Hi today we talk about oceans, which are the blue eyes of steve mold, because he dare to make a video yet again on the chain, fountain or mold effect, trying to convince me that i'm wrong and that he wins our bet of ten thousand canadian cents. He made three videos on the subject, and this is my third video to crush his hopes and dreams of getting a single penny. I mean my reasoning has been so clear and convincing. What could he possibly show in his video to change my mind? More importantly, was it enough to convince maddie, it all makes sense medi, it all makes sense he's absolutely right.

How could i be so blind? Damn blue eyes got me again told you. They just remind me of the ocean, which we are also trying to save. Today. You will notice today that there are a ton of videos all around the biggest collaboration started by mr beast and mark robert as usual, to raise funds to remove 30 million pounds of garbage from the oceans same as team trees.

Where we successfully raised over 23 million dollars to plant over 23 million trees, this time we have a goal of 30 million dollars and every dollar removes one pound of garbage from the oceans. So click on the fundraiser link on the side of the video or go to teamsees.org for more information and help us beat our goal of 30 million dollars. And you know what i'm so confident that this steve guy will lose that if i lose i'll donate 500. 000 u.s cents to team seas too bad i'll win.

Today i may donate 10 bucks or something so to re-recap in a chain fountain steve claims. This mould effect is only possible due to a force from the surface, pushing the chain up around the loop, because the chain has a limited, bend radius and acts like a lever that pushes against the surface. In my theory, the surface can't provide sufficient force to fling the chain above the surface. There is a force accelerating the chain from zero to speed and another one.

Changing the speed from positive to negative and these forces oppose the changes and need time and space, and so these curves are inevitable. I showed in my video in my 2d floor test that the loop happens without any push from a surface. Steve said my test was junk because my loop was falling. I said my chain was rising compared to the stationary part of the chain.

You know you can watch steve's last video on the subject for a great recap. So now in his new video, he shows this test, which is a very smart test. I should add i'm very impressed with this setup see he made a ramp with steps and laid down the chain on every step in one setup, the chain is against the step. So he can push against the surface in the next setup.

The chain is on the edge of the step, so it won't push against the surface and in the test, where the chain is pushing against the surface, the chain seems to be rising more than where it started, while the other chain is just flowing through its original Path, this seems to his favor, but it could just be within the margin of error i mean: did he do the test 10 times and average the results for accuracy? I bet not. He says for a 30 centimeter chain fountain, there needs to be a force of around 0.1 newtons from the surface, pushing the chain up, which is pretty small and within all that fast moving chains and noise. It's pretty impossible to measure anyway, but what i can do is use the force gauge in the horizontal experiment and get a reading just at the very end. Here we get a maximum reading of 0.36 newtons and that's certainly in the rubble.

He measured the backward force here. We get a maximum reading of 0.36 newton yep. The force is definitely there around 0.36 newton same weight as a meter of chain which matches his claim. He was right.

I was wrong. What can i say? The force clearly exists. He measured it it's there did. I just promise five thousand dollars to team seas if i lose and if you look at the video here under the screen, i suggested that test to steve did i shut my theory in the foot.

By that suggestion definitely did. I do it intentionally, of course, because i figured it was a good way to measure the force because it was never about who wins but about what is the right scientific explanation for a scientific problem. So here i thank steve for battling this out with me and make me understand the physics around it and congratulate mr biggins and warner who wrote the paper for coming out with their heads held high through this magnificent battle and thank a ton of you for sharing Your knowledge, experiments and simulations, let's watch the rest of steve's video, the international space station, but in the absence of that, we can once again run a simulation. It's interesting that maddie didn't mention the simulations in my previous video in his most recent video.

Why didn't you mention the simulations mehdi? Why didn't you mention the simulations? Well because you know this well because they pretty much confirmed your theory. No, no! Yes, the simulations are very convincing and match steve's theory, but the main reason i didn't address them was because you can't use them to prove science, but they can give you a very good idea how something can work, so you can go back and test the actual Physical science, the simulations are coded by people who have a certain understanding of physics, and here we are disputing the physics to start with and for me to be able to approve them. I have to know the science right and be able to read the code and understand it, so i felt i couldn't rely on them beyond the shadow of doubt, but now, thanks to steve's tests that confirmed the actual physics, i can say the simulations steve included in His videos were so dumb, representative of reality, so good job. On that now let me try to see where i went wrong and if i can place the blame on someone else to make myself feel better.

