I know what you're thinking: Either Henry is taking some well-deserved time off and I'm just helping to fill in during that vacation, or else he's currently tied up in my basement providing me occasional sound bites for food while I slowly take over the channel for good. To anyone worried about case #2, don't be silly. He's in the attic. Way too many escape routes in the basement.
I love how you could understand that with tenth grade math and eleventh grade physics, and also the satisfaction you get when it all clicks together. Grear job!
I am sure he wasn't even refering to this when saying that. He probably was refering to the crazyness of quantum theory and relativity, things so crazy that this seems like kids play.
John there is empty space at the other focus (in a real system there might be some dust or another planet passing near the focus though, but it can’t stay there)
"What special curve satisfies the property that the tangency direction for a point theta radians off the horizontal is given by this vector from the special eccentric point from the circle to a point theta degrees around that circle from the vertical? Okay... Is the question clear?" Uhhhhhhhhhh... *infinite intelligence load error*
I am so sorry, but i just liked your comment, even though it had 69 likes. Thankfully, i have the infite intelligence required for this video and i managed to unlike it, not dislike, but unlike, so that it still has 69 likes. Sorry for the inconvenience
Basically you need to understand for any point along a curve, its velocity vector has a direction tangent to the path. The bit with constructing a circle by placing the velocity vector tail to tail stumps me tho. Rest of it is easily understood if you think about it.
“You don’t need calculus to understand this” *3 minutes later* “As you can see, if you keep adding infinitely small sections to this polygon, it trends toward a circle”
Trying to visualize this is completely inversely proportional to the methods I was taught throughout all of my education. SAD. We should teach HOW to learn not just regurgitating "facts" and "laws" which, imho, are in "fact" just theories based upon the human's finite perception (real and imagined) ...nevermind...what was I saying? LOL
Very realistic, no joke, answer. An average human brain has ~1500 ccm of brain matter. Mathematicians like Gauss had ~1800 ccm of brain matter, that's 300 ccm or 1 coffee mug of brain matter more than regular people - there is just no way for a regular Joe to deeply understand advanced math, no matter how much effort he puts in, preiod. Your abilities are hard capped by the total number of axons and neurons, it's that simple. Parents, don't lie to your kids that they can be anything they want if they study hard enough, tell them the truth - they can only be what their genetics allow them to be - their abilities in life are predetermined from birth, nothing can change them. Blackpill 101
Man, this 3b1b guy (grant sanderson) really deserves more recognition and some prestigious awards. He is one of the most influential math guy in present history, so many people like me are everyday getting inspiration to study mathematics from him.
this lecture is very relatable for me for puzzles that i picked up in povey's problems book and polygons with limits to circles, with even some physics i learnt in A-level. It was all just buried underneath layers of geometry and how the formation of triangles revolving around circles can be used in such a way. I like how you related a physics and mathematics interpretation of the problem not just for your viewers, but as a trace of what feynman truely believed and enjoyed life for. Thanks for releasing these videos 3B1B, and you minutephysics. Nicely done with physics and maths and i hope to see more collaborations in the future, if not already!
On "watching Feynman 'splain things is just like watching Bobby Fisher play chess"... How true! In both cases, I feel I understand about 20% (to be generous) of what's happening. : ) (I think I'll come back to this video from time to time)
You know it think that's what we were born for. To gain infinite intelligence. Like you wil learn to take down walls if you run into them so often, and thus find yourself in always a bigger space, a bigger world, and have more freedom (guaranteed that you don't run into any titans).
New MinutePhysics video notification: "oh neat, I'll add it to watch it later" Topic is "Feynman's Lost Lecture": "Maybe I'll listen to it in the background" Featuring 3Blue1Brown: **heavy breathing** Video duration is 21 minutes: **drop everything I'm doing and hit the fullscreen button**
Once I get into, and then through college, I'm definitely going to build a time machine and yank Feynman out of some class just to show him this video adaptation of his lecture. Beautifully conveyed!!
Thank you for the effort that was put into this. Amazing people, teaching millions of anonymous people, you deserve more gratitude that can be offered in a comment!
I think this was actually somewhat easier to understand than some of his videos, although it might just be because I've has most of the past week off and am actually caught up on sleep.
Unfortuentaly no, this is because at the beginning when the lines were drawn, they formed a perfect circle, so taking the perpendicular bisector of each one would still form a circle, just two smaller ones
I admit I'll need to watch this many times before I might have a decent grasp of it. I'm in my 60's & was a high-school dropout. I went on to get a modest amount of formal education & training in a limited variety of subjects. I did okay with electronics algebra & basic trig, but then I hit a plateau. It took me a good decade to recover from that setback, and begin to realize that math can be awesome, beautiful, and even entertaining. I became a person who wished they could have been an astrophysicist. Part of that desire came from finding my way back to a youthful obsession with the nature of the universe, of which I'd all but forgotten. Later, I began to see how impressive were the skill sets of many of the world's physics giants. In the last several years, while I mainly do more-mundane, day-to-day achievements of a kind, I spend a lot of time examining everything I can find on the laws of nature & the stories of science. I can't seem to get enough of it. But I'm too often struggling with concepts that are way over my head, and I've wished to find an easy way to learn some of the fundamentals. Meanwhile, I've tried hard to acquaint myself with every existing variety of fields in which the highest math skills are put to work. I've gotten some great books from the library, and have devoured countless, thrilling stories of the history of science. I've been given or purchased several of my own, too, and have read all the magazines for the last 15 years.. I've learned about the important breakthroughs of Aristotle, Ptolemy, Newton, Brahe, Copernicus, and quite a few others, including Johannes Kepler. I have an awareness of a good number of modern-day achievements, along with today's heavy hitters. too. I can't entirely explain this fascination I've developed. It has a grip on me, and sometimes I think life would just be a lot easier, if I dropped the whole thing, but but just won't go away. Fortunately, like Ron Burgundy once said, that is in no way depressing. For all these reasons, I found a great deal of enjoyment in your fantastic video presentation. It's one of the most helpful demonstrations I've yet come across. You are to be commended, for providing the layman with such a near-intuitive overview of this sort of topic. I'm anxious to see what else you've posted. excellent job!
Rite! I especially like the anecdotal story of RF debating 2 post-grad guys in a cafeteria, about his alternative to cosmic expansion. And, despite the last scene of MIB 1, RF's shrinking universe hypothesis is un-disprovable!
Interesting to note, at the end of the book "Feynman's lost lecture" the authors reveal that the arguments were first found by Maxwell (From Maxwell's equations) in his book Motion and Matter. So I'd reason that Feynman, who was famously well read in physics books/papers, probably adapted the arguments there for his lecture. Not taking away from the brilliance of the argument and the presentation of course.
Thank you for this! Several, "That is so cool!" moments in this video, and...as much as I love learning...I only went as far as Physics 101 in college. Thus, it's not just cool how all of this works out; it's cool that it can be broken down into individual pieces that are each relatively easy to digest. I'm suddenly reminded of Zen Archery. Don't think about the target; just get each individual step right, and your arrow will arrive at its target "on its own".
@@lorax121323 would agree, if you can't grasp why forming an elipse this way is not the definition of an elispe just worded a different way....you shouldn't be watching this channel
10:48 *3B1B* : Well, specificly it says that this quantity times the mass of the object stays constant, but, I mean, the mass of the orbiting object isn't gonna be changing. *Michael* : Or is it?
@@Hexanitrobenzene Therefore the trajectory of a comet will involve a more difficult calculation.... Now imagine the rate of evaporation is inversely proportional to the distance to the sun as well as proportional to the surface area of the comet facing the sun, would that be a reasonably solvable situation(without getting into numerical analysis)?
