Видео

Thank you for breaking this question down into easy steps. Your tips for understanding how to solve the question are very helpful.

Can you help me with one exercise 😢 it is about stading waves with complex numbers

I need help With one exercise

you saved me <3

wher can i get this apparatus?

Thank you for explaining this sir my highschool teacher couldn't even compare to this 😅😅

Thank youu,it is pretty helpful <3

Part d, the lab frame measures an elongated time (moving clocks are slow) of 10^-6 microseconds. Gamma is 3.2. The particle is at rest with respect to itself, so proper time Tau = (10^-6 microseconds)/3.2. Am I wrong?

Thank you so much for posting these videos! I have been watching over 40 videos and it is helping me a lot with physics!

Yikes!

It's really hard to understand part c. 35:15

thankss

idk what is this, i came by mistake...

yes "de Broy" ruclips.net/video/k45IZDkg2Pg/видео.htmlsi=1_YHzAd2KQat0bCO

18:31 I need help understanding Question 7

Similar demonstration I found helpful: ruclips.net/video/v-1zjdUTu0o/видео.htmlsi=nYlWP2nyxzk9bfL4

I don't know how to explain this... in part (a) the calculations make enough sense to me and I see how we found beta, but the setup is meaningless to me. "In the lab reference frame not all kinetic energy can be turned into rest energy because the total momentum needs to be conserved, but in the 'center-of-momentum' reference frame (where total momentum = 0), all the kinetic energy can be turned into rest energy." That means absolutely nothing to me. Where are we getting these ideas about conservation? Why does total momentum = 0 in the center of momentum reference frame?

This makes no sense to me.

7:38 What is v_0?

d. is gamma*beta*(1 meter)/c

Sage tripped out when I wrote sol = _[0]

37:35 m1 = -1/2 because the f1s cancel?

İyi günler öğretmenim. Algoodo programında bu eğimli şekli nasıl oluşturuyoruz? Yardımcı olur musunuz?

you can integrate it like k*σ*dS/sqrt(r^2 + l^2) while S = dθ*r^2 so dS = 2dθdr. k*σ * (Int 0 to 2π) dθ (Int 0 to +inf)dr*2r*l/(r^2+l^2)^(3/2)

This has nothing to do with relativity. Classically, if the characteristic lengths and times of the rigid body are comparable to the speed of sound in the material the rigid body approximation doesn't work, and since molecular forces are EM the speed of light is the natural upper bound for the speed of sound in the material. Also the example being made here is kinda bullshit, there is nothing wrong kinematically with something moving faster than the speed of light, no contradiction is found in the spinning rod example. However, what is shown to be not possible from the equations of special relativity is to accelerate a body past the speed of light, wich has not been shown here to be impied possible by the rigid body assumption.

I'm not going to watch this. But if there were no air resistance you've gotta wonder how that balloon is 100 metres "in the air."

thanks king

Very under rated video. I was brain storming the 2 concepts, had an intuition that they might be related. And search it on youtube. The only video I found related to it is provided by you only. Thanks a lot🙂

Thank you, sir. You saved me :)

thank for your lesson that help a lot

Thank you for this video

what do you do if there is an I5 but no R5?

thanks for the explanation!

Conservation of Spatial Curvature (both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature) Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. ------------------------ String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension? What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: “We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr (lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957-8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958) The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics? When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks. (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Force" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry. Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Mesons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change. Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons? Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension? Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons . Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process. Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms. We know there is an unequal distribution of electrical charge within each atom because the positive charge is concentrated within the nucleus, even though the overall electrical charge of the atom is balanced by equal positive and negative charge. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles? ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist. The model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles. .

Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. ------------------------ String Theory was not a waste of time. Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: “We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr (lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957-8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958) The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics? When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks. (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Force" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry. Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Mesons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons? Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension? Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons . Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process. Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms. We know there is an unequal distribution of electrical charge within each atom because the positive charge is concentrated within the nucleus, even though the overall electrical charge of the atom is balanced by equal positive and negative charge. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles? ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist. The model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles. .

You are an excellent professor!

You're awesome, thank you very much!

Very helpful, thanks!

Could you solve this problem? Thank you very much. " A bug flying horizontally at 0.65 m/s collides and sticks to the end of a uniform stick hanging vertically. After the impact, the stick swings out to a maximum angle of 8° from the vertical before rotating back. If the mass of the stick is 10 times that of the bug, calculate the length of the stick in centimeters."

강사님 한국분이시죠? Korean?

I'm researching Yukawa's principle for a particle accelerator research project, and this is really helping to explain everything. Thank you.

Hi good explanation! Is it possible to access to the web resource you used?

Is there any reason to add or subtract relativistic quantities? (m*c)/sqrt((c+v)/(c-v)) adds (m*c)*sqrt((c+v)/(c-v)) subtracts This is for momentum. γ*(m*c)*sqrt((c+v)/(c-v)) (m*c)/(γ*sqrt((c+v)/(c-v)))=m*(c-v) p=m*c*sin(arctan(i*v/c)) (m*c)*(cos(arctan(i*v/c))+i*sin(arctan(i*v/c)))=m*c/sqrt((c+v)/(c-v))=mcγ(1-(v/c)) (m*c)*(cos(arctan(i*v/c))-i*sin(arctan(i*v/c)))=m*c*sqrt((c+v)/(c-v))=mcγ(1+(v/c)) E^2=p^2*c^2+m^2*c^2=(m*c*i*sin(θ))^2*c^2+m^2*c^4 E^2=m^2*c^4*((i*sinh(arctan(v/c)))^2+1)=m^2*c^4*((1-sinh(arctan(v/c)))^2) E=m*(c^2)*cosh(arctan(v/c)) E=m*(c^2)*γ if v>c then E=m*(c^2)*i*sinh(arctanh(v/c)) E=m*c*i*γ*v

thank you, you are very helpful

It wasn't because the helio was more 'elegant'. It was a philosophical reason that the geo is a case for God, they prefer a non Godley world. Both geo and hello are still theories because they can't say the geo is wrong. Because there is a God who made the earth and human therein in a special place in the middle. Wake up

this question was on my fucking exam and was only worth 3 points. What the hell??? You need a very deep understanding of the previous chapters regarding forces and motion, and my test isnt even supposed to have this old chapter! i was literally stuck because i thought this was a simple work problem, but no, its a long problem that requires a mastery in a previous chapter knowledge, and on top of that you need to have knowledge in the work chapter too. How is this even fair?

For the R4 I get 6 but the answer on index in text book shows the answer is 18. And I look over your equation it gives 6 too. I think the index answer is wrong lol

Do you let to download your .pdf from somewhere? That could be nice. Thanks

Thank you this helped a lot