Пікірлер

• 
  @sor3na3692 күн бұрын

  Best explanation I've found for this problem. Good job

• 
  @madaydude_physicsКүн бұрын

  Thanks :)

• 
  @crabkerenchannel27692 күн бұрын

  Waw is good

• 
  @studiosdetodo82955 күн бұрын

  Is there any reason why u prefered to use the linear frecuency? I mean the angular frecuency omega is just less convoluted to write and deal with, i guess that there are moments where using one is better than the other, if you can provide me any example of where o when is better to use frecuency f than frecuency w. I have only use the angular frcuency in all my signals and sistems class about fourier and laplace transform.

• 
  @idkmanmanidk6 күн бұрын

  This video really cleared up all the basic doubts I had regarding work energy theorem and conservation of energy, thank you very much!

• 
  @madaydude_physics6 күн бұрын

  Of course, happy to hear this helped

• 
  @igang24487 күн бұрын

  I = 1/2 * m * R^2 ?

• 
  @frax505117 күн бұрын

  How can you be this good? I feel like everything just fell into one place. You used a great tactic. Firstly, you introduced the formulas and laws that we are all familiar with and then you explained everything step by step perfectly (leaving nothing unexplained). Just magnificent. Thank you for this gem! 🔥

• 
  @madaydude_physics17 күн бұрын

  Excellent! Love to hear when these ideas just “click” for you all :)

• 
  @user-tg6gs6vu7h20 күн бұрын

  i am sorry to ask here but in the newton shell theorm vedio i wasnt able to solve the integral and no machine i know was able either can the channel owner give me any insight about it

• 
  @madaydude_physics19 күн бұрын

  Use a u substitution of r - Rcos(theta). Don't forget to update boundaries. This will recast the integral in a more common form: udu/(R^2 - r^2 + 2ru) ^(3/2) If you want to suffer, now do the integral manually with integration by parts, or again reference a table/integral calculator. If you have further questions, let me know, but I'm guessing this will be enough for you.

• 
  @jimhuang953623 күн бұрын

  @22:50 last term should be Ftheta * Dpartial(theta hat)/Dpartial(theta)

• 
  @Leo-if5tn25 күн бұрын

  For the ones curious: omega^2 . Re . cos^2(theta) Is: 0,0337 m/s^2 for Theta = 0° And 0,0238 m/s^2 for Thera = 45° g = 9,8066 m/s^2 is the average value!

• 
  @lih339125 күн бұрын

  Did you have the value of g at the poles? How did you get it?

• 
  @adosar726126 күн бұрын

  Correct me if I am wrong, but we don't even need to think about what happens after poking the stick. We just need to think what happens at the time of poking. The only acceleration the center of mass can have is that of the impulse, meaning it must move forward in the direction of that acceleration. If its motion deviates from this direction (e.g. if it was to rotate about some point), then Newton's 2nd law would be violated.

• 
  @madaydude_physics25 күн бұрын

  Yup, in both cases, during and after poking the stick, the center of mass motion must obey Newtons 2nd law

• 
  @nishantkumarsingh5002Ай бұрын

  So can we say any free body always rotates about its COM.... whenever an external force is applied

• 
  @emanuellandeholm5657Ай бұрын

  I would love a Lagrangian type action minimizing take on this problem aimed at math nerds who don't really understand mechanics. Grounds up.

• 
  @AlexseiAllenАй бұрын

  how does it account for gravity assuming this is an xy plane?

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  The rod is spinning on a flat surface like on the surface of a table, not with or against gravity.

• 
  @studiosdetodo8295Ай бұрын

  Dude i really, realy like your style, everytime i learn a physics concept that i am not understanding, i come here to get them established in my head. Thanks. And i also like the fact you have everything so well orderd. Do you have any motivation o goal in making this videos?

