Sometimes, I feel Newton's third law of motion is forced to suite a narrattive, even when it doesn't necessarily explain a phenomena. It is hard to explain the applicability of the law in relations to the motion a bicycle. I think it is because the bicycle moves vertically, meanwhile the law suites horizontal motion. It better fits the working for a rocket going to space. But for a bicycle I find I awkward. Great video by the way
The laws of physics are equally applicable in ALL frames of reference. It doesn't matter if the frame is vertical, horizontal, or rotating. It's all the sane physics. E=mc. Acceleration defines mass/energy. There is only more acceleration or less acceleration.
Newton was really the true scientist who had changed the thinking habits of the people. Before him, people were facing the same kinds of problems but no one tried to find the reasons behind these happenings. I salute Newton for giving us a sense of thinking and imagining.
perfect! this explains it quite well. Nice demonstrations and real world examples that are easy to "rap my head around", however I would have added a bit more arrows to illustrate more forces which were applied / left out.
I really like when topics are used to relate a scientific concept. Here is a series about Psychology within the context of bicycle prejudice: ruclips.net/p/PLFOOfdNQa2zteDZZED-loSpz6SSxLtCDE
Nice video, but something missing or not directly stated, for Newton's 1st Law: Objects at rest tend to stay at rest *unless acted upon by an outside force.* Objects in motion tend to stay in motion with the same velocity (velocity is speed with direction, and depending on your frame of reference, it can be negative) *unless acted upon by an outside force.*
bruh he stated that, you need to apply force for your bicycle to start moving from rest but one it starts moving it becomes way esier to pedal.........
How is it that TED education has so much better volume control than their regular videos on their director channel? The intro on that one is so much louder than the video itself.
One question: How does the bike stay upright? When a person mounts a bike and stays still (no kickstand or legs, just the two bike tires) they fall over. But, we said person is moving it is really easy to stay up. However, no new force is applied in the left/right direction to help keep the bike up? So how does the bike stay up while it is in motion?
momentum... it is too "focused" on moving in one direction, that is to say it alleviates the potential of falling left or right like a domino. Remember that there is also air resistance... aerodynamics keep it aliened as well, much like an arrow flies straight and only straight, until an external force (such as wind or gravity) interferes. I hope this helped in answering your question.
Todd Gobbett But why do three wheelers stand upright even if they are not moving? why only vehicles having below 2 wheels fall down when not in motion? I mean my bicycle falls down but my car or tricycle doesn't when in rest.
blasttrash Because then the weight is more evenly distributed throughout the 3 given points. The tricycle has more surface area to support its centre of gravity. A bicycle or unicycle does not.
I believe the speed of the bicycle does not allow it enough time to be pushed over by air on either side. Or in other words, the force applied in propelling the bicycle forward is more than the force applied by the air on either side. Then there's also the fact that the centre of masses of you and the bicycle are properly aligned I guess. Todd Gobbett gave a pretty good explanation as well.
gilgamesh2399 actually these are all bad explanations an arrow flies straight for a complitely different reason, air drag and gravity always work on it in flight bicycle is not "too focused" on forward movement, there is no such quantity in physics this is explained via precession, which is a very comlex mechanical concept that relies on the conservation of angular momentum a frisbee flies, a spinning ball changes direction, a spinning top stays stable - all due to precession thank you for asking questions btw to anyone who got it wrong: props for trying, it is better than not analysing at all. :)
Divide mass of world by mass of cyclist. A person ways 70 kg whereas the earth ways something like 6,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 kg so we're talking something like more than 10,000,000,000,000 times more people than live on the planet atm.
+Matthew Smith This actually happens every morning in major cities world-wide in the morning commute. It's just that with their commute home at night, the world is set right again.
My teacher in middle school explained the 3rd law like punching a wall. The softer you hit the wall the softer the molecules in the wall hit back, the harder you hit it the harder they hit back at you and that's why it hurts
A little error in the video. Please make sure that the directions of reaction force on two different tyres of cycle after 2:50 should be different, and not the same. Otherwise, it is a nice video. Inspired.
there is no mistake in the video.. the direction of the wheels rotation is same that y the cycle moves ahead, if the forces are opposite (*which is impossible if u are cycling*) like you stated they will cancel out each other and cycle wont move.. what you are stating is that in a cycle the wheels move in opposite direction
Rahul Roy I don't follow what the person is saying. Maybe the idea is that the back tire is acting, because the rider is pedalling, but the front tire is reacting (to the road), since the rider is not pedalling it, so what is taken to be the action and what is the reaction changes. Nevertheless, the directions of the pairs of forces are indicted correctly as far as I can see.
