Stoke's Theorem Part 3

[@juanpreciado4081]

You....... YOU have single handedly obliterated MIT instructional videos for multivariable calculous. Props to your wonderful and personalized use of a little RSA animation. You are wonderful and careful to make sure you are clear and simple. Very impressive and yet so simple. If people do not value what is before them in these videos they are literally embodying the characteristics of the word "git". Please keep this up. You are wonderful. At first I thought your orientation was off by the way you drew your turtle at time 8:00 min. but then I realized your shape is like a tilted hat and we are observing as if looking into it a little bit. Great work! I love it.

[@ImaManCheetah]

absolutely lifesaving, thank you so much!

[@hzkzg1614]

I have nothing to give except my like and thanks.

[@aquibkhan2873]

turtle concept was interesting

[@NEWSBITES-REPORT]

thnkew for explaining in detail & in easy way.

[@jacobvandijk6525]

"SCALAR-CURL" = the surviving z-component of the general curl. Why? Because Green works only with flat 2D surfaces, so the normal vector only has a z-component. P.S. Scalar-curls don't exist in mathematics. A curl always deals with vectors.

[@jakehealthx]

I love how you wrote green's theorem in green. Because his name is green. lol

[@askarzadeh]

Excellent!

[@aishikbhattacharya4870]

The theorum that you stated at the end seems to be just the converse of Stokes theorum!! Why should it be a new theorum??

[@christiannwoke3839]

Thank you ma

[@Cristiosif]

thank you!!

[@loveenvyhatejealousy]

Line integral definition is wrong, it's S F . T dS or S F . dr because dr = TdS

[@multivariablecalculus649]

It is not incorrect, it is just a different notation: your dr is exactly my ds. These videos were for one specific class I was teaching out of one particular book. Because we had been using the notation previously, I did not explain it in detail in this video. However, for what it is worth, I think the notation used in this video (and the book) is confusing. I think a better notation is d*r*, because this book relies on the difference between ds and d*s* to convey meaning.