Well, probably, i can't okay, so my main issue was that in the original explanations i couldn't find the exact mechanism the chain fountain worked. All i saw was that the surface pushes the chain up, but i could definitely say the force was in no way enough to single-handedly throw the chain around the loop. But thanks to our rivalry between steve and i, i was able to dissect his brain and pull out the parts i needed to build the theory. Let me see if i can explain it for you.

According to the theory, this lever force pushing the chain up is equal to the weight of this length of chain from the peak to the surface and that tiny force is applied to every bit of chain right before they rise over a short distance and time. So it puts a very small amount of energy into the system, but continuously for the fountain to work. We also need a bit of my theory. Let's say there is no gravity and we pull the chain on one side with the force, and then there is this opposing force resisting against the change of speed from zero and they create tension that forces the chain to loop and create centrifugal forces.

With a total sum of them like this, which is created from the sum of these forces and when the forces balance the chain wants to loop through the same path same as what steve described and that's what we saw in steve's test when chain is not pushing Against the surface, but the issue is that the original chain, fountain is under gravity that slowly pulls the chain down, not fast like it drops spots slowly, because there are other forces in effect and the faster the chain goes, the slower it drops. So i was wrong under gravity. The chain would never rise or would go down slowly without any additional force. But now, thanks to the pushing force from the surface still clearly measured because the chain slowly goes down, that force has a chance to recharge the fountain with trickles of energy and raise and maintain it.

It is not enough to fling the chain around the loop, but it's enough to create and raise the loop slowly to a point where the losses due to friction become too great. And then it just maintains the loop similar to the behavior of resonance circuits. But then again, what about my vacuum hose test where i still create the loop effect without pushing against any surface in this test? The force of vacuum was pulling the hose inside the wall and friction was pulling the hose back, but as the hose was being sucked inside the wall, it became shorter and shorter, and the force of friction that was pulling the hose back became smaller and smaller, and So it couldn't hold the hose back anymore and closer to the end it shot forward. But how about that magnificent test of chain linked by string dropping from a rod that has no lever effect and is seemingly not pushing against any surface to rise, see if the chain is dropping on this side, because there is tension and the chain wants to go Through the same path in space, it pulls on the rest of the chain, so it pulls down here and up there, but because the chain is starting from stationary, it resists acceleration.

So, with these two pulling, there is a strong force pushing against the surface of the rod, and so the surface pushes back now. Steve argues that this push from the surface is what adds up and helps raise the chain, and i don't agree with that. So maybe we start a new series of rivalry on this. I think there is an easier explanation.

Yes, there is a strong force pushing against the surface of the rod, but that creates friction between the chain and the surface and that, on top of the inertia, won't allow the chain to move forward easily and that helps raise the chain. Okay, let's make it simpler. Imagine a chain going through a path in space like this. It could go forever like this in steady state.

But what happens if we pinch it right here trying to stop it here i have a wheel and i turn it hard. What do you think will happen if i try to pinch it and stop it here? It jumps up. Similarly, the chain kind of rotating like a wheel, trying to go through the same path drags against the surface of the rod and combined with inertia, holds onto the surface of the rod and pulls itself up. Although you could say it is also a lever effect.

The chain rotating fast becomes rigid right. I made a small loop of chain that i'll put around my drill bit and i'll rotate it fast and let go and you'll see that under tension, the loop will hold its shape, so the speeding chain becomes more rigid. Like a lever on one side sitting on the surface and on the other side it flings itself over. Oh well, that's not the point.

The point is that the lever effect is real and i lose you win this time mechanical engineers, so i shall pay off my 10 000 canadian cents to mr mold and 5 000 us dollars to team seas. Hey, maybe i lost a bet, but it was a win for science and if i die now at least i can claim i removed 5 000 pounds of garbage from oceans come on. Everyone show that you don't like garbage in the oceans too, every day tons of garbage end up in the oceans and they hurt everything and everyone stop throwing your junk in the rivers and waterways. They all end up in the oceans and ruin animal life and ecosystem.

In the oceans and beaches and get your butts to my fundraiser button on the side of the video or teamses.org and donate as much as you're comfortable with and be part of, the people who deleted 30 million pounds of garbage from oceans. Do it now? Because we want to beat the goal before january 1st 2022.. Thank you.