Are you gullible? - 2 Truths & Trash
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 09. 2022
- As always, let me know if you have any suggestions for how to improve the series. I am planning to stay consistent for season 1, but season 2 might have some changes based on feedback. Thanks!
Here's a list of questions answered in this video:
1. Can hand sanitizer be used on scratch-off lottery tickets?
2. Does a glass of water invert images that are placed behind the glass of water?
3. Does placing an egg in salt overnight remove the shell and make the egg bouncy?
4. Do Oreos get soggy in both regular and chocolate cow's milk?
5. Does contact solution make a colorful campfire flame?
6. Do broken toothpicks move on their own when placed in water?
7. Can a sonic toothbrush create resonant patterns in sprinkles?
8. Does soap cause food dye to spread out on a thin film of milk?
9. Do dandelions shrivel up when placed in water compared to acetone? - Věda a technologie
The chocolate milk one really surprised me
I did know for certain that the food dye and soap one was real
Yeah, I'm pretty sure my chocolate milk doesn't work like that, unless it's also specific to Oreos.
@@Reashu It depends on the brand and the ingredients they use. If it’s homemade, it almost definitely will make your oreo soggy
@@Reashu That one will definitely be different depending on the kind of milk you use. Your best shot at making it work is probably packaged chocolate milk, since that is probably mixed with all kinds of stuff to make it look and taste somewhat decent. Still tastes terrible though
But I really don't see how it would be specific to Oreos.
my brother used to show me that the trick also works with just a bowl of water with pepper sprinkled on the surface
Yeah, it's the one I got wrong too, I thought "idk which chemical results in green fire so I'll believe that one" I thought the cocoa couldn't make the milk thick enough to not soak up the oreo, guess it was something else at play there
The sprinkle thing actually works with sand and a whole plate vibrating, idk why spinkles don't.
yes it works. i've seen a video where speakers were used. i don't remember seeing circles forming (maybe they are possible with who knows what frequency) and that might be because the plate is square.
not having the toothbrush stuck to the plate (making them one object) means the vibration is quite chaotic and no pattern can form from his setup.
I know, that’s why I was convinced that one was real. Weird it doesn’t work with sprinkles, must be too big or something.
@@matrick2227 on my end the weird sprinkles sound immediately told me this one was fake
well, for sure its not perfect circles like that which made me think for sure it was at least half fake (still classifies as a fake). maybe its even tinier/broader frequency?
It would need to be standing waves. In other words, you would need to find the natural frequency of the surface the sprinkles are on. Not only that, but the patterns won’t just be rings, they’ll be much more intricate patterns. The reason why this method won’t likely produce standing waves is that the toothbrush vibrates at a set frequency. An easier method would be to use a violin bow on the surface, which allows it to find its natural frequency much easier.
The dandelion one is real bc of surface tension. Acetone has very little surface tension, that's why it evaporates so quickly. The many microscopic barbs and fibers of the dandelion seed fluff basically acts like when you mist a screen door and it holds the water drops between each hole. The high surface tension of the water makes a net that prevents it from getting wet.
don't compare another liquids surface tension to water! thats just mean!
@@sleepyninjarin7971 it's a liquid not an animal
Ahh, that makes a lot of sense now. I was wondering why since both acetone and water are strongly polar.
Love the content this is the best series on your channel. TBH both of the sprinkle clips look pretty fake but the first one is a bit more convincing.
They both look really fake and it's the only one I got right
I think the problem is having the sprinkles bunch into very clearly fake circles. If instead they all just bunch up into a pile around the toothbrush, it would’ve been a bit more convincing.
Agreed, they both look fake but it still looks cool
Yeah you can hear the shhhk of reversed audio in both pretty easily
@@brandtwo but it is actually possible to draw patterns on a plate with a method close to this ( search for Chaldni patterns) and the patterns can become really sophisticated. It could have been real but the way it was done seemed very fake since the motive is too perfectly made (we should still see free sprinkles everywhere) and the balls were too big
I got the second one wrong, I knew about colored fire but not what caused it so I thought it was true. I just assumed there's no way the cookie reacted differently to chocolate milk. As for the toothbrush, IMO the second clip was more believable. I still wouldn't have believed it, but the reversing looked more believable. The first one was insanely obvious to me that it had been reversed
That one was also a bit fakey, because those chemicals he mentioned are definitely not common in all kinds of chocolate milk. This stuff is only mixed into factory made packaged chocolate milk
it's especially kinda sketchy because borates really will turn fire green - I guess the fake part is just that there's not *enough* borate?
