You can't say that sqrt(-1). sqrt(-1)=sqrt(-1.-1) The same way you can't say that (-1)³.(-1)³=(-1.-1)³ Xⁿ.yⁿ=(x.y)ⁿ only when both x and y are >0 I think

Awesome

😊😊

Nice explanations 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏 sir

Grandpa hi, can you please make videos on differential eqns for college level thankss!! Basically from order 1 to 2 derivatives and all

From Cabañas Asseryaladub, Panamá🇵🇦. Watching...

Keep it up man 💯❤

i cant believe i am watching this

When you take the square root of a nunber, there are two possible solutions, +x/-x. So, when you attempt to evaluate the square root of 1, you have to check whether the solution is +1 or -1. In this case, you were supposed to pick -1.

-1 does not equal 1

Nice video!

Where is the first video about Leibniz's calculus?

Amazing series, thank you!

Well, THIS should be fun! I loved physics in college, but at the age of 70, I have forgotten most of it. This intro lecture shows me that it should come back without too much pain, so I look forward to spending time in this classroom. Thank you!

sir i was your 124th subscriber your classes are good can i get which course is good electrical or mechanical sir

Amazing!

one question... "Why mass?"

Thank you for sharing. It looks fascinating. I have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about because I never liked maths (I don’t have the brain for it). To me it seems like one huge waste of time because its axioms are ridiculous. Take the question in the title of this video. The answer is zero or, equally valid, as long as you want. It’s due to the two dimensional thinking. Take your drawing for example- in two dimensions. (Why do you bother with 2D? It’s not working and it means nothing beyond circular thinking mathematical speculation). Look at it from above, as if axis y were a vertical stick and you were above it looking down. You will see that y is nothing else than a point of the x axis. But the x axis is the shadow of the y axis, and everything that you will have drawn in the space determined by these two coordinates is the x axis, the shadow of y which is a mere point that cannot be objectively pin-pointed (sorry, couldn’t help myself 😁). There is no y. But neither there is any x (objectively speaking). You’re a physicist, so you may think about time as in the space-time continuum. Have some fun and imagine a sundial made up of axis y and its shadow. So, you look at the nothingness of a point and see somethingness as shadow (as 1 is the shadow of 0; zero is a stupid concept, anyway). Imagine now you as The Observer like the Sun. In the morning the Sun sees only the vertical axis. At midday when She (yes, I know… She is my Mum 🌞) is right above axis y you would see zero (nothing). As you move like the Sun in the afternoon you will again see only y. Only one line i.e. 1 dimension (made of arbitrarily located points, as you fix- postulate- create where you look) . If you think you see both y and x you have entered a 2D space-time mindset (which is like being inside a brane like a sheet of paper or a curtain. Don’t. It’s a conceptual trap). However, you as a human being are in this conceptual trap, that’s why you see both y and x (and everything else that you conceptualise within that field. The introduction of the z axis doesn’t make it tridimensional, it only complicates the 2D). But you’re not the observer Who creates by observing. Something/Somebody else is- The Sun who is The (obviously non- human) Consciousness. You merely see (mind- grasp/ conceptualise/comprehend) the existence of things only as your shadow, and only because you have your back turned to the Sun. I don’t think time is a dimension, but an emergent property of the 3D conceptual model. Get rid of the nonsensical concept of zero. I’d be curious to see what scientists with minds more technical than mine would make of it according to this new paradigm. Don’t scorn it because it looks very simple. I ‘see’ it but don’t have the language to explain it- and it would not make any sense within the current well- established maths- physics paradigms, anyway.

Inin

Is that a Greatest American Hero shirt?

Nope. Great video though...

There is no Schwarzchild radius. General Relativity predicts dilation, not singularities. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" Einstein wrote - "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star clusters) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light" He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's the phenomenon behind the phrase "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is one aspect of dilation, it's not just time that gets dilated. A graph illustrates its squared nature, dilation increases at an exponential rate the closer you get to the speed of light. Dilation will occur wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass because high mass means high momentum. It's the original, correct explanation for why we cannot see light from the galactic center. There is no singularity at the center of our galaxy. It can be inferred mathematically that dilation is occurring there. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. More precisely, everywhere you point is equally valid. In other words that mass is all around us. This is the explanation for galaxy rotation curves, the "missing mass" is dilated mass. Dilation does not occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they do not have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. It has recently been confirmed in 6 very, very low mass galaxies including NGC 1052-DF2 and DF4 to show no signs of dark matter. This also explains why all planets and all binary stars have normal rotation rates, not 3 times normal. Singularities were popularized by television and movies beginning in the 1960's. Einstein is known to have repeatedly said that they cannot exist. Nobody believed in them when he was alive including Plank, Bohr, Schrodinger, Dirac, Heisenberg, Feynman etc.