The Great Physicists' Road Trip by Ms. Rachel C. Millison Great physicists from the past decide to return to Earth for one last road-trip vacation to the coast together. They all appear on Earth on the appointed evening. Heisenberg pulls up behind the wheel of a gigantic 1930's car, a huge grin on his face. As they're getting in the car, Hubble looks up and says "What a wonderfully dark sky". "Shouldn't be" responds Olbers. "Always has been" says Hoyle. "No, it hasn't" says Lemaitre. "I knew that!" says an embarrassed Einstein. Once they're all in, Teller says "Hey guys, this trip is going to be The Bomb!". "Yeah, but why do I always have to organize?" asks Oppenheimer. "Where exactly will we end up?" asks Kepler. "That's impossible to predict" says Bohr. "I just can't believe that's true" says Einstein. Heisenberg punches the throttle and the old car roars off. "Say - this thing sure accelerates" says Newton. "I don't know, Isaac. It feels like gravity to me" smirks Einstein. Later that night, as they are speeding down a country road, a police car catches up to them and pulls them over.[1] "Do you know how fast you were going?" the cop asks. [1] "No, but I know exactly where I am" Heisenberg replies. [1] The cop says "You were doing 55 in a 35" [1] Heisenberg throws up his hands and shouts "Great! Now I'm lost!" [1] The cop thinks this is suspicious and orders him to pop open the trunk. He checks it out and says "Do you know you have a dead cat back here?" [1] "We do now, asshole!" shouts Schrodinger. [1] "I think it's time to split" says Everett. "Say, how did you manage to spot us on such a dark night?" asks Hubble. "I saw the light from your head lamps" says the cop. "How fast was *it* going?" asks Michelson. "That's simple addition" giggles Galileo. "Not exactly" says Lorentz. "Look here" says Heisenberg, "how do you know I was going that fast?" "I clocked you over a measured distance" says the cop. "How often?" asks Hertz. "I disagree with your measurement, officer" interjects Einstein. "Don't start tonight, Albert" says Bohr, shaking his head. "What Herr Einstein is trying to say" continues Heisenberg, "is that time was running at a different rate for you than for us". "WHAT!!!???" exclaims Newton. "It's true" says Maxwell. "We're all famous scientists and, believe us, Herr Einstein has proved it, though it came as no surprise to me". "Sounds complicated" responds the cop. "I'll draw you a simple diagram" says Feynman. Totally flummoxed, the cop lets them go with a warning. As he drives away, Doppler cocks his head and listens to the sound of the receding police car. "Gotta love that" he says. "Amen" responds Hubble. Returning to their car, Lord Kelvin remarks "Sure is warm tonight" "Yep - lots of disorder" replies Boltzmann. "In places you'd never expect" adds Hawking. "I was lucky to get away with that" says Heisenberg. "Most cops think they're better than everyone else". "Yes - I hate inequality" adds Bell. "Though you *were* speeding" says Faraday to Heisenberg. "I carefully observed the needle creep from 35 to 55". "Actually, it was jumping, Michael" replies Planck. As they pile back into the car, Bohr says "See here - you must fill the seats in order - no empty spaces allowed. And stop interfering with each other!" "Only one of you can sit next to me!" yells an agitated Pauli. "Say, Werner - it's stuffy in here. Be a good chap and crack the window a bit" says Hawking. "Sorry, Stephen. It can be all the way up or all the way down, but nowhere in between" replies Heisenberg. "Hey guys - Albert and I just figured out a great shortcut. Only one bridge" announces Rosen. "It will save us a lot of distance" says Einstein, "but it might get spooky". Arriving at the beach the next morning, they hurry from the car and stand looking out over the ocean. "Look at the wonderful waves" says Schrodinger. "They don't look like waves to me" says Bohr. Looking down at the fine sand, Dirac exclaims "Look at all the particles!" "Now *those* look like waves" says De Broglie. "This is great!" exclaims Feynman, rubbing his hands together. "Now, lets go meet some girls!" "Let's delay" says Wheeler. "We have to be discrete" warns Bohm. "Girls? NEVER!" exclaims Newton. 1 Based on, and including the original, attributed to Rich Granger, engineer, Battelle.
David Goodstein is also the spiritual grandfather of 3B1b videos: he made the landmark “Mechanical Universe” series that aired on PBS. It featured a mix of animated equations and historical re-enactments that brought physics to life for a generation.
I think the visuals made it elementary to understand, but I loved the linguistic complexity needed to be able to effectively communicate the concept in the first place. Granted without the visuals I probably would not have understood, nor would I have wanted to understand. Great video!!!
Keep up the asking questions out loud stuff with a slight pause. It aids learning and facilitates the drawing together of seemingly unrelated threads within the consciousness of the viewer. Good work.
Gives me hope that he'll cover my suggestions of RSA and knot theory someday. (Though the latter might be difficult to animate…) To anyone reading this, I highly suggest checking out Pulsar's write-up in the link given. It can help solidify any remaining confusions.
BLUEGENE13 The joke is that mathemathicians sometimes write QED at the their proofs, which is an abreviation of the latin words "quod erat demonstrandum" which means "what had to be demonstrated".
If TH-cam channels like minutephysics or 3Blue1Brown existed when I was in high school I probably would have become a physicist or mathematician instead of a biologist.
"So the question is: What special curve satisfies the property that the tangency direction of the slope for any point theta-radians off the horizontal is given by /this vector/ from a special eccentric point on the circle to a point theta-degrees around that circle from the vertical? Okay, so is the question clear?" XD
With each new replay of the video, the question becomes clearer by 1 word. All in all, 41-43 concentrated plays of this video are required for the question to be clear. If you want proof... well, you have this line that shows it if you just turn it 90 degrees into your brain. Good luck & have fun!
This is EXACTLY what I have pondered for many years! Now it is time to take it to the next step: The algorithm is quite simple actually, all mathematics can be defined with only a couple of variables. My computer science professor would look at me cross-eyed every time is suggested that digital and analog were not meant to be separated and thus the constant battle for accuracy with "smaller and smaller slices" so to speak....
Somehow this seemed even denser than most of 3blue1brown's other material. I feel like I could probably get it all if I spent a couple hours working it out for myself, but right now my head just kinda hurts.
Physics is a different mindset from math, so yeah this did have a different feel. Orbits are really tough at first encounter but incredibly satisfying once you understand, keep at it!
P Sharma I think it's actually the math perspective that's throwing me here. I have a pretty good intuitive understanding of orbits from physics in terms of angular momentum and potential energy (and let's be honest, most of my intuition for orbital dynamics comes from playing Kerbal Space Program) so this sorta abstract mathematical approach is throwing me off. I often find that math is very dense though, so it's not too surprising. The people who came up with our mathematical language did a very good job of distilling complicated ideas into concise and precise language.
I suggest checking orbits out in a college level classical mechanics text, there's way more math involved but it may help you reconcile everything here. The actual derivation of elliptical orbits from Newton's second law is truly awesome and it was a lecture I don't think I'll forget, hopefully you'll enjoy that too.
pyropulse your comment made me laugh so much... If you think physics and math are the same thing then you're either just barely through your majors and trying to talk big or you've been taught rather poorly. This was a wonderful video but it was very noticeably done from a mathematician's perspective, he didn't hit on physical intuition very much because he used math proofs instead which (I'm guessing) is why OP felt like something was different, you with your double major should've recognized that.
