you for science!

  • Maximillion Thermidor
    Maximillion Thermidor 4 months ago

    To be fair an engineering pleb like me would see no problem with this theory. Apply an electric feild and get an electric charge. From that feild we also get a perpendicular magnetic feild, which would attract the positively charged water. However given this doesn't hold up in reality I would be interested to see actual tests done. Perhaps use an inductor instead of a balloon to retry the experiment.

    However I prefer your methodology with the Kelvin dropper.

  • The Mad Hatter
    The Mad Hatter 4 months ago

    I think I know why the water droplets tend to move away when they fall. Imagine if you have a pendulum, if you push it one way and let it go, the pendulum doesn't immidiately stop in the center, it keeps moving till it gradually stops in the center. Likewise, the water is kind of acting like a pendulum in that it doesn't​ flow in the center when you move the balloon away.

  • Fazal Fariz
    Fazal Fariz 4 months ago

    So, does a magnet make the water stream bend?

  • b man
    b man 4 months ago

    So the more overal positive charged water molecules are pulled or favored first leaving more overall negatively charged water molecs for the end?

  • Eugene Arabadzhi
    Eugene Arabadzhi 4 months ago

    He just veritasiumed veritasium

  • Davide Riccardo Gabrielli

    Thunderf00t try that in vacuum

  • John Doe
    John Doe 4 months ago

    This system is such a great example of how you end up with non-linear effects when dealing with realistic systems, and how all the nice approximations physicists use break down.

    1.) Liquid water is a conductor, but it is not close to an 'ideal' or perfect conductor. As a result ions re-arrange themselves to maintain as low of a potential as they can possibly achieve. If there were an infinite amount of ions (or a very large number of positively and negatively charged ones), then the water would attempt to maintain a zero potential. Unlike a perfect conductor the ions in water are not smeared over the surface of the water, although they are still localized.

    2.) The water itself is a fluid, and is moving in response to gravity and the electromagnetic field itself. This is not at all what you deal with with ideal fixed conductors. This results in a two way non-linear coupling ; the electromagnetic field changes the shape of the waters surface and changes it's movement. The changes in the shape of the waters surface and it's movement result in changes in ionic concentrations, resulting in changes in the electromagnetic field. This makes it a difficult problem mathematically.

    3.) In addition, you have the fact that the surface charge on the balloon may rearrange itself in response to the electromagnetic field of the induced surface charge of the water. So there's that. That adds another layer of coupling here.

  • Brian Stevens
    Brian Stevens 4 months ago

    this has probablt been worked out by now but the water moving thru a tube may be gaining charge just like an aluminium skin on a truck moving through air unles this effect is counted up and negated experiment is inconclusive

  • jonas duell
    jonas duell 4 months ago

    If Veritasium was right, distilled water would not react to external charges...

  • oooBASTIooo
    oooBASTIooo 4 months ago

    Wouldn't the natural way to check this is to simply use distilled water and see whether it gets attracted or not?

  • Mecca Miles
    Mecca Miles 4 months ago

    Wouldn't a better falsification experiment consist of the use of deionized water? -Veritasium's claim is that it is not the polarized water bringing about the observed effect, but rather, the ions coming out of the tap; therefore, to prove his hypothesis wrong, simply use deionized water where the only variable is the water itself and, concordantly, the water molecule's electric-dipole.

    Also, it's worth mentioning that simple logic can falsify his claim. If the electric dipole is not the cause of the deflection of the stream of water, but rather, the dissolved ions in the stream coming out of the tap, then the ions will not affect the water in the presence of a charged object, such as the cup, because the errant tap-water ions only act as a sort-of electric middleman between the water and the charged cup.

    That said, great video. Thanks for sharing.

  • Tom Davidson
    Tom Davidson 4 months ago

    For throughness the experiment should be repeated using (A) Conductivity Water, and (B) a non-ionic polar solvent such as ethanol.

  • Retro .Spekta
    Retro .Spekta 4 months ago

    What if you had 2 girls holding that 1 cup?

  • Solder Joe
    Solder Joe 4 months ago

    Revisit this now that you have the high speed camera. Might answer some questions. Isn't there a way of reading the charge on the outside of the tube as the water flows? Maybe a feather with a background gauge. Does the charge change on the drain when you introduce the balloon? That would tell you at least there is something different between drops and a stream and introducing the static charge.

  • Austito R
    Austito R 4 months ago

    slanderous and i love it

  • Alwin Priven
    Alwin Priven 5 months ago

    How about taking distilled water and testing if it's attracted to the balloon/cup?

  • DreadX10
    DreadX10 5 months ago

    H2O, such a simple molecule, until you actually try to understand it's behaviour.

