Physics Education - (Phil extended footage)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 พ.ย. 2012
- Extended interview footage with Phil Moriarty.
Main video at: • Problems with High Sch...
All the extras at: bit.ly/SO4Hrh
Test Tube by video journalist Brady Haran for the University of Nottingham.
More at www.test-tube.org.uk/ - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
I completely disagree with Brady when he says that when they bring up the maths and people get lost or lose interest. I'm actually disappointed when in the videos Moriarty or anyone else starts to get into an equation or graph and they cut that section out. I always watch the extended versions of the videos where everything is more in depth. I think those are the most interesting videos of all.
Sasha Lane To add to that, if you lose interest in something because maths is brought up in regards to it... Then you're not going to be interested in physics anyway.
BlueCosmology True and not true. If you are into physics but you aren't that smart or aren't that well versed in maths then something as simple as the pythagoras theorem can be quite intimidating and can probably even turn people interested away simply because if you have no experience with numbers then i can imagine it being hard to just instantly gain some understanding of maths.
hermest99 There's a difference between knowing, and interest.
If you don't know maths, then you're definitely not an actual physicist, but you most certainly can still be interested in physics.
If you lose interest in something because maths is involved? Then you have no interest in physics. Physics is a subset of maths. Saying you're interested in physics but you're not interested in maths is like saying you're interested in books but you're not interested in literature.
BlueCosmology No it's not at all the same. I am interested in the human body and physiology, as a med student. But studying medication used to bore me and a lot of my peers, even though it's a vital part of being a med student and a doctor eventually. A lot of people have a tough time getting interested in medication, since it's not as cool as processes in the human body. So it's a real thing. Like how driving a car is cool, but knowing how the car works might not be your piece of cake. So you might love cars for driving, but not for the mechanics.
hermest99 That analogy isn't really fitting at all. Driving a car and building/fixing a car are different things. Driving a car, is not a type of building a car.
Physics IS a part of maths.
If you want to use an analogy of a car it would be like someone saying they really love driving cars, but they hate controlling automobiles.
How much physics can you even do in school without calculus? Our physics teacher introduced integral calculus before it was on the math syllabus because we really couldn't proceed without it in any meaningful way. But I guess we had quite an extraordinary physics teacher.
+pinkdispatcher My secondary school physics was completely without calculus (although we did introduce it in maths the last year). You can get all the way through up to some rudimentary introduction to special relativity and tiny bits of quantum physics. But in the process, you are often bound to special cases with constant quantities (so that you get rid of the derivations/integrals and replace them with a special formula, e.g. when dealing with constant acceleration) and static phenomena. You often can't explain where do the formulae come from, which makes it less of a subject to understand, and more of a subject to memorize. It takes away context. I definitely did not benefit from that, my understanding sky-rocketed almost overnight once calculus was plugged into physics during first year university.
Very little, actually.
What you can do is learn what others have done, but you yourself, cannot do any physics. You can see the equation for constant acceleration( you can derive it without calculus actually, courtesy of Cauchy's mean-value theorem), but can you understand the thinking that went into it? No.
Physics is more of a method that a collection of knowledge, but high school physics completely strips it of the former. You learn x and y and so on, but you don't learn the thinking behind x, you don't learn the thinking behind y, because you cannot deal with the math required.
Look at Newton's law of cooling. It perfectly illustrates something basic about physics. Physics requires you to collect empirical evidence, and from there, build upon the evidence. We collect empirical evidence, which is the temperature at different times. From this, we can reasonably estimate the gradient of a graph.
This is usually very easy to do, and in fact is an important method of collecting empirical data in physics. We love rates because they are so easy to measure. So most of our hypotheses start from rates.
We can now see the gradient. We can guess a general trend. Maybe it's proportional to the temperature, or to the square of the temperature, or maybe the cube and so on (this sort of proportionality is easy to see from the graph). Could it be the cube? No way. If it was the cube, the rate of change would be huge, so temperatures would decay very quickly, and things would cool down much faster. Maybe it's the square? Could be, hard to tell. It could be the sin, or the cos, or the ln or something of temperature. It could be. We don't know. Let's take a guess - the simplest solution, because we are really lazy. So we try proportional to the temp.
See? That kind of thinking, is the kind of thinking of physics. Guess something, use physical intuition to guide you. Be lazy (no really, the simplest solution is often the right one). We don't have that in high school courses. We just teach facts, not physics.
