Thank you stanford university for making this free to everyone, i decided to study physics however had (in germany) to decide between chemistry and physics as a school subject, i chose chemistry inorder to at least have some fundamental knowledge about it. Now i figured out that german university have their lectures uploaded however only on private servers which are unacessable to anyone whos not in their university. Thanks for giving me the chance to learn the basics to prepare for university
[Paraphrased] "There are some things you only want to experience once, like a book. You don't want to read the same thing over and over again. But there are other things, like music, that you'll want to listen to continually because it just feels good. I hope my lectures are like that... (paraphrased)." Why yes, Professor Susskind, your lectures are a treasure to listen to. Stanford for the win. :)
The question I need an answer for…on what type of machine..matter…system whatever..can we apply those equations and rules??…I don’t want to study mechanics I’d rather experience mechanics…
when i looked at your symbols of T and T+1 i thought from left to right you started at T+1 to T which did not make sense-then when repeating the video hear you say it starts at T "then" T+1- but looking at it reading from left to right it looks like going back in time in progression
@Darkownage2 I agree with you completely. But I would like to try and expand on your points. Firstly, I would like to discuss the concept of truth. Now truth is a concept that has been create merely in order to make us productive so we can survive. For example, two cavemen agree that the truth is that a bear is in a cave and so they don't go into the bloody cave or more interestingly two cavemen agree that the truth is that murder is evil so they do not kill each other.... SEE NEXT POST
711,000 people viewed this and learned at least a little bit in a very short time. It was a free class taught by an extremely educated man. Imagine the world we would live in if we had this kind of access to every class
Notes about lecture: conservation law conserved quantaty allowable laws of physics, allowable rules 25:40 non-allowable law (in classical physics) can't retrodict the past (opposite of predict) non reversable if reversed, unpredictive (don't know this or that comes next) 29:20 predictive one way, not retrodivtive other way not reversable, "I" don't call it irreversable 30:10 classical physics doesn't allow probability conflicts with the rules of classical mechanics quantum mechanics are not deterministic ambiguity in knowledge of initial condition, so from this statistics in classical mechanics despite deterministic 33:30 how precise do you know the initial condition, this determins how far you can predict the future, example three day weather forcast other way around, if you know how far you want to predict, then you can determine how exact you need to know the initial condition 35:50 allowable, if every state has one incoming and one outgoing arrow next example: point particle(s) moving in space 37:30 first some preliminary mathematics vectors, coordinate systems coordinate system: describing space quantitatively space with three dimensions/coordinates but we are perfectly free to think of systems higher dimensioned or lower dimensioned 38:10 we are interested in describing the basic pricipals, so we don't have to restrict ourselves to specific examples a particle can move in one dimension, it can move in five dimensions, but for now we use three dimensions 39:30 three coordinates, doesn't matter where we put the origin, but it's easiest to put it at the (? 0 location) the three axis are mutually perpendicular label e.g, x, y, z or x1,x2, x3 40:00 still ambiguity about the rotation of the axis, which direction they go in fixing the origin, we also have to fix the orientation of the x,y,z axis theres a convention, right handed coordinate system, if you pick x and y, still need to decide is z pointing in the blackboard or out of it, we settle at right hand, x thumb, y inex finger, then z middle finger points out of the board towards us this is the right hand rule another convention, for distance we choose units 41:50 point is labled by x,y,z, thats also how we describe a particle 43:10 what is a vector has both length and direction, for example a position of a point, relative to it' origin, magnitude is the distance, and it has a direction don't think of a vector of being located anywhere 43:55 vector is the same, no matter where it is drawn in space, doesn't need to be drawn in space vector labled by bar on top, more precise a little arrow it could e.g. be velocity, it could be acceleration, it could be an electronic field it's got, length/magnitude, and it's gotndirection 47:55 (see formula) length equals square root the sum of squares of its components adding vectors, multiplying vectors by numbers 53:30 VectA+VectB=VectC VectA*VectB=AMagnit.*BMagnitude*cos(winkel feda) "the calculated dot product" the product of two vectors is not a vector, it's a number 1:00:00 we can display the dot product in component form VecA*VecB=Ax*Bx+Ay*By+Az*Bz, you can prove this with a little bit if trigonometry VectA*VectA=AMagnt.*AMagnit. 1:08:40 The velocity is the time derivative of the position Dot means derivative with respect to time (so this does not have to be writtenover and over again) Velocity is x of i dot (x1, x2, x3 for the coordinates) 1:13:50 acceleration is derivative of velocity or second derivative of xi, so it's written x with 2 dots X - position V - velocity a - acceleration r-Vector for radius, positiin vector 1:16:00 Formula of an object falling in gravitational field with constant acceleration, xt=a+bt+ct2 uniformly accelerated particle, that has acceleration 2c 1:18:00 Circular motion x+y achsis, the angle increases linearly feda=omega*t 2Pi/omega=period omega is the angular frequency X=cos(feda), y=sin(feda) derivatives of trigonometric functions velocityX=-omega*sin(omega)t angle between velocity and position? more on velocity, acceleration, calculated ways for this shown
I remember watching videos like these before college, which definitely kindled a passion for physics and math deep inside me. Then I also started reading advanced books, which were not even part of the course syllabus, for example the famous series of books published by Lifshitz and Landau. Among other things, I published the step-by-step solutions to many of the classical physics problems in the first book "Mechanics" in an online course on Udemy (called: "Multivariable Calculus and Classical Physics problems"), which deals with the mathematics and physics of rigid bodies, non-inertial systems, and much more. This is to say that videos like these can be very helpful in inspiring youngsters to appreciate physics.
