It is known that various materials have their atoms arranged in a high ordered microscopic

structure, crystals, most metals, rocks and even ice are among others. The structure emerges when the
material solidifies looking for the minimum energy configuration. Every atom interacts with its neighbors
via microscopic forces forming several patterns depending on the specific material and conditions. In the
video, Cody used and confined the magnets as a representation of atoms and the magnetic repulsion
between them for the microscopic forces. The video accidentally included a demonstration of an added
molecule being heavier than the single “atom” magnets due to one magnet being the wrong way and
attracting some neighbors thus demonstrating a molecule and “Chemical reaction” so to speak.

On the surface the video seems to really explain how gas particles work, At 9:30 seconds he talked
about how gravity affects pressure at high altitude, And the air “feels” heavier — that is, more pressing
— at low altitude because there is in fact more weight of air above it, than there is at higher altitude.
Simply put, Pressure is simply the weight of the column of air above you. When you ascend to higher
altitude, you leave some of that air column below you. Less air above you, so it weighs less. Yes, it’s due
to gravity, only in the sense that gravity is what gives “mass” the sensation of “weight,” and therefore,
results in “pressure” being applied even by a stationary mass. Because all that mass would be, in fact,
accelerating toward the center of mass of the combined whole (the Earth’s core) at 1 G of acceleration,
or about 9.8 meters per second per second.

While certainly showing some properties of gas, like higher density on the bottom due to gravity.
The one thing I’d like to point out is as the person the video correctly pointed out, that the particles are
not moving. The kinetic theory of gas describes that particles are constantly at random motion. Their
velocities are also somewhat random and follow Boltzmann-Maxwell distribution. The movement shown
with big magnet does not correctly model movement of gas particles. Another thing is the resemblance
to the Newtonian’s misconception is unsettling as even if the molecules are vibrating they aren't really
evenly spaced like that, just exert equal pressure on all sides because of their elastic collisions so it acts
like they repel each other on a macro scale. Also shows that the heavier molecule didn’t quite sink straight
to the bottom, the same as some carbon dioxide is absorbed into the air though it seems to behave more
like a dense liquid than a gas. The analogy for the Nobel gases was also a sore spot as, Nobel gas atoms
interact via Van-der-Waals-forces, which have an exponential decay with distance. So they have contact
forces and not long-range forces. Leaving me to question:

If the purpose of the author of the video is to represent gas molecules how is it that he chose to
use dense packet of magnetically repulsing circles as gas models instead of per se, round non-repulsing
solid spheres?

. Still full of neat demonstration of air none the less

If the magnets were lubricated, do you think they would shake around a bit better? Also, without any
friction at all (lubricated in a vaccuum maybe?), would they actually move around more, like actual gas
particles?

While certainly showing some properties of gas, like higher density on the bottom due to gravity. The big
no no for me is, However I think this experiment beautifully represents solid material. Magnets are pretty
evenly spread out and I can clearly see them forming a regular crystal structure with some imperfections
here and there - or as material scientists call them, dislocations. In fact when you introduce big magnet
and make them vibrate it's exactly what happens when you apply heat. Molecules are held together by
strong forces in their crystal structure so they can't just fly out as if it was gas. Instead they vibrate around
their fixed position when heated up. The piston showcase is what happens when you hit the material with
a hammer and forge it. This case would be cold forging, we can see the crystal structure deforming but
never quite breaking (in hot forging a structure would break and regrow new one). After the forging we
can see slight elastic recovery in the structure. And when you add "heat" (big magnet) it relaxes even
more. Don't take this as criticism saying you're wrong. I guess if you don't want to delve into microscopic
scale and stury inner workings of gas particles the experiment might very well represent gas. This is just
my take on it.

Really good video but it is too close to the Newtonian misconception of gases for me to be comfortable.
Even if the molecules are vibrating they aren't really evenly spaced like that, just exert equal pressure on
all sides because of their elastic collisions so it acts like they repel each other on a macro scale.

IMHO also that analogy to a nobel gas is quite incorrect. Nobel gas atoms interact via Van-der-Waals-
forces, which have an exponential decay with distance. So they have contact forces and not long-range
forces. This means that nobel gas atoms are best viewed as something like “a heap of tennis balls bouncing
around”. But the author of the video apparently believes that very-densely-packet magnetically repulsing
circles are a *better* model of a gas than very few non-repulsing, solid spheres. This is what I find the
*most misleading* implicit statement of this video. In fact, in physics we say that a gas is ideal if there are
exactly *no* interactions. So you may ask, then what generates the gas pressure in an ideal gas? Well,
that is caused only by the fact that gas atoms are in constant motion at nonzero temperature. The tiny
impulses transferred to the “walls” at each reflection of a fast-moving atom generate the pressure of an
ideal gas. (By the way, this explains nicely why the ideal gas pressure and volume approaches zero at zero
temperature) In conclusion, it’s absolutely not a gas, and (as Pel said) its certainly also not a solid of any
kind (e.g. also not a crystal). The main point why its certainly not a solid is that it cannot sustain negative
pressures (e.g. pulling of the walls) from the outside, and the underlying reason for this is that all particle-
particle forces in the system are all repulsing, and not attracting. The closest physical system is possibly a
highly-charged plasma which is extremely strongly contracted by its own gravitational weight. Probably
such a system exists at the surface of a neutron star.