Can you imagine what sort of lectures and presentations Feynman would have produced if he had access to the same animation software used to make this video...? 😮
@@Ax_x1om You need to stop judging the quality of a lecture by the fame of the lecturer. This isn't tribalism. There are actual intellectual criteria at play here. Use them.
@@Ax_x1om He gave a series of lectures on quantum mechanics once that I actually used to like... until I thought about them a little more and then it became clear that what he was teaching gave people the wrong intuition about what is actually going on in quantum mechanics. I know that (and why) in his mind it all made perfect sense, but what he was communicating doesn't reduce to the correct physics in the mind of the audience because they lack his theoretical background.
Newton started off with a bet to prove this (the ellipse being a consequence of the inverse square law) and produced a series of publications, eventually compiling the principia mathematica out of this seed. However, although he never states this clearly, I'm sure he realized that the proof he gave was for the converse: that given an elliptic orbit, an inverse square force law follows. This was much easier at the time because so much was known about the geometric properties of the ellipse than was about F=m a. In fact, Newton couldn't really mathematically use velocities because they compare two quantities with unequal units (distance, time). Also of course algebraic notations and vectors weren't invented yet. But still Newton claimed to have won his bet, and the Principia avoids any clarity about proving the inverse square law vs. the converse (proving the elliptic shape). I'm sure Newton would have LOVED this type of proof, and this proof in particular! Although I'm sure he'd appreciate how much more powerful modern mathematical notation and ideas such as vector or Lagrangian calculus are. And that's where Feynman and 3blue1brown comes in: Elementary proofs just are the next level of understanding: being able to explain something seemingly complicated in simple terms. With intuitive concepts, but with methods not more complicated that what was available to Newton.
Grant not only is a genius but he is also a fantastic teacher. Honestly, every time i didn't understand a specific part of the proof he addressed it right away, almost as if he could read my mind! That is, in essence, teaching, and he's brilliant at that!
Thanks a lot for the video Grant...You really tried your best to keep it simple...even though I had to occasionally pause and ponder. I wish 3blue1brown makes a collection of all the lectures of Feyman !!!
Goddammit grant. You couldn't just be a teaching god on one channel, you gotta invade minute physics too? Jk, love you both. Henry, you got me into physics when I was in middle school (going into uni in 2 months) and Grant, recently you made linear algebra make sense. Which was strange for me, because my teacher did an absolutely awful job. Thank you both, you've helped me and many others immensely.
Every bit of this statement is true...... Everytime I watch one of your videos, you take my breath away......just as talented as the honorable Christopher Nolan.
I had almost the exact same experience. Henry got me into physics, Sal Khan got me into calculus, I'm now going to second year math studies in uni with Grant inspiring me with every upload! These people are gifts to humanity!
pyropulse dude, everyone is different. I just took my differential equations course and my first nuclear physics course, maybe half an hour of studying a week per class. Aced it. Not all of us have inferiority complexes like you, and not everyone has to study like you.
Latin focō (as in the video) is the ablative of focus, which means at the fireplace. the form focus derives from the nominative which is focus not foco.
Wow!! I'm a mathematician, and as my colleagues will, I think, agree, this video gives a lot more intuition and insight than the standard analytical mechanics-differential equation proof which has hardly any geometry and only blind calculation. Thank you!!!
Surely the word «focus» for that thing in an ellipse existed before Kepler said that each orbit is an ellipse with the Sun at one focus. My guess, it is so called after the target of Archimedes' parabolic mirror or something similar.
*Yes, I'm going to pretend like my brain has enough computing power to fully comprehend every single word in this video and instantly apply it to every subject previous brought up, and watch the video a ×1 speed without pauses.*
Think of operating a cnc machine when carving out, the chips fly in those directions, if the tool breaks it also flys in that direction, just have the infinite intelligence to have the guards shut when it dose!
12:41 shows a coordinate frame shift from position to velocity space. I was just looking at the Royal Institute Sean Carroll lecture on Relativity where the simple statement of 'speed of light is a constant' would be a very interesting mental frame to explore. I have been questioning why time is the proper dimension to differentiate on vs any other. What happens if we shift our entire mental frame from position being the default (requiring differentiating to get rates of change) to a mind model where velocity is default on a unit coordinate system? What happens to the other physical constants when c=1 what values would they be and how do they build into something like the fine structure constant?
I personally Love Feynman's work... His brilliance wasn't in just discovering new things, but being able to explain them at an elementary level. It is almost like watching Monet paint, or Bach compose music... if we could, that is. My only problem with the video is... how does one pronounce "Principia" correctly, but not "Foci?" They are both Latin words, in which the c is always pronounced hard, like a k. Everything else in the video made perfect sense, but it was like hearing nails across a chalkboard every single time he said it. On a side note, speaking of the relation of Kepler and Newton... Kepler spent over 30 years to develop his laws of planetary motion. There is a museum to him that actually still holds thousands of notes on his work. This is actually motivated Newton to try and find an easier way to solve the "Tangent Line Problem." But, don't be fooled... what Newton wrote about in The Principia was not The Calculus we regularly learn. He discusses it in the third part of the book, and it mostly deals with differential equations. Libenitz really was the one who developed most of The Calculus we learn in school. Newton took the claim solely because he was the head of the Royal Society at the time. The same position Stephen Hawking held until he passed away.
@@coolcat23 I've got degrees in Maths and Stats. We are all horrible spellers... And names. Do you know how annoying it is to have classes with people for 4 years, but everyone forgets each other's names? That is the real reason why we seem so quite, lol.
I was a math major for 1 year before I switched to mechanical engineering. I'm now retied and can indulge my first passion. I simply loved this video. I do believe, though that the constructs are merely consequences of natural laws without any useful knowledge.
But it had a hard K sound before the "u", why not the "i"? Later in the talk he mentioned Newton's "Principia" and used a hard K for the "c" before "i". It's too early here to start drinking.
In (classical) latin Cs are always hard. Caesar is actually pronounced Kaesar which is where the word german Kaiser for emperor comes from. However 'i' should be pronounced like 'ee' rather than the english 'aye', and the 'o' should be a short 'o-' rather than the english 'owe' sound.
You lost me at “draw a circle”... what the hell is a CIR-CLE? Squares, I’ve heard of those. Triangles, I’ve seen one of those things before I think. But “cir-cles”... I thought that was sci-fi stuff. Didn’t superman come from a planet called “circle”? And he’s allergic to “circlenite”?
il try that tonight when i have a mirror handy. my head is a bit lumpy though, so not sure if il be able to recreate one of these circle things. maybe if i trace around one of my nuts, thats sort of roundish.
Why did you have to take the velocity vectors diagram? The orbit diagram was explanation enough. Meaning, the object is shooting away from the influence of the sun and has centrifugal force perpendicular to the distance it is away from the sun, on the orbit. It's force would vary proportional to the inverse of the square of the radius, and proportional to the mass, but it would not have enough force to exit the path. Hence an elipse
17:21 In my opinion, all this section with the angle θ is irrelevant and doesn't make any sense. (Unless he identifies the center of the circle with the sun). You can skip to 18:51 Once you have the circle, and rotate it 90°, then, no matter what, the original velocities will be parallel to the tangents of the ellipse
I appreciate your through discussion of this. It really reminds me of my grandfathers explanation. I was looking forward to your method of explanation, and was quite entertained
This video required infinite intelligence to understand. I'd say I understood about 60% of it. 60% of infinity is still infinity. Hence.... you get my point.
Loved this collab. Thanks for this video! Knowledge just blasting off from this video, like water sprinkler.I don't think I managed to catch all the water.
