Here I am studying MSc in Engineering but watching this rather simple video I guess I needed something as simple and clear as this video after being lost in the details, something like this reminds you of the essence of these basic concepts. It's not a shame to go over these simple terms (other simple terms also) every once and a while as I get some sort of refreshness and a slight smile of how things were nice and simple. Great video, thank you.
@bebros2858 Жыл бұрын
bro is the physics jesus
@lucidgen112 ай бұрын
💀
@sharvenkumar3642 ай бұрын
What????
@TerraBloАй бұрын
¿¿¿¿tahW
@DisiCoco-nm2gwАй бұрын
🧗💨✔️
@charleswilantenorio6865 күн бұрын
Nah, he’s the Science jesus
@christospapaioannou9282 жыл бұрын
I dont know if anyone has noticed but Professor Dave seems to know a lot about the science stuff. All jokes aside our videos are really helpful and I watch them every time we learn a new unit in physics.
@sotl974 жыл бұрын
Professor Dave. You are frik'n smart man. Thank you for sharing this video on KZfaq. You're the best!
@purplestacks5 жыл бұрын
I use to hate ur intro and the way you explain things. Lately I've been realizing that you are proficient when it comes to concepts especially when it comes to physics. Keep this subscription forever and I hope you continue uploading videos. Thank you for helping an electronics engineering student who is so terrible at physics.
@YN-zv6ov3 жыл бұрын
@Ashay Playz he said sorry. And what do u expect the world is full of hate
@bilas26456 жыл бұрын
W= mad
@purplestacks5 жыл бұрын
w: why you have to be mad at me?
@saeedalshemeili52585 жыл бұрын
Noble prize is for you
@brauljo4 жыл бұрын
Wario's and Waluigi's origin story...
@bunalatamohapatra8354 жыл бұрын
See W= F.d So now, F=ma That's why m.a.d
@iluvdilfs44653 жыл бұрын
😠
@arshilzia38427 жыл бұрын
I did it by other method First I found k.E 1/2×50×11.2×11.2=3136J As it transfers 1539J to another body so 3136-1539=1597J So new kE is 1597J 1/2mv^2=1597 1/2×50×v^2=1597 ( as mass is given 50) 25v^2=1597 V^2=1597/25 V^2=63.88 V=7.99
@robertstewart39226 жыл бұрын
I did it the same way as you @cartoon stories. I don't completely understand Dave's way of working this out. Would be good if he could add an explanation to his calculations.
@arshilzia38426 жыл бұрын
robert stewart yes you're he should add more explanation/information about equations or calculation specially in physics
@kuiizoo4 жыл бұрын
I'll... just watch the video, thanks. but great explanation. :)
@devikas.90883 жыл бұрын
yep i also did it this way
@sheikhamohammed51422 жыл бұрын
Can I ask how we got the 7.99 at the end
@orb78284 жыл бұрын
im watching this in 2020 and this rlly helped me. I love ur intro!
@evan.59674 жыл бұрын
I looked at your post date and it said "7 months ago" I was like are you sure it's 2020?!?! WTF it's been a loooong year :'(
@johnjavidwrencedelacruz60813 жыл бұрын
Me too
@RJ-kb3qf3 жыл бұрын
Hey from the future haha can’t believe you wrote this a year ago
@wacotaco78843 жыл бұрын
hey from the further future, I don't know why I am doing this.
@rogue41343 жыл бұрын
Hey from further further future, i am doing this to ignore the work in front of me
@assafgreengames49478 ай бұрын
If I'll ever feel useless, I'll remember there's people who dislikes this video
@heythere3845 жыл бұрын
Wow ! You defined potential energy quite perfect .
