Explain law of conservation mass Videos

• 1. Law of Conservation of Matter
• 2. Conservation of mass lesson with Harry Potter
• 3. Law of Conservation of Mass Demonstration
• 4. Vacation or Conservation (Of Mass): Crash Course Kids #23.1
• 5. Simple Explanation of the Law of Conservation of Mass
• 6. Conservation of Mass, part 1 - Lecture 2.1 - Chemical Engineering Fluid Mechanics
• 7. Law of Conservation of Mass and Open/Closed Systems
• 8. Law of conservation of mass (experiment)
• 9. Law of Conservation of Mass experiment | Law of conservation of matter | Chemistry

Law of Conservation of Matter

User Comments

user256 commented on 15 Dec 2014

Its kinda sad that nobody will watch this video again and my comment will never be seen. 

TheTexasGamer commented on 19 Oct 2015

same heer

MIXED KSA commented on 24 Feb 2015

i'v saw it

Conservation of mass lesson with Harry Potter

User Comments

Mr Typical commented on 11 Aug 2015

Yeahhh harry potter does relate to science so plz let us watch the whole movie in class haha

Ethan Marston commented on 12 Aug 2015

+Mr Typical hahaha wouldn't we all like to :D

Law of Conservation of Mass Demonstration

User Comments

Aimee Turner commented on 12 Aug 2015

his was helpful with my science. Yeah, your camera isn't that good, maybe you should get a knew on between now and your next video

Emily Wilmshurst commented on 24 May 2013

Can i do this experiment at home and have a bottle instead of a Test Tube?

Vacation or Conservation (Of Mass): Crash Course Kids #23.1

User Comments

lhsalmond commented on 15 Nov 2015

Your wording is misleading and unclear. The water does "go away" (as a gas), and it isn't "still there" and you just can't see it. that would imply it is the same density where the water had been, but the humid air immediately spreads out. I understand you are trying to say matter isn't eliminated, but it does indeed "go away" and "vanish" to the naked eye.

lhsalmond commented on 01 Dec 2015

+Colin OHaimhirgin Thanks!

Colin OHaimhirgin commented on 30 Nov 2015

+lhsalmond you must be pretty fun at parties.

Mikaela #teaminternet commented on 20 Aug 2015

My chemistry classes should be like this instead of the teacher just teaching the subject making it boring and lame and does not even care do we learn so no one actually understands.

Christin W commented on 24 Aug 2015

+Mikaela #teaminternet Ah, yes the frustratingly outdated lecture... I'm over it and ready for education to evolve, but that's probably why I don't have a teaching job currently.

Zoe Li commented on 19 Aug 2015

Or... The glass could be completely full. Half full of water and half full of air.

Combat King 0 commented on 19 Aug 2015

+Zoe Li But the water and the air are made of atoms, and most of the space in atoms is empty (between one atomic nucleus and the next). So the glass isn't even 1% full, regardless of how much air or water is in there.

Simple Explanation of the Law of Conservation of Mass

User Comments

Michelle Price commented on 05 Nov 2015

Thank you this really helped my son.

Science Kids commented on 11 Nov 2015

+Michelle Price We are glad that we were able to help!

Conservation of Mass, part 1 - Lecture 2.1 - Chemical Engineering Fluid Mechanics

User Comments

Arun Prasaad Gunasekaran commented on 15 Oct 2015

Your videos are great! It's simple and clear! Can you tell me what program / software you are using to make the videos? It is simple and neat!

Yeabsira Maranatha commented on 16 May 2013

thank you for the wonderful video, is it possible to get the notes you used for this video?

Maria commented on 07 Sep 2013

wow... this is the best explanation of continuity equation i've come across on youtube

Hilmer Navarrete Jiménez commented on 19 Jun 2013

I'm from Peru... and I am studying that!! thanks!!

M Umer commented on 13 Mar 2015

thanks, great job...

Law of Conservation of Mass and Open/Closed Systems

Law of conservation of mass (experiment)

User Comments

jbsed1 commented on 29 Jan 2015

This is an attempt at supplying a basic level of understanding on the Law of Conservation of Mass. The main focus is for those first being introduced to this Law. The objective is for viewers to understand that even after a chemical reaction occurs the mass of the reactants will equal the mass of the products therefor mass is conserved not lost.

Carlos Garcia commented on 09 Dec 2015

wow i cant belive the matter of the indoplasmic reticulum actually took form in which i was able to observe the outcome of the math wow

King _Los commented on 13 Oct 2015

Where can you buy the materials used for this experiment, just curious

Edwin Lim commented on 07 Mar 2013

Hey dude, my class laughed (with you) at this video, good work!

