Chat with Greg Fridman

I got a question I don't know how to answer, applied my standard framework, and then decided the framework itself was worth a video. Here is how I handle questions outside my field: what I say, who I say it to, and how I actually research an answer without letting Claude hallucinate at me.

⏱️ Chapters

00:00 A question I can't answer, and my usual technique

00:18 Why I'm sharing the framework itself

00:30 Quick intro, Greg Friedman, PhD bioengineer, startup co-founder

00:40 The question: glass substrates and laser-induced deep etching for chips

01:28 Reminder that plasma is a wide field, and mine is narrow

01:40 What I actually work on: environmental remediation, medical, surface treatment

01:53 Huge parts of plasma I know nothing about

02:02 Why executives, business people, and investors see me as "the scientist"

02:13 The most overeducated person in the room

02:23 Laser-induced deep etching, and how easy it would be to bullshit around it

02:54 Bullshitting undermines credibility. Don't do it.

02:56 Instead, I check who is asking

03:09 Case 1: social conversation (used to be the cute girl at a party)

03:23 Politely redirect: not my topic, but here's a related one I can talk about

04:14 Case 2: investor or boss

04:19 My time has real cost, so my response has real cost too

04:30 How I actually research topics I don't know

04:34 DO NOT prompt AI directly on a topic you can't validate

04:42 You cannot detect its hallucinations if you don't already know the answer

04:58 What I do: download a dozen peer-reviewed papers from high-ranking journals

05:11 Load them into Claude, ask it to answer using only those references

05:29 How I actually reply to an investor: I'll dig in, next Monday afternoon

06:07 Deliberately put a delay in there to test the ask

06:15 Nothing is free. Favor for favor.

06:47 Repeat asks without reciprocation, wrong fit, move on

07:02 Bonus: doing the free version tells me who is actually in front of me

07:17 So today's answer: not my field, but here are two adjacent things I can talk about

07:36 Wrap-up: send me science questions, I will make videos or tell you I don't know

If you're a founder, a scientist, or anyone who gets pulled into technical conversations outside your specialty, this is the episode.

🔔 Subscribe for more: @gregfridman

#Science #Research #Founders #Scientists #AI #Claude #ResearchMethods #Mentorship #Communication

Next in the "Can Plasma?" series: can plasma break down nuclear waste? A viewer on LinkedIn asked. The literal answer is no. The useful answer is that plasma is one of the top solutions for what we CAN do with it: turn it into glass.

⏱️ Chapters

00:00 The question from LinkedIn

00:13 Quick intro, Greg Friedman, plasma bioengineer

00:30 The question in full: can plasma break down nuclear waste?

00:39 The sun analogy: pile any junk under a real thermonuclear plasma and it burns

00:53 Thermonuclear plasma on Earth: tokamaks at 100s of millions of degrees

01:17 Can you drive to Princeton with a bucket of trash? No, they won't let you

01:36 The practical version: plasma gasifiers using thermal torches

01:43 Torch temperatures: 10,000 to 30,000 Celsius

02:11 Still not hot enough to break down spent uranium

02:27 So plasmas are useless? Not exactly

02:35 What we actually do: vitrification

02:42 Two common feedstocks: contaminated soil and radioactive-labeled biological samples

03:10 Where plasma shines: burning off all the non-radioactive junk

03:25 Then mix the residue with sand, melt with plasma

03:32 Result: everything locked into glass rocks (literal glassification)

03:48 Very low leaching, no radioactive runoff

04:06 Same system handles medical waste today, soil tomorrow

04:30 Problem solved? Kind of

04:33 Volume reduction of at least 10x

04:38 You still need to store it, just less of it

04:44 Plasma is energy hungry, and we are entering a data center power crunch

05:04 Gas consumption is high (argon or nitrogen), and off-gas cleanup is real

05:33 Off-gas from nuclear-waste plasma processing is pretty dirty

05:37 So can plasma help? Yes. Break down nuclear waste? No.

05:45 One of the top solutions available today, with real tradeoffs

05:55 Nothing is perfect, and we need more plasma engineers, not fewer

06:00 Data centers need more electricity, so we build more nuclear reactors

06:09 More reactors means more waste to handle

06:11 Which means more plasma engineers to build the systems that handle it

06:19 Apply to university, study plasma, become one of us

06:22 Wrap-up

If you work in nuclear waste management, industrial plasma, or you're a student wondering where the field is heading, this is the episode.