Rahul Roy You need to brush up physics concepts man... Action reaction don't cancel. And I know what I am saying. Kindly refer some physics books before commenting here..
Only on the rear wheel with power does the ground's reaction force push forward, on the front it has an opposite effect, to counter the friction of ye olde wheel bearing and such. The reaction force arrow shall point towards the rear on the front tire I declare!!
It's only the hind-wheel that pushes back to the Earth (action), so it's only the hind-wheel that receives the reaction from the ground. The rest of the bike is pushed forward by the hind-wheel.
You have to be consider each object separately: 1. The bike pushes on the Earth such that it accelerates in the direction it is pushed. 2. Simultaneously, the Earth exerts a force on the bike in the opposite direction so the bike accelerates that way. You might understand this better if you consider rowing a boat. When your paddles push on the water, you send the water in one direction whilst travelling in the opposite direction. The foces are equal and simultaneous, acting on different objects.
the second law does actually does not say that force is the product of mass and acceleration ,it says that force is equal to change in momentum w.r.t time. As we derivate it further we obtain the said result but it is not actually what the second law says
Wow, I just noticed a flaw in this video. At 2:11 it says "As the bouncey ball hit's the floor, it causes a downward force on the floor... The floor reacts by pushing on the ball in the opposite direction." This is wrong. The floor isn't what reacts, it's the object that CAUSES the reaction. The ball is the reason it goes in the opposite direction. If what the video was saying was the case, the floor would have to be flexible.
O ato de iniciar a pedalada em uma bicicleta demonstra-se potencialmente mais desafiador do que manter uma velocidade constante, em virtude de fatores que incluem a necessidade de superar a inércia inicial, equilibrar-se adequadamente, ajustar as marchas de maneira pertinente, lidar com resistências iniciais e coordenar meticulosamente os movimentos. Tais desafios, entretanto, tendem a ser progressivamente superados por meio da prática sistemática e da aquisição de habilidades específicas associadas ao processo inicial de movimentação.
in the 3rd law ,is it an equal and an opposite reaction, or a reaction thats equal?they spoke differently in the 17th century than we do now.so did Newton word the 3rd law badly, or since we percieve/live in a 3 dimensional world are there two reactions to the original action?i.e. an equal reaction and an opposite reaction. i always thought the 3rd law was worded badly. it should be "an equal opposite reaction",not "an equal and opposite reaction".
Here is the thing: F is not equal to m * a. It's equal to rate change of momentum i.e. d/dt (mv) If the mass remains constant, then only f = m×(dv/dt) = m×a. Assumptions should be minded all the time.
Unfortunately I will not use this video in my physics class. Already mentioned in previous posts: 'overcoming inertia' is not correct, action and reaction happen simultaneously (that is why I prefer the use of the word interaction forces). I want to add to this list of errors that the reaction forces of the floor on the weels of a bicycle do NOT both point foreward. In fact the (static) friction of the floor on the weels points foreward on the rear wheel, but backwards on the front wheel.
Light can break Newton's third law: Wimmer, M., Regensburger, A., Bersch, C. et al. Optical diametric drive acceleration through action-reaction symmetry breaking. Nature Phys 9, 780-784 (2013). DOI: 10.1038/NPHYS2777
I was looking at an 11 minutes long video, and by minute 7, I still haven't understood a thing. I came here and this guy just explained it to me in three minutes... what a goat.