@Akira_drafts Жыл бұрын
2022 and still helpfull !!! The content he teaches in under 5 mins is just awesome ! Loved it ❤
@nafyssacisse Жыл бұрын
2023 and still helpful
@Nostlgiq3 ай бұрын
@@nafyssacisse 2024 and still helpful
@vivitt40303 ай бұрын
True
@clayton21174 жыл бұрын
I remember when I was a kid jumping on my trampoline I’d take my mums keys and let them go as I was coming up or falling back down but what supprised me (besides the fact that the keys and I fell at the same speed) was that when I let them go as I was coming up they would go higher then me but then still fall at the same speed, back then I didn’t know what gravity was or that things fell at the same speed but it was so mesmerising letting go of the keys because they’d kind of just move in slow motion as they were faking
@studies9119 Жыл бұрын
Proffersor dave, thank you, I had a difficult time answering this question "in a frictionless enviroment, would an object of heavier mass have greater ke than a lighter mass?" until I watched this vid. Wish you the best in your future endeavours.
@davidmudry5622 Жыл бұрын
As far as I'm concerned it's a lot easier to understand the truth of 9/11 when you realize Einstein's gravity, which Neil deGrasse Tyson says superseded Newton's gravity, does not accelerate objects down to the ground, and does not push objects down with a force. And when you do, you'll also realize objects need a support from below, where the one and only force that comes from below to give objects their weight, then you'll realize that nothing comes down unless that support underneath the object is first removed or weakened. And if that support below is weakened to the point where the object will become lighter, the object will then descend with the illusion of apparent acceleration. There are many, at least a dozen KZfaq videos on Einstein. They all talk about Inertial Frames of reference, which both Newton and Einstein agree on, which it is when an object is not accelerating. They're both totally opposite as to when you would say an object, influenced by just gravity alone, is being accelerated. But we know it is a force of acceleration in ONE direction that is the explanation of why mass has weight in the OPPOSITE direction, like how you fall backwards when the bus takes off forwards...then you've figured it out who makes more sense about inertial frames of reference...Einstein was right, free fall is not acceleration, free fall is not kinetic energy, because free fall is weightless and is standing still. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/e5pjYKaX2tGpl6c.html
@kyuu23 жыл бұрын
I feel so proud of myself actually getting the practice problem right lol. Thank you so much!
@dkwhattouseasusername101210 ай бұрын
Just discovered this channel but wow, really good, his explanations are simple and easy to understand
@kimfigueroa29143 жыл бұрын
Since the start of online classes, some teachers are not at all efficient in explaining this. ARIGATO GOZAIMASU DAVE SENSEI!!!!!!😄
@lindseyrosario10238 ай бұрын
Remember this
@swagdork25843 жыл бұрын
the intro was like a primary school teacher and then he starts bamboozling my brain
@ilyverse3 жыл бұрын
THANK YOU SO MUCH! I HAVE TO WRITE AN ESSAY ABOUT POTENTIAL AND KINETIC ENERGY AND THIS HAS HELPED ME A LOT :)
@sarinayaghoobian Жыл бұрын
This man taught me in 4 mins what my science teacher couldn’t teach me in 4 months
@gemmaleigh60517 жыл бұрын
Our school played this for Science! :)
@tinygiant62856 жыл бұрын
Samee
@gocommitbreathe21oxygen115 жыл бұрын
you're luckyyyyy
@SamuelGillIBAKAGY2 жыл бұрын
not very good
@MrMarkgyuro4 жыл бұрын
just understood, thank you Professor! I have realised it is called potential because it is potential.
@user-qq5es3se6s7 ай бұрын
Thanks ❤prof dave
@zw37564 жыл бұрын
2 questions: 1) Between step 2 and 3 of the answer for the comprehension, how did -1,539 *J* become -1,539*kg m^2/s^*? 2) Between step 3 and 4 of the answer to the comprehension, how did (11.2 m/s)^2 turn to 125.4 m^2/s^2? Btw great video 👌😄
@ProfessorDaveExplains4 жыл бұрын
1) that's what joules are, N-m, and N are kg m/s^2 2) by squaring it
@zw37564 жыл бұрын
Wow I can’t believe I didn’t catch these simple things. Thank you so much, and also, thanks for answering so quickly. You’re a fricking legend
@myprofilepictureisbeberexha3 жыл бұрын
Thanks Professer my school teacher showed us the video and it helps me alot.
@honeybee21454 жыл бұрын
Concepts are very clearly and briefly explained. I like Prof. Dave's videos.
@kennyhuang73932 жыл бұрын
Have an exam tomorrow at 10:30 AM. Your videos are really helping me study last minute.
