Newton's superb theorem part 2: gravity inside the shell

[@ChampikaMWijerathne]

Quality academic explanations and straightforwardly delivered. Really hope your channel will grow!

[@IcarusGravitas]

Thank you!! I've been waiting for someone to make this video for a decade. It is perfect!!!

[@paradigmshift03]

Hey Mathapeel! Both this video and your previous one were just so fantastic! You truly have a knack for explaining things, and your animations really complement your explanations very well. Do you mind me asking how you animated your videos? Did you use Manim? Specifically, did you use LaTeX for your math equations?

[@Mathapeel]

Thank you! That's very kind. :) I made the animations for both videos in Keynote. I probably would have used manim if I knew how, though. Keynote does natively support LaTeX, so that’s what I used for the equations. But I can’t really say it was the easiest tool for the animations, at least as I had originally imagined them. I felt like I was constantly struggling to find tricks and workarounds to get something that looked roughly like what I had in mind.

[@paradigmshift03]

@@Mathapeel Thank you for this info! Yes, I can appreciate your frustration with using another software to accurately translate what you had originally imagined. I'm writing my own mathematics visualiser for that very reason. But I'm stuck at the LaTeX rendering stage, hence my question haha. Do you plan to make more content in the future? If so, I'm fully subscribed, and looking forward to it!!

[@visheshantal412]

Your videos are perfect thanks for explaining this topic in a simple way, but why did you stop making them ?

[@markkennedy9767]

This is a nice explanation but at 4:00 when you say that if we take really thin cones, we can "get away with" taking the bases of the cones as flat even though for an arbitrary point inside the sphere these cones could hit the sphere such that the base of one cone is at one particular angle to its height and the base of the other cone is at a totally different angle to its height: ie two differently lopsided cones. How can we justify the statement "base area is proportional to the square of the distance from the arbitrary point" exactly if this is the case. Otherwise I'm fine with this theorem. Do infinitesimals magic the problem away. I hope you can shed light on this. Thanks. Edit: at 5:00 you beautifully addressed my query so ignore my post. Kinda annoyed I didn't see this final detail myself. Cheers

[@goon-705]

Great video keep it up :D

[@sebaarroyo7]

amazing. thanks for makign this. i'll share it with my students

[@xXDogeNgamerXx]

Incredible explanation. Thanks a lot!

[@SoloRenegade]

if all math and physics was taught this way, with practical application examples for each lesson, more people would enjoy and even excel at math and physics.

[@caveyful]

So inside the singularity within a black hole is a void. Then a black holes mass is contained entirely within this shell which, through length contraction, has zero length - it's not there, unless you pass the shell's boundary. Could this shell be analogous to the shells the electron orbits within the atom?

[@bangrojai]

can you use newton equation in such situation like inside electron or inside blackhole or lets say, some unseen sphere that surrounded earth?

[@caveyful]

@@bangrojai I don't think so. Newtonian dynamics breaks down when distances approach zero yielding results of infinity. U are then in the quantum realm where time and space as we know it don't exist.

[@houssamennoura233]

program used ?

[@leiyisun4514]

ur actually insane (insanely good of course)

[@NiharikaAChirayil]

Thanks for the video! It helped me a lot.

[@martinluther3712]

Very good video

[@jameemabdulla]

Great

[@marufhasan1732]

This is some goated level thing

[@fredericdux7920]

First

[@CutleryChips]

Zero gravity but negative pressure?