Boman Irani ko jai hos jai nepal ban bibhag jaii physics youth icon

It is falling, but it keeps missing

Same reason why an electron doesn't fall into the nucleus. Simple!

thanks sir had a hard time understanding this but now concept clear

Your videos are great. Informative and easy to digest. Are you a teacher or someone with a background in an engineering field? I couldn’t find anything like an introduction or background.

Sir pls don't stop uploading lectures this is the most underrated channel

I thought the horse/cart analogy was fantastic. It has been the best example I've seen on this topic and Newton's Third Law makes a little more sense to me now.

hello papa

Dad?

You are wrong. Space and Time are SEPARATE frames of Reference. Thats why Relativity is junk science. Its why you dont understand physics. Its why you keep making the same fundamental errors. Objects accelerated in space are also accelerated in time. By how much? Depends on g-forces. Depends on the amount of Energy put into the system. The Breakthrough Starshot solar sail. Its heating up and bursting into flames much beyond .2c. Why is that? Not all of the force acting on the sail goes into accelerating it in space. The sail absorbs some of the energy causing the atoms to become accelerated in time. At what rate? Depends on the density (mass) of the sail. E=mc. The greater the mass (density/acceleration factor of the atoms) the longer it takes to accelerate them in time. You can also install a cooling system which removes the energy. Just as with the clock's cesium-133 atom. You are teaching junk science.

Iam from India 😊

Excellent

Another excellent video on Refraction. After watching the Physics Ninja's video on Fermat's Principle: watch?v=uBiVGd_UPcA my minimum x values where the light intersects the medium are now matching your values: point A (0,0) point B (5,5) y=1 c=3 (x,1) is the intersection point t1 = (n1/c) sqrt(x^2+1) t2 = (n2/c) sqrt((5-x)^2 +16) t=t1+t2

Another great video. My Cutnell and Johnson Physics 10e textbook refers to this as the mirror equation.

Another excellent video on the reflection of light. That was a nice question at the end illustrating the law of reflection. I've never encountered that problem before in any of the university physics texts that I have.

You have to really stupid to buy into this relativity nonsense. Clocks are instruments that measure motion in space. Both Twins experience the same amount of Time. One just experiences more Space. Analyzing the Hafele-Keating and other synchronized clock experiments, both clocks use the the same amount of Energy. E=mc or Energy equals Acceleration. Time is a measurement of Acceleration so Energy equals Time. Both clocks used the same amount of energy and have the same amount of runtime on the battery. Where is the time-dilation? F=ma. Mass is the 3 dimensions of space and a is acceleration from point A to point B. Atomic clocks use electromagnetic waves as the accelerating force. For a photon, it's mass is its wavelength. Since light travels in its own frame of reference, a clock on motion changes the distance (length) that the photon has to travel to reach the target. The inverse square law shows that as distance increases, force decreases. The Force (operating frequency) remains constant, the mass (wavelength) increases, the Acceleration factor (clock cycles) decrease. The difference in clock readouts is strictly due to a longer travel path for the photon. Space and Time are two separate frames of reference There is no time-dilation occurring. What is the force that accelerates plant growth? It's sunlight. Moving away from the sun decreases the amount of sunlight while moving towards the sun increases the amount of Force. Animals are accelerated by the food they consume. During lift-off, astronaut's heart rates are in an accelerated environment and are consuming more calories/energy. In a non-accelerating environment (0 g-force) heart rates are near normal showing that the same amount of energy is being consumed. Once again, where is the Time-dilation? Relativists think they are so smart when debating flat Earthers. This time-dilation nonsense just proves that Relativists are just as dumb as flat earthers.

Time to reach apex is 50 sqrt(3) sec or 86.6 sec. Distance covered on the ground is 25,00 sqrt(3) m or 43.30 km. And total time of flight is twice that, so 173 sec. The actual range works out to 2*(2500 sqrt(3) ) = 86.6 km.

Thanks for this. Some quality questions on mechanics that were very clearly explained.

Nice, the sound is fixed.

c stands for celerité it's a french word (speed of propagation of a wave)

Thank you sir i just want to know why there is no square on E

veri good lectcher

Excellent explination of SR twin paradox, thanks. Sub.

hello I do not compleitly understand

Slaaaay Qweeeen 💅