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  Glad you enjoy! At the end of the day I make these videos because I enjoy it, I think of each one as a little project to create. I like to think of the basic goal as a physicist or just a scholar in general is in 2 parts: building new knowledge (research) and spreading knowledge, so this lets me start working towards the latter early on in life :)

• 
  @SamanthaPyper-sl4yeАй бұрын

  Theorem 9: The Euler-Lagrange equations, which are the fundamental equations of motion in classical mechanics and field theory, can be derived from the principle of least action, which states that the path taken by a system between two points is the one that minimizes the action integral. Proof: Let q_i(t) be the generalized coordinates of a system, and let L(q_i, dq_i/dt, t) be the Lagrangian of the system, which is a function of the coordinates, their time derivatives, and time. The action integral S is defined as the integral of the Lagrangian over time: S = ∫_t1^t2 L(q_i, dq_i/dt, t) dt The principle of least action states that the path taken by the system between two points (q_i(t1), q_i(t2)) is the one that minimizes the action integral S. To find the equations of motion, we require that the variation of the action integral with respect to the path is zero: δS = 0 Using the calculus of variations, we can show that this condition leads to the Euler-Lagrange equations: (d/dt) (∂L/∂(dq_i/dt)) - (∂L/∂q_i) = 0 for each generalized coordinate q_i. These equations describe the motion of the system and can be used to derive the conservation laws and symmetry principles of classical mechanics and field theory. The fact that the equations of motion can be derived from a variational principle, which involves minimizing an integral, suggests that the concept of zero or nothingness (in the sense of a minimum or stationary point) may play a fundamental role in the dynamics of physical systems. Moreover, the action integral itself can be interpreted as a measure of the "amount of nothingness" in the path of the system, in the sense that it vanishes for the classical path (the one that satisfies the equations of motion) and is positive for all other paths. This interpretation suggests that the classical path of a system can be seen as a "zero mode" or "vacuum state" of the action integral, and that the properties of this zero mode may be related to the fundamental laws of physics and the symmetries of nature.

• 
  @Lucifero222Ай бұрын

  Hey! , a genuine question here from trigonometry. I was doing trig then i came upon an angle whose value in trig functions i forgot from the table, From their i remembered a trick of learning those values from the early days, to write down the numbers(for angles-(0,30,45,60,90 only) 0,1,2,3,4 then dividing these by 4 and then taking a square root and then respectively we get the values 0,1/2,1/rt2,rt3/2,1 *Why does this trick work?*i am getting an insight into this regarding the unit circle and the 4 quadrants but still cannot get an accurate answer , tried finding the answer on google, it was something like mentioned above but it did not explain well. Kindly spend a minute or two on this thought and if possible please make a video of it. Thankyou Amazing video by the way👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  Nice question, I think this is a great idea to make a little video on those proofs. I’ll add this to my video plans

• 
  @darshan5044Ай бұрын

  fantastic

• 
  @hydropage2855Ай бұрын

  Criminally underrated. Such a relaxing voice and style, and a great well-paced explainer. Instant subscribe

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  Thanks! Glad to hear you enjoy hydro :)

• 
  @hydropage2855Ай бұрын

  @@madaydude_physics I might make my own simulation. I made a numerical damped pendulum simulation, but this would be really interesting. Do you think it'd make sense to make a "coil" shape by taking a sine function with a fixed number of periods and plotting it in space while shifting it and rotating it as the spring expands and contracts? Because I'm pretty sure a coil from a side view is just a trig function

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  @@hydropage2855 Yup, there are different periodic shapes people will use for their springs, but that’s the right idea. I’d be happy to see a video of your simulation if you end up making it :3

• 
  @hydropage2855Ай бұрын

  @@madaydude_physics What program did you use? I think I’ll use Processing. Also, I’m really curious, how can damping be incorporated into a Lagrangian? I’m not sure how damping would work for a spring-dulum in general, I’m struggling to imagine that

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  ​@@hydropage2855 Hi again hydro-- one nice way to incorporate damping is with the Rayleigh Dissipation Function: these links will explain the basics phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Classical_Mechanics/Variational_Principles_in_Classical_Mechanics_(Cline)/10%3A_Nonconservative_Systems/10.04%3A_Rayleighs_Dissipation_Function#:~:text=The%20Rayleigh%20dissipation%20function%20R(q%2C%CB%99q)%20provides,both%20Lagrangian%20and%20Hamiltonian%20mechanics.&text=Consider%20the%20two%20identical%2C%20linearly,%CE%B2)%20shown%20in%20the%20figure. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rayleigh_dissipation_function

• 
  @Atrue0914Ай бұрын

  Bro your channel is a gem 💎. Keep uploading such videos.

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  Thank you! Will do :)

• 
  @Atrue0914Ай бұрын

  Bro are you fuckin kidding me I was trying to understand this and now I understood and find a gem channel.

