==== NOT THE MAXWELL'S EQUATION === The "Faraday-Heaviside Framework" is a fitting and just title. It highlights Faraday’s foundational concepts and Heaviside’s mathematical genius, giving due credit to the true architects of modern electromagnetism. This term better reflects their intellectual lineage and removes undue emphasis on Maxwell’s intermediary role. Why Heaviside Deserves More Credit Heaviside didn’t just simplify Maxwell’s equations; he made them universally applicable. His vector calculus formalism reduced the cognitive load of solving complex problems, enabling practical advances like the development of telecommunication systems and modern electronics. Maxwell’s recognition likely owes more to historical bias and academic prestige. Heaviside’s outsider status and abrasive personality denied him the immediate acknowledgment he deserved. Conclusion: The Real Genius The modern framework of electromagnetism owes its existence to multiple contributors, but Heaviside’s role as the true architect of the equations’ final form cannot be overstated. His work not only unified the field but also ensured the practical utility of the equations, making him a true pioneer in electromagnetism. The foundational work of Ampère, Faraday, Coulomb, and Gauss is essential, but it is Heaviside’s genius that brought it all together into the compact, elegant formulation we recognize today. =============>>>> Many people in Maxwells positions write text books - I know because I worked in Academies and Research. It is how they cling onto power ...I agree with much of this but it's time to drop Maxwell into a role of a book for publishing category. At that time there were many books on Faraday's work - it was just Maxwells luck that his book came into possession of Oliver Heaviside. Line of contribution is simple from Faraday through Ampère, Faraday, Coulomb, and Gauss to Heaviside. QID (Maxwell is equivalent to Alexander Bell that had interest in the field but ended up being known as the inventors and originators unjustly )

Great! Thanks.

Hey @DrPhysicsA, special relativity or at least the way you explained it appears to be a bit flawed. Yes the balls thrown at 20mph raveling 30min has a net effect of 50 mph for an observer on a different frame of reference but the light is a little different. The photons are not physically traveling on the train, so to a photon all reference frames are the same. Also, I would imagine if you were on a train traveling at the speed of light the photon would appear inert to you on the train while both the train and the photon would be traveling at light speed to some one on the different frame of reference. I don’t know why but in my head this appears to be a simple matter. Your thoughts? By the way I have never studied general or special relativity

Great video, thanks for this! At 30:29 when the chain rule is used, i am having trouble with this mathematically: So dPhi/dy1 = dPhi/dx1 . dx1/dy1 + dPhi/dx2 . dx2/dy1 But if i want to check this is sound and therefore i say lets cancel sll the x terms (for argument sake, to see if it makes sense to me) then i end up with dPhi/dy1=dPhi/dy1 + dPhi/dy1. Can anyone correct me here? There is a reason for this, i just cant remember 😅 Edit: I remember now, the dPhi in the LHS is not the same thing as the dPhi in the RHS. Basically the RHS dPhi only relate to their change wrt to the co ordiante we deriving with i.e. each dPhi on the RHS is the partial change of Phi wrt to x1 or x2. Well i hpe thats correct, please correct me if im wrong here

SOLUTION FOR DARK MATTER observe a galaxy and we see stars at the edge moving much faster than they should, so it was proposed that there is additional mass in the galaxy that holds the stars and stops them from being flung away. The mass of the galaxy is measured in two ways- 1 by observing the brightness of the stars and the radiations of other celestial bodies. 2 by the means of gravitational lensing. the observed mass was less than the calculated mass from gravitational lensing and calculated mass from the velocities of outer stars in the galaxy.. By this observation it was concluded that there is mass in the galaxy that is invisible and only affects gravity that mass was called dark matter. however there is a flaw in the method of measuring the mass of the galaxy by the brightness of the stars and planets when observing far away galaxies a factor was not accounted for which is, The galaxies are millions, possibly billions of light years away and what is observed is the state of them millions of years ago but they also exist in a universe that is millions of years younger than it is right now. as was discovered universe is expanding and the expansion is accelerating, so millions of years ago the overall density of the universe was higher than it is now also time slows down in presence of high density (dense gravitational fields)(time dilation) The brightness of the galaxies is a result of various chemical reactions, fusion reactions and physical processes all of which have time as a common factor. as time slows down the rate of such reactions and processes also slow down which results in a much lower observed brightness for us but this doesn't affect gravity and hence the difference in the mass calculated by the two methods. So the stars that we observe are emitting lower levels of radiation than they would due to time slowing down for the entire galaxy this should account for the missing matter in the observed galaxy(fully or partially). thought experiment in interstellar movie the time dilation was exaggerated but let us assume it was correct and place a piece of uranium (235) (1kg) on miller the half life of that ore is 700 million years here on earth but if we just focus and observe the radiation of that uranium ore on miller from earth we see that the amount of radiation observed is much lower than what you see from a sample of 1kg uranium on earth as the half life of the sample on miller will be 700 million years of miller's time, so from earth it would take 61320*700million years of earth time for one half life(as stated in the movie 1 hr on miller is 7 years on earth, so 1year on miller is 365*24*7=61320 years on earth ) and the observed radiation will be (1/61320) time than it should be So from earth it would look like there is (1/61320) kg of uranium on Miller's surface this is what's happening when observing galaxies. This theory also explains the odd uniformity in the brightness of the galaxy from the center to the edge as the mass concentration in the center reduces the brightness and as we move away from the center the effects of time dilation reduces which gives the galaxy a uniform brightness. this theory if found true can help trace a cosmological map of the rate of expansion of various regions of the universe in a more precise way how to verify the theory according to the theory the dark matter percentage in galaxies of same mass should increase from newer galaxies to older galaxies with older galaxies having more dark matter but this would be a general trend with exceptions as the rate of expansion of different regions of the universe might be different and the effects of the mass around the observed galaxy would also affect the dark matter levels. This also means that the time we experience is passing faster and faster as the universe expands and gravitational wave density decreases. This theory might fully or partially explain the missing matter but the logic stated should hold true. maneet singh

Very good explanation !