And what now? Now we are stuck. Without calculus, we cannot solve the differential equation, which is how we express our rates mathematically. So not only do we not have the thinking, we don't even have the tools to follow the thinking. But let's say we did. How would it work out. We solve the differential equation, and end up with a proper expression for temperature. Now we see that our expression has all these constants. Well that's fine. We SHOULD use physical intuition to work these out, but what we were taught in math class about boundaries works too.
We have an equation. Are we done? No. Now we need to test our equation. We see it has a constant. What is the constant, physically? We obviously see that different things cool at different rates. If the constant is bigger, our rate is bigger so perhaps that is what the constant means? Let's try it out with say, coffee and metal perhaps. Our experiment shows that our guess was right. It is what distinguishes between materials.
Plus now, we just showed that our model worked. Our equation did indeed predict the cooling curve to an excellent degree, so yeah, we at least know we did the calculations correctly. Now we have to take our equation, predict something with it, and then test again. Then our equation would be validated. Validated in the range of its applicability, scope, and for a few years until a more accurate model comes along. It's always dynamic.
But we don't show that. We just show, this is the fact, this is the question you will get on the exam, answer the question.
Then when we get into college, and have to learn this thinking, we basically face-plant into our desk.
It strikes me that the problem is not the teaching of physics; it's the teaching of maths. Isn't the answer to start increasing mathematical literacy right from the primary school level? That way we keep the qualitative nature of A level physics that seems more appealing, but all students will be equipped (in parallel ) with the numeracy they will need for university.
I do believe this is the case aswell.
I went to uni in the UK after going to highschool in france, for a chemistry degree (which is half physics really) and I was astonished at how much more literate I was in mathematics compared to the other brits.
Primary school maths is taught horribly in Britain, I was shocked when I was tutoring primary school kids for year 6 tests and assessments. Some of them barely knew basic algebra, were slow and confused with basic geometry, etc! Terrible school system. Conservative government always seem to make a right mess of education.
What's up with the sociology textbook on the shelf?
He likes reading sociology also. He said in another video how he follows a physicist turned sociologist's work closely.
I love it when Phil says "... and I'll shut up after this" 'cus I bet he's still bending Brady's ear half and hour after the camera's switched off. ;)
Outstanding observations and philosophy. I couldn’t agree more. I am a 68 year old retired engineer. I have asked my son , a highschool senior to watch the first half of your video. Couldn’t agree more.
5:50 Or in other words, "How can you have your pudding if you don't eat your meat?"
Teachers, leave them kids alone.
I love listening to this guy. Back in my University days I would have taken all your classes just for the lectures ;)
Spectacular interview.
Euclid said "There is no royal road to Geometry".
The same goes for Physics.
When I was in high school, I asked my physics teacher how to show the first law of Kepler using Newtons´ laws, something he said to me was possible. His answer was: "I can´t show you with the maths you know."
Mosco Monster I wonder why teachers are incapable of doing stuff because we are incompetent
I actually got that question in my physics test back in highschool
@@ramind10001 Often when you reach physics to school kids, you get into a situation like: E = mgh or E= mv^2/2 or similar equations, and often, the school kid is not well enough versed in math to connect that if m increases and E is staying the same, then some other parameter have to decrease and other similar mathematical concepts.
@@RodelIturalde I understand that might be an issue. But the school system should've prepared that kid before taking the physics class. Personally, in college I wasn't able to get into a few calculus classes and couldn't take any intro to physics courses at my college, I had the option of taking physics at another college, which didn't require calculus, but ultimately I graduated a year late but took the calculus based physics at my own college; I was there to learn not just take classes and get over with it sooner.
At the level of high school and even lower division math, most derivations are often a few lines and very rarely more than a page or two. I dunno how, but it would be lovely to get people in on derivations, because it feels like such a creative process.
Thankyou so much for that, I need all the help I can get, I think, in order to choose my
A-Level courses this year!
My dad showed me notes & worksheets his mother produced in a Calculus class around the late 1800's. I was shocked by the discipline & high level of understanding she displayed & compared it to my own maths work in the '60's. If the physics/maths education degraded noticeably then, I wonder what it's like now! Although my Calculus classes helped me understand the physics well enough to become an engineer, I'm sure that more thorough & intense maths education would have made me a better engineer. Professor Moriarty is right!
