Comments by "seneca983" (@seneca983) on "Veritasium" channel.

11:45 If that's the correct answer then what about if the wire is cut at both ends of the loop (at 300,000 km away) either before or at the same time the switch is flipped? By your logic the light should turn on for at least 0.5 s and then turn off again. This is despite the fact that there's no continuous path for the current to flow. Is that correct?
9
2:10 He said that he'd show an equation that should show that the acceleration is negative whenever the car exceeds windspeed. However, no such equation was shown which is a big letdown. Of course, the equation would be wrong in some way but I would like to understand why it's wrong. Does anyone know where I could find this equation?
2
@teivu5292 Thanks, it hadn't occurred to me to check the description. However, it seems that as Kusenko was eventually swayed he modified his slides to reflect that so I can't seen the incorrect equations there.
1
Is this strategy optimal? Is it known if it's optimal or not?
1
@custu2814 I've since seen ElectroBOOM's video on this. What would happen is that the bulb would turn on at a partial power and then after 1 s then power would either increase or decrease depending on whether the ends of the wires are cut or not. However, one should note that if instead of having long wires close to each other one has large circular loops of the same length the situation would be different. The the capacitive connection is much weaker and the initial effect of flipping the switch is much, much weaker even though the battery and the switch are still close to the bulb. Thus I think this video was maybe a little bit misleading though I understand that one can't always fit all the relevant points in a single video.
1
@bornboss9199 "if you cut the wire then to have just disrupted the electromagnetic field buy cutting off the electrons" The point was that the effect of that cutting cannot be felt 0.5 light seconds away until after 0.5 s has passed.
1