🔔 Subscribe for more in the "Can Plasma?" series: @gregfridman

#CanPlasma #PlasmaScience #NuclearWaste #Vitrification #NuclearEngineering #WasteManagement #IndustrialPlasma #EnergyEngineering #DataCenters

Next in the "Can Plasma?" series: can plasma replace your stove? A viewer sent me a great question about the plasma cooktops appearing online, whether they could replace propane/natural gas, and whether the same technology could replace oxyacetylene torches. Short answer: no on Earth, yes in space, and please don't buy the AliExpress ones.

⏱️ Chapters

00:00 The question: plasma stoves, torches, and efficiency

00:07 Quick intro — Greg Friedman, plasma bioengineer

00:34 The viewer's setup: plasma cooktops replacing gas burners

00:59 Also asking about replacing oxyacetylene and propane torches

01:10 A funny story: the plasma cigar lighter I built for a boss

01:24 It worked — a gliding-arc based lighter for a big cigar smoker

01:38 Expensive, gimmicky, and natural gas is cheaper

01:52 The alternative: resistive heating (already lights your cigar just fine)

02:01 My first reaction to "plasma stove": bullshit

02:07 I dug in — there are vendors, mostly AliExpress and Alibaba

02:16 Reads like marketing junk to me

02:31 A few YouTube videos show them working — sure, they can

02:38 The camping trade-off: propane canister vs battery + electric stove

03:14 Per unit of energy, propane wins on weight

03:20 Resistive and inductive heaters are decades-optimized

03:34 My hunch: plasma efficiency loses to resistive on Earth

04:20 The real problem #1: NOx production

04:22 Thermoplasma runs hotter than flame → more nitrogen oxides

04:31 NOx + water = nitric acid → don't breathe it near your stove

04:44 Regular burners produce NOx too, but at lower temperature and lower concentrations

05:02 The real problem #2 (the big one): safety

05:05 Thermal plasma needs 2 electrodes, high voltage, exposed metal

05:20 If you get your finger near the arc, it jumps to you instead of the other electrode

05:36 Barefoot on grass while camping? "You gonna die."

05:59 Or: metal frying pan handle → arc jumps to the pan → into your finger

06:15 As a novelty for someone's cigar? Sure

06:31 As a commercial product? Enormous safety-engineering problem

06:38 Tiny plasma lighters for candles/cigarettes exist and are fine

06:46 Scaling that up to "boil a pot of soup" is another thing entirely

06:52 A white paper I'm working on: industrial uses of plasma as a heat source

07:27 Localized heating for metal bending — no need to heat the whole sheet

07:41 Sputter cleaning and surface prep

07:48 In space (vacuum), you can cold-weld: two clean, flat metal surfaces just fuse

08:18 Adding hydrogen to the plasma to prep and clean surfaces for cold welding

08:35 Plasma as a chemical reduction agent for hydrocarbon or water contamination

08:54 Surface activation for adhesion

09:03 Near-surface metallurgy: heating just a thin layer to change metal properties

09:27 Why this matters now: space manufacturing

09:30 Electricity is abundant in space (solar + small nuclear); natural gas isn't

09:56 Plasma needs little more than electricity — a competitive edge in orbit

10:02 On Earth, natural gas is very hard to beat as a heat source

10:26 The verdict: plasma for cooking hot dogs on Earth? Nope.

10:33 Plasma for cooking hot dogs in space? Yes — astronauts are trained not to touch the arc

10:47 Specialty applications where price doesn't matter? Absolutely

10:59 Wrap-up — send more questions like this

If you're an aerospace engineer, materials scientist, or you saw a "plasma stove" on Alibaba and wondered whether to buy it — this is the episode.

🔔 Subscribe for more in the "Can Plasma?" series: @gregfridman

#CanPlasma #PlasmaScience #Cooking #SpaceManufacturing #Manufacturing #ColdWelding #Metallurgy #Aerospace #IndustrialEngineering #PlasmaChemistry

A viewer sent me one of the most thoughtful questions I've gotten on this channel: what does the future of medicine look like in the next 5 to 10 years? And specifically — can plasma and bioelectric therapies be used for health optimization, not just pathology treatment? Long one. Worth it.