In Brazil, we don't have Calculus in high school as well. The difference is that any science course in university is 4 to 5 years long. And most people take one year more to graduate. Personally, I'm graduating in Electrical Engineering next year and it'll be 6 and a half years of university (given that I spent one year in an exchange program in the UK). Our two first years are basically maths and physics (Calculus 1, 2 and 3, Physics 1 and 2, Mathematics for Physics 1, Complex Variables, etc). What I'm getting at is, maybe, you could solve the problem by teaching the maths first so, when they decide to do Physics, they can see all the maths on the course structure beforehand.
At 6:37 , did anyone else notice the 12 minute jump in time?
THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!
brady, thanks for not cutting the part where he is talking about this style of videos!
I can completely agree with this. I did my A-Levels last year in germany and I started studying chemistry, which is not as math dependant as physics. In my very first lecture, which was revolving around simple thermodynamics and the concept of enthalpy the whole audience was shocked by the simple term dU= dQ + dW, because nobody in this room has ever dealt with Infinitesimals in this explicit way. Sure, everyone was getting used to it but this shows up the enormous difference between science in school and "real" science. There was barely anyone not being able to explain (not mathematically ofc) why fructose reacts positive on the fehling-test but this simple, crucial term was scaring the sugar out of everyone.
Well rounded!
As well, I'd like to say thanks to you, the other profs & Brady as well for making these videos. I had quite a bad education in our public schools here in the US, and as a result have had to do a lot of work to catch up to the level of my classmates in my university.
Regarding market control of educational outcomes. We have that issue as well here in Florida - the amount of money paid for state standardized testing practice is outrageous. Our teachers teach the test, not concepts
Thank you so much
You brought up an interesting point of not being able to hear explanations of complicated relationships from people or demonstrations. You said something to the effect of needing to read a clean cut, presentation of data and information and then piece it together yourself. In my experience as a high school senior going into engineering, your explanations are monumentally helpful. Hearing from an experienced professional that sees how students learn every day. Maybe you don't realize it but by going through what sounds like a tedious learning process, you have developed clear and communicable descriptions of phenomena in physics. It's almost as if you have skipped the formalities and unnecessary confusions for me. This allows me to dedicate my focus and critical thinking on the aspects of importance rather than some possibly unimportant and confusing details.
However, I agree with your idea that this reduces our ability to analyze, breakdown, and formulate strategies to address problems. I think this is complex mathematics' role. The organization and consistency needed for accurately describing calculus problems builds this skill.
Well, I wouldn't call it useless. I'm currently studying physics at medical school and usually when I have a problem understanding certain topics I always try to understand them by myself and in most cases it works. Brady's videos not only give me different point of view on the topic but they help me understand it more clearly and it is thanks to you Prof. Moriarty and the other tutors at NU who help me see physics from a different perspective. And I'm thankful for that. - Martin :)
they come at the universitiy and expect Sixty Symbols movies, then they see the actual math ;) :P
As a 2nd year (external) physics student at University who doesn't shy away from the math: Sixty Symbols videos make a great accompaniment to my studies - as an introduction to topics, for example.
***** nice. but you should exercise language understanding too... cos this just completely wasn't what I said.
Alrighty then, way to take a swing at my comprehension skills; I'll be the bigger man and fight the urge to correct your punctuation/grammar. You should know I wasn't disagreeing with you, only adding to your comment to dampen the connotation it carries. Why can't Sixty Symbols "movies" be a part of the Uni experience?
Thank you, good sir. When I was tutoring mathematics and physics - couple of decades ago now - I was getting this sort of question a lot. And, given the modular nature of the A-level in maths, we'd usually recommend further maths for anything involving maths, physics or electrical/electronic/civil/mechanical engineering.
Again, thank you for your input. I think Thomas will find this very useful.
I would love to see this channel highlight some of the underlying mathematics!
This guy's great. How often will you ever hear 'irregardless' and '...14 page derivations...' mentioned by the same bloke?
Imagine criticizing a guy with a doctorate in physics on his grammar
here in norway, idk if our physics is different, but i feel that we do "endless" problems about inclines etc. etc. i looked at my dads book about mechanics for a engineering degree from university and sure i didnt understand everything, all of it seemed familiar, just at a more difficult level than what we do
I just can't get over how much I like that accent. I'd pay more attention in lectures if more people had accents like this.
is it not a requirement to complete a level maths? i will be sitting for my A2 next month and i did study calculus as well as mechanics, not exactly in physics but in mathematics.