• 
  @User-jr7vfАй бұрын

  The voltage at 0:39, how have you obtained it?

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  Measured the signal received by the solar cell from the home lights, then subtracted the dc offset leaving the oscillations only.

• 
  @lgent2435Ай бұрын

  If the initial condition of the object is released from the angle θ and without initial velocity: a. What is the maximum spring elongation length? b. What is the speed of the object when θ = 0? Also what is the elongation of the spring at that time? How do you find the 2 points above?

• 
  @Johnnius16 сағат бұрын

  a. Use conservation of energy law. I assume that the object is released from relaxed spring. Then, the total energy at the beginning is E0 = -mg l0 cos(θ). Maximim elongation happens when kinetic energy is zero and θ=0 (so all energy is used to elongate the spring) Then by energy conservation law, we get a quadratic equation: E0 = V + T = -mg(l0 + ρ) + 1/2 k ρ² + 0, or: -mg l0 cos(θ) = -mg(l0 + ρ) + 1/2 k ρ² which gives two solutions: 1. ρ = 0 2. ρ = 2mg/k Since we are looking for maximum elonagtion, the accept the second solution, ρ = 2mg/k. Note that this is an upper bound on elonagtion and might not be reached. But I suspect that unless there is some weird resonance, the spring will come arbitrary close to this elonagtion. b. I am almost sure that you cannot calculate this. You can only calculate pairs of speed and elonagtion that are possible. You could also do some asymptotic analysis to approximate the solution, if approximation is good enough for your application.

• 
  @studiosdetodo8295Ай бұрын

  Bro, did you still have the notes you said you would upload in the video. I have already used vectors and know what they are(engeneering student), but never have It be presented to me with this euclidian style, seem intresting and more understandable, i mostly just do problems and have the feels of how to work with them and moved on.

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  So the end result of this set of videos was an equation sheet with all the coordinate essential formulas summarized for polar, spherical, cylindrical coordinates- I post it and reference it in physics videos where I need a given formula for the coordinate system I’m working in. You can find it linked in the last video I posted about Spring Pendulums.

• 
  @LandenDoesSomeMathАй бұрын

  I’d love to see you take this a step further with a torsion-spring-pendulum sort of deal, if that makes sense? Take this spring-dulum here and apply some torque to it as well as set it in motion and stretches from spring equilibrium

• 
  @ES-qe1nhАй бұрын

  Hi, I think your videos on these topics are quite good. May I ask, what's your educational background/ can viewers expect videos anytime soon on topics like quantum field theory or relativity? Thanks again for your work

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  I’m glad you enjoy the videos here! I’m currently an undergraduate going into a Physics PhD, doing experiment based research, not theory, so generally speaking my videos are naturally going to have a bit more of a utilitarian flavor to them. To answer your question: it’s probable I will *eventually* cover such concepts, but regardless I would want to make more foundational content with undergrad level E&M, Quantum, Thermo etc before I get to that (assuming I don’t drown in grad level work and research first haha).

• 
  @husamaltalhi8579Ай бұрын

  Hey madaydude, you helped me a lot with this video. i did some work on a simplified grasshopper landing model,if you can help with checking what i did that would be helpful 😊

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  Glad to hear it! Now I’m no expert on grasshopper landing *ahem* so I might not be of too much use, but I’d be curious to hear about your work, sounds interesting!

• 
  @husamaltalhi8579Ай бұрын

  @@madaydude_physics oh, don’t worry too much, the model is simple. It’s almost acts as a three link manipulator, i am mainly concerned about my (derivation, kinematics, and how i add an input), thanks in advance, so where can i send you the file?

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  @@husamaltalhi8579 Ok, try emailing it to me: use the email attached on my channel page under channel details... I'm going to use you as my guinea pig also to make sure that's set up right ;)

• 
  @husamaltalhi8579Ай бұрын

  @@madaydude_physics i sent the files, 🙏

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  @@husamaltalhi8579 Excellent, I will check it out when I have spare time

• 
  @emanuellandeholm5657Ай бұрын

  I really like this! One thought, isn't the assumption that the ball will roll in a circle on the disk kind of baked in here, in how you set up the parameters? That is to say, what you showed is that if the ball moves in a circle, here's how to find the angular velocity. Or did you actually prove that the ball moves in a circle? Physics is confusing to me.