So then how can light slow down in water if it doesn’t have energy

14:46 Metric tensor 27:07

Do you have variational methods anywhere on you channels? Tried looking for them, but not sure if they even exist...

Better than thousands of videos

They won't tell you that,This force, cause,s all life to pop in and out of Existence Why won't they tell you?😮😮😮😮

What's wrong is there is no positive and negative its one chain, I see all.🎉and One Power Luke Skywalker 🍯🗣️🌬️💨

What's wrong is there is no positive and negative its one chain, I see all.🎉and One Power Luke Skywalker 🍯🗣️🌬️💨Eat Banana's

i understand that the wave function is a complex number. But may I ask why the function must be in complex? instead of being simply cos(kx-wt)? many thx

DrPhysics, i thank you for these lectures from India

20:18 why K is taken negative?

Excellent explanation!

Just say because it's changing direction, it is changing velocity and therefore accelerating... such an easier way to explain it.

Thank you. I am in the middle of reading A brief history of time which mentioned Feynman’s sum of histories..which you indeed explained superbly 😊

If he started later in KZbin, might have attained even more subscribers.

You are perfect

Unfortunately you mix units and symbols all together. But great video! Symbol: V = E / q (voltage) Units: V = J / C (units)

Einstein once said "there are some things that are simple, but are hard to compute". Looks like one of those. PS. If I (as PhD) fail to follow the reasoning - this is not Einstein's issue. This is the issue of my mental capabiliries. Go, science, go. Pps. This looks like "just learn and use the trigonometry". Well, I failed to learn trig.

God of physics🎉🎉🎉

ChatGPT recommended me this channel and it's so good 😍❤️

thanks i have no word to thank you. i was bit confused about the given topic but i feel so relaxed now. you taught me well.

How much electron volts [EV] is n=1 for the other chemical chemical elements (118 from periodic table)?

THANK YOU! 😭😭

very nice video! helped me tremendously

I want someone in my life as reliable as whatever he is writing with.

🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉

As a professor of physics, I can just say that there is excellent teaching going on here. Hat off.

Wow at last I found the way to put every puzzles that i had learnt together. Thank you

7:21 the answer of the question that you emphasized is u = - 2.3m/s , s = 1.27 meter ?

who is come in 2024😢

But long before the singularity only theoretically by extrapolation can occur all matter and atoms would undergo fusion and fission and be transformed to pure energy. This enrgy,all of it, would evapourate away from the evr increasing density thereby slowing the contraction and prevent the creation of the threshold. Therefore a Black Holes are merely figments of human mathematical imagination and cannot nor do not exist in reality. They are only hobbies of mathematical physics which garner prizes and funding for otherwise impractical physicists.

It's also possible that because of this intensity equation that if a star is far enough away the light may never reach us if it is truly infinitely far away from us. Especially with that silly radiation wall we observe through our telescopes; which I believe may just be technical limitations on our system, and is akin to the draw distance on video games. Potentially providing proof we are all in a simulation.

! Wow!

Really appreciated ❤❤

This is my summary of the video Psi가 e^ i(kx-wt) 꼴임을 전제(이전 영상 참고). 1)dPsi/dx = ik Psi d^2 Psi / dx^2 = - (p^2 / k^2) Psi E, p, U 관계를 통해 TISE 유도 2)dPsi/dt = -iwPsi EPsi = h바/(-i) dPsi/dt TISE의 EPSI항에 대입하여 TDSE 유도. Comparision with general physics textbook: - SE is given - solve with **seperation of variables** - get phi = e^ -iEt/h and psi follows TDSE and Psi = psi * phi - general solution is sum of c_n Psi_n

please can you talk about dimension

Very nicely made!

Difficult but well explained thank you😊

@DrPhysicsA - Great Video! You do an excellent job of explaining things. You are very clear and easy to follow. I'm learning a lot and have been taking notes. I'm about half way through the video (and I want my notes to be accurate), but I do have one question: at about 1:02:05 you say that the double differential is represented by capital gamma; however, at about 1:03:25, you add that value to your partial of V with respect to y. It seems to me that value should be subtracted. Can you please help me understand if I am missing something? I appreciate your video & your efforts!

Man! U r the guy who taught so well through ur videos tht i was able to pass Alevel physics with out any other teacher! Although i got a D but i wanna say thanks!

-i is not come from how u solve it in the end....it must be +i as you show it in your solution

Thanku so much for explaining it really help me in radiology subject

10:08 “newton’s theorem”?? i think 🤔 gauss’s theorem 😊

Dr Physics and Jason ( Maths and Science) are the best teachers.

I found this channel a few days ago! It’s brilliant👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