That video gave the impression that the energy from the bouncing ball is all delivered to the floor that in return sends it back to the ball, is this accurate? I don't really have knowledge about physics but I have always thought that the bouncing ball bounces because it has less resistance to keep the energy in itself by contracting and releasing it by expanding. This also explains why the doesn't bounce off a surface that is softer than the ball itself. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I believe it is a combination of both. Granted, you've probably learned this by now, since this comment was ten years ago, but for anyone else with the same question: There are two parts to this. First, the ball delivers its energy to the ground, and the ground pushes it back. However, how much the ball actually bounces does depend on factors such as softness of the ground (softer absorbs more energy) and resistance of the ball, e.g., material and density. The second part is why rubber bouncing balls bounce better than hard, dense baseballs or soft, barely dense cotton balls.
If you bounce a ball on concrete the concrete doesn't give, the ball does. Even timber floorboards as shown in the cartoon wouldn't give enough to bounce a ball back up on its own. If that was the case then pretty much anything should bounce off a floor. Try bouncing a pillow. A rubber ball bounces because it's rubber. Rubber is flexible therefore bouncy. Unless of course the boards are full of termites, in which case the ball will just keep going.
True enough, but the number of times it is correctly shown as simultaneous as opposed to the number of times it is incorrectly shown as a cause and effect relationship means the average student will incorrectly remember that one force happens first and then the second force reacts to it. This is why I don't use the "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" phrasing when I teach the third law. But I probably err on the side of being more precise than the average student needs.
Newton's 4th law of motion -😃A book remains at rest and covered with dust until and unless some internal or external exam appears.😆 The speed of turning page is directly proportional to the syllabus to be covered and the tension remains constant. 😅🤣
Kla M.3/13 #10 This videos summarize three law of Newtons and Explain about Newton's law. Three law of Newtons is Connected.What newton recognized was that thing tend to keep doing. "Newton's Law of Motion" in humankind is importance because Newton's Law of Motion is basic for movement and Newton's Law of Motion is can do many thing .
My lecturer was talking about dynamic processes one day and made an example: "Imagine a car that is moving at 80 km/hour speed. It will have 20 meters breaking distance. Why?" - I wanted to yell: "Inertia!", but he interrupted: "Because a car has memory!" :)
I understand what you want to show with your example of the bouncy all, but actually it's not the "action" of the floor pushing the ball up again (otherwise a marble would bounce the same way) - it's the ability of the bouncy ball to quickl deform and immediatly reform again! Or am I wrong?
As a physics teacher, my problem with this video is that it incorrectly implies that the action and reaction forces are not simultaneous. This may be the fault of the animator rather than the lecturer. Unfortunately, it makes the video useless for my classes. It is a common misconception that the action force happens first and then the reaction force, but one I do not want to perpetuate. TEDEd, is there any chance that we could get a revised version on the video without this error?
A bicicleta move-se quando o ciclista pedala, transferindo a energia para as rodas através da corrente. A força nos pedais faz as rodas girarem, impulsionando a bicicleta para a frente.
The main thing is In class:- my full attention is toward to my teacher and i barely understand anything In this vedio:- my full attention is on writing the comments down but i understood everything. ~Unknown~
A student in bed will remain in bed until acted upon by a large enough panic: The lesser-known Newton's 4th Law.
a student in motion will stay in motion until acted upon by a large enough sleepiness
completely true
Lmao so true, especially with COVID-19
lol
😭😭
Thank you for teaching in 3 minutes what my teacher couldn’t teach me in a week.
Lol
bruh
Lol 😂
when your teacher was the one who sent it to you :D
You probably didn't focus on the class. Don't always blame your teachers.
By far this is the perfect and easy explanation of Law of motion
ruclips.net/video/6a_cFv1jYsY/видео.html
You haven't played Artemis in Minecraft then...
3 hours worth of class compressed into 3 minutes worth of video
amazing...👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
3 hours worth of useless class compressed into 3 minutes worth of video
I agree. 1 month of 1 hour 30 minute classes only to be explained easily in 3 minutes
I did my own experiment by hitting my dad, and he reacted.
if this only has 1 like it was me.
Lol
LOL
Lolll
I also liked my comment
These videos are gold
Cylde Dellafish they are not gold,but diamonds....
True
4 years later and without this i wouldnt be passing
they straight up made this man dummy thicc just to slow him down
yeah
I was forced to watch this.
Zerospacedude dis my homework
same dude. for a test...
wiki page
I'm doing this for miss wasco XD
Tropic Splash WSMS
Me after watching 2 videos about maths and science.
