What is Momentum ?

[@nikhilthomas11]

wow! Quantity of motion!. what a simple yet vivid way to describe momentum. Thanks 😊 👍

[@shahzadkhan-xg5uq]

ridiculously simple explanation. Loved it !

[@PhysicsMadeEasy]

Thank you for your kind comment. The title of my channel is a lie... I am not making physics easy, it is easy already :-)

[@hoacpu]

Thank you, it is a lot easy to understand in term of amount of motion than the word momentum.

[@PhysicsMadeEasy]

Hi, I am glad this perspective helped you improve your understanding!

[@mayateola4732]

Thank you! I finally understood the notion of momentum

[@PhysicsMadeEasy]

Super glad :-)! Your few words show that I am reaching my objective! Thanks!

[@KDOERAK]

excellent!👍

[@eugeneigwe3353]

Great teacher 👍

[@PhysicsMadeEasy]

Thank you Eugene

[@facehugger4145]

good explanation

[@user-fazal19]

Great teacher ❤👍👌

[@PhysicsMadeEasy]

Thank you

[@nuramuhammadashura4406]

Sir explain more about conservation of momentum, thank you.

[@PhysicsMadeEasy]

Hello Nura. There is an extended version of this video. Check it out: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fJm0mH5ni9mWntU

[@PHYSICSGUY.]

Litterly your explanations are ❤

[@PhysicsMadeEasy]

Thank you Dark Fire !

[@sanashoukat7761]

Great

[@stacy9841]

thank u for this video

[@saitejachidurala3675]

thank u sir

[@En_theo]

Could you please explain intuitively why the kinetic energy (Ke=1/2mv²) is not directly proportional to momentum ? The 1/2 and the v² (why square ?) is puzzling me. I understood the mathematical demonstration, but after I ran several basic maths transformations, I realized it was due to Newton's 3rd law. But everyone seems to disagree with it lol

[@PhysicsMadeEasy]

Hi Theo, Momentum and Kinetic energy are two different ideas: Momentum is a quantity of motion, as Energy is a capacity to carry out to do work (Carry out an action). Maybe you can formulate your question under another angle: Why is momentum proportional to velocity, and KE proportional to the square of velocity? If you derive the formula of KE starting from the mathematical expression of work (Delta E = W = integral of F over x), then the square on v appears naturally. If you do the same with Impulse (Delta p = Impulse = Integral of F over t), then you only reach a proportionality to v. And it is the second law of Newton that you need to use (F = ma) to do so, not the 3rd law… I hope this helps PS: continue to ask yourself these kind of questions, the path to a true understanding of Physics is paved with these kind of question :-)!

[@En_theo]

@@PhysicsMadeEasy Hey, thanks for the answer. I know that at first glance, it seems that the second law is the first link with the kinetic equations. But then I realized that the 1/2 (from the 1/2 mv²) was really coming from the fact we "divide" all forces of any pushing objects in two equal parts (action/reaction). If you're interested, I have some easy math (I wrote it so anyone can understand). It's a little long but quick to read. But no problem if you're not interested, I just mention it in case of.

[@johnsonkitz9938]

I'm confused. I thought a running car is accelerating but in this video it only has velocity. ? One thing more if it is in space if an object is accelerated does that mean it will accelerate forever like it would be faster than light?

[@PhysicsMadeEasy]

Question 1: When a car runs at a constant speed on a motorway, you wonder why the driver needs to continue pushing the accelerator pedal. That's your question? The reason is simple: The driver 'accelerates', this provides gas to the motor that develops a force on the car that goes forwards. But as the car gains speed, the air resistance / friction increases. When the air resistance force is equal to the driving force of the motor, the net force on the car is zero, the car is as now running at constant speed. Question 2: That's when Einstein shows up :-). accelerating means that you are applying a force that works on the object. In other words your provide energy to the system. For low speeds, the energy provided goes into the kinetic energy of the object (the object gains speed). But when you approach the speed of light, a fraction of this energy goes into the mass of the object (the mass increases). Closer the speed of the object comes to the speed of the light, larger this fraction. In the end bringing the object to the speed of light would imply deploying infinite energy, and the object having an infinite mass.

[@krasimirronkov17]

Yes but the mass of an object can also change due to a force being applied to it

[@PhysicsMadeEasy]

Not within the scope of classical mechanics: In Newtonian mechanics, applying a force on an object, thus subjecting it to an acceleration and therefore changing its velocity, will not change the mass of that object.

[@Rajbirsingh-ef5mb]

But you take no. Of many cars to define large amount of motion but momentum is defined for single body

[@PhysicsMadeEasy]

Hi Rabir, You can define momentum of a system (you just need to add the momenta vectors of all the constituents of the body). You can see it that way of you want: you slide on an icy slope at constant speed. you have momentum right? what about your atoms? they also have momentum p = m(atom) * velocity. Add all the momenta of your atoms, and you get the momentum of your body.

[@Rajbirsingh-ef5mb]

@@PhysicsMadeEasy thank you so very much