I am not a mathematician but I love it! I once took a physics class called Physics for Poets and this is exactly what it was like. You and of course Feynman deconstructed this concept so that even a guy like me could appreciate its beauty. Thanks!
Great video. It's a bit like the classic Cambridge natsci/physics interview question "describe how you might approach proving the following or what laws you would need to invoke'. Thankfully mine was simpler however. We had a first edition of Newton's Opticks in the college library and I was kind of thrilled to request it and read a chapter... in a long-gone innocent age where there was no door security on the college or the reading room.
Hey 3b1b! As you always say "Go play!" after teaching something, I played a bit with the construction of ellipse that you gave and eventually discovered that if I pull out the eccentric point out of the circle, the shape that pops out seems to be a hyperbola!! How do you explain that? I would like it very much if you made a video on this property and explain it in your own, very elementary and very satisfactory way. *Note*: It also seems that as in the ellipse construction, the foci are just the centre of the circle and... what do I call it? The ex-circular point?
Yes it forms a hyperbola, and if you put the point ON the circle it will trace a parabola. Just like how a body escaping the gravity of earth would eject out in a hyperbola and a body having just enough energy as a parabola. This is basic JEE stuff
Wall...so nice and not complicated at all. I think would be so hard to come with concept but once it is done is not that hard at all. He is basically using some calculus and geometry concepts. It is unbelievable how the graphics help the understanding of these things. Imagine Newton doing this from scratch with no visual aid. Also we need to congratulate Blue Brown, the way he explain it is so clear. It is like he sees inside your brain and trace the path to make your neurons flow. I didn't even had to focus that much, I just laid back and let the lines do the work for me. Awesome.....
This is an amazing talk - I wish I had had this "class" when I was in college. I have a question - can you do with acceleration what you did with velocity?? thanks!!!
I know what you're thinking: Either Henry is taking some well-deserved time off and I'm just helping to fill in during that vacation, or else he's currently tied up in my basement providing me occasional sound bites for food while I slowly take over the channel for good. To anyone worried about case #2, don't be silly.
He's in the attic. Way too many escape routes in the basement.
I love how you could understand that with tenth grade math and eleventh grade physics, and also the satisfaction you get when it all clicks together. Grear job!
Lmao
3b1b: it is case #3 I'm interested in. Got an answer for the LAG of gravity given its known speed? (see separate question)
3Blue1Brown loooool🤣🤣🤣🤣
You think of everything.... until you find out he can break through the roof tiles
As Feynman once said "...it takes tremendous strain on the mind to understand certain concepts.." now I know he was right.
I am sure he wasn't even refering to this when saying that. He probably was refering to the crazyness of quantum theory and relativity, things so crazy that this seems like kids play.
Unfortunately Feynman never explained some of the simplest concepts, like the ellipse. What is at the other focus?
Unfortunately Feynman never explained some of the simplest concepts. What is at the other focus?
John there is empty space at the other focus (in a real system there might be some dust or another planet passing near the focus though, but it can’t stay there)
@@zephilandevol exactly, theres nothing there. so Feynman's analogy is false
I find it fitting that a guest video was used to talk about a guest lecture
Serendipitous, to be honest...
@@mabell01 now rotate that by 90°
where can you find that "infinate intellegence" lecture can you please tell me?
G squared?
"What special curve satisfies the property that the tangency direction for a point theta radians off the horizontal is given by this vector from the special eccentric point from the circle to a point theta degrees around that circle from the vertical?
Okay... Is the question clear?"
Uhhhhhhhhhh... *infinite intelligence load error*
That has stumped me for a minute :D
ngl, i repeated that single sentence at least 5-6 times before i didn't understand it and sucked it up and went on with it
I am so sorry, but i just liked your comment, even though it had 69 likes. Thankfully, i have the infite intelligence required for this video and i managed to unlike it, not dislike, but unlike, so that it still has 69 likes. Sorry for the inconvenience
Basically,... we're back to the (constructed) ellipse within the circle, made with the string and two focal points.
.
Basically you need to understand for any point along a curve, its velocity vector has a direction tangent to the path. The bit with constructing a circle by placing the velocity vector tail to tail stumps me tho. Rest of it is easily understood if you think about it.
Ohhhhhh, it all makes sense now. Not to me but I'm sure to someone it does.
I'll just stick to god.
That's what I was going to say.
“You don’t need calculus to understand this”
*3 minutes later*
“As you can see, if you keep adding infinitely small sections to this polygon, it trends toward a circle”
😂 ∆x v/s dx
Daniel Kunigan
Caculus
@@YaseenKhan-qf8mq The Calculus.
Lmao
i was tricked
ooh this gonna be good
Tibees It seems like all my fav science/educational youtubers are on this video or in the comments, incredible, didnt expect to see you here
Yeah it's great!
can you explain what he said at 15:49 please
Heeeey... Good to see you here...
JEE girl.
I'm afraid I only have a finite amount of intelligence.
otherwise you'd be the one reinterpreting newtons mechanics
Trying to visualize this is completely inversely proportional to the methods I was taught throughout all of my education. SAD. We should teach HOW to learn not just regurgitating "facts" and "laws" which, imho, are in "fact" just theories based upon the human's finite perception (real and imagined) ...nevermind...what was I saying? LOL
Sebastián that's what I'm saying
Very realistic, no joke, answer. An average human brain has ~1500 ccm of brain matter. Mathematicians like Gauss had ~1800 ccm of brain matter, that's 300 ccm or 1 coffee mug of brain matter more than regular people - there is just no way for a regular Joe to deeply understand advanced math, no matter how much effort he puts in, preiod. Your abilities are hard capped by the total number of axons and neurons, it's that simple. Parents, don't lie to your kids that they can be anything they want if they study hard enough, tell them the truth - they can only be what their genetics allow them to be - their abilities in life are predetermined from birth, nothing can change them. Blackpill 101
Sebastián
I feel soo sorry for you :/
Man, this 3b1b guy (grant sanderson) really deserves more recognition and some prestigious awards. He is one of the most influential math guy in present history, so many people like me are everyday getting inspiration to study mathematics from him.
Coming from Al Farabi, that surely means something :)
Why mean@@kamiel79
this lecture is very relatable for me for puzzles that i picked up in povey's problems book and polygons with limits to circles, with even some physics i learnt in A-level. It was all just buried underneath layers of geometry and how the formation of triangles revolving around circles can be used in such a way. I like how you related a physics and mathematics interpretation of the problem not just for your viewers, but as a trace of what feynman truely believed and enjoyed life for. Thanks for releasing these videos 3B1B, and you minutephysics. Nicely done with physics and maths and i hope to see more collaborations in the future, if not already!
Twenty One Minutes Physics
Isn't that the name of a band?
Twenty one savage
What an original joke that has never been used on this channel before.
Stephen Heirtzler What an original comment that has never been used on this channel before.
Zombie Salad What an original reply that has never been used on this channel before
As my eyeballs glazed, I realized fully that I do not have 'infinite intelligence'.
I guess it's good for us to run into a wall now and then. Wow.
On "watching Feynman 'splain things is just like watching Bobby Fisher play chess"... How true! In both cases, I feel I understand about 20% (to be generous) of what's happening. : ) (I think I'll come back to this video from time to time)
You know it think that's what we were born for.
To gain infinite intelligence.
Like you wil learn to take down walls if you run into them so often, and thus find yourself in always a bigger space, a bigger world, and have more freedom (guaranteed that you don't run into any titans).
You know I'm amazed how aot connected here.