*Now i know everything in the universe, im even smarter than einstein*
Same
then go watch a VSauce video
That’s basically how conspiracy theories start
Sometimes, I feel Newton's third law of motion is forced to suite a narrattive, even when it doesn't necessarily explain a phenomena. It is hard to explain the applicability of the law in relations to the motion a bicycle. I think it is because the bicycle moves vertically, meanwhile the law suites horizontal motion. It better fits the working for a rocket going to space. But for a bicycle I find I awkward. Great video by the way
yes! it gets confusing when the directions change
ENGLISH!!!!
The laws of physics are equally applicable in ALL frames of reference. It doesn't matter if the frame is vertical, horizontal, or rotating. It's all the sane physics.
E=mc. Acceleration defines mass/energy. There is only more acceleration or less acceleration.
THIS VIDEO IS 11 YEARS OLD
It is older than me like breh
Now , it is 12 years old.
@@usawtun1904 yup
@@Eznopedopeplayshow old are you 😭🙏
@@Eznopedopeplaysits so over…
Newton was really the true scientist who had changed the thinking habits of the people. Before him, people were facing the same kinds of problems but no one tried to find the reasons behind these happenings. I salute Newton for giving us a sense of thinking and imagining.
I wish your lectures were there in my college days, physics sure would have been fun
perfect! this explains it quite well. Nice demonstrations and real world examples that are easy to "rap my head around", however I would have added a bit more arrows to illustrate more forces which were applied / left out.
I love this. It is so fun to learn about things. especially, science of all kinds, mathematics, computer programming, engineering, Etc.
Are you stalking me?
Todd Gobbett no!
I really like when topics are used to relate a scientific concept. Here is a series about Psychology within the context of bicycle prejudice: ruclips.net/p/PLFOOfdNQa2zteDZZED-loSpz6SSxLtCDE
Nice video, but something missing or not directly stated, for Newton's 1st Law:
Objects at rest tend to stay at rest *unless acted upon by an outside force.*
Objects in motion tend to stay in motion with the same velocity (velocity is speed with direction, and depending on your frame of reference, it can be negative) *unless acted upon by an outside force.*
bruh he stated that, you need to apply force for your bicycle to start moving from rest but one it starts moving it becomes way esier to pedal.........
Ted ed has become my favorite channel after i got my first A in maths and now they both are straight A's
Ted is forever Ted. I love these lessons! @TED-Ed
Doesn't everyone?
How is it that TED education has so much better volume control than their regular videos on their director channel? The intro on that one is so much louder than the video itself.
This was very useful for doing my school work.
That's so cool bruh sub to my chaneeell
TEEJ no one cares
One question: How does the bike stay upright? When a person mounts a bike and stays still (no kickstand or legs, just the two bike tires) they fall over. But, we said person is moving it is really easy to stay up. However, no new force is applied in the left/right direction to help keep the bike up? So how does the bike stay up while it is in motion?
momentum... it is too "focused" on moving in one direction, that is to say it alleviates the potential of falling left or right like a domino. Remember that there is also air resistance... aerodynamics keep it aliened as well, much like an arrow flies straight and only straight, until an external force (such as wind or gravity) interferes. I hope this helped in answering your question.
Todd Gobbett But why do three wheelers stand upright even if they are not moving? why only vehicles having below 2 wheels fall down when not in motion? I mean my bicycle falls down but my car or tricycle doesn't when in rest.
blasttrash Because then the weight is more evenly distributed throughout the 3 given points. The tricycle has more surface area to support its centre of gravity. A bicycle or unicycle does not.
I believe the speed of the bicycle does not allow it enough time to be pushed over by air on either side. Or in other words, the force applied in propelling the bicycle forward is more than the force applied by the air on either side. Then there's also the fact that the centre of masses of you and the bicycle are properly aligned I guess. Todd Gobbett gave a pretty good explanation as well.
gilgamesh2399 actually these are all bad explanations
an arrow flies straight for a complitely different reason, air drag and gravity always work on it in flight
bicycle is not "too focused" on forward movement, there is no such quantity in physics
this is explained via precession, which is a very comlex mechanical concept that relies on the conservation of angular momentum
a frisbee flies, a spinning ball changes direction, a spinning top stays stable - all due to precession
thank you for asking questions
btw to anyone who got it wrong: props for trying, it is better than not analysing at all. :)
How many cyclists does it take to let the earth spin at the speed of an average cyclist?