  • Ethan Labun
    Ethan Labun 5 months ago +1

    Wow thunder foot
    Have you ever tried getting views by other means besides criticism and spreading gloom
    I feel what you do is pathetic just going around dissing people who are more successful than you
    Try making the world a better place
    E.g build something amazing like idk a hyperloop oh wait your too dumb so instead you say hate about people who know what their doing

  • Sentient Potato
    Sentient Potato 5 months ago

    Thunderf00t, the most cynical scientist on YouTube. I love it.

  • rosselur
    rosselur 5 months ago

    what in the fuck gnome kind of shotglass holds 25 ml of liquid?

  • Alexander Sannikov
    Alexander Sannikov 5 months ago

    It is such a good feeling when you're first defying an effect that makes Kelvin water dropper work, my hands are just itching to write a comment about that and then you do actually talk about that as well and in the end you do prove that this effect can be shown when droplets form. My only complain is that in your veritassium video you said that ions move slowly in water: well, duh, electrons' directional movement in metals is pretty slow as well but because there's so many of them they still might form a considerable electrical current.

  • Dom Vasta
    Dom Vasta 5 months ago

    Did we ever figure this one out?

  • Tigrou7777
    Tigrou7777 5 months ago

    You spin me right round, baby
    Right round like a record, baby
    Right round round round...

  • Jonnki
    Jonnki 5 months ago

    Veritatium?

  • gonnabeadoctorsoon2
    gonnabeadoctorsoon2 5 months ago

    Needs less fake science or possibly someone with an actual science education. Issue #1: You are not using enough water to disprove this theory. #2: You are moving the balloons closer at the end of your "experiment". #3: Vertasium did not say ions, he says charge. You, in your very poor understanding of science, jumped to and made that conclusion. Again, please stop making bad science videos for your own ego. Your false information and poor scientific principle cause as much damage to science and people as anti vaxxers and flat earthers.

  • signalamplifier
    signalamplifier 5 months ago

    much more convincing would be an experiment with the double distilled water.

  • Remus
    Remus 5 months ago

    Next please do Vsauce.

  • Techo536
    Techo536 5 months ago

    You're videos are well put together and make sense. Have you ever considered becoming less negative and, instead of only proving stuff doesn't work or is incorrect, coming up with solutions or alternative explanations? I read the description but this idea that just rebuffing an idea and being done with it is all pretty pseudoscience - very few studies just say something is incorrect and don't provide an alternative explanation. I think you should work on providing a more positive side to your channel - your negativity gets on my nerves because it's all your channel consists of!

  • Joseph A. Muniz
    Joseph A. Muniz 5 months ago

    Lol. Tnunderf00t can be an ass at times. However, that's one of the reasons I enjoy this channel. I love Veritasium channel too. If ever I had to choose which I'd rather have a beer with, I'd likely choose to have a drink and conversation with Veritasium... Only because Thunderf00t would likely sit trying to find rebuttals to everything I'd say. lol. I have a great level of respect for both channels.

  • coolascats
    coolascats 5 months ago

    I think there is an issue with relative reference frame here. 0.02. Both great channels.

  • Russia Did It
    Russia Did It 5 months ago

    i think im tto stupid for this

  • Jesse Gardner
    Jesse Gardner 5 months ago

    what the fuck?! it's this guy an idiot? thanks thunderf00t.

  • Tyson Romaniuk
    Tyson Romaniuk 5 months ago

    i thought it was charge sperations. same reason a balloon sticks to a wall

  • Jakob vucelic-frick
    Jakob vucelic-frick 5 months ago

    mind blowing stuff

  • Darieee
    Darieee 5 months ago

    Sweet !

  • Grae Hall
    Grae Hall 5 months ago

    Ahh, checking out Thunderf00t's channel, for actual science. It takes me back to the early days of youtube. God damn, such a fuckin' nostalgia hit right now. I hadn't checked up on this channel in quite some time. When it started focusing more on culture and ideology I just ... drifted off. But damn, proper trip down memory lane, jesus, this was one of the first youtube science channels to which I subscribed, and from which I learned, and learned so much and that's getting close to a decade ago. This was my introduction to youtube science education. Nostalgia FTW :)

  • doggonemess
    doggonemess 6 months ago

    4:02 Great, now I have to pee.

  • Myke Prior
    Myke Prior 6 months ago

    Thank you for disproving this infotainment twat.
    1x10^-7 moles/L of positive charges......yeah that won't deflect shit. It's dipoles, can do the same thing with acetone, but not gasoline.
    If that actually happened, you should be getting zapped by your sink every once and a while....this is super well known and not any mystery realm of science.

