Garrison Turner

Пікірлер

@robog9084 18 күн бұрын

my friend missed half of our unit for chem because he was out of the country and our disgrace of a teacher is making him take a test tomorrow on this .. he randomly found your video and is actually watching it as we speak 😭 hopefully these comments are true, wish him luck lmao

@garrisonturner5670 18 күн бұрын

@@robog9084 lemme know if the video helped!

@OneAverageCatcher-xm7fe 18 күн бұрын

my class watched this video to learn

@christopherporter2167 22 күн бұрын

I’ve been watching dimensional analysis videos for hours and this is the first one that made sense. ❤

@garrisonturner5670 22 күн бұрын

@@christopherporter2167 glad it helped!

@MitchelGracious Ай бұрын

This is so helpful thank you❤

@davematison8969 Ай бұрын

Your Ota appears to have slight pinched optics, and mine has unfixable, severe pinched optics. I cannot agree with your recommendation nor would I make one.

@garrisonturner5670 Ай бұрын

@@davematison8969 I’m not 100% certain what you’re seeing is pinched optics; the crude processes I’ve used to get some of the pictures into small-file formats instead of bulky 30+ Mb files involves copying/pasting in windows programs such as paint, which reduces the resolution of the original pictures. When I get a chance, I’ll do a more detailed analysis of some of the original photos and further technical testing of the optics over the next few weeks as time allows. You may be right in some pinching, but I won’t know until I do a deeper dive. As for the recommendation, for me it still stands as, especially for one getting into the game as a beginner, I (and I assume many folks) may be willing to sacrifice some detailed specs for ‘out-of-the-box’ shots that are of high enough quality to start sharing on CN forums and such. If the optics are too severely pinched then that changes things of course. For what it’s worth, when zooming in during focusing at the beginning of the night, I see round stars. I’ll try to report back here what I find. Have you tried reaching out to Astronomics about the pinched optics issue?

@davematison8969 Ай бұрын

@@garrisonturner5670 as you know, pinched optics show round stars with cross like artifacts in them. My recommendation stands: avoid this scope.

@bhaveshchoudhary6945 Ай бұрын

Wow this is shit

@Mrflightlogic 2 ай бұрын

Garrison, you helped me decide. I sold the AT 80 and was on the fence on this scope. Looks like your review has convinced me it will do just what I want. I might not even used filters at first. But maybe a filter wheel in time. Backfocus should be much easier to deal with in this type of design.

@garrisonturner5670 2 ай бұрын

@@Mrflightlogic I literally just need a 42 male to 48 female adapter, like the ones made by ZWO, and I’m good to go with either the 533 or 2600. It’s a really versatile OTA and it’s just plain fun to use!

@petermonson3719 2 ай бұрын

Excellent video. Thanks. I have one of these. Very happy with it.

@garrisonturner5670 2 ай бұрын

@@petermonson3719 I’m really happy with mine. Fine instrument 🙂.

@samobot3445 2 ай бұрын

first

@AndSooOn 2 ай бұрын

Amazing video

@williamwalker39 2 ай бұрын

The Poynting vector has a problem in the nearfield of a dipole source. It can be shown that by setting the wave equation equal to a oscillating charge, that the transverse electric field component is generated outside the source at about 1/4 wavelength and launches waves both toward and away from the source, whereas the other components: longitudinal electric field and transverse magnetic field.are created at the source and propagate away from the source. The problem with using the Poynting vector in the nearfield is that it hides the fact that some of the energy is going back into the source and some is propagating away from the source, which cancel, creating no net energy flow in the nearfield, but energy flow in the farfield. Whereas in reality there is energy flow in the nearfield if one isolates each the individual field component terms, which can be done with a suitable dectector. Analyzing the individual field terms shows that the speed of the fields are instantaneous in the nearfield and reduces to about the speed of light in the farfield, at about 1 wavelength from the source. This corresponds to the phase speed, group speed, and information spees. Since the energy is proportional to the square of the field, then the energy is propagating at the group speed, which as I mentioned is instantaneous in the nearfield and reduces to about the speed of light in the farfield, at about 1/4 wavelength from the source. For more information see my paper: arxiv.org/abs/physics/0603240 The consequences of these results are discussed in my KZbin video presentation, and the paper it is based on: *KZbin presentation: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qZazlX1tq7iErLM *Based on this paper: vixra.org/abs/2309.0145 Here is our most recent paper which experimentally demonstrates an EM pulse propagates instantaneously in the nearfield: *Electromagnetic pulse experiment paper: www.techrxiv.org/doi/full/10.36227/techrxiv.170862178.82175798/v1

@genebelcherskeyboard 2 ай бұрын

thank you king

@grandtheftOfficial-dw7sl 2 ай бұрын

noice

@garrisonturner5670 2 ай бұрын

There are two mistakes; the two unit vectors are incorrect on the electric and magnetic fields. The electric field should have a j unit vector and the magnetic field should have a k unit vector in this particular example.

@nisingizwelambert 2 ай бұрын

Byiza cyane

@intellectual_69 3 ай бұрын

this was some heat 💯🔥🔥🗣🗣🗣🗣

@alexj.9011 3 ай бұрын

might have to put a supercharger in that car so we can get it to 3000N and get 6 m/s^2

@sofiancv 3 ай бұрын

Great explanation!

@IOSALive 3 ай бұрын

Garrison Turner, I subscribed because your videos are super cool!

@MartinKorim 3 ай бұрын

Well explained 👍

@garrisonturner5670 3 ай бұрын

Thanks!

@kelvindavid1592 4 ай бұрын

Firstly Thank you for all your lectures sir they're really helpful,and i have one question sir where is the 10 coming from at g wich is Gravity why not use 9.80 are they the same?