@Nostlgiq3 ай бұрын
Dave just taught me Hour 1-2 of Physics 4a in just 5 minutes, that's insane!
@mareged99786 жыл бұрын
it would be so cool if you made versions of the videos with all the vector calculus involved
@patriciaanders13325 жыл бұрын
This was a great helpful video when discussing with my middle school student! Thank you
@SanaKhan-zh9gw4 жыл бұрын
Ur kid's in the wrong school if he learning potential energy in middle school
@harshitakaushik77713 жыл бұрын
In which standard you are ?🤔
@jeffwilken72414 жыл бұрын
Delivery is quite stiff, but I love your format and exceptionally clear writing. Thanks for making this!
@kelvinthehuman2 жыл бұрын
He sticks to rigor and he's fun yet which is rather a rare combination. Only someone gifted can do something similar. Saludos desde la República Domincana!
@Crescendo_theGreat Жыл бұрын
this guy has saved us from at least 1 exam
@SuperShana975 жыл бұрын
Your video was short and helpful compare to other videos. I kinda got the material gradually. When I do the problem, I almost got it except the negative signs. I wonder why is negative ?
@SuperCarbohydrate Жыл бұрын
same question
@SuperCarbohydrate Жыл бұрын
I want to know why as well:(
@watermeloneo6 ай бұрын
5 years late but its negative because the question states "1539J of energy is transferred" implying that its work done BY the system which is always negative like professor dave said earlier in the video
@E-2.715 жыл бұрын
I enjoy Professor Dave's videos, helps me learn subject better!!
@michaelgalario66552 жыл бұрын
@prof Dave, Just want to ask questions for clarification. According to the Kinetic Molecular Theory "particles of matter constantly move". Kinetic Energy by definition is often defined as the energy of an object due to its motion. At a macroscopic level, we identify and differentiate Kinetic energy and Potential energy based on the observable motion of an object. Simply, if it's moving there is KE (energy in motion). Otherwise, PE.(energy at rest). However, at the microscopic level, as per the KMT, particles that make up matter move constantly, and this is where my understanding of KE and PE becomes a bit fuzzy: 1. Considering KMT - particles of matter are always in motion, does Potential Energy form really exist? Hope you could give clarification on this.
@thecosmosian102 жыл бұрын
On microscopic level all energies are either Kinetic or potential as they are either created due to motion or particle interaction.
@stormingsharks2 жыл бұрын
I'm thinking that the reason for W being negative is for a similar reason that exothermic reactions in chemistry are negative. They transfer or "release" energy into their surroundings, which is represented by a - sign. Idk if this is a proper way of thinking about it, or if it's even correct, but it worked for me so I'm kk with it.
@SuperCarbohydrate Жыл бұрын
I have the same question as well. I cannot understand why it is a negative W
@Deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez4 жыл бұрын
I wasn't careful enough so didn't take into consideration that W has to be negative. Just by the change of a sign I got my results = 13.674m/s. So just by the change of a sign I gained more energy after the impact x'D
@SailorJenova7 жыл бұрын
I wish I knew about you when I had to take Intro to Physics like 2 years ago. I would've gotten an A NOT a B! :( Oh, well ....understanding it is more important than a grade.
@sayandkr43334 жыл бұрын
Grades follow
@dhruvverma64604 жыл бұрын
@@sayandkr4333 grades relegates. It's just a number after-all
@FieldMarshalYT4 жыл бұрын
Imagine being upset about a B.
@hunzalashahid40004 жыл бұрын
@@FieldMarshalYT imagine being super relieved cuz you passed the subject with a D XD.
@FieldMarshalYT4 жыл бұрын
@@hunzalashahid4000 I can relate
@luveeii3 жыл бұрын
Thanks this is really helping me I have an exam tomorrow and this will help thanks
@erasmith35117 жыл бұрын
Very nice explanation
@freepointsgals6094 жыл бұрын
This is the equation I came up with to solve for vf in the comprehension section at the end of the video. (2((w)+1/2(m)(vi^2))/(m))^(1/2)=vf What's wrong with my algebra? I'm extremely frustrated.