@@mpay2874 Oh I see, now it has a different name, it's called "Multivariable Calculus and Classical Physics problems", I decided to merge two courses into a single one, due to the strong connection between the two. So, yes, it is still available.
I'm in final year of my high-school and I'm slowly starting to love physics. Thinking about studying physics in undergraduate. So, spending my time watching these lectures.
I love this man. The way he explains things, the way he talks, the way he thinks, the way he moves, his wisdom. Having watched many of his lectures, I feel a deep friendship without ever having met him in person. Thank you so much, Lenny.
"can anyone guess what my first picture will be?" to that poor guy "of course you can, you've been here before." 💀💀💀💀 Bro got roasted in front of the entire class by the damn professor 😭
First 16 minutes is the most succinct and persuasive explanation for conservation of energy I’ve sat through. A lot of people tend to explain it through tautologies.
Coin and dice configurations and laws of motion, conservation; infinite configuration space 22:00; non allowable laws, reversibility 26:00; vectors 37:30; particle position and motion and acceleration 1:05:30; 2 examples: motion on a line, circular motion 1:15:00;
Susskind: *show a group of people how to draw a simple 2-dimensional graph* Also Susskind: *Assumes that the same group of people can differentiate trigonometric functions*
@@hiruki8 u didn't get the joke lol. Susskind tries to explain simple stuff and skips over relatively advanced stuff ( students know both) but just the way he is going on
1st of all. Thank you You are one of the greatest teachers I've ever come across. You love this Sh*t and it shows. I have one question. Do you mind showing me the equation of the simple rotating dice example. The one where 1 goes to 2 which goes to 3, etc... I apologize I am but a lowely plumber and electrician. I have been extremely interested in general relativity and quantum physics for over 30 years but the equations are over my head. Thank you
Finally I found someone who is going to teach me the concepts in math I need to understand my big love, astrophysics, a little better. That it's such a famous physicist, the better. I'm somewhat proud I still remember and understand most of what he talked about in this lecture although I graduated from high school 38 years ago although I never really needed this since then.
AMONG US TEACHER?????? ඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞඞ
no one bothered correcting the professor 28:00 , it is ETETET... not ETTE... , i don't know why was he lost throughout the whole lecture. not hating, just saying.
+Klanos 2x and 1.5x for me, but I had to go back to the stuff on dot product and proving the law of cosines cause I was playing Factorio and not paying attention. I love the speed feature of RU-vid. I feel like I have been robbed of some of my life because I didn't discover it sooner xD
I have a question: Are there exercises (and solutions) that was made for this lecture? I really like Susskind's lectures but I think one can only learn, if you do exercises. So I'd really like to get access to exercises that fits to this lecture. If anybody can give me some hints, where to find such exercises, I'd be very grateful. :)
How I recommend watching these videos: 1 Get some notebook paper. 2 At the top of every sheet, write the RU-vid video's web address, RU-vid Channel & video name. 3 If Prof. Susskind writes it down, you should also write it. 4 Write a timestamp on the left side of your notes so you can easily get back to a given subject. 5 Pause when needed. 6 Re-watch a section if you're still unclear. 7 Go to Khan Academy if you need to brush up on, or learn new math concepts ( ru-vid.com )
MikeRoePhonicsMusic Thats exactly what I did, but with another youtube channel named Prof. Leonard, he teaches calc, great teacher btw. Ive filled 3 books worth of calculus, im at calculus 2 rn.
So everyone knows this is not a real course lecture in classical mechanics! It's a course for non students who want to know more about how physics is done. It follows his book called the Theoretical Minimum and it is just minimal mathematics to show how it's roughly done! If you only followed this series as a replacement for actual lectures in CM you would fail so badly it would make your head spin!!!
Thank you Leonard and Stanford for this. The extras and insights mean a lot. You could lean this stuff from a Dover reprint, but learning it on a trajectory towards Scrodinger and company really helps one focus on what counts. I have been able to make quantum work for a long time, but I find myself returning to the roots over and over again to regain a sense of what I'm actually doing. I think lecture series like this are invaluable for contributing towards a future in which a significant subset of us understand what the world we can make claims about actually us.
It's a bit confusing that he uses dice and coins which are in the realm of probabilities to explain deterministic outcomes and states of a classical system
I'm taking this class in the spring and I'm scared. I've been told as long as I can solve differential equations I'm good but I still think I'm going to struggle. Anyways I think that these videos are going to help a LOT.
I have a question: I plan to watch all these lectures by Mr Susskind on classical mechanics, but will I get anything out of these lectures without an accompanying textbook? Thanks.