  • Wolf Edmunds
    Wolf Edmunds 6 months ago

    Being wrong in science is better than being right.
    It's much better to spend more time and develop a better theory than hastily believing an incomplete one, which will no doubt come back to bite you in the ass much later.
    Thunderf00t might not be the right one either, so stop arguing about who's right and who's wrong. More papers needed.

  • JYelton
    JYelton 6 months ago

    I appreciate the power of peer review, and am glad to see Derek (Veritasium) post a comment. However, the tone in the beginning of the video seems to be unnecessarily condescending.

  • Weslin Camden
    Weslin Camden 6 months ago

    So does the polarity of the water molecule have no influence on the attraction then? Or is the polarity of water exactly why there is induced charge in the stream in the first place?

  • Beaujangles McJiggle
    Beaujangles McJiggle 7 months ago

    PEER FUCKING REVIEW, BITCHES!!!!

  • Mr Mürk
    Mr Mürk 7 months ago

    now try it with something like heptane

  • RoonyKingXL
    RoonyKingXL 7 months ago +1

    Guys, explain to me, why you downvote this video please.

    He creates a experiment to disprove a scientific hypothesis. He's essentially doing science. So what's wrong?

  • Qeeet
    Qeeet 7 months ago

    What music is at the end?

  • John Reed
    John Reed 7 months ago

    Could you run this experiment again, but with a restricted flow rate so the stream becomes droplets closer to the glass tube. This would result in the water having a lower velocity when passing the balloon, and thus a longer time to experience the pull/push from the balloon, and thus a greater visual effect for demonstration purposes.

  • dudeskidaddy
    dudeskidaddy 7 months ago

    Why not try with deionized water.

  • Frank l
    Frank l 7 months ago

    I heard that pure water does not conduct electricity and it is often metallic or other minerals with in the water that conducts electricity. Could the speed and the motion of water traveling through be conducting a slight static charge?

  • xokelis00
    xokelis00 7 months ago +6

    Seems like you should redo this experiment with your new 15000 fps camera. =)

  • Dan Simbadd
    Dan Simbadd 7 months ago +1

    aw man I wanna be a scientist :(

  • 11RoAR11
    11RoAR11 7 months ago +2

    Wouldn't be the first time Veritasium is wrong.

  • Kosmos Horology
    Kosmos Horology 7 months ago

    I expect the experiment should behave very differently using the insulated setup Thunderfoot used - surely the fact that mains/household water supplies are connected to earth has a bearing on this? The water in the original earthed setup has an enormous pool of "neutral" charge behind it. The experimental setups are not equivalent, as I see it.

  • newton9837
    newton9837 7 months ago

    a simple test would be to test the ph of the water droplets with an without the cup. it should be slightly acidic of the H+ ions are the cause.

  • Jesse Gunn
    Jesse Gunn 7 months ago

    DAMN! Thunderf00t that is such a cleverly designed experiment. This is why I watch your channel. :) Thanks for the critical thinking!

  • pj
    pj 8 months ago +1

    Why didn't you try using deionized water? wouldn't that have been an immediate refutation of Veritasium's Experiment should there have been attraction (or a significant reduction of attraction) in this case?

  • Col. Cool
    Col. Cool 8 months ago

    naive realism?

  • jet flaque
    jet flaque 8 months ago +19

    two scientists one cup :)

    • jet flaque
      jet flaque 8 months ago

      sorry for that..its friday


  • Algie Evan DeWitt V
    Algie Evan DeWitt V 8 months ago +6

    You know... I wonder how effective showing differing experiments on video like this back and forth between scientists would be at showing people what science really is and why it works. I think part of the issue with people 'believing' in science is the fact that they are always being told what the end result is instead of seeing how the conclusion was made and how it was checked and verified. I know this would be very difficult to do in many cases... but I think that instead of simply showing how "right" science is... showing how getting /to/ the right answer with science is effective.

    I imagine it is a lot like being in higher end science classes where you need to prove or disprove something through an actually presented experiment. I do think the major flaw with an idea like this is how solidly most science already is... but a skilled teacher could present scenarios in a wrong but possible fashion and have those they are teaching work to show how it is incorrect.

  • joel arseneault
    joel arseneault 8 months ago

    I love how 1. Thunderfoot, who has a reputation for going for the throat, was relatively polite. 2. VE and Thunderfoot and humble enough to have a discussion about what's really happening.

    Pride gets the best of us sometimes, but it's good to see some people can get a handle on it and move forward.

  • Ron Ronson
    Ron Ronson 8 months ago

    What happens when you bring balloons from both sides at the same time? Does it disrupt the constant stream, and force the stream to break into droplets sooner?

Analyse website