@captainlabuАй бұрын
I am doing masters in theoretical physics . i was studying about electrons EPE in a experiment but suddenly forgot about PE . i guess more knowledge you gain it gets all sort of messed up in head , it needs to be cleared out time to time 😂.
@dash_board20263 жыл бұрын
Intro ... That's a great way to start a video
@seanfox1214 жыл бұрын
Thanks so much! This video was really helpful!
@trenek59433 жыл бұрын
what a mad work :D
@kellangemaehlich79443 жыл бұрын
your good i hope you get 1 million subs
@nybaddies3 жыл бұрын
lol not my school showing this video for science-
@narayanidhar78994 жыл бұрын
Professor Dave sir can you please describe the problem
@KodeArtss Жыл бұрын
FR BRO
@GuerrasLaws Жыл бұрын
What are the difference between kinetic energy and potential energy? I discovered that all animate objects possess kinetic energy, while all inanimate object exhibit potential energy. Kinetic energy can be transformed into a potential energy, but the reverse is not true. Additionally, potential energy remains constant, regardless of whether it is in motion or at rest. ~Guadalupe Guerra
@nitsuha1482 жыл бұрын
Potential energy ☀️
@edrozario54916 жыл бұрын
Why is the work in the comprehension in negative value?
@kiahmedallo97885 жыл бұрын
"transfers" 1539 J energy to another object as work, so work is done "by" the system. Therefore, work has a negative value.
@jonah59084 жыл бұрын
Can someone provide a more in depth explanation? I made the same mistake, I input the value for W as a positive integer. Please explain?
@davidkatuin45273 жыл бұрын
I have an interest in kinetic energy and I am looking for a definition as we as an example. I also think it should be broken down and simplify. I know that a ball sitting on the ground still has kinetic energy.
@carultch2 жыл бұрын
A ball sitting on the ground has zero macroscopic kinetic energy in the reference frame of the ground. If you look at it from a different reference frame, like the center of Earth, it will have kinetic energy as a consequence of moving with its immediate environment. It also has internal kinetic energy at the molecular level, as this is how objects store their thermal energy. Every object that isn't at absolute zero has internal kinetic energy.
@michellekhoshaba42495 жыл бұрын
You are a god sent, thank you!
@rollinginthedeep6900 Жыл бұрын
Thank you for explaining this! I was wondering why it was necessary to ascribe an object at rest "potential energy" when it hasn't moved and isn't necessarily going to. I was wondering why we can't just say it has energy when it's actually in motion. But the pulled arrow on a bow and compressed spring examples illustrated the point, and then the clarification that potential energy exists due to an object's position in a *field*, and often when we say potential energy we are talking about gravitational potential energy. I hope I understood that but that was my take away! Thanks!
@hazimahmed87134 ай бұрын
As velocity is frame dependent, is kinetic energy also frame dependent?
@RYUKAILAKSAMANAКүн бұрын
Hi im at 7th grade can you please explain about Mechanical energy?? Thank you so much dave 😊
@domshot12384 жыл бұрын
1:01 holy cow
@thomasbastiansen84993 жыл бұрын
"after some simplification" lol, still seems hard to me
@kuiizoo4 жыл бұрын
i am only in 6th grade pls help :( my teacher set homework to do and we had to watch this video and I now have to write a 3 page essay about kinetic and potential energy but the video rlly helped :)
@hersheychocolate75424 жыл бұрын
oh my, how did it go. I’m in 8th having to take notes.
@mecharenadestroyallmechs84222 жыл бұрын
0:56 WORK IS MAD 🤣🤣🤣😂
@youngsaxena26416 жыл бұрын
you are great sir . thanks a lot.
@angelitapinto97124 жыл бұрын
i want this teacher to my school
@monirferdouskhan33463 ай бұрын
Would someone please explain the difference in 'work done on a system' and work done by the system'??
@LinkFreak99992 жыл бұрын
Thanks once again! Love your videos.
