The crossover we never knew we needed. You helped me with my A-level physics 2 years ago and he’s helped me with Year 1 engineering mathematics last year.. Couple of legends
don't want to be rude, but if you need help for your 1st year core subjects, maybe something else would be more fitting for you? you'll have to solve more complex tasks in the future without being able to rely on such kind of backup.
@@MrTrollo2 Everyone learns at their own pace, and everyone has their learning styles, it could be because of their lecturer or because they attended uni late well after school. Not to be rude, but you being as an engineer is probably not a great fit, these horrible assumptions is a bad tendency in engineering.
As a GCSE student who watched some of this video, I found it very interesting how much you were able to surmise in these mechanics problems from good physics knowledge, and the problem solving skills you used. Looking forward to the video of Tom getting challenged!
I'm a maths teacher turned tutor now. The best thing about all these videos is that I can get my students to see how they should be thinking and approaching questions. The toughest job is always getting them to stop thinking like kids, always expecting questions should be like using a mobile phone app. Life isn't just "press a button, there it is." Nice one lads. You help my students a lot.
In the second question part b it would be easier to look at the Impulse (change of momentum) and just solve the integral with respect to the i vector (west/east movement). integral(-8+4t) = 0 gives you a t = 4 meaning the velocity vector in the i direction is 0 at t = 4.
Came here from Tom’s channel. Hey everybody. One point of grievance ;) In science you don’t pick and chose the significant figures, it depends on the sig fig’s of the number you start with. Come on you guys.
53:44 4.(c) They give you hints with the previous parts, but it isn't a problem to solve completely algebraically. Like Tom pointed out, with absolutes, you just split it into 2 cases. For the case x - 1 >= 0 (or equivalently x >= 1), you end up with a quadratic with no real roots (b^2 - 4ac < 0). For the case x - 1 < 0, you get x = 3 or x = -2 (57:53), but x = 3 contradicts that x - 1 < 0, so is not a solution. Hence x = -2
Calculate time to peak height: v = at => t1 = v/a. v = 25 * sin(15) m/s a = 10 m/s^2 t1 = 2.5 * sin(15) s Use half angle rule for sin(30). Double this time to find the time to return to the initial height. Next find the time to go 4 m down. d = vt + at^2 /2 2d = 2vt + at^2 2d/a = 2vt/a + t^2
Great stuff - well after my school days I wondered why the hell those kinematic equations weren't derived by first principles in a maths class? Also when at university doing Algebra and vector geometry we utilised imaginary parts which is actually way better than using trig when things get knarly (numbers needing to be expanded to a zillion DP) when angles become extremely small or close to 90deg (infinity): I then went to surveying classes which were hot on trig not the vector geometry where life could have been a whole lot more simple, especially when computers were coming into their own. The integration of more maths in physics would be a welcome change as there are dozens of ways properly utilised maths can make things easier
Teachers of physics must know very well such basic notions of vectors i and j in 2D ,and i, j and k in 3-D. You can't say that you have never used such notions before Although in calculus' notion of indefinite integration, it's mathematically correct to add the constant C to the resultant Integral, it is absurd to have a velocity at rest in physics because you can never ever be both at rest and in motion at the same time. What all human mathematicians always severely lack when manipulating mathematical formulas is logical reasoning I have mentioned many times with examples that you can be mathematically correct, but completely nonsensical in physics, or the real physical world, because there are numerous flaws in human-invented notions of mathematics, which are not aligned with the real physical world
I have a master's degree in physics. And already my grammar school teacher insisted that in physics there should never be a number without a unit. So it hurts a bit to see Lewis write down for example a speed as just a number without the unit m/s. But that's probably just me ;-)
“I like the way that you got around using the quadratic formula” meanwhile from a physics perspective using the quadratic formula would be getting around the physics of the problem
Even college basic mechanics Physicists solve this with angle theta velocity v and height differential d and gravity g. Then plug in actuals for arithmetic.