Yeah same. I thought choco milk one was fake because I literally tried although it was homemade.
For me one thing that made the sprinkle one so obvious was the fact that you pulled up at the end (pushing in)
I absolutely love this series. I got the first one right, but not the other two ..
The green fire one was too specific. You weren't lying that chemicals can make green fire. I tried it back in school too. But you gave a specific chemical name, that doesn't actually make it (but others do). How was anyone meant to know that?
Yea i couldn't tell if that one was supposed to be bait, because I know it's true and you can find tons of demos online for colored fire, white is especially cool. Nilered has a video of that. But i dont know what does and doesn't work by name off the top of my head lmao
There are a few 'this is true but not the right component/method' and i always make my decision with the caveat that I could just be being baited by something I don't think is necessarily fair, which affects my deductive reasoning on things that I don't know and haven't seen before, but seem to make sense or not make sense based on my general understanding of the relevant sciences and stuff. If I know one or more is real, it lets me focus more on strange things. Like the sprinkles moving very unnaturally, despite the fact that you can indeed get wave separation effects like that from different methods.
This series is wonderful because it encourages skepticism and critical thinking. Thank you for making it!
I hope you never stop with these videos. I love it. (also, the second sprinkle video seemed more convincing. Just my opinion)
PLEASE MAKE MORE! These are some of the most informative, witty, and entertaining videos I’ve seen on CZcams. This channel is great!
I got 3 right out of 4! The fire colors was my second guess in that set.
Nice, learned something new. Great vid!!!
I like these videos cause they're a fun way to illustrate how easy misinformation can be constructed, and some common tricks used to do so.
As a science geek, this playlist has been one of the greatest finds of my surfing the CZcams space. And yes, the sprinkles one was quite obvious!
This is so good keep it up man
These are great. Keep it up.
I was telling my siblings about the chocolate milk oreos thing and when they asked me what my source was I had to say "internet science man" because I forgot the exact explanation given here. I'll tell them next time.
you can't just say that theirs like 27
@@poison-LICKTHEPOISON what?
@@Raiun313there’s like 27 internet science men
@@portalbuilder7021 oh ok
So many people thinking the sprinkle SHOULD make patterns just showcases a problem with educational entertainment. Showing people something working and the explaination does not guarantee the people will undestand the explaination. But they WILL think the undestand the fenomenon. So they just go "Yeah, plates and vibration = patterns, i saw in veritsium"
This channel is a good reminder thst knowing ABOUT somrthing doesnt mean you know said thing. Same with the second one. I'm sure a lot of people chose number 2 without questioning it since it sounded plausible enough
Love this you learn in an fun way
My chocolate milk is broken. I've done that all my life and got soggy oreos.
Yeah the other sprinkle clip shoulda been used imo. The one you ended up using was very sudden with it's transformation, I got it immediately. The other one was much smoother, so it was harder to tell it was in reverse
Anyway, love this series a whole lot, can't wait for more!
Love these!
The egg one seems the most dubious. Use of clear water bottles as lenses is a thing I know about and it makes sense that scratch-off coatings like those on lotto tickets would be soluble in *something* because coatings are usually applied in a liquid solution.
I love watching your videos ceep up the good work
The contact solution one really got me. Many boron compounds do burn green. Granted the sodium in that would overpower it and turn the flame bright orange. But boric acid, borax, and several other compound are really good, safe, dry additives to make a green flame. Though Id imagine the campfire stuff used a barium compound since that tends to give much stronger coloring.
Sodium borate is literally an alternate name of Borax lol. Sodium borate is a generic term that refers to a number of different sodium-boron salts.
From what I can find, most of them appear to burn green. Some have insufficient data, but I can't find any evidence that any of them burn a different color.
So there's a pretty good chance that the problem here was just that the concentration was too dilute, rather than it being the wrong compound.
The Oreo is the first one I’ve ever gotten wrong out of dozens of these! I wasn’t thinking RE: the colored flames, as I’ve used those packets before myself lol
Round 1: That was evil. I did get it right but that cheeky little "Did you notice the jump-cut? No? Because there wasn't one" was E V I L (well played)
Round 2: I knew the third one was real, and I knew the second one does happen but not if it happens specifically with sodium borate. I definitely would've gotten this wrong if I hadn't tested it.