@TheHalalCrack2 жыл бұрын
awsome explanation
@physicskiawazbabitaparmar48464 жыл бұрын
Great explanation
@lilosnitch32474 жыл бұрын
Can i ask u something? Im doing some research and phycis say that increase in potential energy will increase kinetic energy.A bow and arrow for example or even throwing a ball.....but in fighting like boxing and muay thai, winding up(pulling your arms back) and developing power that way is actually ineffective and very discouraged. Can u explain how in this senario it becomes different please??
@carultch2 жыл бұрын
"Increase in potential energy will increase kinetic energy" The opposite is true. Energy comes out of the potential form and converts to the kinetic form. Or vice-versa. This is what happens when no non-conservative forces come in to play. It is a trading of kinetic and potential energy. Human forces are not conservative forces, so the concept of potential energy doesn't apply to them. There may be parts of the concept that will apply.
@mr.miranda46242 ай бұрын
Man, and what about some explanation about the other types of Energy? ? ?, chemical, heat, solar, etc
@albertocruz89924 жыл бұрын
I have a question. In the part of the work-kinetic energy theorem, you said that when the work is negative, the system is doing a work, but in my opinion, the force is doing a work that makes that the kinetic energy of the particle decreases, and this work can be computed as the subtraction between final kinetic energy and initial kinetic energy of the system. What do you think?
@carultch2 жыл бұрын
When net work is negative, this means work is leaving the kinetic energy of the object we are studying, and the object decreases its speed. This could mean energy is being stored in the form of potential energy, or it could mean a non-conservative force such as kinetic friction is converting the energy into heat and taking energy out of the mechanical domain. Potential energy is a shortcut to calculate the work done by conservative forces, because it is a state function instead of a path function. It only depends on initial and final states, rather than the details of the path. When we exclude forces associated with a potential energy, and only study the non-conservative forces, the work-energy theorem changes from "KEfinal = W + KEinitial" to "KEfinal + PEfinal = KEinitial + PEinitial + Wnc". The sum total of PE+KE is what we call the mechanical energy; i.e. the energy we can exchange reversibly through the mechanical actions of the system. Wnc is the work of non-conservative forces. Such as work done by human forces to initiate the energy of the system, or work dissipated as heat by frictional forces, or work done on a human as human forces guide the system to rest. Any force that can add or subtract energy to an object in motion, for which we don't track a potential energy.
@ryankuykendall83032 жыл бұрын
@@carultch Great explanation. I know you're responding to someone else but that's still very helpful for me, thanks xD!
@carultch2 жыл бұрын
@@ryankuykendall8303 Always happy to help.
@michdawnespera95782 жыл бұрын
@@carultch so does that explain why 1539 is negative because it is leaving the Kinetic Energy of the object?
@carultch2 жыл бұрын
@@michdawnespera9578 Yes. If kinetic energy is decreasing, that means the net work being done on the object is negative. Is there a specific issue I could help clarify, that I'm not seeing in your question?
@johnnyrottenpiss3 жыл бұрын
Cool jingle, dude.
@derekanderson7854 Жыл бұрын
I don't understand how the gravitational potential energy can depend on height in this simple way. Suppose you take an object and increase its height by 100,000,000 kilometers; does such an object have more potential energy or less than an object at 10 meters above the ground? The object at 10m will experience much greater acceleration because the object at 100,000,000 km is so far away and thus experiences a much weaker gravitational field. Does the definition assume a uniform gravitational field throughout space?
@shanmugamv88153 жыл бұрын
What if the other object's mass is greater
@SamuelGillIBAKAGY2 жыл бұрын
not very good
@AA-N323 ай бұрын
What the skibidi
@mameabduraman2306 Жыл бұрын
Our hero
@kripashankarshukla40736 жыл бұрын
Sir why GPE is always negative?
@ProfessorDaveExplains6 жыл бұрын
because a negative amount of work is always done to bring an object closer to earth!
@gretawilliams87996 жыл бұрын
Professor Dave Explains But if we lift a rock up then how does that - sign cancels out
@carultch2 жыл бұрын
Potential energy can be both positive and negative. It is arbitrary where we define potential energy to equal zero, although there usually is a convention for each type of force for where we define it to equal zero. For gravity in the uniform field approximation, we define a datum where elevation is zero, and GPE is measured relative to being zero at that datum. Negative GPE would just mean GPE that is less than the datum amount of GPE that is defined as zero. For universal gravitation, the convention is to define GPE to be zero, infinitely far away. In this convention, GPE will always be negative.