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  You’re 100% spot on- in this we use the observation of the ball’s circular motion and focus on extracting out the period of the circling. To PROVE that the motion is indeed circular, instead of plugging in expression for centripetal force directly in, you would more generally set F = ma (r double dot in this context) then have to “solve” the equation of motion (or just guess a circular motion solution which indeed will satisfy the equation- see paper linked in description, this is how they approach it).

• 
  @emanuellandeholm5657Ай бұрын

  @@madaydude_physics Thanks! I will look at the paper, you and Steve Mould have piqued my interest. :)

• 
  @SayedHamidFatimiАй бұрын

  I'm just a bored guy at home who likes physics and maths, you got my sub

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  Physics is indeed a good cure for boredom :3

• 
  @Nightmare4You1Ай бұрын

  Im a college student in Mechanical Vibrations and this is by far the best and most thorough explanation i have ever seen of this topic. You explain the mechanics so eloquently.

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  Wow, what an honor, much appreciated! :)

• 
  @gametimewitharyan6665Ай бұрын

  I am just a grade 11th student but I enjoyed watching your video a lot! You gained another sub

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  Thanks, glad to hear it :)

• 
  @dogspaghetti7118Ай бұрын

  Omg, I loved this the other day :) You did a beautiful job explaining (youve gained a fan). Personally, do you prefer Lagrangian or Hamiltonian Mechanics?

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  Thank you! Oooh, that’s really tough >.> Hamiltonian Mechanics really appears everywhere, particularly foundational in Quantum… so that’s hard to beat + I happen to like thinking in terms of phase space! Both are amazing though!

• 
  @ZymplecticАй бұрын

  Is there (in your opinion) ever a case where it is advantageous to use polar coordinates q=(p,theta) as generalized coordinates as opposed to Cartesian coordinates q=(x,y). While the method you presented is generally found in textbooks, I found that derivations with Cartesian coordinates yield significantly faster simulations, and that Cartesian coordinates allows for considerably easier derivations for multi-spring systems, which in addition are trivial in Hamiltonian mechanics.

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  I don’t have a very strong opinion on this either way for this problem, as you would know from your simulation work formalisms like Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics are so nice due to their form invariance under coordinate transformations (canonical transformations at least). I would at the very least say in problem solving if you save on the number of coordinates in a different coordinate system, you should use it. For example, for a simple pendulum it would be far more efficient to use a single angle instead of tracking both x and y (or having to write out the dependence of y on x using your constraint since you’d be using more coordinates than your degrees of freedom otherwise). But yeah, of course coordinate systems are a choice, we can convert between them easily as well etc etc. Cool simulations by the way, I checked a few out :)

• 
  @ZymplecticАй бұрын

  @@madaydude_physics Alright, thanks for the input. I've been curious for a while why derivations (textbooks and otherwise) almost always use polar coordinates. The angle is indeed the simplest choice for the 1DOF simple pendulum, and also for the zero gravity case of the spring pendulum that reduces to 1DOF from conservation of angular momentum. For the simple pendulum, it is actually more efficient to use two Cartesian coordinates than a single angle (about a factor of 2 or 3 in C. Trigonometric functions are just that slow) - although this requires constraints that generally make derivations non-trivial. Of course you may disregard numerical performance for tasks involving analytical treatment. Thanks, you too. Apparently there was a reason why my feed picked up on spring videos just now.

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  @@Zymplectic Yes, thank you as well, having this nice numerics perspective with an idea of the differences between those computation times will be nice for others to note as well

• 
  @user-yt6tb8zv9kАй бұрын

  Thank you so much!

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  Of course!

• 
  @magicgamer5963Ай бұрын

  That insane. You doing cool things

• 
  @marvinco33Ай бұрын

  Enjoyed this amazing video, wish me luck on my physics midterms this Saturday!

• 
  @madaydude_physicsАй бұрын

  Good luck! :3

• 
  @lukewilsontv2 ай бұрын

  I hate that I can’t understand this. One day I will return

• 
  @stefanmarien74632 ай бұрын

  this is so calming, thanks

• 
  @edgaragde17812 ай бұрын

  Awesome content!

• 
  @aaronsarinana16542 ай бұрын

  It would have been more illustrative if you had used different spring constants (i.e. k1, k2, k3) and different masses (m1,m2). In any case, the video was very useful to me. Thanks!