Round 3: Obvious. And yes the second clip was ever so slightly more believable.
We NEED 10 min + versions :)
Love the content!
I was surprised by the boron fire being fake since I thought boron burns with a green color
boron does burn with a green fire I think because of the other things on the bottle it doesn't but technically every option on that one was true
The assumption of boron burning green is true but the video itself isn't, i guess the presence of water and the low concentration of boron make it difficult to notice any effects on the flame
great video man
actually couldn't get the campfire one, but i think my reasoning is sound!
i have a VERY vivid memory of once, camping as an 8 year old with my family on a very windy night. a camp chair containing my mums toilet bag (with all of her & us kids' toothpaste, hairbrushes, shampoo,etc) onto the fire. the flames turned green and purple, presumablt from chemicals in the toothpaste. my hairbrush thay i still use to this day has sand melted into the handle and some bristles cut off that were unsalvageable! so since some household items were able to make it green, i didnt think it was a stretch for cleaning products to do so.... though as a scout i WAS very sceptical of squirting it directly onto the fire, as i know that flames can follow an unbroken stream of flammable liquid up to the source & even explode bottles..
*"did you notice the jump cut in this clip?"*
Me: Omg i got it right!
*"There wasn’t a jump cut"*
Me: 😡😡😡😡
you thought it was fake!?
With the oreo one, my chocolate-loving self admittedly knew that one from experience, not from an understanding of why. Lol
Okay, the oreo one was the first one I ever get wrong in this channel. I didn't consider people were talking about highly industrialized crazy additives chocolate milk. Its been years my idea of chocolate milk has been just mixing some homemade plant milk with pure but good cocoa power and however much sugar I decide it should have. I wonder if it works the same.
Neither of the sprinkles videos would be sneaky enough. The illusion breaks as soon as you notice all the sprinkles rushing from the rim towards the center
”these beautiful looking flames..."
Well, I'm colorblind, and those flakes look no different to regular flames to me
I thought the salt dissolving the egg shell could be possible, because I learnt in school that kitchen salt is acidic, but sadly... maybe it needs some water in there too?
Actually nice content. I thought shorts were all trash but you proved me wrong
at least there's tasty yellow mushrooms
The sprinkle video was pretty obvious in both cuts, however it's worth noting that you can do something like that, it's called cymatics. The patters are different though and you would use a speaker instead of a toothbrush.
I instantly knew the chocolate milk one was real; chocolate milk and Oreos was the snack of choice that one of my cross country coaches would bring to informal practices and social runs.
EPIC!
The time-reversal trick only works on clips that are time-reversible xD. Those sprinkles were easily picked out the bunch, sadly you placed it first and the time-irreversibility was quite noticeable.
The cookie one Caught me off guard lmao
Sprinkles would never be made into circle, but frictions could form Chladni figures out of them. It would be pretty cool tho.
The sprinkles one is almost true, it's called chladni figures.
If you place a plate on a fancy speaker that can hold said plate, and play a sine wave of just the right frequency, then place salt or sand or any small and light particles (like sprinkles), you do get coherent paterns that line up with areas where the wave and its reflection interfere in a destructive manner.
of course it's not as simple as vibrating any random plate at any random frequency, and it doesn't make perfect circles like the ones show in this video, but it's still an intrusting demo.
people really think salt got superpowers
The Oreo one got me, just wondering if some similar cookie or something does not follow this, or is it universal
I love how I got every single one correct in first try
I felt like the rings formed at the "end" were too perfect and it happend too quickly, so maybe starting with some sprinkles lying around random would help, also maybe less vibration so the rings get destroyed slower?
I have a problem with the sprinkle and fire experiments. They are both possible under certain conditions.
I need that colorful campfire kit
You can do the sprinkle one with actual sound. Though it won't be a nice normal shaoe like that.
In the final round I’m predicting that the sprinkles demo is fake. That isn’t even what the standing wave pattern in a square pan like that would look like; assuming the electric toothbrush even vibrates at its resonant frequency.
