Пікірлер

• 
  @salmanridwanКүн бұрын

  thank you professor !

• 
  @labidifaycal3185Күн бұрын

  Relativity is WRONG , THE PROOF : how do you know that the two events occur at the same time or not even before both signals arrive at the two observers. That means you AGREE that a former " non relativistic" or " classical" frame of reference is needed to validate the simultaneity or not of events. Relativity is under many contradictions and over the history these errors are not discussed because of two main reasons: 1- the overwhelming of Quantum mechanics more rich experimentaly and its applications are several from the molecular level to atomic then to sub-atomic, and the diversity of phenomenological surprises. 2- the force of the new ideology : EINSTEINISM , which means : you are only rediculous if you try to prove Einstein wrong.

• 
  @jerryx80c2 күн бұрын

  Thanks for giving me some confidence in the world of electricity.

• 
  @engr_chie2 күн бұрын

  he writes backwards?!

• 
  @robynwilliams4604 күн бұрын

  Finally I understand ! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

• 
  @leewilliam34174 күн бұрын

  Amazing

• 
  @venomgaming61085 күн бұрын

  Love your videos

• 
  @VenkataJoganpalli-xe9er6 күн бұрын

  Professor, light after two bounces returns parallel. In a cube it bounces thrice . Can you please clarify how three bounces gives parallel instead of two bounces as you explained here.

• 
  @FaithOziegbe-w8v7 күн бұрын

  Love it 😍😍 amazing!!😘💖

• 
  @sssss35367 күн бұрын

  Why this equation 1/2mv^2 = 1/2 K x^2 turn into this v^2= k/m . X^2

• 
  @Thevwsheldon8 күн бұрын

  Pressure requires a container, especially if it stops at any point without mixing becoming more evident as time goes on THEN you relearn most of what this guy has taught you

• 
  @user-mq3lj9jc3t8 күн бұрын

  Very helpful!

• 
  @TPEC0078 күн бұрын

  Such a wonderful revision of school time. Very nicely explained .

• 
  @therealemtothebee9 күн бұрын

  all I can think ab is whether he's writing backwards or if the camera is flipped but if the camera was flipped then his class wouldn't be able to see the words so... he's writing backwards......????

• 
  @user-vw2tk2ru2r9 күн бұрын

  Clearest explanation I have seen yet!

• 
  @nerverstopgaming99299 күн бұрын

  he is underrated ngl

• 
  @jakobriisjensen33099 күн бұрын

  thx, very helpful

• 
  @chrisyo446110 күн бұрын

  How do we determine the amount magnetic field lines in an area. I know we used the example 3 here, but how would you determine how much they are really

• 
  @TheSolomeee10 күн бұрын

  Why not we never tried to convert this pressure to energy?

• 
  @gokusan-rl4nu11 күн бұрын

  sir, i really love your explanation (love from india)😄

• 
  @ina617611 күн бұрын

  thanks sir

• 
  @Suha_Irshad_052512 күн бұрын

  Is it possible to go inside the center of earth as there is no gravitational acceleration?

• 
  @chadbyford268012 күн бұрын

  Wrong! The water level goes down! Your theoretical ice doesn't work because you have too much ice out of the water, that's not how it works in real life, there is always more ice under the water, than above. So your "pen, paper" math you have going on here has no real world mechanics working, FALSE INFORMATION just because your math says so doesn't mean it's fact.... I wonder how much this has happened for so many other things that we think of as "fact"....

• 
  @chill4r58512 күн бұрын

  Prof, we can use the kinematics equation when its un-uniform motion? No right? I mean the a isnt constant. So why you said we can get the at from kinematics equations?

• 
  @gokusan-rl4nu12 күн бұрын

  sir, i"ve really love the way you explain and more over i can really understand it😄

• 
  @gokusan-rl4nu12 күн бұрын

  Thank you sir, you made the topic easy to me😁😆

• 
  @how-about-no_5613 күн бұрын

  Thanks for another awesome video! Love from Bharat

• 
  @robinkumar468114 күн бұрын

  I wonder where that fucking sound is coming from in the background.

• 
  @GRAN_EME16 күн бұрын

  a ver, lo voy a simplificar i=x2+y0 \ o=x1+y1, hacen mucho quilombo al pedo, usen equivalencias es mas simple

• 
  @fourierfoyer36516 күн бұрын

  Anyone else blown away about how he's writing backwards so legibly?