• 
  @rossholst53152 ай бұрын

  How does the direction the ball is spinning, and the velocity at which the ball spins affect the path of the ball? It seems important that the ball rotate against the direction of rotation, but it might not be. It would also seem that there would be a maximum velocity with which the ball could rotate, as at some velocity the circular path the ball wants to take would exceed the size of the turn table. What are the stable velocities of the ball such that it will stay on a turn table of a finite size along with the possible initial directions the ball could be traveling with respect to? Would we get elliptical orbit if the ball was initially was traveling at some intermediate direction? We have shown that there are circular orbits? I would also think there would be parabolic orbits and hyperbolic orbits (for lack of a better word, because orbit implies it comes back)? Are there stable elliptical orbits (I feel like no, not on a disc for the rotating background)? Cool video though.

• 
  @youssefelyousfi49292 ай бұрын

  mathematics is language of the unvierse .

• 
  @Polyamathematics2 ай бұрын

  lovely video!

• 
  @madaydude_physics2 ай бұрын

  Thanks :)

• 
  @AndymaZzZ2 ай бұрын

  Seldom see someone talking about this problem，the explanation is exactly logical and wonderful，and I really appreciate it😊

• 
  @madaydude_physics2 ай бұрын

  Excellent, glad you enjoyed!

• 
  @lih33912 ай бұрын

  Thank you, the math is always skipped.❤ How much longer would it take to derive without knowing that it would move in a circle? Also, have you thought of using geometric algebra? It usually just makes more sense for physics.

• 
  @madaydude_physics2 ай бұрын

  Good question! I haven't tried myself, but presumably it would be a bit longer-- without the assumption you would go through and instead of immediately substituting equation for centripetal force in, you would more generally use F = ma (r double dot with reference to the picture), and then with an initial condition (say the ball starts at some position r0 and has some initial velocity v0) you'd have to solve the equation of motion (again assuming no slippage) to first prove the circular motion (at this stage it would still be easiest to assume the final answer is uniform circular motion, then plug into differential equation and show it satisfies it, which is the approach the paper takes, but there might be other differential equation methods to go about solving it).

• 
  @mochamochamatcha6772 ай бұрын

  thanks for the explanaysh

• 
  @madaydude_physics2 ай бұрын

  Sure thing!

• 
  @sanadsameer29182 ай бұрын

  amazing video , thank you very much , i loved the music can you tell me what piece is this ?

• 
  @madaydude_physics2 ай бұрын

  Thank you! I actually made this one myself with GarageBand. I never really gave it a name :3

• 
  @user-oe9vx7kf8z2 ай бұрын

  hi, i have absolutely no idea of what you are talking about, you just appeared in my home page, tho i learned a thing or two, i recommend using a different cursor or something because i did get lost with it, didnt knew where the cursor was

• 
  @madaydude_physics2 ай бұрын

  Thanks for the feedback, I'll look into using a larger cursor, maybe with more contrast from the white background. Feel free to let me know if you have any questions about the video

• 
  @user-oe9vx7kf8z2 ай бұрын

  @@madaydude_physics yeah, any non white cursor will be way nicer

• 
  @user-oe9vx7kf8z2 ай бұрын

  @@madaydude_physics also, really cool videos!

• 
  @madaydude_physics2 ай бұрын

  One comment I would like to add with respect to the signal we see being transformed in the video: notice that the signal I reference oscillates between + and - 0.04V. Only positive voltages are being collected by the solar cell, in fact the original oscillations were centered about +2V. To get only the AC component to process, you *subtract off the DC offset* (by collecting the mean of the original signal, then subtracting that off). If you don't subtract DC offsets off, you will get a giant impulse around 0Hz in your frequency domain.

• 
  @aamid_riyaz2 ай бұрын

  An insightful and balanced approach from a practical standpoint!

• 
  @madaydude_physics2 ай бұрын

  Excellent, glad to hear you enjoyed Aamid

• 
  @fabjulian79263 ай бұрын

  Thank god, you've uploaded such a helpful video! You actually saved my master's thesis in aerospace engineering :D it's all about the basics, once you've understood those you can build upon them thanks!

• 
  @madaydude_physics3 ай бұрын

  Awesome to hear, glad this helped!!