I must agree. When I understand chemistry like that, its really nice, and it gives a more rich and fuller clarity to the subject, just like the butter in a pastry.
I agree totally. i was going open lectures of university to study chemistry and got hit by alot of really tough mathematics just because they never taught us qm or VSEPR theory which is pretty easy compared to other subjects in chemistry. Also thermodynamics was pretty challenging but I loved every bit what really they are doing in university. I wish they course where you could study university level math in highschool for people who are really interested.
Rock on!
I love phil, he's so into it and energetic. Probably a function of the amount of coffee....but "irregardless"? IRREGARDLESS?! lol
come on man...basic english
Irregardless is a word. Look it up.
Wrong.
Regardless is the word, "irregardless" is not. Then again, Phil's a physicist, not an English professor.
Jonathan Holden Yeah,everybody is susceptible to mistakes.
I think he was starting to say something else and instead followed immediately with "regardless" automatically as a function of his way of speaking.
Basics: Calculus is basically analyzing functions and their behaviors - or how they change, like Wiki says. The building blocks of calculus are "differentiation", which is a way of finding the slope of an algebraic equation from the equation itself, and the opposite, 'integration'. So if you have, say, a position function, you can differentiate to find a velocity function, and again to find an acceleration function. It's tremendously useful in physics and is often easier than algebraic methods.
It's weird because the lack of mathematics in A-Level physics is what drew me away from carrying on with it at university level and instead went on to do just mathematics.
type "Khan Academy" in google. Everything your looking for is there :)
except Geometric Algebra, Geometric Calculus and Probability Theory as Logic.
Ja, I learn a lot from these videos.
I think you could also apply this "population inversion" to population sciences. To some people it is undesirable to live in a place like NYC or Brooklyn, or Atlanta, but because of a stimuli, be it a laser or a job opportunity, they will do so regardless resulting in a larger population in an unfavorable area, and a lower population in a more favorable area, and a general trend of favorable areas being less populated over time and less favorable areas being more popular.
Correct me if I am wrong, but this is my understanding of it.
better yet, a whole channel
I agree wholeheartedly with your last point, which really is the whole point. Schools are on league tables, and so are in competition with each other. Schools acting in their own interests rather than those of their students is damaging. It's a prime instance of market policies failing.
I want Phil Moriarty as my MP. 🇬🇧
What about Leaving Cert. physics? (I know Philip probably isn't as familiar with the LC syllabus these days). As far as I know there's no multiple choice or tick the box style answers. How does it compare to the A Levels?
Not being a physicist myself I will speculate the following: a physicist without mathematics is like a painter without a brush.
What is the unit for the numbers to the right of the second counter? It's weird how it never goes to/over 30.
9:08
"Get rid of the idea of having different proviers. Get rid of entierly the idea of a market anywhere close to something which is a pulic good like education. That doesn't matter if its primary school, secondary school, or higer education. Lets think about it as a public good thats something that should not be driven by market choices and profit."
-Phil Moriarty
Professor Phil is awesome!
dose Phil remind of Roy from the it crowd to anyone else?
9:51 " and then I'll be drummed out the tory party" 🤣🤣
I don't get this. How can you study high school mechanics without calculus? Has this situation changed since the posting of this video?
I dropped physics when I was 17, and while struggling towards the end of my second year doing A-Level maths I decided to learn what the hell calculus really was. I went from getting failing grades to grades ranging from Ds to Bs. With this new found understanding I really, really regret not trying harder in my first year and carrying on with physics. I agree wholeheartedly with what this guy's saying!
The points he makes at 7:00 really are quite fantastic. I've never thought of it that way before.
Very good luck to you! Are you applying to British universities, or..? I'm starting a Maths degree this year, really looking forward to it.
PLEASE! Tell me you are Professor Moriarti - just... well for the pure awesomeness
When do you think is a good time to begin teaching calculus? I went to a college full of 14-15 year olds (Simon's Rock, if you're curious), and we learned calculus without an issue (an age where high schools refuse to teach calculus). And we used Serge Lang. :p But seriously, it seems to me that calculus should be learned/taught much earlier on, maybe 12 year olds (whatever you want to call them, 6th-7th grade here). Waiting until your last year or so of high school seems insane.