+potugadu Yeah, I'm in the same situation and I've found something interesting here: ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/8-09-classical-mechanics-iii-fall-2014/readings/ Hope that helps!
+loc tran Thanks. Honestly, I prefer not to read a textbook. I am neither looking to pursue a career in physics nor knowledge of physics required for my job; I am just curious about theoretical physics. So, I wanted to know if I can get by with just watching the lectures. I am willing to put pen to the paper, though. I did calculus based physics in high school & for a quarter in college long time back, and I consider my knowledge of physics & calculus still pretty good. BTW, lot of reviews of Landau & Lifshitz on Amazon state that it is not a beginner's book. A book by Georg Joos was recommended instead.
+potugadu Totally right! Landau is horrible even for the ones who study physics =)), it rather be a doc for reviewing when you've already cover all the stuff, I think. If you want to dig (but not too deep) in the physics, Taylor's or Thornton & Marion's would also be a good option. Or you can wait until the Edx have this course. It's well-fitted to those who prefer self-study, especially to study without reading textbook. :)
loc tran Thanks for recommending Taylor's book. Read reviews that it is a perfect book for self study. An edx/online course on theoretical physic will be great for learning with some structure & discipline, and also to finish the learning/course in fixed amount of time. For me, any study/learning with no deadlines means never completing the study.
+potugadu the best accompanying to this playlist is Susskind's book "Theoretical Minimum: What You Need to Know to Start Physics. and for the playlist on Quantum Mechanics is his other book.
Will he talk about the Hamiltonian mechanics and Legendre transformation later in this course? I am looking for physics underlying Symplectic and Poisson Geometry would appreciate it if you introduce some materials to me.
Could please activate in the video the option of automatic subtitles, that depends on the administrator, if they do not activate the other people does not get that option. Podrían por favor activar en el vídeo la opción de subtitulos automáticos, eso depende del administrador, si no lo activan a las otras personas no le sale esa opción.
Time in nature might not actually be the abstract of perceiving it as going back or forward to actual events but instead are actually the observable chronological movements of objects that are speeding up or slowing down "DEPENDING" on the level(amount) of gravity and perhaps G-force that's constricting or not constricting the atoms that gives the "OBSERVABLE CHRONOLOGICAL MOVEMENT" we all see around us
Came to supplement the awesome textbook with the lectures, but what’s with the camera-work.. it’s making me dizzy and nauseous 🤢 ..amazing content tho!! So guess I’ll have to soldier on.. 🤢 🤢 🤮
Think wind. Imagine a wind tunnel in the shape of an enormous cube and two adjacent walls and the floor are fans or air conditioners. For the sake of simplicity, ignore gravity and friction. Where's a speck of lint at any particular moment in time starting from a particular location. Basically I visualize most new information as wind or the equivalent in space, in which the various forces, described by vectors, result in a path some object moves.
at 19:03, the laws of evolution for die world are categorized by number and TYPE of cycles, e.g. there might be three cycles: one 1-cycle, one two-cycle and one 3-cycle, like his example but there could also be three 2-cycles, so it is more than just the number of cycles - as he hinted.
In science, when predicting how it works, everywhere we seek for a deterministic solution. Hence Probability is only required if some laws of science seems to be uncertain by the law itself, such as putting a bird in a cage and calculating its displacement at time t to the initial displacement. Similar to the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle of quantum Physics. If something is in-deterministic in science and it seems by only the limitation of our knowledge, then we consider probability, but probability is the part we want to avoid to use in determining quantities in science, but it does and without that it may become more unpredictable...
According to this source, dice was once the plural of die, “but in modern standard English dice is both the singular and the plural: 'throw the dice' could mean a reference to either one or more than one dice.”
Frankfurt is in Deutschland isn't it? Where is Twin Cities sir? I see in page vii of Editor's Preface to the First Edition. "...being built on Mississippi at Monticello, about forty miles upstream from the Twin Cities."
1 A. Philip Bray 2 Stanley I. Auerbach 3 Arthur R. Tamplin 4 William A. Brungs 5 Joseph A. Lieberman 6 Ernest D. Harward 7 Charles L. Weaver 8 Merril Eisenbud 9 J. Newell Stannard 10 Harold P. Green 11 Craig Hosmer 12 S. David Freeman 13 M. King Hubbert 14 James T. Ramey 15 Barry Commoner
Yo who tf cheaped out on a 1080p camera in 2012? 1080p has been the standard since mid-2000's. Stanford is supposed to be a pillar in the education community. Someone couldn't add another $50-100 at the time to get some decent quality?
suskind takes simple subjects and makes them complicated.... i think it's like he's told to teach classical mechanics, so instead he decides to talk about what it is in terms of systems or something interestinly some people argue that quantum mechanics is deterministic we just haven't found out how (hidden rules) ... to me it's all just models i think you can use them without thinking so deeply
I really like the book as a companion to these lectures. It gave me deeper insight in some physics concepts that I used to just "take for granted" otherwise. The exercises also help for that matter and I can't wait for a quantum mechanics sequel and the rest of the series.