@miteshhingnekar47705 жыл бұрын
What is energy? What is origin of energy?
@michaelcoverdale75724 жыл бұрын
Energy is the ability to perfum,work or change an object.
@jre353seriesenjoyer42 жыл бұрын
Oh no the W is mad
@jonaswhenry93713 жыл бұрын
it really helped thank you so much
@ngathjwokesther58804 жыл бұрын
I find it easy to watch your explanation than reading too much notes
@sudiptachatterjee16102 ай бұрын
Can anyone tell me from where the 0.5 comes? I struggled to understand😢 4:10
@mimidoomiraclegreatmiraclo22982 жыл бұрын
Plz sir I so grateful for ur lesson and love it, it's more understandable. But plz sir can u illustrate ur calculation, I am finding it difficult to... Plz 🙏🙏🙏
@GuerrasLaws Жыл бұрын
Keeping it simple, I discovered that all animate objects are Kinetic Energy & all inanimate objects are Potential Energy & only Kinetic Energy can become Potential Energy & not the other way around. ~Guadalupe Guerra
@elangop8357 Жыл бұрын
thank you so much sir !! your videos are short and clear. initially I hated physics but after seeing your videos I got clarity about concepts . Your doing great job.
@aloneandforloneАй бұрын
4:12 Why did we take work negative?
@iamnoob4429 Жыл бұрын
I got full marks on objective test because of you
@leoyanshianliao67062 жыл бұрын
Professor I think you forget to mention the relation of work with potential energy, I wonder if it’s work= change in potential energy
@tGoldenPhoenix2 жыл бұрын
Done.
@hihowareyou00002 жыл бұрын
Great video 😀👍💖
@niceguy48013 жыл бұрын
Thankyou sir!
@ashfaqmahmudshovon90972 жыл бұрын
As velocity is relative,Is kinetic energy relative?
@petpiranhagamer73762 жыл бұрын
Thank you, physics Jesus
@Klarpimier2 жыл бұрын
Work = mad Sounds about right
@EMH-ov8hq3 жыл бұрын
Professor why put negative sign in 1539J .plz can you explain me.Thank you Sir
@advanced27803 жыл бұрын
wow my pshyc teacher gave us link to here
@berniethekiwidragon43822 жыл бұрын
0:53 You W? YOU W?! I'll see myself out now...
@EpicSelenium346 жыл бұрын
I watched a video that proposed that potential energy is not stored within an object, but instead is directly associated with the system that the object inhabits. Since energy is not really a "thing" in the physical sense of the word (it is an intangible capacity), both perspectives seem equally valid. Which one is right?
@ProfessorDaveExplains6 жыл бұрын
i guess if we get super technical, the latter sounds more rigorous of a definition to me, but sometimes it's easiest to just speak colloquially and bestow objects with potential energy and things like that. a physicist would probably offer better insight!
@jessicagaffney40855 жыл бұрын
Thank you!! very helpful!
@akipajarinen38054 жыл бұрын
Would be nice if you kept your terms constant, initially you're using 1/2mvf^2 and later on in the comprehension check it is marked as 0.5mvf^2... Very confusing when you're learning! :D
@smitshah80743 жыл бұрын
thank you
@ianjaypaullo12843 жыл бұрын
Finally know the right answer now😊
@buscadores66574 жыл бұрын
excuse me teacher how can you answer this question if you dont have all the values? where is the mass of the pasive object? are you just flattering or just Mad? now id like to see how to calculate 1.539 jules hitting an object with high mass lets say it hits a masive truck with no wheels. its an old and rusty truck with 45weight tns its just like a 45tons rock. whats the new velocity after the event?
@syedanaveera1871 Жыл бұрын
As object go downwards the potential energy decreases, when it reaches the ground does it have potential energy? I mean there's no height covered left so p.e will be zero. Right?
@ProfessorDaveExplains Жыл бұрын
Yes, because we assign the ground as having zero potential energy. We set the axes ourselves.