Видео

Thanks... Hope it helps

Glad the video helped

Thank you...happy to know that you liked my explanation.

Thank you.

Thanks...an explanation of why this is happening will come with the next few shorts

You are welcome

Option 1: N = kg*m/s2 (F=ma) ... So Nms becomes kg*m/s2*ms = kgm2/s Option 2: The change of angular momentum is Torque* time...Nm*s, while Angular momentum is rotational inertia*angular velocity, so kgm2*rad/s ... The rad is "untitless" so kgm2/s Change in angular momentum and angular momentum have to have the same unit, thus kgm2/s = Nms Q.E.D. ;-) Hope that helps.

Because we want to have the rays appear to come from a spot 0.32 m away from the lens on other side than the eye, this creating a virtual image. Virtual image = negative sign.

Thanks

You made it through all those thresholds!

All three can be used. It depends how many datapoints you have and how much weight you want to give to "outliers" in the data. Few data points and the uncertainty is to include them all: min-max Lots of datapoints with outliers that you consider important: standard deviation Lots of datapoints with a small amount of outliers that you/d rather ignore: average deviation

@@StefanBracher Thank you for responding. is it okay if I email you? I have an assignment due in 5 hours, and I'm really lost. It's a quick question

@@han.splash9648 better ask your teacher for questions about a specific assignment

De nada

Bob and I are happy that the video is helpful

You are welcome

One kg of blocks or just one kg?

The answer is that your calculator is withholding information... ruclips.net/video/qxp35e7bY70/видео.htmlsi=4oAbVuuwoZ74DJHO

In parts yes... But the main reason is that the speed of the light is the same in all reference frames, even if those frames move relative to the source of the light.

Displacement indeed ... oopsie. thanks for pointing it out ;-)

Sorry I failed to help you with this video... The definitions of proper time and proper length are only mentioned (and displayed on screen) shortly as the goal of the video is to figure out who measures which one. If you happen to find a video with focus on clear definitions, please come back here and post the link, as it might be helpful to others learning about special relativity.

@@StefanBracher thanks for your kind reply.

Usually that is how we do it. As here, it is the difference in volume we are after, we can also take the middle or the top - as long as we use the same for the initial and final volume.

For a second I was considering using a 😺... That would have been difficult too (a toy cat that is)

Thanks

Glad it helped.

Proper length is measured by all inertial reference frames in which the two points between which the distance is measured do not move relatively to the frame of reference.

teaching physics is always dangerous, but so much fun ;-)

What was the shelf - Half-Life of Half-Life 2? Maybe after 2 Half-Lifes of Half-Lifes, we get Half-Life 4? ;-)

@@StefanBracher It would be a miracle😂

@@johannesburstrom7314 well, in each Half-Life, there is a 50% chance for the "event" to happen ;-) (okok...next time I do a video about ☢️...I will have to build-in a reference to the game)

Haha... should have built a reference in the video ;-)

Glad it helped

Hi, virtual means the light rays only appear to come from there, in the real image, the light rays pass through the image.

There are indeed two "forces": The gravity the moon exerts on Earth, and the gravity the Earth exerts on the moon. However, when evaluating Newton's 337-year-old Second Law of Motion on the system "moon", only the force the Earth exerts on the moon must be considered. The result gets fairly close to "a month"... or a "monath" as we used to call it.

Thanks

This first one (this video) was plexiglass... much cheaper, but it does scratch easily while cleaning, so after a while the plexiglass needs replacement to avoid lines in the video. The second one (ruclips.net/video/JgvB0AQikYQ/видео.htmlsi=-UvvPotJE3vdJS9N) is ultra-clear glass. Much more expensive.

Proper time is measured in the reference frame in which the event occurs at the same location. So if you are travelling at 0.5c and the event (the two events between which you measure the time) happen at the same location relative to you (for example a timer on your wristwatch), then you have proper time. (Starting the timer and the timer beeping happens at the same location for you... But for someone traveling in another direction, the watch would have moved location between event one: timer started, and event two: timer beeps)

​@@StefanBracher, two events cannot be determined as simultaneous, so one cannot say they are in the same frame if moving relatively.

@@geronimomiles312 Relativity of simultaneity is another aspect of special Relativity not covered in this video. It means that two observers will not agree if events are simultaneous or not - just like they do not agree on length and time. To determine proper time between two events, you need the events to happen at the same location, not at the same time.

Glad Bob helped

Thanks

Hi, total cost was in the low hundreds... So far no breaking. The main difference to the "commercial" ones might be the size.

In both cases you forgot the minus... for the object at infinity, the image will form at -0.5 m, which means in front of the lens. A normal sighted person can see objects 50 cm in front, so possible but resulting in a headache (from the eye muscles never able to relax again). When reading a book at 0.25m distance, the image of the -2D lens will form at -1/6 m... thus still in front of the lens but it might be closer than the nearpoint (closest distance to see sharp) and cause a trouble. An interesting question could be to figure out how close the new closest distance to read would be when wearing the glasses. Put the "no glasses nearpoint" in q and find the new limit to p. (Should be further away, so the person has to hold the book much further)

This video does not require calculus, but sure high-school math helps. It shows that in theory, when cutting a few corners, a month takes 27.4 days (the time it takes the moon to go around earth). Not sure what "proof" you were looking and how that would have convinced your family. Good luck. (Maybe in a few years, we can go visit the landing sites and then you can settle the debate for good)

@@StefanBracher I appreciate it 👍 I've showed them the LRO images and stuff then explained why it couldn't be faked without being able to imitate(which wouldn't be possible) the lunar gravitational acceleration 1.62 m/s² like in the Rover videos with the dust and all that lol 😆 My cousin is a very stubborn person though and doesn't seem to get it 🤷‍♀️ Some people just can't be convinced. But either way it was a great video and I learned stuff at least 😊

@@LisaAnn777 actually, you could fake that... (dropping the studio at the required rate rate, play slow motion etc...). ;-)

I am using the zame akkzent as Einstein ;-)

i never tried only one side... wrapping them all around seems easier.

That is the beauty of physics: there are always multiple ways to solve a problem. In case you ever want to impress someone but don't have the test lenses with you (or someone asks for it in a test), the video might come in handy.