⏱️ Chapters

00:00 The question: future of medicine, next 5-10 years

00:20 Quick intro — Greg Friedman, plasma medicine since ~2000

00:40 Reading the (long, thoughtful) viewer question

01:22 The key ask: plasma therapies for health optimization

01:29 Why devices are currently approved as treatment for pathologies, not optimization

02:07 Broader bioelectric therapies as preventative care

02:14 Why this space is underexplored

02:22 The "sick care" model critique

02:33 Devices used in the 1800s that we're only now understanding scientifically

02:55 The viewer's prediction: major change to healthcare in the next decade

03:00 "Standard pill care reached its limits"

03:06 Sorry, that was in tiny font

03:15 The historical arc: cold baths, red light, device-based medicine

03:44 Penicillin arrives — and the revolution begins

03:53 The pendulum swings hard toward pharmaceutical agents

04:03 150 years later: you leave the doctor with a pile of pills

04:29 Pills for the side effects of the first pill, then more pills for those

04:35 The pile grows with age

04:44 But recent developments in devices are amazing

04:57 Plasma in cancer resection surgery — treating tumor margins

05:25 Plasma for acne, scarring, cosmetic conditions

05:37 The bioelectrics field

05:44 Lasers on the rise

05:53 Combination therapies — plasma as adjuvant to chemo

06:05 The pendulum is swinging back toward devices

06:16 Why devices are also attractive to medical professionals

06:33 Why patients accept paying for device treatments more easily than pills

07:10 Rising disposable income makes this economically possible

07:27 Plasma device development is driven by microelectronics

07:30 Better/cheaper/faster phones → better manufacturing → medical spillover

07:43 Advances in materials science, biology, biochemistry

08:11 The Apple Watch and data collection systems

08:21 Exporting my Apple Health data

08:28 5.5 gigabytes of raw text data about me

08:44 Coupling wearable data with large language models

08:48 Tuning devices — not just drugs — to specific patients

09:08 Why device tuning is easier than drug tuning (frequency, amplitude, dose, dose rate)

09:29 One patient, one Apple Watch, one dose. Next patient, different.

09:53 Devices are programmable in a way pills aren't

09:58 Ag tech: drones + plasma targeting a specific pathogen on a specific leaf

10:18 Heavy regulatory friction: FDA and USDA

10:39 Fingers crossed on 5-year timelines

10:50 Not a revolution — a slow, real shift

11:12 In 3 years, we'll start seeing these devices on the market

11:20 …and watching them interact with AI

11:35 Follow-up video likely — send more questions like this

If you're a physician, researcher, medical device founder, or a patient wondering where healthcare is heading — this is my honest 10-year outlook.

🔔 Subscribe: @gregfridman

#PlasmaMedicine #FutureOfMedicine #HealthTech #Bioelectrics #MedicalDevices #Wearables #DigitalHealth #AI #Healthcare #PrecisionMedicine

A viewer asked one of the best beginner-friendly questions I've gotten: how do you actually make plasma in a lab? Is it expensive? Can a regular person build one? Great question — with an answer that spans $3 to over a billion dollars, depending on how you want to do it.

⏱️ Chapters

00:00 The question: how do you make plasma? Is it doable at home?

00:11 Quick intro — Greg Friedman, plasma bioengineer

00:54 The four methods: radiation, light, high voltage, and kinetic

01:11 Method 1: Radiation

01:16 Plasma is just ionized gas — radiation ionizes it

01:47 The radiation source itself isn't expensive

02:04 The facility is. Certification, shielding, monitoring, training.

02:33 Bottom line: hundreds of thousands, mostly in safety

02:46 Method 2: Light (lasers)

02:56 Focus a laser, high-energy photons ionize gas and metal

03:32 A $100 10W laser can etch metal or paper

03:59 Fiber lasers: thousands. Industrial cutters: under $100K.

04:37 Well-developed, off-the-shelf, mature technology

04:58 If I were building one today, I'd buy the components

05:07 Method 3: Kinetic (particle colliders)

05:13 Smash molecules together, electrons fly off, plasma

05:28 Study individual particles — Higgs bosons, exotic plasmas

05:44 Can you build one at home? A ghetto one, sure.

05:55 A real accelerator: billions of dollars

06:30 The costs are dominated by vacuum pumps and long tubes

07:03 A few hundred thousand for small effects, billions for interesting ones

07:05 Method 4: High voltage (saved for last)

07:13 Two electrodes + high potential difference

07:33 The magic number: 32,000 volts per centimeter to ionize air

07:58 The transformer trick — turns ratio steps voltage up

08:52 A 100V input with 1000× turns ratio = 100,000V output

09:22 Trade-off: current drops proportionally (power is conserved)

09:37 Can you do this at home with cheap parts?