i solved exercise one with 3 ways :- 1) dividing the question into 2 parts part where it reaches from point A to point of maximum height and the other from point of maximum height to point B * note that the maximum height will be = 4 + (distance from point A to Mid point). 2) solve it directly from A to B by getting two equations. 3) solve it by using integration over y-axis -----{ ady = vdv and a=dv/dt where a is negative and vB is negative , yB = - 4m , yA = 0} got time needed and then you can get the horizontal distance vAx = vBx cause this is a projectile motion which means constant velocity on x- axis XA-B = vBx * tA-B
For the second problem a real life senario could be you’re at the airport on the flat escalator thing that you walk on (varying your speed bc you’re busy texting while walking) and the 2kg object is your carryon
It's not as weird as it would seem. I majored in physics and in my experience, after my first physics class the kinematic equations rarely showed up again. Partially because we moved onto other fields, besides classical mechanics, but also because we learnt more powerful tools to solve classical mechanics problems and the problems we had to solve became more complicated. Even in physics 1, when you get to energy, the kinematic equations kind of become redundant. Your able to use the conservation of mechanical energy to solve problems that would be much more complicated with the kinematic equations and Newton's laws. Tom didn't even major in physics, he majored in math, so it makes sense to me he wouldn't know it off the top of his head.
The time span from now to studying further math was very funny. I can relate to that and haven’t even obtained my degree so long ago, but I do struggle to remember all of it because of not getting or giving myself the opportunity to keep all that knowledge in my short short term memory bank😂😂😂
Merry Christmas, sir! I wanted to take the opportunity to thank you for all the comprehensive resources that you work tirelessly to get out to students, on Physics Online website, TH-cam and throughout your books. It really helps me with GCSE Physics, and I think your videos teaching practical concepts (take transformers, for example) have really shown me the importance of physics, which is possibly the main reason why I decided to take this incredible subject forward to A-level and perhaps beyond. Thank you so much for inspiring me and many others ❤ PS. My family gave me V-sign pens for Christmas; I've joined the club!
Welcome to the V-sign club. Thank you so much for commenting as it’s great to hear when I have helped people. It really is a brilliant subject the more you get into it! Keep working hard - it will be very rewarding for you.
The last question of the first task was not answered correctly! If we don't count in the air resistance the air speed doesn't matter. Period. In all previous parts of the task we ignored the air resistance (and rouded the ground acceleration to 10.0 m/s instead of more accurate 9.81 for that matter which is another reason the ball travelled further). So the air speed is the answer only if we take into account the air resistance!!
Is it just me or would the initial projectile questions have been much more clearly answered by simply calculating the parabola? And then basically reading off the answers from that.
For Q1 isn’t the trajectory just the quadratic that needs to be solved. A key point is that s = ut + o,5 t^2 works for the whole trajectory with s=-4 even though the ball moves up and then down again.
@@rojka-_- that's school program, in worst case 1 semester and these people have been studying math for 10+ years lol, they must be able to solve problems of this level in their heads
Tbh मुझे ये वीडियो काफी पसंद आया ,, मुझे फिजिक्स वैसे भी काफी पसंद है ,, most of question jee mains लेवल का था ,,, इस वीडियो सीरीज को कंटिन्यू रखियेगा ❤, इंडिया से बहुत सारा प्यार🤞
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Part 2 where I try some Physics Exam questions now live here: th-cam.com/video/UuxHb8FMKRM/w-d-xo.html
Had a lot of fun making this - Part 2 where I try some Physics questions will be on my channel on WEDNESDAY (20/12).
i'm your maths fan!
The crossover we never knew we needed.
You helped me with my A-level physics 2 years ago and he’s helped me with Year 1 engineering mathematics last year..
Couple of legends
don't want to be rude, but if you need help for your 1st year core subjects, maybe something else would be more fitting for you? you'll have to solve more complex tasks in the future without being able to rely on such kind of backup.
exactly i was about to say the same@@MrTrollo2
@MrTrollo2 engineering is extremely hard it's quite normal especially for engineering to need outside help especially 1st year
@@alexandrosandreou8585 nah, Not really
@@MrTrollo2 Everyone learns at their own pace, and everyone has their learning styles, it could be because of their lecturer or because they attended uni late well after school. Not to be rude, but you being as an engineer is probably not a great fit, these horrible assumptions is a bad tendency in engineering.