The earth already spins faster. It spins at about 1000 mph
The earth already spins faster. It spins at about 1000 mph
Divide mass of world by mass of cyclist. A person ways 70 kg whereas the earth ways something like 6,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 kg so we're talking something like more than 10,000,000,000,000 times more people than live on the planet atm.
1 thousand moles
way more than the population right now
please explain static friction and its relationship to the backward force of the tires to the ground
Simple, Short but VERY useful. Thank you 🙃
this really helped me understand better of newtons laws
So if we all cycled East, we would make the world spin faster?
+Matthew Smith No lol. The Earth is so massive (literally "mass"ive"), and many people will end up on the sea floor within 1 sec
+Matthew Smith This actually happens every morning in major cities world-wide in the morning commute. It's just that with their commute home at night, the world is set right again.
+Matthew Smith yes it would, but by an amount so tiny it would be unmeasureable
Echelon Arts Photography Well not everyone go to work by travelling east, therefore if the people going east should balance people going west
Actually slower.. no?
My teacher in middle school explained the 3rd law like punching a wall. The softer you hit the wall the softer the molecules in the wall hit back, the harder you hit it the harder they hit back at you and that's why it hurts
These videos are so valuable.
fr
Thanks for putting a a whole week lesson into 3 minutes appreciate it😁😁
11 years ago huh ty for that great video
A little error in the video. Please make sure that the directions of reaction force on two different tyres of cycle after 2:50 should be different, and not the same.
Otherwise, it is a nice video. Inspired.
there is no mistake in the video.. the direction of the wheels rotation is same that y the cycle moves ahead, if the forces are opposite (*which is impossible if u are cycling*) like you stated they will cancel out each other and cycle wont move.. what you are stating is that in a cycle the wheels move in opposite direction
l
Rahul Roy
I don't follow what the person is saying. Maybe the idea is that the back tire is acting, because the rider is pedalling, but the front tire is reacting (to the road), since the rider is not pedalling it, so what is taken to be the action and what is the reaction changes. Nevertheless, the directions of the pairs of forces are indicted correctly as far as I can see.
Rahul Roy
You need to brush up physics concepts man... Action reaction don't cancel. And I know what I am saying. Kindly refer some physics books before commenting here..
Kenneth Florek
Nopes...
Newton's
1st law - 0:48
2nd law - 1:19
3rd law - 2:04
THANK YOU
@@kierstenhoggard3955 your welcome!
Thanks Bro, This video helped me a lot in Newton's law of motion.
Thank you
I love riding my bicycle!!
Only on the rear wheel with power does the ground's reaction force push forward, on the front it has an opposite effect, to counter the friction of ye olde wheel bearing and such. The reaction force arrow shall point towards the rear on the front tire I declare!!
Newton and Bicycles??? My two favorite & most interesting things??? Awesome!!!!!
Excellently Explained!!
These videos are such a great way to refresh on things !
It's only the hind-wheel that pushes back to the Earth (action), so it's only the hind-wheel that receives the reaction from the ground. The rest of the bike is pushed forward by the hind-wheel.
this was the best explanation i found!!!
One should be sure that all of what's said in this video is valid in an inertial frame only.
He's leaving out the center of gravity and the angle or geometry of the pedal mechanism and the slope of mass upon which the force is exerted.
Awsome explanation🎉🎉🎉 just lovedit
You have to be consider each object separately:
1. The bike pushes on the Earth such that it accelerates in the direction it is pushed.
2. Simultaneously, the Earth exerts a force on the bike in the opposite direction so the bike accelerates that way.
You might understand this better if you consider rowing a boat. When your paddles push on the water, you send the water in one direction whilst travelling in the opposite direction. The foces are equal and simultaneous, acting on different objects.
the second law does actually does not say that force is the product of mass and acceleration ,it says that force is equal to change in momentum w.r.t time. As we derivate it further we obtain the said result but it is not actually what the second law says
Wow, I just noticed a flaw in this video. At 2:11 it says "As the bouncey ball hit's the floor, it causes a downward force on the floor... The floor reacts by pushing on the ball in the opposite direction." This is wrong. The floor isn't what reacts, it's the object that CAUSES the reaction. The ball is the reason it goes in the opposite direction. If what the video was saying was the case, the floor would have to be flexible.