This guy has the life force.
I am not going to say exactly where, but it is in a little town near Spokane Washington.
thanks for the insight amazing (: never been much on grammar. numbers never betray
You just got yourself a new subscriber Phil! :D
the truth man... i always go to utube to learn abt the description of amazing physics but is oblivious to the maths :(
Problem with school learning: No greater goals set -> Learn counting -> learn math -> Introduction to something interesting in physics -> Not going deeper into subject.
-
Versus how self study works: Find something interesting / have a goal -> Sub divide by category -> Sub divide problem where x is given-> Learn how to get first x. Result: small incremental (calculus) introductions + seeing progress + working towards goal.
I failed physics once in highschool :s but when i tried again the next year i loved it. it happened the same with math.
I think one of the major problems with math is that teachers don't know how to make the lessons interesting for students. Also we should have math classses at least 4 times a week (insted of 3x) because the teachers barely have enough time to teach the entire program for the year let alone train some exercises in class.
I'm Portuguese so i apologise for any mistakes.
for the first year of physics, the firs semester should be all about getting students excited about physics and the next semester bringing in the math to physics and really showing how it relates.
Well spoken Phil.
with the Open University in the UK, we had computer marked assignments which were essentially MCQ items. the thing was - the answers given were not exact, so we had to do the problem-solving in order to select the correct formula to use for something - and use it correctly in order to get the points.
Phil has his own youtube channel, why didn't I know about this? If I missed the link or something I apologise but Brady, you should give a link to all the other professors channels so we can check them out.
I'm taking AS-Level maths in grade 9 (year 10 I think it'd be). Coming from the US, it's a different system, but I was prepared for the maths that I needed here in Switzerland. It's the IGCSE's, so it is a different system than pure GCSE's, but it's very easy to start from algebra/geometry and build up to calculus as long as you like maths.
(2)I am curious as to the nature of these questions, and I am also wondering if you take the context outside of the fact that it is to some extent Catholic (or private) of the school into account. That is to say, do you compare the schools to others in the area with similar demographics and attempt to standardize the results for demographic differences? I would assume that certain types of aspirations create an atmosphere where you would be invited.
"Do they come expecting a Brady Harran video?"
I'd love to have this guy as a teacher
This has gotten me interested in trying out mathematics again. lol
I'm not from the UK, I'm from Belgium. (we don't have CEGEP either) We had a trimester system in the first 4 years of secondary school (3 exam periods) and a semester system in the last 2 years (2 exam periods), which is the same as in university.
At A Level Physics we did some basic calculus, purely because we were told we had to do A Level Maths, or a Foundation Maths course to get some calculus, though this was starting A levels in 2007 before new modules in 2008. In our Cosmology option we did lots of Special Relativity, but this was through videos rather than teaching as our teacher didn't feel he could explain it. But it inspired me to do a degree and I'm looking at Nottingham for a Physics PhD
I do A2 physics, and maths with mechanics at the moment and after watching this video it seems to me like they've took some of the maths out of the physics, and put it into the maths A level. When I joined my college they recommended that I did maths with mech if I was going to do physics. The core maths doesn't link in with the physics at all, but the mechanics mainly does. Do you think its a good idea to overlap the content anyway? The universities would disagree, and I like the current system
why a sociology book is on a physicist's book shelf?
As someone just finishing my second year of a physics degree, I completely agree that the physics a-level is too different from a physics degree. I never even did further maths because I was unaware just how useful it would have been to have already got some extensive background knowledge of the mathematical techniques used in physics. I think unis definitely need to make prospective students more aware of what physics is like at uni
BRADY, sorry to shout, but how about a calculus video or series of videos on numberphile? Explain what it is, how to do it, where to find out more.
I'm currently in AP Calculus (in the US) and I have found that it is a bunch of algebra with a little calculus twist. I LOVE MATHS.
My schooling never made me curious, about science or anything else, it was the dead opposite. In fact (I'm a year removed from high school) now that I've made it out I'm trying to reunite with passions that school stood in the way of. Science is one of them, it seemed terribly interesting to me as a child, but I learned in high school it was all about being given an experiment, writing the hypothesis for it (which you already know), then doing it and getting the result you already knew.