RaGEkaczynski commented on 02 May 2013

for when teachers are to lazy to teach... they go to youtube

Akshay Chopra commented on 07 Oct 2012

However he had proved law we should give respect to him

Jared Midwood commented on 30 Sep 2015

Very helpful....... You make a good science teacher

619Awsome commented on 15 Feb 2012

ya im learning look a tripple beam ballance

Aczel Barron commented on 09 Dec 2015

spanish I thought this was algebruh

Aczel Barron commented on 09 Dec 2015

no way carlos me 2

jbsed1 commented on 01 Oct 2015

Thank you, Jared.

ShopTube22 commented on 21 Sep 2012

Good job mister B

Amber Rodriguez commented on 27 Sep 2013

What a geek

Corey Hudson commented on 09 Dec 2015

Carlos?

Aczel Barron commented on 09 Dec 2015

Corey?

Carlos Garcia commented on 09 Dec 2015

aczel?

zanewest100 commented on 02 Oct 2012

Tyler?

Tyler wilhite commented on 02 Oct 2012

cool

cmcmathey1 commented on 02 Oct 2012

ikr

Jaskeerat Brar commented on 05 Feb 2013

o_O

cmcmathey1 commented on 02 Oct 2012

>.

Law of Conservation of Mass experiment | Law of conservation of matter | Chemistry

User Comments

attk master commented on 07 Oct 2012

matter cannot be created or destroyed, yet the big bang, which is accepted by nearly all scientists couldn't have happened if this were true, one disproves the other case closed. if the reaction occurs in an indestructible flask the flasks still breaks because it's made of matter and antimatter reacts with ALL matter, the reaction releases energy and the matter disappears. ofc it doesn't have negative mass, it reacts with all of the mass, unlike other reactions which react with some of the mass.

AdderSIG commented on 05 Oct 2012

You mis-understand antimatter. Antimatter is made when high-end gamma rays form matter/antimatter pairs. When they "destroy completely" they just turn back into the gamma radiation. Energy and matter are the same thing, just in different states. You cannot "destroy" matter. You just turn it into an equal amount (and arguable, an equal weight) of energy. Anti-matter is not "negative" matter, it does not cancel out matter. It just causes the matter and antimatter to turn back into what formed it.

AdderSIG commented on 06 Oct 2012

Because of how charge conjugation/parody violating K meson decaying. Or because the universe is not a closed system. Matter formed in greater quantities than antimatter, but they both formed from radiation (energy). Assuming the universe is closed, there's the same amount of energy as there always was (by definition of "closed system") so this law applies to the entire universe as a whole (if they universe is a closed system). Matter is energy. Antimatter is the same energy. It's all energy.

attk master commented on 06 Oct 2012

that's ok, i don't expect you to understand how the universe really is, scientists say things that are completely contradictory to what they've "proved" yet ignore it completely, which is why these scientists know little to nothing, and quite obviously, these are the basics of earth's science, not the universe's science, this is where quantum mechanics come into play and everything that is known is pretty off, or unknown how it works. like this law, how did everything get here is it's true?

Wovaka commented on 03 Oct 2012

that is not actually true. while energy is created as in gamma rays. mass is not destroyed in the process. it simply gives off energy, much like say a fire doesn't destroy what it is burning (yes it may take molecules apart but no atoms were harmed in the production of that energy) and the mass stays the same. as for alpha and beta you should be educated enough to know that theese are helium cores, and electrons again not destroyed. just expelled from the atom/molecule leading to decay.

AdderSIG commented on 07 Oct 2012

What contradiction? My point is: Matter and antimatter react to release the same amount of energy that created the pair (particle and anti-particle). If this occurs in a closed system (indestructible flask) the mass will be unchanged. That has been my consistent point. Whether it's matter or just energy, it has mass. Antimatter does not have a negative mass value (1000 positrons weigh the same as 1000 electrons). It does not disappear when interacting with matter, it releases energy.

veryconfused91 commented on 03 Oct 2012

You don't "lose" mass to convert it to work. Energy from chemical bounds can produce work, but in order for mass to be lost something needs to be taken out, or atoms destroyed. Unless this chamber blew up due to an atomic explosion, then I don't think matter was lost. What did happen was the oxygen in the air (plus other gases) were converted to another substance. I'm guessing that the person is not in the chamber during weighing, and they carry out some of the converted mass.

AdderSIG commented on 06 Oct 2012

A rudimentary glance at any science site that deals with antimatter will show you've got it wrong. A basic understanding of general relativity (or special relativity) will show that energy has mass or that energy will condense into matter and vice-versa. Scientists these days know more than you, more than me. Conservation of energy/matter in a closed system (even if that system contains positron producing 82Rb) occurs. Energy is not "nothing".

attk master commented on 04 Oct 2012

this experiment doesn't even relate to what i'm talking about, when matter and anti matter come together they cause a massive 100% release of energy (unlike other reactions which are far less than 100%) which results in an explosion if enough reacts. if this happens in a container it's guaranteed to explode unless it's strong enough to withstand the reaction. both are destroyed in the process, erasing the existence of both.

attk master commented on 05 Oct 2012

they are wiped out of existence, as i clearly stated. they don't turn into anything, they're completely gone. the container would be destroyed due to the massive amount of energy released, it would be over 1000x as powerful as putting cesium into a glass container filled with water. the law is dis-proven by anti-matter reactions. you seem to misunderstand what happens when they react and what their names mean.

attk master commented on 05 Oct 2012

you can destroy and create matter, simple as that, just because a group of unintelligent human scientists say you can't doesn't mean you can't, antimatter + matter = energy, which results in nothing, it's so simple. anti matter IS negative matter, hence the anti part, it does cancel out matter and itself when reacted, stop thinking inside the lines, you'll get nowhere, just like scientists these days.