The linking of two masterpieces, so "mesmerizing?" yet so simple.
New MinutePhysics video notification: "oh neat, I'll add it to watch it later"
Topic is "Feynman's Lost Lecture": "Maybe I'll listen to it in the background"
Featuring 3Blue1Brown: **heavy breathing**
Video duration is 21 minutes: **drop everything I'm doing and hit the fullscreen button**
Felipe Figueroa damn right
This is literally me!
damn true
That true. Just cancelled everything and went full screen.
Even though I couldn't follow everything exactly.
I've seen this video 3 times already. I understand what he's saying everytime I watch it, and then forget how he did it the next time I come around.
Write it down
That probably means it's not explained well.
Once I get into, and then through college, I'm definitely going to build a time machine and yank Feynman out of some class just to show him this video adaptation of his lecture. Beautifully conveyed!!
Thank you for the effort that was put into this. Amazing people, teaching millions of anonymous people, you deserve more gratitude that can be offered in a comment!
My head hurts a little, but I think I understand most of it. Remembering it on the other hand.....
BlueKavet you can then always watch it again!
How I feel after every 3b1b video
I think this was actually somewhat easier to understand than some of his videos, although it might just be because I've has most of the past week off and am actually caught up on sleep.
There are three steps in understanding a proof:
1. You can understand the proof
2. You can reproduce the proof
3. You can find a better one
Vladimir Shitov true! I ALWAYS skip to number 3
Minutephysics + 3blue1brown + Feynman? Knowledge-gasm!
Sebastian Elytron agree
I consumed so much knowledge that I pooped out an introduction to physics book the next day.
Quantum tunneled.
Sebastian Elytron
Good one...
LOL
0:54 - Notice that the endpoints of all those many line segments form two other circles. Is there a significance to that?
Unfortuentaly no, this is because at the beginning when the lines were drawn, they formed a perfect circle, so taking the perpendicular bisector of each one would still form a circle, just two smaller ones
3blue1brown: *explanations*, Right?
Me: Uhhh *brain.exe is not responding*
3Blue1Brown: *continues explaining*
Me: *brain.exe crashed*
David Timothy P yooo for true, I'm just ganna watch Feynman explain it
*_brain.exe_** has encountered a fatal error. Please try repairing the program before launching it again or contact your support team.*
Brain better off after the workout!
I admit I'll need to watch this many times before I might have a decent grasp of it. I'm in my 60's & was a high-school dropout. I went on to get a modest amount of formal education & training in a limited variety of subjects. I did okay with electronics algebra & basic trig, but then I hit a plateau. It took me a good decade to recover from that setback, and begin to realize that math can be awesome, beautiful, and even entertaining. I became a person who wished they could have been an astrophysicist. Part of that desire came from finding my way back to a youthful obsession with the nature of the universe, of which I'd all but forgotten. Later, I began to see how impressive were the skill sets of many of the world's physics giants. In the last several years, while I mainly do more-mundane, day-to-day achievements of a kind, I spend a lot of time examining everything I can find on the laws of nature & the stories of science. I can't seem to get enough of it. But I'm too often struggling with concepts that are way over my head, and I've wished to find an easy way to learn some of the fundamentals. Meanwhile, I've tried hard to acquaint myself with every existing variety of fields in which the highest math skills are put to work. I've gotten some great books from the library, and have devoured countless, thrilling stories of the history of science. I've been given or purchased several of my own, too, and have read all the magazines for the last 15 years.. I've learned about the important breakthroughs of Aristotle, Ptolemy, Newton, Brahe, Copernicus, and quite a few others, including Johannes Kepler. I have an awareness of a good number of modern-day achievements, along with today's heavy hitters. too. I can't entirely explain this fascination I've developed. It has a grip on me, and sometimes I think life would just be a lot easier, if I dropped the whole thing, but but just won't go away. Fortunately, like Ron Burgundy once said, that is in no way depressing. For all these reasons, I found a great deal of enjoyment in your fantastic video presentation. It's one of the most helpful demonstrations I've yet come across. You are to be commended, for providing the layman with such a near-intuitive overview of this sort of topic. I'm anxious to see what else you've posted. excellent job!
"Surely you're joking, Mr Feymann !" is one of the best book I have ever read. Its deep, it's mind-boggling, and much more, it's fun !
My favorite work of nonfiction ever.
Rite! I especially like the anecdotal story of RF debating 2 post-grad guys in a cafeteria, about his alternative to cosmic expansion. And, despite the last scene of MIB 1, RF's shrinking universe hypothesis is un-disprovable!
My favorite book for sure
The video currently has 467,294 views including my 467,200 views to understand it
That too at 0.5X speed
LOL
LOL
LOL
LOL
LOL
Interesting to note, at the end of the book "Feynman's lost lecture" the authors reveal that the arguments were first found by Maxwell (From Maxwell's equations) in his book Motion and Matter. So I'd reason that Feynman, who was famously well read in physics books/papers, probably adapted the arguments there for his lecture. Not taking away from the brilliance of the argument and the presentation of course.
Thank you for this! Several, "That is so cool!" moments in this video, and...as much as I love learning...I only went as far as Physics 101 in college. Thus, it's not just cool how all of this works out; it's cool that it can be broken down into individual pieces that are each relatively easy to digest. I'm suddenly reminded of Zen Archery. Don't think about the target; just get each individual step right, and your arrow will arrive at its target "on its own".
Newton - "OMG they don't understand my physics!"
Feynman - "Hold my beer."
@@lorax121323 would agree, if you can't grasp why forming an elipse this way is not the definition of an elispe just worded a different way....you shouldn't be watching this channel
@@lorax121323 and that is why he wrote his own encryption ;-)
If anything, Feynman's gift was an ability to put the cookies on the bottom shelf
Hold my bonjos
Not only Newton. It should be all the other physicists vs. Feynman. Feynman was born too early. He should have appeared today on our planet.
10:48
*3B1B* : Well, specificly it says that this quantity times the mass of the object stays constant, but, I mean, the mass of the orbiting object isn't gonna be changing.
*Michael* : Or is it?
Well, if a comet goes near a Sun, significant part of it will evaporate. So, it does not hold always.
*Vsauce music intensifies*
*Michael* : Or is it?.. Change... This word is made up out of 6 roman letters..
*Me* : Wtf.....
@@Hexanitrobenzene Therefore the trajectory of a comet will involve a more difficult calculation.... Now imagine the rate of evaporation is inversely proportional to the distance to the sun as well as proportional to the surface area of the comet facing the sun, would that be a reasonably solvable situation(without getting into numerical analysis)?
Dun dun dunnnnnn
The Great Physicists' Road Trip by Ms. Rachel C. Millison
Great physicists from the past decide to return to Earth for one last road-trip vacation to the coast together. They all appear on Earth on the appointed evening. Heisenberg pulls up behind the wheel of a gigantic 1930's car, a huge grin on his face.
As they're getting in the car, Hubble looks up and says "What a wonderfully dark sky".
"Shouldn't be" responds Olbers.
"Always has been" says Hoyle.
"No, it hasn't" says Lemaitre.
"I knew that!" says an embarrassed Einstein.
Once they're all in, Teller says "Hey guys, this trip is going to be The Bomb!".
"Yeah, but why do I always have to organize?" asks Oppenheimer.
"Where exactly will we end up?" asks Kepler.
"That's impossible to predict" says Bohr.
"I just can't believe that's true" says Einstein.
Heisenberg punches the throttle and the old car roars off.
"Say - this thing sure accelerates" says Newton.
"I don't know, Isaac. It feels like gravity to me" smirks Einstein.