09:40 A magnetic core costs pennies. Wind copper wire by hand.

09:54 Plug into the wall, get 60Hz 100,000V on the output

10:07 Then real life: overcurrent protection, safety engineering

10:27 Plasma power supplies on Amazon for a few bucks

10:44 The $3 Amazon power supply — 10% efficient

11:04 For a mushroom growing experiment, 10% efficiency is fine

11:28 The moment industry gets involved, electricity matters

11:45 Increasing efficiency = increasing complexity

12:06 Our own lab's power supply hits 80% efficiency (proud of that)

12:16 Industrial systems with matching networks: millions of dollars

12:27 Dynamic load sensing microelectronics

12:40 Why this matters for chip manufacturing (billions of chips × pennies)

13:09 And for industrial melting, where energy cost = product cost

13:25 These are old, mature technologies with fierce competition

13:32 The lab vs industry split: cheap and easy in the lab

13:55 CAPEX and OPEX questions dominate industrial application

14:07 So — the summary

14:18 Can you make plasma with any of the 4 methods? Yes

14:22 Easily and cheaply in a lab? Yes

14:35 Easily, cheaply, competitively at industrial scale? No — that's where I work

14:53 Wrap-up — send more questions like this

If you're a student, a maker, a science teacher, or just curious what it takes to make plasma yourself — this is the episode.

🔔 Subscribe: @gregfridman

#PlasmaScience #PlasmaPhysics #DIY #MakerScience #Physics #Electronics #HighVoltage #Lasers #ScienceEducation #ResearchLab

It's 2026 and industry still uses open flame for surface treatment of plastics. A viewer wrote in asking why — and specifically, what's the actual difference between corona (plasma) treatment and flame? The answer is more interesting than "one is better." Let me walk you through it.

⏱️ Chapters

00:00 It's 2026 and industry still uses fire

00:11 The viewer's question: what's the difference between flame and plasma?

00:17 Quick intro — Greg Friedman, plasma bioengineer

00:29 Corona treatment in the plastics and printing industry

00:39 What surfaces get treated: polyethylene, polypropylene, PTFE

00:48 The viewer's surprise: seeing methane flame used on polyethylene bottles

01:12 A colleague's story: three oxy-fuel torches pointing at a tube

01:22 Bottles fly through the flame before printing

01:37 Flame is old — and flame works

01:50 What flame and plasma have in common

01:55 Both create reactive oxygen species (especially with excess oxygen)

02:30 Let's focus on the sameness for a second

02:35 Both create microscopic surface roughness

02:39 Neither is perfectly uniform

02:43 Both are line-of-sight

02:53 Both effects decay over time — you must treat close to the next step

03:12 Both are dry processes and chemical-free (ignoring methane vs electricity)

03:28 Now advantages and disadvantages

03:37 Flame's biggest downside: startup time

03:43 Flame runs continuously and emits CO₂ the whole time

03:55 Excess oxygen in flame → carbon monoxide toxicity risk

04:18 Plasma's biggest advantage: on/off in microseconds or nanoseconds

04:26 Sensor-triggered plasma — treat only when the bottle is present

04:51 Massively less energy per unit treated

05:19 Plasma bonus: frequency tunability with the same power supply

05:30 So should you switch from flame to plasma?

05:35 If flame works for you, don't bother — unless you care about safety or energy efficiency

05:42 Wrap-up — drop your questions in the comments

If you work in packaging, plastics manufacturing, printing, or industrial surface treatment — this is the mechanism episode for you.

🔔 Subscribe for more: @gregfridman

#PlasmaScience #SurfaceTreatment #CoronaTreatment #Manufacturing #IndustrialEngineering #PackagingIndustry #Plastics #PlasmaChemistry

A viewer asked a great follow-up to my recent beauty industry episode: what's the actual mechanism of plasma cosmetic treatments, and how is it different from microneedling or fractionated laser? Also — how does a "plasma cream" even work? Let me walk you through all three, plus a garbage-bag analogy for your skin that will make the rest make sense.

⏱️ Chapters

00:00 A follow-up question from a viewer on plasma cosmetics

00:22 Quick intro — Greg Friedman, plasma bioengineer

00:36 The viewer's question in full

01:07 The core question: plasma vs laser vs microneedling

01:14 Plasma cream — how does it actually work? Or does it?