O ato de iniciar a pedalada em uma bicicleta demonstra-se potencialmente mais desafiador do que manter uma velocidade constante, em virtude de fatores que incluem a necessidade de superar a inércia inicial, equilibrar-se adequadamente, ajustar as marchas de maneira pertinente, lidar com resistências iniciais e coordenar meticulosamente os movimentos. Tais desafios, entretanto, tendem a ser progressivamente superados por meio da prática sistemática e da aquisição de habilidades específicas associadas ao processo inicial de movimentação.
A fantastic and concise explanation for those looking to re-educate themselves after being out of school for some time.
A boy called Usman Riaz wrote the music from his album Circus in the Sky. hes a TED Fellow. you can get more information on his facebook page.
A student will remain at rest, or will constantly binge watch, unless the force of realization of due work kicks in
I don't like action-reaction and F=ma as a physics teacher. Replace it with forces come in pairs and a = F/m.
thanks for teaching me in 3mins which 2 teachers couldnt teach me in a week.
in the 3rd law ,is it an equal and an opposite reaction, or a reaction thats equal?they spoke differently in the 17th century than we do now.so did Newton word the 3rd law badly, or since we percieve/live in a 3 dimensional world are there two reactions to the original action?i.e. an equal reaction and an opposite reaction.
i always thought the 3rd law was worded badly. it should be "an equal opposite reaction",not "an equal and opposite reaction".
It's just one reaction. And yes it it worded somewhat unclearly.
Here is the thing:
F is not equal to m * a. It's equal to rate change of momentum
i.e. d/dt (mv)
If the mass remains constant, then only f = m×(dv/dt) = m×a. Assumptions should be minded all the time.
???
Unfortunately I will not use this video in my physics class. Already mentioned in previous posts: 'overcoming inertia' is not correct, action and reaction happen simultaneously (that is why I prefer the use of the word interaction forces). I want to add to this list of errors that the reaction forces of the floor on the weels of a bicycle do NOT both point foreward. In fact the (static) friction of the floor on the weels points foreward on the rear wheel, but backwards on the front wheel.
could you please explain the 2nd one in a more specific way.i didn't get it so good
but it was awesome explanation.thank you
Light can break Newton's third law:
Wimmer, M., Regensburger, A., Bersch, C. et al. Optical diametric drive acceleration through action-reaction symmetry breaking. Nature Phys 9, 780-784 (2013). DOI: 10.1038/NPHYS2777
really well explained
First law: 0:38
Second law: 1:10
Third law: 1:58
Physics is really awesome! and thank you for this simple and understandable demonstration.
I was looking at an 11 minutes long video, and by minute 7, I still haven't understood a thing. I came here and this guy just explained it to me in three minutes... what a goat.
The crash course innit
You forgot the most important law!
"A student at rest will remain at rest unless acted upon a deadline."
That video gave the impression that the energy from the bouncing ball is all delivered to the floor that in return sends it back to the ball, is this accurate? I don't really have knowledge about physics but I have always thought that the bouncing ball bounces because it has less resistance to keep the energy in itself by contracting and releasing it by expanding. This also explains why the doesn't bounce off a surface that is softer than the ball itself. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I believe it is a combination of both. Granted, you've probably learned this by now, since this comment was ten years ago, but for anyone else with the same question:
There are two parts to this. First, the ball delivers its energy to the ground, and the ground pushes it back. However, how much the ball actually bounces does depend on factors such as softness of the ground (softer absorbs more energy) and resistance of the ball, e.g., material and density. The second part is why rubber bouncing balls bounce better than hard, dense baseballs or soft, barely dense cotton balls.
Perfect explanation
i was forced to watch this
Good but why?
I don't think the front tire exerts a rearward force on the ground, only a downward force.