As a GCSE student who watched some of this video, I found it very interesting how much you were able to surmise in these mechanics problems from good physics knowledge, and the problem solving skills you used. Looking forward to the video of Tom getting challenged!
I'm a maths teacher turned tutor now. The best thing about all these videos is that I can get my students to see how they should be thinking and approaching questions. The toughest job is always getting them to stop thinking like kids, always expecting questions should be like using a mobile phone app. Life isn't just "press a button, there it is." Nice one lads. You help my students a lot.
Loved to see you bond over love of graphs at the end!
In the second question part b it would be easier to look at the Impulse (change of momentum) and just solve the integral with respect to the i vector (west/east movement). integral(-8+4t) = 0 gives you a t = 4 meaning the velocity vector in the i direction is 0 at t = 4.
55:00 How refreshing to watch a maths video where "-6" is verbalised as "minus six", rather than the 'Merkin "negative six".
Loved this video! Such a fun watch!
I think I must be the oldest watching this: I did physics A-level in 1978!!
We learnt, Should old Harry, Catch a herring, Trawling off Alaska
I did 20 years after that in 98
Wow, in 2013 we just say SOH CAH TOA😂
1975 Acton Tech - We used Some People Have Curly Brown Hair Till Partly Bald.
Love Physics and Applied Maths
Came here from Tom’s channel. Hey everybody. One point of grievance ;) In science you don’t pick and chose the significant figures, it depends on the sig fig’s of the number you start with. Come on you guys.
This was something that really stood out when we did these papers - how the approach in A Level Maths and Physics is so different.
53:44 4.(c) They give you hints with the previous parts, but it isn't a problem to solve completely algebraically. Like Tom pointed out, with absolutes, you just split it into 2 cases.
For the case x - 1 >= 0 (or equivalently x >= 1), you end up with a quadratic with no real roots (b^2 - 4ac < 0).
For the case x - 1 < 0, you get x = 3 or x = -2 (57:53), but x = 3 contradicts that x - 1 < 0, so is not a solution.
Hence x = -2
I’m not even doing A-levels anymore but I still watch you videos😂
Same here!
Calculate time to peak height:
v = at => t1 = v/a.
v = 25 * sin(15) m/s
a = 10 m/s^2
t1 = 2.5 * sin(15) s
Use half angle rule for sin(30).
Double this time to find the time to return to the initial height.
Next find the time to go 4 m down.
d = vt + at^2 /2
2d = 2vt + at^2
2d/a = 2vt/a + t^2
why cant you use the equations im so confused?
These questions are as much physics as applied maths. I would like to see the physics chap challenged him to a few harder pure maths questions
My thoughts too.
The highlight was certainly when "what's the real world application of this" was asked 😂😂 the response was perfect 🎱🌬️🌬️
Two legends in one video
As a physics student on my last year of bachelor degree I would've solved the first problem the same way Tom explained
I agree his way was much better
The greatest crossover event in history cannot wait !
Great stuff - well after my school days I wondered why the hell those kinematic equations weren't derived by first principles in a maths class? Also when at university doing Algebra and vector geometry we utilised imaginary parts which is actually way better than using trig when things get knarly (numbers needing to be expanded to a zillion DP) when angles become extremely small or close to 90deg (infinity): I then went to surveying classes which were hot on trig not the vector geometry where life could have been a whole lot more simple, especially when computers were coming into their own.