• 
  @joenahhas437717 күн бұрын

  I can produce E = mc² using any physics. Newtonian derivation of E = mc² *In Newton’s law:* Force = mass x acceleration (Areal velocity = constant is included in Newton’s law) Newton’s gravity law F = - (G m M /r2) **r1** Acceleration in mathematical form is: (rʹʹ - r θʹ2) **r1** + (2 rʹ θʹ + r θʹʹ) **θ1** Force = mass x acceleration = m x [(rʹʹ - r θʹ2) **r1** + (2 rʹ θʹ + r θʹʹ) **θ1];** Force = F = mass x acceleration = - (G m M /r2) **r1** And m (rʹʹ - r θʹ2) = -G m M /r2 ---Newton’s gravitational force law. And (2 rʹ θʹ + r θʹʹ) = 0 -------------- Kepler’s constant areal velocity law. Divide Kepler’s law by r θʹ Visual distance: r = (distance) r₀ x e± i ω t Visual angular speed θʹ = (angular speed) θʹ ₀ x e± 2 i ω t = r₀ e± i ω t And θʹ = θʹ₀ e± 2 i ω t And (2 rʹ / r + θʹʹ/θʹ) = 0; rearrange: (2 rʹ/r) = - (θʹʹ/θʹ) = ± 2 i ω *In Kepler law*: Areal velocity = (r2θʹ) = constant Or (r2θʹ) = k; r = distance; θʹ = angular speed Take the derivative: d (r2θʹ)/ d t = 0 And (2 r rʹ θʹ + r2θʹʹ) = 0; divide by r2θʹ And (2 rʹ / r + θʹʹ/θʹ) = 0; rearrange (2 rʹ/r) = - (θʹʹ/θʹ) = ± 2 i ω And (rʹ/r) = ± i ω And d r/r = ± i ω d t And ∫ d r/r = ∫± i ω d t L n (r/r₀) = ± i ω t L n e = L n e± i ω t And r = r₀ e± i ω t And - (θʹʹ/θʹ) = ± 2 i ω And θʹʹ/θʹ = ± 2 i ω The solution is: θʹ = θʹ ₀ e± 2 i ω t If r₀ e i ω t; θʹ = θʹ₀ e- 2 i ω t If r₀ e - i ω t; θʹ = θʹ₀ e 2 i ω t E = mc² S = r ℮ ỉ ω t P = [v + ỉ ω r] ℮ ỉ ω t (P. P) = [v² - ω² r² + 2 ỉ ω r v] ℮ 2 ỉ ω t E = m (P. P)/2 = (m/2) [v² - ω² r² + 2 ỉ ω r v] ℮ 2 ỉ ω t E = (m/2) [c² - c² + 2 ỉ c²] ℮ 2 ỉ ω t With ω r = v = c E = (m/2) [2 ỉ c² ℮ 2 ỉ ω t] E = (m/2) │2 ỉ c² ││℮ 2 ỉ ω t│ E = (m/2) (2 c²) E = mc²

• 
  @DadiKefiyalew18 күн бұрын

  Wow I like it your expression methods God bless you

• 
  @iskan264918 күн бұрын

  The rocket example everyone gives when explaining escape velocity is very misleading, since rockets are usually percieved as having their own means of acceleration, so they can escape the Earth at basically any speed as long as said acceleration is greater than or equal to 1g (assuming its moving directly away from the planet) . Escape velocity, however, is about initial speed of a body without any forces applied to it other than gravity, just like you said in the video

• 
  @AubreyForever18 күн бұрын

  How does this work that he is writing on glass or is he really? Is he writing on a mirror?

• 
  @carultch14 күн бұрын

  He's writing on a glass board. In the setup he uses for filming, he inserts a mirror. A live student watching his class will see the board reversed, and will see a live video feed on a monitor on the side.

• 
  @crownityz19 күн бұрын

  9 years before and still understandable. Greate Teaching sir 🗣️🔥

• 
  @SMsmSM1234320 күн бұрын

  Climate change folks say the ocean rises because of melting ice. 🥴 but common sense and this math says that’s not the case.

• 
  @respectable254020 күн бұрын

  11 years ago damn

• 
  @mimalgr810821 күн бұрын

  Pr Ayache made made me watch this for the catch-up exam 🥲

• 
  @gonnieben-tal818621 күн бұрын

  Thank you for sharing these videos! They're easy to follow and are interesting.

• 
  @raamenstallings22 күн бұрын

  Very useful information

• 
  @azmaeenadib382123 күн бұрын

  in certain problems, we assume the normal force to be equal to the weight, like in friction problems,are we neglecting centripetal force here?

• 
  @curtistrinh565424 күн бұрын

  In case it is not clear, Solution(2), we use the theta= 30 and plug it into V_bR*costheta to find the vertical component/component crossing the river.

• 
  @linwang389625 күн бұрын

  An awesome EE prof! Really appreciate it. Thank you.

• 
  @springsteen-games513426 күн бұрын

  Kinda nuts this college kids think about everything so mathematically. I haven’t finished the video but I’m pretty sure the answer is basically zero. If you are in the dead center of the earth you’d be so close to the core gravity would not be pulling you anywhere. You’d be essentially weightless. Maybe I’m wrong

• 
  @canafsar859726 күн бұрын

  initial velocity would be changed at the last part right ?

• 
  @samukhelengoma331227 күн бұрын

  Full video please

• 
  @Courage2527 күн бұрын

  Amazing❤2024

• 
  @cluelessMuslims-ed5js27 күн бұрын

  Call me crazy but I just binge watch his content for fun😭😭 They're so interesting

• 
  @VuHoang-dq4jr27 күн бұрын

  I dont even know why i searched up for this

• 
  @AjayKumar-gx2lp28 күн бұрын

  Sir one doubt,,,how was electron loss in the electric field not a conductor 😊😊