Wovaka commented on 03 Oct 2012

i think he is thinking of the fact that alpha and beta radiation are particles and lumps of say uranium will over time become less and less. what he doesn't understand is the fact that while theese particles ( helium cores for alpha and electrons for beta) while the mass of uranium becomes less as you weigh it. the particles ejected still remains, just not in the same place.

AdderSIG commented on 05 Oct 2012

"Destroyed completely" makes it sound as if they're wiped out of existence. The release of energy (thanks to E=mc^2) is due to the mass (of the matter AND antimatter) turning into energy. So if the container did -not- explode it would still have the same total mass inside it (since energy IS mass, mass = energy/c^2). This law is not dis-proven by antimatter reactions.

AdderSIG commented on 04 Oct 2012

If you're excluding the container (or allowing it to explode) then you're not doing this experiment. You're dealing with an Open System, where even energy does not have to be conserved. Matter and anti-matter produce energy in an amount equal to the matter destroyed. It would still hold true, but you would need to contain the explosion to get an accurate end weight.

attk master commented on 04 Oct 2012

the container is excluded, the container would be destroyed if there was one due to the massive explosion taking place inside of it. mass is destroyed, in a chemical reaction, such as when hydrogen is fused, something new is created and is the mass would be converted into energy, when anti matter and mater come together both are destroyed completely.

AdderSIG commented on 03 Oct 2012

Not quite true. If there was any mass lose it would be due to a change in free energy levels. In this case, the energy created from metabolism would turn to heat/entropy and this might equal the over-all change in mass. But 1/4 ounce would mean 2 megajoules of energy diffused/released. That's a lot of energy.

attk master commented on 06 Oct 2012

assuming the universe is NOT a closed system, which i can guarantee that is not true. and how did everything get here if matter can't be created or destroyed? assuming this law is correct, then it would have had to come from a different universe, meaning this universe isn't a closed system.

AdderSIG commented on 07 Oct 2012

Not true. The big bang released a whole lot of energy. That energy condensed into matter. This is the standard accepted model of the big bang theory. The fact more matter was created than antimatter is a bit strange, but K meson decay gives an asymmetric matter/antimatter relationship.

attk master commented on 07 Oct 2012

released...so that matter was there already? seems legit. like i said, scientists don't know nearly as much as you think they do, the universe is always changing, and you're stick to values that are contradictory and not even confirmed to hold true throughout the universe.

Rahul Raghavendra commented on 08 Oct 2012

I disagree to obey LCM because commandments in bible typifies matter can be created and destroyed as u like. And nothin can be transformed without his permission as per the holy book. Which means, choose either to the book or to this video, but nt both in tandem.

Petrico94 commented on 04 Oct 2012

For this reason, the universe is impossible and the big bang never happend. I love how science in the end never fully solves the big questions. Religion is weird but these people are claiming to be better so the madness hits harder.

attk master commented on 09 Sep 2013

We knew a lot more at that time than we did before that time as well. We knew that the Earth was flat, now we know the earth is an imperfect sphere. Your lack of understanding of the progression of science is appalling.

attk master commented on 03 Oct 2012

what about anti-matter, if something can't be made/destroyed during a chemical reaction, then how come when matter and anti-matter come together they completely destroy each other? this law is wrong.

J Lee commented on 02 Oct 2012

I thought this was wrong, but i dont think it is. If work is done, then energy will be conserved, but technically as glucose is metabolised into co2 and water, it would lose mass. True dat

Su Min Lee commented on 03 Oct 2012

This demonstrates that Internet has been a good teacher. But you still need to place yourself in the right environment to get the right connection. I leave it to my daughter Ang Shi Ren.

AdderSIG commented on 03 Oct 2012

They don't "completely destroy each other". They annihilate releasing a massive amount of energy. That energy is equal to the mass "lost" following Einstein's equation e=mc^2

AdderSIG commented on 03 Oct 2012

What I'm saying is, assuming the container remains intact, it will still weigh the same. The mass is converted to energy. It does not stop existing, it just changes.

Cryzer commented on 03 Oct 2012

now show an experiment where the mass changes... that wouldve been more fun, than something which seems overall too logical to even talk about...

attk master commented on 12 Oct 2012

matter can be created and destroyed, according to the big bang theory, you can't have the big bang theory without the creation of things.