Later that night, as they are speeding down a country road, a police car catches up to them and pulls them over.[1]
"Do you know how fast you were going?" the cop asks. [1]
"No, but I know exactly where I am" Heisenberg replies. [1]
The cop says "You were doing 55 in a 35" [1]
Heisenberg throws up his hands and shouts "Great! Now I'm lost!" [1]
The cop thinks this is suspicious and orders him to pop open the trunk. He checks it out and says "Do you know you have a dead cat back here?" [1]
"We do now, asshole!" shouts Schrodinger. [1]
"I think it's time to split" says Everett.
"Say, how did you manage to spot us on such a dark night?" asks Hubble.
"I saw the light from your head lamps" says the cop.
"How fast was *it* going?" asks Michelson.
"That's simple addition" giggles Galileo.
"Not exactly" says Lorentz.
"Look here" says Heisenberg, "how do you know I was going that fast?"
"I clocked you over a measured distance" says the cop.
"How often?" asks Hertz.
"I disagree with your measurement, officer" interjects Einstein.
"Don't start tonight, Albert" says Bohr, shaking his head.
"What Herr Einstein is trying to say" continues Heisenberg, "is that time was running at a different rate for you than for us".
"WHAT!!!???" exclaims Newton.
"It's true" says Maxwell. "We're all famous scientists and, believe us, Herr Einstein has proved it, though it came as no surprise to me".
"Sounds complicated" responds the cop.
"I'll draw you a simple diagram" says Feynman.
Totally flummoxed, the cop lets them go with a warning. As he drives away, Doppler cocks his head and listens to the sound of the receding police car. "Gotta love that" he says.
"Amen" responds Hubble.
Returning to their car, Lord Kelvin remarks "Sure is warm tonight"
"Yep - lots of disorder" replies Boltzmann.
"In places you'd never expect" adds Hawking.
"I was lucky to get away with that" says Heisenberg. "Most cops think they're better than everyone else".
"Yes - I hate inequality" adds Bell.
"Though you *were* speeding" says Faraday to Heisenberg. "I carefully observed the needle creep from 35 to 55".
"Actually, it was jumping, Michael" replies Planck.
As they pile back into the car, Bohr says "See here - you must fill the seats in order - no empty spaces allowed. And stop interfering with each other!"
"Only one of you can sit next to me!" yells an agitated Pauli.
"Say, Werner - it's stuffy in here. Be a good chap and crack the window a bit" says Hawking.
"Sorry, Stephen. It can be all the way up or all the way down, but nowhere in between" replies Heisenberg.
"Hey guys - Albert and I just figured out a great shortcut. Only one bridge" announces Rosen.
"It will save us a lot of distance" says Einstein, "but it might get spooky".
Arriving at the beach the next morning, they hurry from the car and stand looking out over the ocean.
"Look at the wonderful waves" says Schrodinger.
"They don't look like waves to me" says Bohr.
Looking down at the fine sand, Dirac exclaims "Look at all the particles!"
"Now *those* look like waves" says De Broglie.
"This is great!" exclaims Feynman, rubbing his hands together. "Now, lets go meet some girls!"
"Let's delay" says Wheeler.
"We have to be discrete" warns Bohm.
"Girls? NEVER!" exclaims Newton.
1 Based on, and including the original, attributed to Rich Granger, engineer, Battelle.
thanks for putting this thing up, its awesome
Really enjoyed this one.
Most well crafted comment on youtube.
Thanks for sharing😉
I read one small excerpt from this and it was amazing. I didn't realize it was a full story!
"Stay focused"
I see what you probably weren't intending to do there.
David Goodstein is also the spiritual grandfather of 3B1b videos: he made the landmark “Mechanical Universe” series that aired on PBS. It featured a mix of animated equations and historical re-enactments that brought physics to life for a generation.
And the animation of Kepler’s second law is so close to the one from the Mechanical Universe that I think it might even be an homage.
True
“So I’m gonna draw it nice and thiccc”
*12 year olds have entered the chat
Alex Matsumura “so you can see all the parts” 😂
NANI
timestamps??
10:00
That's a pretty *_normal_* way of constructing an ellipse!
I see what you did there
I thought it was 3blue1brown who uploaded video
Chandravijay Agrawal I did too lol
Chandravijay Agrawal me too
Same
tru
me too
I think the visuals made it elementary to understand, but I loved the linguistic complexity needed to be able to effectively communicate the concept in the first place. Granted without the visuals I probably would not have understood, nor would I have wanted to understand.
Great video!!!
Keep up the asking questions out loud stuff with a slight pause. It aids learning and facilitates the drawing together of seemingly unrelated threads within the consciousness of the viewer. Good work.
2000 years later:
The physics/maths behind creating level II universes.
Animated and taught by 3b1b the 500th.
So each 3b1b lived for just under 4 years?
Holy crap, I suggested this topic to Grant on his subreddit. I can't believe you guys are actually doing this! Awesome!
www.reddit.com/r/3Blue1Brown/comments/86e1jw/video_suggestion_a_geometric_proof_of_keplers/
Gives me hope that he'll cover my suggestions of RSA and knot theory someday. (Though the latter might be difficult to animate…)
To anyone reading this, I highly suggest checking out Pulsar's write-up in the link given. It can help solidify any remaining confusions.
O no you di'nt
I am fully convinced that the term 'Quantum Electrodynamics' was coined solely to make the 'QED' joke
I think Feynman was trolling mathematicians. ;-)
Having heard Susskind's comments about Feynman's massive ego, it would be his kind way of saying, 'Take that, mathematicians; I win!'.
whats the joke
@@BLUEGENE13 r/whoosh
BLUEGENE13 The joke is that mathemathicians sometimes write QED at the their proofs, which is an abreviation of the latin words "quod erat demonstrandum" which means "what had to be demonstrated".
If TH-cam channels like minutephysics or 3Blue1Brown existed when I was in high school I probably would have become a physicist or mathematician instead of a biologist.
This is AWESOME ~ Thanks for sharing this!! Love 3Blue1Brown! You summed this up awesome!!
"So the question is: What special curve satisfies the property that the tangency direction of the slope for any point theta-radians off the horizontal is given by /this vector/ from a special eccentric point on the circle to a point theta-degrees around that circle from the vertical? Okay, so is the question clear?" XD
With each new replay of the video, the question becomes clearer by 1 word. All in all, 41-43 concentrated plays of this video are required for the question to be clear.
If you want proof... well, you have this line that shows it if you just turn it 90 degrees into your brain. Good luck & have fun!
+Amar Are you telling me the answer is 42?
the answer is an ellipse. which is a curve that satisfies the above property
@@yashpandey5416 that's an elliptical way to say 42
This is EXACTLY what I have pondered for many years! Now it is time to take it to the next step: The algorithm is quite simple actually, all mathematics can be defined with only a couple of variables. My computer science professor would look at me cross-eyed every time is suggested that digital and analog were not meant to be separated and thus the constant battle for accuracy with "smaller and smaller slices" so to speak....
Was I the only one that forgot this was a minute physics video?
No
'No,' sarcastically or literally? It can _go either way!_
Literally, it’s just like a 3b1b video: long and interesting af.
kindlin I had just taken it literally but now I'm curious
Nah
Somehow this seemed even denser than most of 3blue1brown's other material. I feel like I could probably get it all if I spent a couple hours working it out for myself, but right now my head just kinda hurts.
Physics is a different mindset from math, so yeah this did have a different feel. Orbits are really tough at first encounter but incredibly satisfying once you understand, keep at it!
