More bullshit from mathematicians who have to come up with ways to handle zero when it's problematic.

thank you omg

Very good explanation!!

i really like how u actually teach us the proofs of the formulas for all ur videos instead of jus throwing it like our school teachers, i wish all teachers were like u bro

Quad root 4 is just square root 2

Sec 4 here

Is the presentation not wrong? Dy/dx=0 is for stationary points not increasing y. Should be Dy/dx more than 0

period of tan graph is 180/b

best h2 math lecture video ever

dude your actually saving me, i am learning the whole topics from basic knowledge/scratch for o lvls which is in abt 2 weeks , man god bless u

very helpful

thank you for sharing your experience😊 at least i know im not alone with strugging for vectors in j1. now i also know how to improve 😁wish i found this vid sooner tho

Thank you mr, your explanation is really helpful, i hope i can study in SG in the future

I think 3rd last working got careless mistake you forgot ²

Slow down...I can't follow you...u r like a jet plane 😢😢😢😢

thank uu!

Best explanation ....but for always negative a< 0 .....😊.. printing mistake not yours ,sir .. From india 🙏

Invalid argument; the generalized case should be n(n-1)! where n is not equal 0. To prove this plug 0 in for n and then 'do the math'. 0! should be undefined.

U are saving my life

I Think there was a slight mistake. 2/y=-1/x + 4 should equal to 1/y = -(1/2)(1/x) + 2, since you're dividing the equation throughout by 2.

At 20:30, your U substitution seem not quite right =8(2x+l/x)? You let u=x^2+lnx in the first place? 😁

Its easy. Just solve the equation 2x²-3/x-2 = 1 2x²-3= x-2 2x²-x-1=0 (2x+1)(x-1)=0 x=1 and x= -1/2 and also the region x>2 So the answer is 1>x>-1/2 and x>2

This isn’t a fully accurate proof but rather a trick to show how you can manipulate a formula. It’s using the definition you’re trying to prove in the same expression Remember that factorials come from combinatorics, and for nCr, your explanation breaks because it allows division by 0, which is undefined This means that 0! Is conventionally defined then as 1, but why? From set theory, think of 0! as all the ways I can choose something (or nothing) from an empty set. The answer is 1.

Cool 😂

but if line PF have same direction vector as the line … should they be parallel

Good teaching vid 😊👍

the new tutor sound so boring ngl

Thanks Sir! Very very helpful video...I'm so happy that I finally found a video that explains Kinematics so well!

very helpful! I finally understood kinematics a day before my exam 😭

Your penultimate step states: 1! = (1)(1-1)! So, simplify each side by diving by 1. Multiplicative identity property states that any real number n multiplied (or divided) by 1 equals n. Thus, 1! = (1-1)! 1! = (0)! 1! = 0! Therefore, your math does not prove that 0! = 1. On your last step, you just dropped the ! symbol off the 1 without a valid reason.

im so glad i found this channel :)

One of the best kinematics lessons out there! Thank you so much for this video, very clear and easy to understand.

thankyou for this !!

your videos are very educating & well explained! do keep uploading olevel amath contents!

Love your content!! It's really helpful for us

cher i have a question, at 25:35 is the term 5 answer 58240? i got 29120

7:09 The ratio of area of circle can just square root like that to find ratio of radius meh? I tot area of circle = pi r squared.... thn wht happens to the pi and r squared😅

For part a do we have to do via completing square or can we also do it using the formula?

Hi there. Did my a levels in 2007. 17 yrs ago. Watching ur channel for fun

Thank you for this excellent explanation!

I wish it was 1!= 🐘

principal value for inverse tangent is wrong. shouldnt have inclusive of -90 and 90.

your principal value for inverse tangent is wrong. shouldnt inclusive of -90 and 90.

🙏👍

I think 0 factorial is not even possible as when we are finding factorials we just find the multiplication of all the natural numbers till the number for positive integers and all negative integers starting from -1 till the number. So 0 is never in the list. No matter which method we choose 0 is not fitting in any one of them. And also he took formula wrong during 1! As actual formula is n!=n[(n-1)!] not n!=n(n-1)!

Thank you for investing in such a great mic. Your content is great.

this is jc level?

😊😊😊 Cool

Thanks

Cool