I'd agree with what you said about Calculus. I am an engineering student (19) taking a HNC in Electrical and I am only now diving into calculus in my spare time. We have had very little experience with how it works and instead have focused on rote memorisation of formula. Im starting to find out how it works through talking to engineers where I work, but teachers at school shouldn't be dodging the questions students ask. At 15 I often got the response "Thats outside the scope of the curriculum."
I like how it goes from 7 minutes to 20 minutes were missing a Phil rant somewhere.
I had a lot of mathematics in high school (as much as I could choose) and even then the difference with university physics was very big. The initial adjustment took me quite a while and I think this could be solved by increasing the slope of mathematics in high school. Maybe not for everyone, but certainly for the science students. Then you have more room to manoeuvre in physics as well. If you're interested in physics and you're good at maths, you should have the opportunity to explore more.
Which is the best university for physics in the UK?
why does the timer's last two digits keep cycling between 00 and 20
The Militant Potato 00 -> 24. It's counting off the frames at 25 frames per second.
(1)Is the problem of the 'race to the bottom' not the problem of a faulty tool? In fact, is it not caused by a variety of tests being available, rather than just one? And likewise the test dynamic require teaching to the test seems to be due to the standardized curriculum being overly extensive... the test is a reflection of the curriculum, after all. Consider reviewing older standardized tests, where the questions are fewer, but more probing.
and for software engineering?
I remember a quote from Star Trek: The Next Generation. As Picard is walking down a deck, you can hear a father and six year old son talking: "Dad, I don't want to learn Calculus!" The father responds, "Son, everybody needs a basic understanding of how the Universe works."
A similar simplification of the Maths Course is taking place in the Irish Leaving Certificate at the moment, with emphasis being placed on applications to the detriment of theory. I am sad to say that I am of the last generation (graduating in 2013) of Irish Students to learn Integral Calculus...
I think that there should still be the math-free videos that introduce the concepts, but I also think that there should be extra videos from SixtySymbols that go into the mathematics for those who want to know about the concepts in greater detail.
If I had not been given basic Physics education my first year of high school, I wouldn't have decided to go into Physics because I wouldn't have known anything about it.
Also to add I think it should be compulsory to do A Level Maths if you are taking A Level Physics as that way you can include the more complex maths into the Physics as you are taking them alongside each other. But again you need to have communication at least within the institution where the courses are being taught to be able to get on the same exam board/decide when certain things are taught so the maths and physics are running together.
PS7)I have recently asked Seton about this but I suspect their books "run very hot", about 6th grade in 4th and a staggering 12th grade in 8th. They offer testing but I wondered if the testing also places them, this for providing guidance for fellow parents who want to add something to their kids education or are worried that their child is struggling. And, thank you for your time.
You'll be doing Further Maths though, right? Calculus is in both single and further maths A Level but Complex Numbers are a first year Further Maths topic on all exam boards.
Can we have a whole segment about Phil's rants?
11:00 -- It's interesting to hear your opinion on Math in the videos, since mine is the exact opposite. When it comes to SixtySymbols videos, I always miss at least some Math behind the physics phenomena.
I love this guy's voice, what accent is it exactly?
at my university we had two options for physics. The usual calculus based series and a algebra based series. while i took the calculus based series because of the degree i was getting, i could see why you don't actually need it if you do not have a hard science degree. It was to bad that the algebra based physics was not offered at my high school. I would have had an easier time of it if i had.
In general calc is required in physics. However, you can,( although it's really not suggested because it obscures a few things, especially in EM and beyond,) waive calc, through Cauchy's mean-value theorem.
To you specifically there's a good MIT video "Big Picture of Calculus" if you want to watch it.
Why's that?
I agree that high school is dumbing down the technical aspects of a lot of the sciences but there is still advanced functions, algebra, vectors and calculus taught in the math faculty so why not just make them requirements for the physics students nottingham accepts and there would be would be no issue
4:17 I see what Phil is getting at here, but for A-Levels this is exactly the kind of thing that is covered in A-Level Mathematics - specifically the mechanics modules. The mechanics goes up to quite an advanced level, tackling quite tricky rotational problems that are more than sufficiently advanced for university physics.
He emphasises that this should be taught within physics so that those going to uni know that there not only going to learn the fun staff in physics but also prepare that the only way to understand is through maths