P Sharma I think it's actually the math perspective that's throwing me here. I have a pretty good intuitive understanding of orbits from physics in terms of angular momentum and potential energy (and let's be honest, most of my intuition for orbital dynamics comes from playing Kerbal Space Program) so this sorta abstract mathematical approach is throwing me off.
I often find that math is very dense though, so it's not too surprising. The people who came up with our mathematical language did a very good job of distilling complicated ideas into concise and precise language.
I suggest checking orbits out in a college level classical mechanics text, there's way more math involved but it may help you reconcile everything here. The actual derivation of elliptical orbits from Newton's second law is truly awesome and it was a lecture I don't think I'll forget, hopefully you'll enjoy that too.
pyropulse your comment made me laugh so much... If you think physics and math are the same thing then you're either just barely through your majors and trying to talk big or you've been taught rather poorly. This was a wonderful video but it was very noticeably done from a mathematician's perspective, he didn't hit on physical intuition very much because he used math proofs instead which (I'm guessing) is why OP felt like something was different, you with your double major should've recognized that.
That escalated quickly
Everything to know about physics relates to geometry. This was such a pleasure to watch
Can you imagine what sort of lectures and presentations Feynman would have produced if he had access to the same animation software used to make this video...? 😮
Even worse ones. ;-)
@@schmetterling4477 Ok
@@Ax_x1om You need to stop judging the quality of a lecture by the fame of the lecturer. This isn't tribalism. There are actual intellectual criteria at play here. Use them.
@@schmetterling4477 Ok, may you explain why Feynman was a bad lecturer then?
@@Ax_x1om He gave a series of lectures on quantum mechanics once that I actually used to like... until I thought about them a little more and then it became clear that what he was teaching gave people the wrong intuition about what is actually going on in quantum mechanics. I know that (and why) in his mind it all made perfect sense, but what he was communicating doesn't reduce to the correct physics in the mind of the audience because they lack his theoretical background.
Didn't think it was serious until he said Go full screen.
It's the only way to watch a 3blue1brown video imo!
Newton started off with a bet to prove this (the ellipse being a consequence of the inverse square law) and produced a series of publications, eventually compiling the principia mathematica out of this seed. However, although he never states this clearly, I'm sure he realized that the proof he gave was for the converse: that given an elliptic orbit, an inverse square force law follows. This was much easier at the time because so much was known about the geometric properties of the ellipse than was about F=m a. In fact, Newton couldn't really mathematically use velocities because they compare two quantities with unequal units (distance, time). Also of course algebraic notations and vectors weren't invented yet. But still Newton claimed to have won his bet, and the Principia avoids any clarity about proving the inverse square law vs. the converse (proving the elliptic shape).
I'm sure Newton would have LOVED this type of proof, and this proof in particular! Although I'm sure he'd appreciate how much more powerful modern mathematical notation and ideas such as vector or Lagrangian calculus are. And that's where Feynman and 3blue1brown comes in: Elementary proofs just are the next level of understanding: being able to explain something seemingly complicated in simple terms. With intuitive concepts, but with methods not more complicated that what was available to Newton.
Wow! What a trickster!!!
God not again
Beat Toedtli I didn’t even read the comment because I knew I wouldn’t understand it but I’m acting like I do understand it so I seem smart.
wait Newton didnt have vector????
I think he proved it both ways.
Grant not only is a genius but he is also a fantastic teacher. Honestly, every time i didn't understand a specific part of the proof he addressed it right away, almost as if he could read my mind! That is, in essence, teaching, and he's brilliant at that!
Thanks a lot for the video Grant...You really tried your best to keep it simple...even though I had to occasionally pause and ponder.
I wish 3blue1brown makes a collection of all the lectures of Feyman !!!
Feynman was an artist who had shown us some ultimate beauties of universe through the colours of physics....
This is a gem.... 💎💎
This is the most satisfying maths/physics video I've ever watched period.
LOLL'I579 Welcome to the 3blue1brown land.
I'm already a citizen of that place :D
go have a look on fractal geometry ;)
fierce competition? =p
urgh
Goddammit grant. You couldn't just be a teaching god on one channel, you gotta invade minute physics too? Jk, love you both. Henry, you got me into physics when I was in middle school (going into uni in 2 months) and Grant, recently you made linear algebra make sense. Which was strange for me, because my teacher did an absolutely awful job. Thank you both, you've helped me and many others immensely.
Every bit of this statement is true...... Everytime I watch one of your videos, you take my breath away......just as talented as the honorable Christopher Nolan.
I had almost the exact same experience. Henry got me into physics, Sal Khan got me into calculus, I'm now going to second year math studies in uni with Grant inspiring me with every upload! These people are gifts to humanity!
There's always that one guy.
pyropulse dude, everyone is different. I just took my differential equations course and my first nuclear physics course, maybe half an hour of studying a week per class. Aced it. Not all of us have inferiority complexes like you, and not everyone has to study like you.
Ok
Latin focō (as in the video) is the ablative of focus, which means at the fireplace. the form focus derives from the nominative which is focus not foco.
Wow!! I'm a mathematician, and as my colleagues will, I think, agree, this video gives a lot more intuition and insight than the standard analytical mechanics-differential equation proof which has hardly any geometry and only blind calculation. Thank you!!!
I don't think a Mathematician would ever say "blind calculation".
Surely the word «focus» for that thing in an ellipse existed before Kepler said that each orbit is an ellipse with the Sun at one focus. My guess, it is so called after the target of Archimedes' parabolic mirror or something similar.
A guest lecture about a guest lecture! Excellent! Hopefully this will never become known as "3Blue1Brown's Lost Lecture"
*Yes, I'm going to pretend like my brain has enough computing power to fully comprehend every single word in this video and instantly apply it to every subject previous brought up, and watch the video a ×1 speed without pauses.*
I too, shall do this.
@@fanimeproductionst.v.3735 Wonderful, truly wonderful!
An energizing idea!
Think of operating a cnc machine when carving out, the chips fly in those directions, if the tool breaks it also flys in that direction, just have the infinite intelligence to have the guards shut when it dose!
Ok
20 minute Physics
Even better!
12:41 shows a coordinate frame shift from position to velocity space. I was just looking at the Royal Institute Sean Carroll lecture on Relativity where the simple statement of 'speed of light is a constant' would be a very interesting mental frame to explore. I have been questioning why time is the proper dimension to differentiate on vs any other. What happens if we shift our entire mental frame from position being the default (requiring differentiating to get rates of change) to a mind model where velocity is default on a unit coordinate system? What happens to the other physical constants when c=1 what values would they be and how do they build into something like the fine structure constant?
I personally Love Feynman's work... His brilliance wasn't in just discovering new things, but being able to explain them at an elementary level. It is almost like watching Monet paint, or Bach compose music... if we could, that is.
My only problem with the video is... how does one pronounce "Principia" correctly, but not "Foci?" They are both Latin words, in which the c is always pronounced hard, like a k. Everything else in the video made perfect sense, but it was like hearing nails across a chalkboard every single time he said it.
On a side note, speaking of the relation of Kepler and Newton... Kepler spent over 30 years to develop his laws of planetary motion. There is a museum to him that actually still holds thousands of notes on his work. This is actually motivated Newton to try and find an easier way to solve the "Tangent Line Problem." But, don't be fooled... what Newton wrote about in The Principia was not The Calculus we regularly learn. He discusses it in the third part of the book, and it mostly deals with differential equations. Libenitz really was the one who developed most of The Calculus we learn in school. Newton took the claim solely because he was the head of the Royal Society at the time. The same position Stephen Hawking held until he passed away.
