Hello! On this channel, I share educational videos about Physics & Maths. I studied at Cambridge for 8 years, first gaining an MSci in Natural Sciences (specialising in Physics) and then a PhD in Astronomy. During my PhD, I also worked as a Physics supervisor for four different Cambridge colleges. Now, I'm working as a private tutor, teaching Physics & Maths up to A Level standard. More information here: benyelverton.com/
Hello, in a question about essentially this problem it's mentioned that the constraint is rheonomic (time dependent). However, to me that does not seem to be the case. What do you think?
Hello. Thanks for the video. Should the Euler Lagrange Equation have an extra term on the right hand side of the equation instead of zero since it is a non-conservative system? Thanks
@DrBenYelverton thank u DrBen.I know it is a bit difficult to make a high quality intuitive video about elliptic functions ( integrals) & their applications in mechanics problems such as (not small angle pendulum or rigid body dynamic equations ) But in ur representation it would be great.Again thank u for ur great efforts 👌
for the SHM equation of motion for theta, is it also possible to solve it using newtonian mechanics and considering that the centre of mass of the system will stay constant?
This is very interesting sir. What about water bottle rockets though? What would be different when calculating the boost in speed and/or acceleration if we take into account the pressurized air within the bottles? I would be immensely grateful if you could make a video on that.
What would be the changes to this derivation in the case of a water bottle rocket? Considering the pressurized air inside the water bottle which causes water expulsion and thrust?
So since the constant curves of mu and nu intersect at more than one point, we need to choose the quadrant of the point that corresponds to the value of nu that we chose. This way any point mu,nu will describe a single point in space. I also did this by looking at x and y with a fixed mu, and that just gives you a cos and sin parametrization with different scaling factors. Let me know if this is a correct interpretation please. Thank you!
Thank you. I have been spending hours searching for some explanation of inertial forces and Reynolds number. It's the only video that clarified my doubts. And all in once.
Excellent, I'm glad this helped! A lot of explanations are very mathematically involved but it's possible to understand the concepts intuitively with quite a simple model.
Sir where to find other video where you apply this equation. Just cuosity leads to a class 12 student to see most general equation for us (damping, forced ossilation combined) and it turn oit to be intresting😅😅.
Sir, why we take angle of upper T acting on length element as theta+d(theta) not theta - d(theta) as upper angle is less then lower angle(angle made by lower T with horizontal?
Have you seen Steinmetz’s diagram of the dielectric and magnetic fields in his book? commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Elementary_lectures_on_electric_discharges,_waves_and_impulses,_and_other_transients_(Steinmetz_1911,_fig_9).png The dielectric field is what you are talking about here and they are interrelated with the magnetic field.
Dear sir , I have a question if u r seeing this can u clarify it . If we observe a object which is rotating with omega from a frame of reference which is itself rotating with angular speed omega prime , then what should be the centrifugal force in our frame of reference on that object .
Great explanation....I was stuck with a problem in Berkeley Volume 1... I was using conservation of energy and what was getting was sqrt(gx)... thanks a lot
Well, wasting energy just means converting it into a form that's not useful. Conservation means that the sum of useful and wasted energy remains constant but you want to keep the useful proportion as big as possible!
Been trying to find a really sound derivation of this and this is the only one I’ve located that really goes through it rigorously without making leaps in logic that obscure the explanation, great work!
Thanks for saying so, glad this was helpful. There are quicker ways to do this but I wanted to show that it still works out if you consider all the details!
Nice and clear explanation! But one quick question, how do you know to try with geometric sequence? Just because each term is the term times the previous term? This is still quite a leap for me...