@garrisonturner5670 4 ай бұрын

This video was recorded for a conceptual physics class so I had no problem letting students use 10 instead of 9.8 m/s^2. In fact the books we used made the approximation everywhere. For algebra or calculus-based courses though, I strictly use 9.8. Thanks for watching and I hope the videos are useful!

@Justuskalasathefithdimension 4 ай бұрын

Wow 😲😳. God bless you sir. I really needed this ❤

@DanielCee-lm7ge 4 ай бұрын

This was so helpful, on a topic I was really struggling with. You sir are the goat, may your pillow always be cold on both sides.

@kelvindavid1592 4 ай бұрын

thank you for your lectures they've really helped me alot, thank you once again and I love you sir........

@leventeonodi1122 4 ай бұрын

How come it only has 190 views? Amazing video, thank you so much!

@user-ri3uv7xz6p 5 ай бұрын

Wish my physic tutor was you. Well explained...thank you and may GOD bless your carrier.

@user-pm1sn3gl3x 6 ай бұрын

Thanks

@ZIBANOMAUNGA-qt9tj 6 ай бұрын

Thank you sir this really helped me in revising for my test

@garrisonturner5670 6 ай бұрын

Glad it helped!

@DanielObeng-b9u 6 ай бұрын

Thanks alot for your physics videos am from Ghana Africa and you have really help me alot

@garrisonturner5670 6 ай бұрын

Glad they are useful! Good luck in your studies. If there are particular topics you need covered, let me know. I can’t make guarantees to make them but I can do my best as I have time.

@skygame5004 6 ай бұрын

Thank you sir.

@RongNam-hw2fn 6 ай бұрын

This was such a great teaching

@user-sb7np6nq5o 6 ай бұрын

This is really helping me 😊

@garrisonturner5670 6 ай бұрын

Glad it did!

@ShockingDatas 6 ай бұрын

Wow 🤩

@garrisonturner5670 6 ай бұрын

Thanks!

@TerryYaglpan 6 ай бұрын

Really appreciate it Thanks

@Sk_cule747 7 ай бұрын

Life saver, thank you 💫

@user-ly2jq4ce8w 7 ай бұрын

can you teg me in your next video conversion of units

@garrisonturner5670 7 ай бұрын

Is there a specific part of unit conversions that is confusing? I might be able to help.

@qennyaa 7 ай бұрын

thankyou so much man

@garrisonturner5670 7 ай бұрын

Glad it helped!

@thelmyasu3073 7 ай бұрын

This was very helpful for me. Thank you so much, sir

@senaanosama5181 9 ай бұрын

Thank you

@user-bn7vx4iz7q 10 ай бұрын

This is my biggest problem in physic 😢

@sahibhasan7095 10 ай бұрын

Thank you so much

@user-nf1xr2xj3c 10 ай бұрын

His has helped me to understand

@hopcfizl3671 10 ай бұрын

At 3:29, did you mean ro say per unit time instead of per unit cycle?

@garrisonturner5670 10 ай бұрын

Yes. Good catch.

@jameshenry3530 10 ай бұрын

So, 2000 pounds = 1 ton is not an equation?

@garrisonturner5670 10 ай бұрын

Sure it is. It is also a useful conversion factor as well. It's not an equation in the algebraic sense with multiple variables, but it is an equation demonstrating an equivalency.

@jayantamiri755 11 ай бұрын

Inaccurate video. Less negative displacement as compared to positive displacement

@garrisonturner5670 11 ай бұрын

I think you’re being a little nit-picky for a few reasons. 1) If it’s off, it’s not by much. A little more than half of the 200g print on the mass goes past the 30 cm mark above the dashed line at 50 cm and similarly past the 70 cm mark below. If it’s off, it’s by less than 2 cm. 2) Given that this was shot for a physics lab in which uncertainty is to be estimated/discussed, any perceived deviations would be included in the error analysis, and the deviation of perhaps 1 cm out of the amplitude of 20 cm is well within the uncertainty that one would see in a physical classroom experiment. Even though this is a simulation, there are plenty of ways error can crop in; I may not have set the dashed line exactly at the 50 cm mark (you might never know because you don’t know if there is any error due to camera angle), I might not have pulled the mass down exactly 20 cm from either the dashed line or the 50 cm mark (if they are in fact not exactly lined up), and the list goes on. This is part of understanding error and how to discuss it. If you were my student writing a lab report based on the video, I’d expect you to give me details and calculations based on your basic uncertainty estimates to derive final uncertainty values for whatever measurement is being made; the spring constant, energy conservation, predicted frequency, etc… so, even if there are deviations from true harmonic motion, it’s not a flaw in the simulation (the mass continues to bounce between the same two numbers), but perhaps a slight error in the equilibrium position. Although I would still argue it’s minuscule but also a great way to dive into complex error analysis on a relatively simple mechanical system.

@jayantamiri755 11 ай бұрын

I have re-watched the video carefully. You are correct.

@garrisonturner5670 11 ай бұрын

@@jayantamiri755 if you really want to get it down to as accurate as the video can get, plot points at every place you can pause the video and do a chi-square fit on the frequency, amplitude, and phase. This will give the best estimate for any deviation the true equilibrium point is from the 59 cm mark.

@iHamza7 11 ай бұрын

Really helpful video!

@flixerstudios1862 11 ай бұрын

Where did we use the fact that they do not collide head on? If the would collide head on then there would be no angle between them.

@ari-man 11 ай бұрын

Cool video, thanks

@pirilacbanda2440 11 ай бұрын

Literally have an exam in 20 minutes

@muhammadmuqri5570 Жыл бұрын

alhamdulillah. thank you prof

Ең жақсы KZbin

Пікірлер