"Leibniz" not "Libenitz"
@@coolcat23 I've got degrees in Maths and Stats. We are all horrible spellers...
And names. Do you know how annoying it is to have classes with people for 4 years, but everyone forgets each other's names? That is the real reason why we seem so quite, lol.
I LOVE ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING FEYNMAN!!! This was a great video, and I love seeing the cooperation between math/physics/science channels.
Everything except the accent...
minute physics+3b1b+Feynman what could i want more, best day of this month
This channel is amazing. Minute physics, your channel is one of the best out there. Keep it up!
This video came from 3blue1brown. See the video description for more videos like this.
I was a math major for 1 year before I switched to mechanical engineering. I'm now retied and can indulge my first passion. I simply loved this video. I do believe, though that the constructs are merely consequences of natural laws without any useful knowledge.
I always thought it was called focal point coming from optics that can be used to bundle sunlight and create fires.
wait... isn't foci pronounced with a k-sound? o.0
no, thank god latin does not have english pronunciation
But it had a hard K sound before the "u", why not the "i"?
Later in the talk he mentioned Newton's "Principia" and used a hard K for the "c" before "i".
It's too early here to start drinking.
In (classical) latin Cs are always hard. Caesar is actually pronounced Kaesar which is where the word german Kaiser for emperor comes from. However 'i' should be pronounced like 'ee' rather than the english 'aye', and the 'o' should be a short 'o-' rather than the english 'owe' sound.
But it is clearly not pronounced as it would be in latin
he also pronounces φ as "phee"
You lost me at “draw a circle”... what the hell is a CIR-CLE?
Squares, I’ve heard of those.
Triangles, I’ve seen one of those things before I think.
But “cir-cles”... I thought that was sci-fi stuff.
Didn’t superman come from a planet called “circle”? And he’s allergic to “circlenite”?
Are you notch?? The one that created minecraft??
LOLL'I579 lol
first you draw a head, then you erase some of the more detailed features, and 1, 2, 3 a circle ... thingy.
il try that tonight when i have a mirror handy. my head is a bit lumpy though, so not sure if il be able to recreate one of these circle things.
maybe if i trace around one of my nuts, thats sort of roundish.
I think it's a name he came up with for cDonald's Theorem.
I am definitely gonna have to rewatch this several times but I look forward to it
Thanks for the easy and simple explanation. Every thing is clear now.
Grant: "Ok? is the question clear?"
Me: Nods in liar liar pants on fire
Woah 3blue1brown! :)
Fingernail Clipper I believe it was supposed to say, G's up ho's down
The PCA explanation by 3blue1brown got me a job ❤️
Rohan Damodar could you link to the video?
Not exactly a video on PCA. But understanding the eigen values and eigen vectors helped me a lot.
@@ROHAN0APK to q,2
I accidentally replied
That black dot on the screen from 1:43 to 1:48 got me! I was pawing at my screen trying to remove the 'spec'. How dare you! :3
Why did you have to take the velocity vectors diagram? The orbit diagram was explanation enough. Meaning, the object is shooting away from the influence of the sun and has centrifugal force perpendicular to the distance it is away from the sun, on the orbit. It's force would vary proportional to the inverse of the square of the radius, and proportional to the mass, but it would not have enough force to exit the path. Hence an elipse
17:21 In my opinion, all this section with the angle θ is irrelevant and doesn't make any sense.
(Unless he identifies the center of the circle with the sun).
You can skip to 18:51
Once you have the circle, and rotate it 90°, then, no matter what,
the original velocities will be parallel to the tangents of the ellipse
For each angle θ you have to know the appropriate velocity vector, so you do need the angle.
1:00 top row 2nd square
*GRID-CEPTION*
I appreciate your through discussion of this. It really reminds me of my grandfathers explanation. I was looking forward to your method of explanation, and was quite entertained
This video required infinite intelligence to understand. I'd say I understood about 60% of it. 60% of infinity is still infinity. Hence.... you get my point.
Damn right
Your comment itself is the proof - you are indeed a genius!
How sophomoric of you.
thank you for making this !!! love you !!!
"...approaches a Perfect Circle. Isn't that neat?" - "indeed it is!" (Walks away and puts Lateralus by Tool on play)
yeah 3blue1brown you are my daily dose of intelligence
Infinite intelligence? :P
honestly it kind of does the opposite and reminds me that i still have much to learn.
Loved this collab. Thanks for this video!
Knowledge just blasting off from this video, like water sprinkler.I don't think I managed to catch all the water.
Fantastic video. Grant does a good job of graphically summarizing Feynam’s lost lecture.
I am so confused but I'll come back to this later when I've approached infinite intelligence.
I am not a mathematician but I love it! I once took a physics class called Physics for Poets and this is exactly what it was like. You and of course Feynman deconstructed this concept so that even a guy like me could appreciate its beauty. Thanks!
I'm impressed with the accuracy Grant can predict each moment my is brain is about to melt
When 3B1B hosts this channel:
*Bravo Six, going dark.*
Great video. It's a bit like the classic Cambridge natsci/physics interview question "describe how you might approach proving the following or what laws you would need to invoke'. Thankfully mine was simpler however. We had a first edition of Newton's Opticks in the college library and I was kind of thrilled to request it and read a chapter... in a long-gone innocent age where there was no door security on the college or the reading room.
i have paused at 5:33 and it did not equal 8 for a fact it equaled 7.99 so this must be wrong help me if I'm wrong
How did I not knew about 3blue1brown till now? I'm now subscribed to him. Thank you.
Hey 3b1b! As you always say "Go play!" after teaching something, I played a bit with the construction of ellipse that you gave and eventually discovered that if I pull out the eccentric point out of the circle, the shape that pops out seems to be a hyperbola!! How do you explain that? I would like it very much if you made a video on this property and explain it in your own, very elementary and very satisfactory way.
*Note*: It also seems that as in the ellipse construction, the foci are just the centre of the circle and... what do I call it? The ex-circular point?
Omg this is cool. Maybe it has something to do with that both ellipses and hyperbolas pop up if you slice a cone? No clue tho lol
@@cookiequeen5430 can you explain what the OP said to me please, I dont understand.
Yes it forms a hyperbola, and if you put the point ON the circle it will trace a parabola. Just like how a body escaping the gravity of earth would eject out in a hyperbola and a body having just enough energy as a parabola.
This is basic JEE stuff
It would be amazing for you guys to remake the feynman lectures on physics videos. They are wonderful, but hard to see and hear
The incredible nature of the rubber band. Think like Feynman. He amazed me when I found his lectures on you tube. I love this man
Wall...so nice and not complicated at all. I think would be so hard to come with concept but once it is done is not that hard at all. He is basically using some calculus and geometry concepts. It is unbelievable how the graphics help the understanding of these things. Imagine Newton doing this from scratch with no visual aid. Also we need to congratulate Blue Brown, the way he explain it is so clear. It is like he sees inside your brain and trace the path to make your neurons flow. I didn't even had to focus that much, I just laid back and let the lines do the work for me. Awesome.....
This is an amazing talk - I wish I had had this "class" when I was in college. I have a question - can you do with acceleration what you did with velocity?? thanks!!!
Beautiful graphics! :)
Infinite inteligence was INDEED required hahaha. If i wanna understand this im gonna have to take notes, and rewatch the video multiple times haha
Thanks
Wow...loved this one...
Is there a fundamental reason that two distinctly different forces, light (electromagnetism) & gravity, both adhere to the inverse square rule?
Heph333 now you’re asking the real questions