You are simply the best at explaining this subject matter I have found on youtube. So direct, intelligent, and non-condescending.
@MS-sv1tr11 ай бұрын
Well-explained. I had a dream I ran into a physics professor carrying a demonstration. It was a wooden rectangle, maybe 2'x4', with several simple pendulums of different lengths and angles drawn on it, all "hanging" from the pivot point of the wooden block. I think the idea was to find the equation of motion for any of those simple pendulums. I realized I didn't know how to solve it so I googled it when I woke up. So all you would need to do is solve the equation of motion for the center of mass, and then make a position substitution to find it for any given point in the object. Thanks
@mustaphachemchem4856Ай бұрын
for my reference, thank you
@muhammadmushtaq19954 жыл бұрын
Outstanding 💞💞💞💞💞
@arjeshkarmacharya9303 Жыл бұрын
Thank you for this 🙏🏼🙏🏼
@federicoguglielmotti39882 жыл бұрын
great video! you made it so straightforward.
@HadikhanKhan-fo3yh Жыл бұрын
Really amazing 😌
@surendrakverma5553 жыл бұрын
Very good 🙏🙏🙏🙏
@markkennedy9767 Жыл бұрын
Hi thank you for this. You might be able to help me. With the physical pendulum I understand that an equation relating torque to angular acceleration times the moment of inertia around the pivot (I_a), is the way to solve it: mlgphi+(I_a)phi double dot (where we use the usual small angle approximation sin(phi) as phi). But could you tell me why a simple equation using Newton's second law on the centre of mass along the phi hat direction of the circular arc through the centre of mass doesn't work. In other words: mgphi+mphi double dot=0. The reason I ask is translational motion for an extended body can be described using Newton's second law as long as we use the mass m and the centre of mass. Then shouldn't the net force applied at every instant through the centre of mass act in the phi hat direction and be equal to the mass times the acceleration in the phi hat direction. I'm obviously overlooking something as the physical pendulum isn't reducible to the simple pendulum. Can you shed light on this. I would appreciate any help. Thanks.
@Mar-eg3lk4 жыл бұрын
wow thanks!!!! Please make more videos!
@AbrahamYohannes-mo4xj11 ай бұрын
Why not we use parallel axis therom? In the place of inertia
@elahek45663 жыл бұрын
Thank you so much
@Roe12411 ай бұрын
How did you go from the second derivative to tetha(t) ?
@MS-ld3jn6 жыл бұрын
Awesome! Would it be possible to make a video for a physical pendulum with damping
@mrfloppydonkey7287 Жыл бұрын
what if the angle is not small, thus we cannot use the sma?