The integration of more maths in physics would be a welcome change as there are dozens of ways properly utilised maths can make things easier
Teachers of physics must know very well such basic notions of vectors i and j in 2D ,and i, j and k in 3-D. You can't say that you have never used such notions before
Although in calculus' notion of indefinite integration, it's mathematically correct to add the constant C to the resultant Integral, it is absurd to have a velocity at rest in physics because you can never ever be both at rest and in motion at the same time. What all human mathematicians always severely lack when manipulating mathematical formulas is logical reasoning
I have mentioned many times with examples that you can be mathematically correct, but completely nonsensical in physics, or the real physical world, because there are numerous flaws in human-invented notions of mathematics, which are not aligned with the real physical world
I have a master's degree in physics. And already my grammar school teacher insisted that in physics there should never be a number without a unit. So it hurts a bit to see Lewis write down for example a speed as just a number without the unit m/s. But that's probably just me ;-)
I think I just forgot in the excitement of recording the video!
I can find the angle that maximize the distance of landing without the use of any derivative or differentiation :)
“I like the way that you got around using the quadratic formula” meanwhile from a physics perspective using the quadratic formula would be getting around the physics of the problem
Even college basic mechanics Physicists solve this with angle theta velocity v and height differential d and gravity g. Then plug in actuals for arithmetic.
i solved exercise one with 3 ways :-
1) dividing the question into 2 parts part where it reaches from point A to point of maximum height and the other from point of maximum height to point B * note that the maximum height will be = 4 + (distance from point A to Mid point).
2) solve it directly from A to B by getting two equations.
3) solve it by using integration over y-axis -----{ ady = vdv and a=dv/dt where a is negative and vB is negative , yB = - 4m , yA = 0}
got time needed and then you can get the horizontal distance vAx = vBx cause this is a projectile motion which means constant velocity on x- axis XA-B = vBx * tA-B
For the second problem a real life senario could be you’re at the airport on the flat escalator thing that you walk on (varying your speed bc you’re busy texting while walking) and the 2kg object is your carryon
it’s strange to see that Tom doesn’t use/know suvat. I’m currently being taught it in A-level Physics, Maths and Further Maths
It's not as weird as it would seem. I majored in physics and in my experience, after my first physics class the kinematic equations rarely showed up again. Partially because we moved onto other fields, besides classical mechanics, but also because we learnt more powerful tools to solve classical mechanics problems and the problems we had to solve became more complicated. Even in physics 1, when you get to energy, the kinematic equations kind of become redundant. Your able to use the conservation of mechanical energy to solve problems that would be much more complicated with the kinematic equations and Newton's laws. Tom didn't even major in physics, he majored in math, so it makes sense to me he wouldn't know it off the top of his head.
I love this channel!
The time span from now to studying further math was very funny. I can relate to that and haven’t even obtained my degree so long ago, but I do struggle to remember all of it because of not getting or giving myself the opportunity to keep all that knowledge in my short short term memory bank😂😂😂
Merry Christmas, sir! I wanted to take the opportunity to thank you for all the comprehensive resources that you work tirelessly to get out to students, on Physics Online website, TH-cam and throughout your books. It really helps me with GCSE Physics, and I think your videos teaching practical concepts (take transformers, for example) have really shown me the importance of physics, which is possibly the main reason why I decided to take this incredible subject forward to A-level and perhaps beyond. Thank you so much for inspiring me and many others ❤
PS. My family gave me V-sign pens for Christmas; I've joined the club!
Welcome to the V-sign club. Thank you so much for commenting as it’s great to hear when I have helped people. It really is a brilliant subject the more you get into it! Keep working hard - it will be very rewarding for you.
@@PhysicsOnline Thanks 🙂
The last question of the first task was not answered correctly! If we don't count in the air resistance the air speed doesn't matter. Period.
In all previous parts of the task we ignored the air resistance (and rouded the ground acceleration to 10.0 m/s instead of more accurate 9.81 for that matter which is another reason the ball travelled further). So the air speed is the answer only if we take into account the air resistance!!
The drag of the golf ball should have been included. A 1d drag equation should suffice.
He looks like he is stuck in 2009 eternally
Best part is the question was random ya? And i like how he approaches the problem by questioning in his head and explains as well
This is amazing!
Is it just me or would the initial projectile questions have been much more clearly answered by simply calculating the parabola? And then basically reading off the answers from that.