01:33 The problem: something has to get through your skin

01:54 Your stratum corneum is a garbage bag (a very good one)

02:22 Why I'm skeptical of collagen-boosting creams as such

02:29 Microneedling — the mechanism

02:38 A drum with tens of thousands of micro-needles rolled over the face

02:50 Tiny holes let cream (and even oxygen from air) get through

03:10 Why your body repairs them fast — like a paper cut

03:24 Micrometer to a few hundred micrometer holes

03:45 Fractionated laser — same idea, different tool

04:02 Splitting a powerful beam into many small ones

04:37 Why the treatment works: your body responds to controlled stress

04:43 Immune cells clear blemishes while repairing damage

04:53 Stressed skin cells release collagen — this is what tightens the skin

05:08 Cold plasma — a fundamentally different mechanism

05:15 Reactive oxygen and nitrogen species: strong antimicrobials

05:27 Why acne (a tiny skin infection) responds so well to plasma

05:38 Bacterial vs viral acne — plasma is very effective against bacterial

05:59 The clever bit: plasma species dissolve in skin oils

06:14 Peroxides and peroxynitrites penetrate the stratum corneum without holes

06:20 Same collagen and immune-system stress signals as microneedling

06:29 …without making holes in your skin

06:38 Complementary tool, not a replacement

07:12 So plasma is not microneedling. It's not laser. It's different.

07:23 Another modality in the dermatologist's / aesthetician's toolbox

07:30 Wrap-up — drop your questions in the comments

If you're a dermatologist, aesthetician, cosmetic scientist, or someone considering a skin treatment — this is the mechanism episode.

🔔 Subscribe for more: @gregfridman

#PlasmaScience #PlasmaMedicine #Dermatology #Microneedling #FractionalLaser #SkinCare #ColdPlasma #CosmeticScience #ReactiveOxygenSpecies

New sub-format! I asked Claude to analyze my channel and come up with gloriously dumb "Can Plasma?" questions. First category: Food & Kitchen. Five questions. My usual joke is that the answer to any plasma question is "10 out of 10 yes it can do something" — but this time, one of them actually stumped me.

⏱️ Chapters

00:00 The setup: I asked Claude for gloriously dumb Can Plasma questions

00:18 Quick intro — Greg Friedman, plasma bioengineer

00:29 First category: Food & Kitchen

00:30 Q1: Can plasma cook a steak?

00:34 The two kinds of plasma: thermal (way too hot) and cold (disinfects but doesn't cook)

01:10 Cold plasma on raw beef — sterilization angle

01:32 Adding nitrates to meat via atmospheric plasma

01:53 Q2: Can plasma make better coffee?

02:08 Roasting: no

02:15 Grinding: plasma-sprayed ceramic coatings on grinder blades for durability

02:42 Cleaning coffee-maker water lines to prevent mold growth

03:11 "Mold-free coffee, I'm sure, tastes better"

03:20 Maybe not better coffee — cleaner coffee

03:25 Q3: Can plasma ripen a banana faster?

03:39 Laughing at the creativity of the LLM asking me these

03:47 They're not just dumb — they're gloriously dumb

04:02 The answer: no — but plasma does the OPPOSITE

04:06 Bananas release ethylene, which signals other bananas to ripen

04:26 Plasma destructively removes ethylene from banana storage

04:39 Adding plasma to your fridge to slow ripening

04:49 A banana experiment you can try at home (buy 6, eat 5, add to next 6)

05:13 Q4: Can plasma unclog a ketchup bottle?

05:23 Plasma-deposit a hydrophobic coating inside the bottle

05:45 This is industrially viable and cheap — should already be happening

05:58 "My ketchup never really clogs, but then I never really use ketchup"

06:04 Q5: Can plasma make bread rise?

06:16 Bread rises from yeast releasing gas bubbles

06:28 Plasma kills yeast — the opposite of what you want

06:47 My usual "10 out of 10 yes it can" joke — this one broke it

06:54 "You got me"

06:58 If you can think of a way, post it in the comments

07:03 Do you want more gloriously dumb questions? AI has 5-6 other topics ready

07:11 Today was Food & Kitchen — more coming if you want them

07:14 Wrap-up

If you're a plasma scientist, a home cook, or you just want to see me stumped for once — comment your best "gloriously dumb" plasma question below.

