Robert Cruikshank

Пікірлер

@wilbertchambles 5 күн бұрын

Great video!

@virtua_t4695 9 күн бұрын

Very well made!

@moizkhan1501 10 күн бұрын

Thank you. Very easy to understand. Brilliantly explained. Respect from Pakistan.

@RoyalYoutube_PRO 11 күн бұрын

absolutely great video

@brianleach1392 11 күн бұрын

at 0:31 you say "pressure times volume has the units of work", but the whiteboard says "pressure times the change in volume has the units of work"

@robertcruikshank4501 11 күн бұрын

Both are true. Volume and change in volume have the same units.

@PreciousOkunzuwa-t1e 12 күн бұрын

Thanks!!

@williamkinum6941 20 күн бұрын

This video was incredibly helpful! Thank you for posting this.

@sunilg72 20 күн бұрын

I can't explain how much it useful for my exams. I was always confused in batteries one. You cleared all my doubts. Thanks a lot from India🇮🇳🇮🇳

@Lexyvil 20 күн бұрын

Thanks! Also for the current we can choose any direction all the time?

@robertcruikshank4501 20 күн бұрын

Yes! It's just like choosing a coordinate system, there's no wrong answer. If you get a negative number for your current that means it is actually flowing the other way, just like if you say up is positive and get a negative vertical velocity it means the object is going down. Just be consistent.

@emirhandemir3872 21 күн бұрын

Wow, this man can explain quantum physics to a toddler! BTW, how did I get here? Oh yeah, I was trying to learn what the f natural gradient is!!!!

@robertcruikshank4501 21 күн бұрын

Well, maybe not a toddler, but I did channel Dr. Seuss for it at one point: www.quora.com/search?q=Dr%20Seuss%20quantum

@midnightposting 22 күн бұрын

You just showed that a commutative binary function is associative iff it satisfies a stronger form of commutativity. It's the first time I see that idea!

@prashantpatle8979 26 күн бұрын

Thanks for clearing my doubt

@jacobvandijk6525 28 күн бұрын

The field lines of a quadrupole: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/Z6-Pdqp33rGZk5s.htmlsi=gUBuYevLHnP9t3JJ&t=371

@lavanyawasnik8719 Ай бұрын

Indiaa❤

@k.chriscaldwell4141 Ай бұрын

Thanks.

@AnuragRana-mw8nl Ай бұрын

My teacher taught me complex circuit without making my basics clear so i cant understand that but you made my basics crystal clear

@rijannpli9283 Ай бұрын

Thanku❤

@86ajmn Ай бұрын

I found your channel googling tesla unit of measurement. Thank you for teaching me this sir.

@DYNOPUNCH Ай бұрын

This helped me out immensely. Thank you!

@adambachert9405 Ай бұрын

I would give this 1000 likes if I could. Thank you!

@johnchakkour Ай бұрын

Clear and informative. Thanks

@pranavchandrav6071 Ай бұрын

I'm studying to be an actuary, a big thanks to you for making these!

@erhanjaved5903 Ай бұрын

Fantastic Explanation! 😊

@Abduzzzzzz Ай бұрын

Thnxx

@vuthanhphan6565 Ай бұрын

Thank you so much.

@tereshtaymor1404 Ай бұрын

Bro your a life saver❤

@lodgechant Ай бұрын

What a wonderfully hel pful diagram - thank you!

@amnont8724 2 ай бұрын

Thanks so much!!

@shortskills7612 2 ай бұрын

I saw this video before 3 month it was help full. But I forgot it. Now this time I searched on KZfaq,but you tube don't suggest me so I searched it on Google and found it. Tank you sir

@jahshjahsh2002 2 ай бұрын

Why not leave the small x's and y's as they are (not take their logarithms), and try to figure out a good enough equation to describe the relation between them using some other way? (I know the result won't be a straight line and won't be a first degree equation).

@robertcruikshank4501 2 ай бұрын

Because how do you measure a "good enough" equation? The formulas we use essentially say, rewrite the variables until we have a linear relationship, then fit the data to the line, and then if need be transform back. You can skip that if you can come up with a better way of defining "good enough" that is quantitative.

@jahshjahsh2002 2 ай бұрын

@@robertcruikshank4501 thanks for the reply

@suryaks8988 2 ай бұрын

I wonder why it took so long for me to find this channel ❤️ Keep it up Mr. Cruikshank!

@cravesman 2 ай бұрын

you are an absolute legend... appreciate your work!!

@mr.dumb1996 2 ай бұрын

This is amazing. So simple and straight to the point. Thank you.

@existentialrap521 2 ай бұрын

Thx, Doc. We in the streets turning up to this one. Using exponential families right now for most sufficient statistic work, but I am hoping to get this theorem down well. Also, you looking sharp, homie. I like the haircut and fit. Fresh.

@taylorhodges8977 2 ай бұрын

Stuck on how you got 6.62V @1500resistor. I do .0441*1500 and come up with 66.15. Am I missing something? Thanks.

@robertcruikshank4501 2 ай бұрын

Good catch! I missed a zero, since .012/e = .00441, not .0441. Since I had it correct on my calculator, my next calculation came out right so I didn't spot my miscopy.

@fiaz8899 2 ай бұрын

wise person

@sof8309 2 ай бұрын

Thank you ❤

@clems6989 2 ай бұрын

Great job !

@robertcruikshank4501 2 ай бұрын

Thank you!

@Hgkbukk 2 ай бұрын

This is the best video I've found all year! Much better than just memorizing formulas, now you understand formulas! Thanks!

@raltonkistnasamy6599 2 ай бұрын

thank u sir

@charonhades 3 ай бұрын

Thank you Robert. It was a great help in my exam.

@rajeshkumar-pt4wf 3 ай бұрын

Best explanation I've seen of saturated vapor pressure. After watching this video actually things got cleared.

@suryajandhyala 3 ай бұрын

We got dot products giving us vectors before GTA 6

@khaeyovillaruel693 3 ай бұрын

Incredible. Thank you

@aashraylakkad723 3 ай бұрын

That helped me. Thank you so much sir

@FerdinandLeube 3 ай бұрын

THANK YOU SO MUCH

@goosecouscous7658 3 ай бұрын

Watching this 30 mins before my final exam. Thank u 😭😭😭

@Quixotic-rr8qu 3 ай бұрын

that was incredibly helpful thank you for making this video!!!!

@mohammedalawlaqi1227 3 ай бұрын

This is the best explanation of the definition of sufficient statistics I have ever seen. Thank you for sharing this awesome experience.

@robertcruikshank4501 3 ай бұрын

Thank you! Fair warning, a couple of professional statisticians have contacted me saying I'm wrong on a technicality I don't really follow, saying "parameters are not random variables". It remains true that this is a correct result and an easy way to remember it.

@mohammedalawlaqi1227 3 ай бұрын

@@robertcruikshank4501 It is true. Thank you for the clarification. That is why I'm Bayesian. Your explanation is great.

@vittoriosalvatore6066 3 ай бұрын

Great explanation! ty so much!! :D

Ең жақсы KZfaq

Пікірлер