Damn feel old. Did a level maths, further marhs and physics in 98
1971, in my case.
blimey must not be a theoretical physicist, hasn't integrated lately wow
Did not expect this crossover
so excited!
I think the way he solved (a) part of projectile is lengthy
It was - but I was highlight the approach that may be taught in an A Level Physics classroom.
@@PhysicsOnline no issues Sir , you are doing great 👍
I solved by using:-
2vsin(®)/g + 4/vsin(®)
Maths? Im from America.
what is A level BTW, is that higher than O levels, really don't understand the British Education system
It is higher than o levels
woooo .... be ready for the challenge ;-)
i liike you both!
why not create a simple diff eq
Shouls use t = 2usin(theta)/g = 1.29 s
Big up Lewis !!!!
How come u dont remember basic integration being an A level physics teacher?
because you don’t need integration in physics and he hasn’t done it since uni 😂
@@mikayeel0760 idk abt high level physics but i regularly require integration while solving physics question.
Lol but my first approach was the quadratic equation in this case ‘cause when you’re in EE you not often -almost never exposed to SUVAT
again.
My maths teacher was crazy. Sex On Horseback / Can Actually Happen / To Our Amazement - SOH CAH TOA 🤣
What’s the device he uses to write on? What is the best one for studying if anybody has a tip?
For this I was using an iPad with Notability to write on.
HOW long have we been running so far pls?
2vsin(®)/g + 4/vsin(®)
Good luck 😊
😂😂 the look to camera when he said no friction or air resistance
Tutoring is a big business in UK!
"too easy for 5 marks" Me not understanding not even one part of the question, let alone the equation 😅
It’s hilarious when a student is expected to solve in 3 minutes and an expert is taking much lomger
doe that first question you did, why was the velocity negative.
Because he chose downwards as positive and set the acceleration due to gravity as positive in that direction.
you're my fav teacher!!!
At what university do you teach Physics?
I’m full time self-employed now, writing physics books and making videos.
In a physics paper 1.75 s = 2s 😅damn that's relatable .
It's funny that a physicist has an issue with g being 10 when pi, 2 and pretty much all constants are equal to 1 (for small values of pi, 2, &c.) 😂
Say “el n”! The goat pronunciation lol
I feel so thick!!!
For Q1 isn’t the trajectory just the quadratic that needs to be solved. A key point is that s = ut + o,5 t^2 works for the whole trajectory with s=-4 even though the ball moves up and then down again.
It is - but I’d forgotten the quadratic equation!
is it supposed to be that easy or A just means easy?
thats easy?!
@@rojka-_- that's school program, in worst case 1 semester and these people have been studying math for 10+ years lol, they must be able to solve problems of this level in their heads
In India we can't use calculator😢 in school or exam
What!? Which state? I used calculator in exams
I loved this collaboration!
Thank you!
Tbh मुझे ये वीडियो काफी पसंद आया ,, मुझे फिजिक्स वैसे भी काफी पसंद है ,, most of question jee mains लेवल का था ,,, इस वीडियो सीरीज को कंटिन्यू रखियेगा ❤, इंडिया से बहुत सारा प्यार🤞
Thank you!
tom is so beautiful
Best youtube crossover since the advent of youtube
Such a fun cideo
nobody saw this coming
give this paper to an Indian high school student preparing for JEE and he would solve this in record time
!!
Op boss
I’m sorry how can you not solve for t? It’s called solving quadratically.
YOOOOOO
Its like sociology doing politics exam....
Try alevel further maths caie questions pleaseeeeeee caie baord is way harder the older years etc💀
I gonna tell my child that this dude is dantdm😂
this video made me realise these youtube channels about maths and physics aren't even that bright themselves 💀💀
Still got a First at uni! But it’s amazing how much you do forget when you’re not practising regularly!
This is physics not math tf are you smoking
In the exam, we have like.. 3 minutes for exercise 1😂🤦♂️
This is 14 year physics in India IT JE 😮😮