Second toothbrush clip was better but that’s kind of possible with bigger vibrations like from a speaker
There’s cool patters you can get using a speaker and salt on a tray like that
I believed it for a second because I knew about that but when I saw the obvious sped up reverse clip it knew right away
that one with fire is also real because its sodium borate so the sodium makes green flame the electrons are excited by the heat of the fire, and when they return to their ground state, they give off a frequency of green light fix me if im wrong
I got them all right!!! Let's gooo!!!
ohh finally got me i thought the pan was real ive seen simular things before so
yeah, sprinkles don't just lock into place
and, if it was a standing wave, (which it probably isn't) it would settle in the areas where the height is zero and not negative
The chocolate milk one is incredibly misleading. It's not always true. In fact, it's more frequently untrue, than it is true. Some chemicals do make fires burn green, for example Copper(II) sulfate and boric acid (which can be poured in a liquid mix). This makes it easy to meta game the question just because you used a specific term (sodium borate) in one video to make what is otherwise true (pouring a liquid on fire can change it to green), instead become false only because you said sodium borate and not boric acid. Whereas you didn't specify anything about the chocolate milk. So anytime you hyper-specify anything it automatically makes that video false because you're using it as a cheat to turn a true concept into a falsehood.
I'm not gullible, I'm skeptical. I doubted more than half of these, despite being told 2/3 of them were true.
Definitely should have used the last clip
I prefer soggy fall-apart Oreos.
It just tastes better that way.
2 out of 3, the sprinkles one was super obvious :P
The only giveaway for sprinkles was that some of them were just already moving before it touched down
The sprinkle video would have been even more promising if the inner smaller rings were solid, but as it got farther and farther, the rings get less pronounced.
I think the second and third ones tricked me because you CAN do shit like that, just not with what you were using. They do vibration pooling things with sand and speakers, but at different frequencies than your toothbrush lol. And the sodium borate one tripped me up, because _borax_ in fire _does_ make it change color (Google says bright yellow-green), and I was thinking, "oh that must be a similar enough compound, right?" Like those are both effects that are within the realm of a CZcams science video, but weren't being performed in this specific video.
I reall thought the sprinkle one was real, because we basocally had something like this in physics class, where a sheet would vibrate and sand would form sth like that
I was inclined to believe the vibrating plate one because things like that can happen under specific circumstances. However, waves propagating through a metal square would not be concentric circles, but would instead make different patterns. The video also kinda looked fake, if it was real then it would happen slowly and continuously, the balls would not suddenly jump into position at the end.
receipts also make fire green
gold spray paint also causes fire to turn green, I found out the hard way.
The sprinkle one was so obvious the vibrate sound thing was in reverse and the shake just idk it just looks like it’s reverse
I can't say I found either of the toothbrush videos particularly convincing, and I think it's because when reversed, the first sprinkles to move are the ones on the outside, and the ones on the inside take a while.
He has a sonic screw driver cool. Lol
3,2,1. these are pretty easy. could you make it harder?
Fun fact: of you put a box of gram crackers into a fire the fire starts to turn green
I dont like the sodium borate one as it is mieading. Sodium borate does actually burn bright green but not by itself
The fire one is real, but only with specific chemicals.
both toothbrush videos were very obviously in reverse. backwards vibration doesn’t look similar to forwards vibration in any way
I did however get fooled by the fire one, since I was so sure that the oreo one had to be fake!
I've never had an oreo get soggy in 10 seconds.
The sprinkle one was obvious because you could see the sprinkles move before there was contact
Two out of three!
My guess is 3 because that shell came off too easily
The first electric toothbrush clip was probably more believable
honestly it didnt seem that believable to me
Wait you're in Colorado?? COLORADO GANG!!
Only reason I got the 1st one right is because the other 2 would have been harder to fake.
yay
1:15 Laughs in knowing chemistry. (green flames are produced by copper)
boron also makes green flames but yeah copper ALSO makes green (slightly different color imo but they are all green)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flame_test#Common_elements
This series is making me question reality
round 2 was the first time i ever failed
1/3... I got TTT 1 correct atleast
sodium borate actually does burn green though so I mean
first time i got all right!!!
the only one i got wrong was the chocolate milk, thought it was fake
The electric brash make sound wave not radio, it should have lead me right to that
Actually there's a way to make it work, it's called chladni figures
i completely forgot about copper and believed the saltrick
I hoped the green fire would be real, I wanted to save my game with it.
If it’s any consolation Copper salts will turn flames green
Be wary when doing this with a campfire as copper ions are Hella toxic to most forms Of vegetation
@@funfaxwithyaboi6483 Bruh just use boric acid and or borax (sodium borate) they are probably even cheaper
how many scratchers did you have to buy to get one with winnings
This is the first time I get one of these wrong. I thought for sure borax burned green.