I'm glad it's helped 😊

I'm glad it's helped you

I'll try speaking twice as fast next time 😄

I'm glad I could help you 😊

Thank you 😊

I'm glad it's helped you 😊

♥

Hello. What the question is saying is the acceleration of the particle moving in a circle increases proportionally to the distance of the particle to the enter of the circle multiplied to the velocity of the particle. If we were to plot this with acc on the y axis and (r^n*v^m) on the x axis, it would form a straight line because the two terms are proportional to one another. What we don't know is how steep or shallow this line is... what is the gradient of the line? So, the best we can do is place a constant infront to represent the gradient. If you remember from High School maths, you can plot straight line graphs of y = mx + c In our case y=a m=k x=r^n*v^m and c=0

@PhysicsTutoringHub thank you

If it's still confusing, don't worry these types of questions can be tricky and take time to understand. And it might be a good idea to present this question to your tutor and work through the solution together. They'll be able to explain the constant (k) in more detail than I can here and they'll be able to draw a graph showing you exactly what's going on.

Me neither 😄

Hopefully it has helped you though!

I'm glad it's helped you! 😊

I'm really glad this video is helping 😊 And don't worry about last weeks test result. I've had a few bad test results in the past even when I thought I'd done really well on the test. Sometimes teachers don't explain all the details that clearly (the same is probably true for my videos hear as well) that's why student's must watch videos from a variety of different channels before it sticks. I wish you luck, Table, for your next test 😁

You're most welcome and thank you for the kind words 😁

Thank you very much 😊

Time is something you can measure and has units of seconds. Dimensional analysis is about making sure that the units on both sides of your equation are the same.

Thank you so much. I'm glad it's helping you 😊

Brilliant! I'm so glad it's helped you out 😊

You're very welcome Jaap. 😊

That's really nice of you to say. Hearing this makes making these videos worth it. 👍

Hi, this is a really good question. There isn't a single, exact method for creating equations in physics and it can be a lengthy process. First we might start by making observations, taking measurements and finding patterns in our experimental data. E.g. We fire alpha particles at a thin sheet of gold and, to our amazement, some alpha particles bounce back! - (Rutherford's Gold Foil Experiment). This result is unexpected, so we use logic and the physics we already know to develop a hypothesis as to why alpha particles fly back in our direction - maybe, gold atoms have a dense "nucleus" where the majority of its mass is located. Even though Rutherford was right - atoms have a dense nucleus, he introduced a new problem and question involving orbiting elections: According to classical mechanics, a charged particle moving in a curved path would emit electromagnetic radiation, causing the electrons to lose energy and spiral into the nucleus. If there is a dense nucleus, why do the electrons still remain in stable orbits in the atom? Rutherford couldn't solve this problem but Niels Bohr attempted with his own experiments and mathematics. Long story short, we need to learn maths and physics sequentially and once our physics and maths knowledge is strong enough, we can develop our own equations and experiments like Rutherford and Bohr.

Thank you. I'm glad it's helped.

@@PhysicsTutoringHub your welcome

Thank you 😊

Brilliant 😊

you should make more videos like this sir

@@oy29 Thanks😊 I've got 79 videos on this channel so far but I'm working on more all the time. I'll be doing more mathematics vids in the near future.

⁠@@PhysicsTutoringHubsir canyou make video on basic of algebraic expression basic

@@PhysicsTutoringHubbtw where ru from ? sir

Hi 😊 That's a good question. So, with this equation, it's best if we break it down into parts rather than trying to understand the whole eqn in one go. r1 and r2 represent lengths. If r1 = 10 ft and r2 = 2 ft, then (r1 - r2) = 10ft - 2ft = 8ft You can see here that our answer for (r1 - r2) = 8ft has dimensions of length (8ft is a measurement along a 1 dimensional line). But, (r1 - r2) has been squared using the ^2 symbol, this means that we are multiplying a length by a length -> (r1 - r2)*(r1 - r2) = 8ft * 8ft = 64ft^2 (64 feet squared) When we multiply two lengths together we get an area. If you look at your bedroom wall, for example, the height of the wall will be around 8ft tall. It's width along the bottom might also be 8ft, which means the total surface area is 8*8 = 64ft^2. This comes in useful if you need to calculate how much paint you'd need to cover your entire wall. Don't worry if you don't understand right away, this video is meant for students aged 16 and above, so you're doing really well getting this far. 😊

Thanks. I'm glad it's helped you.

You're welcome Khadija 😊

I'm really pleased it's helped you Emmanuel 😊

That's realy good. I'm glad it's helped you 😊

Thank you 😊

Hello Nora. I'm really glad the video is helping 😊. I had a quick look back at the part you mentioned. I don't think I said that the sum of r1 and r2 is not a length, but I did say when you multiply two lengths together you'd get an area. So at 18:55 I say that the height itself is a length, but when you square a length, you're effectively multiplying it by itself -- it becomes an area. At 19:35 I say that when we square the sum (r1- r2) it turns into an area, because we are multiplying two lengths together -- (r1-r2)^2 = (r1-r2)*(r1-r2) = L * L = A I hope this clears things up.

Hello. Thank you. Yes, the video is helping a lot. I did not understand much of my lecture but I was able to understand your video. 🙏 Maybe my hearing is wrong, because it still seems to me that from 18:43 you say "...and we can see this, because the sum of r1 and r2 won't result in a length." Anyways, thank you.

@@norawallberg1345 That's okay 😊. I just listened back to this and I did say "will" but my pronunciation of it was a bit off (I don't know why this is, I am a native English speaker 😄). The subtitles do say "won't" which is wrong. So, long story short, I will try and say "will" more clearly next time 😊. I'm really glad the video is helping as well. I always found lectures to be hard to understand. All this physics stuff takes time to fully absorb and understand. So, please keep going with it and don't be afraid to ask more questions in the future and I'll do my best to answer them. Take care.

@@PhysicsTutoringHubI understand! That explains it. Thank you for the inspiring words, I will keep them in mind. Just started studying physics at university. Take care. 😊

@@norawallberg1345 That's brilliant. I wish you the best of luck at uni 😊

Excellent. So glad it's helped 😊

Lol. I'm glad it's helping you. 😊

That's so kind of you to say. Thank you so much 😊

Brilliant, I'm glad it's helped you 😊

When we do order of magnitude calculations, we want to simplify numbers to a power of 10 that closely maches the 67million. So 100 million would be a good choice here. But 50 million is closer to 67 million in this example so I chose 50 million. Looking back at my old physics book, there is an example of estimating the number of breaths a person might take in a lifetime. Now for the the number of days in a year, they have rounded this up to 400 and for the number of hours in a day, they chose 25. These two numbers are much better to use than 100 days and 10 hours respectively.

😁

Excellent. That's usually the way. Take care 👍

Brilliant 😊 So glad it's helping. I'll be posting up Isothermal and adiabatic processes in the next few days.