Simpler Than You Think

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a slice of pie for yourself:
makit.wtf/charity/
(In case the site don't work, use the direct link)
www.gofundme.com/f/a-slice-of...
In case you'd like to support me:
patreon.com/sub2MAKiT
my discord:
/ discord
My twitch:
/ charitycheckups
Other MAKiTs:
‪@MAKiTResearch‬
‪@mktcharity‬
‪@makitmovies‬
‪@makitshitpost‬
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once again I'd like to thank sodaguyz for allowing me to use their music in my video, here are the links:
their main channel: / @sodakcmusic
their second channel: / channel
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intro: 00:00
Boat fender: 00:18
The really cool E equation: 06:00
Two lines: 10:30
MAKiT WILL BUILD A WEAPON?: 14:29

[@crumblycookie3518]

Why do I feel like one day he’ll make a weapon and it will just be a giant steel integer

[@robotcrocodilio3109]

Science makit moment

[@Goat0910]

*Crowbar moment*

[@HungryAppl3man]

Inside you there are two wolves, the one who is lazy and does all the equations needed to get a perfect result without thinking much about it, and the one who is lazy and uses the good enough method

[@insearchofpeace-xp3cf]

☕

[@roiburshtein852]

Nah that a+bx+cx^2 has caught me off guard

[@SKYTutorials]

Many Things are simpler than you Think because thinking is more Complicated than most things.

[@lih3391]

You should watch sudgylacmoe's intro to projective geometric algebra. In essense, the smarter you are about representing 3d stuff, the less convoluted your algebra will be, and it's A LOT of algebra you don't need to do.

[@MRYachim]

For the two lines, why not just take the lengths of the two vectors directly and subtract them? Also, if the target point is to the left the x coordinate of the points P2 and P3 should be - (y - d/2) = -y + d/2 (assuming y > 0 since it's the distance). To prevent this and make it easier, I will place the coordinate system between the two slits so that the target point is at a distance y from the center (making it symmetric).
The points are (replacing P2 and P3 with T since they are the same):
left slit: Pl = [-d/2, 0]
right slit: Pr = [d/2, 0]
target: T = [y, D]
The displacement vector is the difference between two points:
left: vl = T - Pl = [y + d/2, D]
right: vr = T - Pr = [y - d/2, D]
|vl| = √[(y + d/2)^2 + D^2] = √(y^2 + yd + (d^2)/4 + D^2)
|vr| = √[(y - d/2)^2 + D^2] = √(y^2 - yd + (d^2)/4 + D^2)
the difference (as absolute value):
s = | |vl| - |vr| | = |√(y^2 + yd + (d^2)/4 + D^2) - √(y^2 - yd + (d^2)/4 + D^2)|

[@MAKiTHappen]

Yes, you can and that's kind of my point
The purely graphical, brute force way with no thinking is convoluted and pointless, and the more thinking you add the simpler and clearer the final equation

[@brandonhan9201]

underrated as usual keep up the good work!

[@FlaviousMaximus]

This one is one of the best you have done yet, you should do more math stuff

[@Daniel-yc2ur]

9:25 that equation can be simplified so much for example root 1? Collecting like terms like the s squared in the denominator?
13:01 you can simplify this in 2 ways,
1: arctan addition formula
2: cos(arctanx) or sin(arctanx) can be simplified using harmonic form
So the exact formula will be a lot cleaner

[@MAKiTHappen]

Whoops

[@pix5754]

Another banger by the goat. (Please continue making videos, they are so good #^#)

[@treidex]

ArcTan in pascal case is devious

[@Bennett_Fourr]

another makit banger

[@MysteriousObjectsOfficial]

This is so underrated.

[@m.you.301.13]

That's an amazing video, but idk why the forer formula isn't working on desmos, please give me the right way to apply it

[@alvargd6771]

just use the pythagorean theorem yeesh

[@bjornfeuerbacher5514]

I don't get the formula at 5:15. Why should the volume of the "pill" be Ap times Ap divided by f(0)?
Don't you have to calculate the volume by the formula pi times integral over f(x) squared, the formula for the volume of a solid of revolution? Or do you perhaps use Guldin's rule here somehow???

[@seard8442]

Is the equation simplified? If so, why is there √ 1 left, is it for demonstration purpose?

[@Anife69]

thanks makit now I know big equations

[@srig3649]

God I wish I could donate, but I fully understand you putting a paywall man
I hope you will gain more views soon though. I mean c'mon, the explanation and the animation!? You deserve it :)

[@milvus7392]

Amazing vid.

[@xen_relay2]

math 🥰🥰🥰

[@no.elements]

aaaaa so cool (nice axe by the way :) )

[@NStripleseven]

accurate

[@PizzaRanger]

Not all channels die

[@Daniel-yc2ur]

Who’s the target audience for this video? Someone who doesn’t know about Pythagoras but is familiar with Fourier transforms? What

[@MAKiTHappen]

There is no target audience, I just made it to be entertaining

[@howareyouhi12345]

Hi

[@wijo605]

yea you see even the math agrees with you, because you didn't spimplify these at all. If you would they would be way smaller. I'm probably just falling for comment bait right now so good job I guess

[@MAKiTHappen]

That was the point of the video you see.
The point being that if you just "brute-force" solve everything you'll end up with these massive equations which describe the simplest of things. Like a massive equation for what's effectively a pill, or a drawn-out pointless equation for something that could be simply approximated with a single ratio, and the actual skill in math comes from MAKiNG simpler equations that describe more complex phenomena.

[@wijo605]

@@MAKiTHappen oh ok that makes sense, I just completely misunderstood the message then c:

[@MAKiTHappen]

@@wijo605 Yeah, that is my fault, I don't think I explained my point all that well