🔔 Subscribe for more in the "Can Plasma?" series: @gregfridman

#CanPlasma #GloriouslyDumb #PlasmaScience #FoodScience #AI #Claude #Kitchen #PlasmaChemistry #SciComm

A short break from plasma to chat about something that comes up in almost every research conversation I have lately: should scientists use AI? Here's my honest take after two decades in research — the concerns I think are overblown, the one I take seriously, the benefits that move my work 10×, and the app I asked Claude to build yesterday that's already running on my phone.

⏱️ Chapters

00:00 Today: AI in science, not plasma

00:24 Concern 1: Is AI deskilling researchers?

00:48 Why I think it's the opposite — AI breaks the "singular mindset" of searching

01:23 Use AI as a tool, not the answer

01:33 Concern 2: Hallucinations and fake citations

01:38 You shouldn't be citing papers you haven't read

02:00 What I've seen: real citations to abstracts with no content

02:08 Double- and triple-check everything

02:21 Concern 3: AI "homogenizing ideas"

02:31 I'm not sure what this means

02:46 Concern 4: AI worsening the reproducibility crisis

02:55 Why reproducibility was already a mess — humidity, room temperature, environment

03:30 The real bad behavior: copy-pasting AI output as your own

03:53 Concern 5: AI flooding journals

04:18 Peer review has been strained for decades

04:23 The one concern I do take seriously: AI reinforces existing bias

04:31 Why LLMs trained on academic writing carry academic bias

05:14 Now the benefits

05:18 Speed — AI solved protein folding

05:36 Catching the word I skipped while reading

05:55 Finding buried literature I didn't know to look for

06:11 Asking what related topics I should investigate

06:25 Cheap research access for anyone without a university library

07:07 Pattern detection across thousands of graphs

07:48 Loading my own papers into Claude for review

08:31 Bottom line: AI as a tool — my work moves 10×

08:51 The clearest issue: publish-or-perish meets a 10× publishing tool

09:39 The app I built yesterday

09:46 The restaurant-tracking problem (my wife and I have a messy Apple note)

10:11 Claude pushed back on me trying to sell it

10:31 Two hours later, a fully functional PWA we now use

10:57 Lean into it. Don't be afraid of it. It's here.

11:36 Embrace it. I did.

12:50 Wrap-up — questions in the comments

If you're a scientist, a researcher, or a student wondering how to approach AI in your work — this is my honest take.

🔔 Subscribe: @gregfridman

#AI #ArtificialIntelligence #Science #Research #LLM #Claude #ChatGPT #ScientificResearch #AcademiaTwitter #ResearchTools

Next in the "Can Plasma?" series — a 4th of July special: can plasma do anything for fireworks? Yes, but with caveats. Three real applications, and a chemistry lesson about why the colors in the sky aren't from plasma.

⏱️ Chapters

00:00 Spirit of the season: can plasma do fireworks?

00:09 Quick intro — Greg Friedman, plasma bioengineer

00:25 The short answer: kind of, not directly

00:29 Application 1: Moisture control via hydrophobic encapsulation

00:53 Why fireworks materials are so moisture-sensitive

00:56 The reactive metals: strontium, barium, copper

01:13 These metal salts react readily with water

01:22 Moisture-proofing as a quiet, critical step

01:26 Application 2: Surface activation of castings and tubes

01:33 Why fireworks are mostly encapsulation engineering

01:41 Application 3: Plasma ignition

01:48 Why a small battery + a thermal arc beats a fuse

02:09 Plasma ignition is much faster than chemical combustion

02:23 Why it's also more reliable

02:32 The minimum hardware: 2 metal needles + a trigger

02:42 Microsecond-scale ignition timing

02:55 What plasma can't do: the colors

02:58 Plasma creates light — but in atmospheric air, it's just faintly purple

03:04 Nitrogen overtakes everything in atmospheric plasma color

03:15 Carrying batteries up into the sky is its own challenge

03:25 Where the colors actually come from: metal salts

03:28 Strontium = red, barium = green, copper = blue

03:45 So can plasma do something for fireworks? Yes, but limited

03:54 As pyrotechnics improves, plasma is a contender for making fireworks better

04:06 Happy 4th of July

If you're into pyrotechnics, materials chemistry, or just curious about what's actually happening in the sky tomorrow night — this is the episode.

🔔 Subscribe for more in the "Can Plasma?" series: @gregfridman

#CanPlasma #PlasmaScience #Fireworks #4thOfJuly #Pyrotechnics #PlasmaIgnition #MaterialsChemistry #IndependenceDay #PlasmaChemistry