Needed for Performa Task, we need 3 laws in one action IT REALLY HELPS CAUSE I ALSO NEED EXPLANATION❤
If you bounce a ball on concrete the concrete doesn't give, the ball does. Even timber floorboards as shown in the cartoon wouldn't give enough to bounce a ball back up on its own. If that was the case then pretty much anything should bounce off a floor. Try bouncing a pillow. A rubber ball bounces because it's rubber. Rubber is flexible therefore bouncy. Unless of course the boards are full of termites, in which case the ball will just keep going.
So a power bottom will continue to generate power based on the ammount of force and mass he recieves?
True enough, but the number of times it is correctly shown as simultaneous as opposed to the number of times it is incorrectly shown as a cause and effect relationship means the average student will incorrectly remember that one force happens first and then the second force reacts to it. This is why I don't use the "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" phrasing when I teach the third law. But I probably err on the side of being more precise than the average student needs.
Newton's 4th law of motion -😃A book remains at rest and covered with dust until and unless some internal or external exam appears.😆 The speed of turning page is directly proportional to the syllabus to be covered and the tension remains constant. 😅🤣
🤣🤣
Thanks
A Pharaoh in a tomb will keep sleep in a tomb, and a student on a bed will keep in his bed.🎉
My favorite physicist
Kla M.3/13 #10 This videos summarize three law of Newtons and Explain about Newton's law. Three law of Newtons is Connected.What newton recognized was that thing tend to keep doing. "Newton's Law of Motion" in humankind is importance because Newton's Law of Motion is basic for movement and Newton's Law of Motion is can do many thing .
My lecturer was talking about dynamic processes one day and made an example: "Imagine a car that is moving at 80 km/hour speed. It will have 20 meters breaking distance. Why?" - I wanted to yell: "Inertia!", but he interrupted: "Because a car has memory!" :)
This is super good!
Newton's second law doesn't state that F=MA rather Force is the rate of change of momentum
Yes, but both are correct. Force by definition is the ability to accelerate objects, or even deeper, cause a change in momentum of the object.
bro you really taught me what my teachers couldn t
I love videos like these.
This was the easiest explanation thanks
1.4 Million views but only 546 comments!
Excellent video
I understand what you want to show with your example of the bouncy all, but actually it's not the "action" of the floor pushing the ball up again (otherwise a marble would bounce the same way) - it's the ability of the bouncy ball to quickl deform and immediatly reform again!
Or am I wrong?
vitopetre it all depends on how elastic the collision is...
thanks joshua, that was mildly interesting.
Awesome explanation btw what application have ya used for the animation of this video pls do tell!
K WOW I LOVE TED TALK YOU LEGIT HAVE BEEN HELPING ME SO MUCH IN MY FINALS AH
Thank you, you have saved me, I would’ve been relying on chat gpt if I didn’t know this and I actually need to learn rather than copy😭😭
Thanks a lot! You helped me understand the lecture
Can someone please explain why the reaction force was greater than the action force we gave to the ground so wo move forward?
thank you so much for this video! Simple and quick explanation! Keep up the good work!
Damn this website actually makes physics interesting,i absolutely hate hysics like in other subjects i get as and bs but not physics
i mean channel not website sorry
As a physics teacher, my problem with this video is that it incorrectly implies that the action and reaction forces are not simultaneous. This may be the fault of the animator rather than the lecturer. Unfortunately, it makes the video useless for my classes. It is a common misconception that the action force happens first and then the reaction force, but one I do not want to perpetuate. TEDEd, is there any chance that we could get a revised version on the video without this error?
A bicicleta move-se quando o ciclista pedala, transferindo a energia para as rodas através da corrente. A força nos pedais faz as rodas girarem, impulsionando a bicicleta para a frente.
The main thing is
In class:- my full attention is toward to my teacher and i barely understand anything
In this vedio:- my full attention is on writing the comments down but i understood everything.
~Unknown~
There's action & reaction in nature so why is this perfectionism
It's the friction that you need to overcome to keep moving though...
Bruh!! I want a teacher someone like you
How am I propelled to move in the forward direction due to the reaction force(Since the action force is balanced by the reaction force)
Thanks studying for finals I’m so tired I can barley look at the page this helped a lot thanks