Thank you, man I take out of your presentation what I need or what I am in agreement with, if there is something I consider is wrong then that would be an opportunity to debate or to learn from any mistake. Thank you for your time and effort.
In what universe does a student, who needs to know how to use the navier stokes equation, also need to be told in baby terms what "viscosity" is... and for that matter, in what universe is a student, who needs to be told what viscosity is in baby terms, ready to mathematically approach the navier stokes equations.
In some universe I'm familiar with where some unknown form of energy driving universal expansion accounts for 73% of the total matter density and some form of matter holding galaxies together accounts for 23% of it and regular matter accounts for just 4% of it and where electron is the most stable lepton, in that universe the riemann hypothesis is taught first by explaining argand plane in general terms, where the poincare conjecture is taught by first considering what basically a sphere is, where general relativity is taught by lecturing about newtonian gravity and lagrangian mechanics for a substantial time before again considering 4-tensor is etc. Oh!, just happens to be quite similar to our universe where we resideIn essence, I just wan to say that everybody has his own method of lecturing and teaching from which the person feels he can make his pupil understand something in the best way
Yes, I understand this, but come on... he's talking about the Navier-Stokes equations, but then interjects by explaining that there is such a principle as the conservation of momentum. Don't you think this is a bit out of place? I mean, that would be like if you taught what quaternions are before teaching what the imaginary number is.
it looks like these guys arent giving a lecture. it looks like they are giving a verbal presentation for an in subject assignment. I imagine they were required to explain these things as a part of the marking criteria or something.
the millenium prize for the navier stokes equation is given if you prove existence of the solution and if you prove the uniqueness of the solution that you've proven existence of... Nobody said anything about finding an explicit solution... in fact finding an explicit solution may not even be possible.
More area in the pipe should imply higher static pressure because of slowing down of fluid through that section....I am trying to think in terms of Bernauli.....
Correctish! Fluids flow along streamlines of negative dp/dx. In other words, if you have a high total pressure part of a pipe and low part, fluid will necessarily flow from the high to the low. That being said, dynamic pressure is just a function of density at flow speed, so for an incompressible fluid, a faster section of the flow (like in the video) will have higher DYNAMIC pressure, despite having lower total pressure.
At minute 12:50 Those are not the NAvier Stokes eqns of the millenium prize. I do not see the mixed derivatives which really makes the difference, the difficulty of the system to have a solution!! But the millenium prize is about demonstratingte existence and uniqueness of a solution to the navier stokes equations, not to solve them....
Thank you, man
I take out of your presentation what I need or what I am in agreement with, if there is something I consider is wrong then that would be an opportunity to debate or to learn from any mistake. Thank you for your time and effort.
In what universe does a student, who needs to know how to use the navier stokes equation, also need to be told in baby terms what "viscosity" is...
and for that matter, in what universe is a student, who needs to be told what viscosity is in baby terms, ready to mathematically approach the navier stokes equations.
In some universe I'm familiar with where some unknown form of energy driving universal expansion accounts for 73% of the total matter density and some form of matter holding galaxies together accounts for 23% of it and regular matter accounts for just 4% of it and where electron is the most stable lepton, in that universe the riemann hypothesis is taught first by explaining argand plane in general terms, where the poincare conjecture is taught by first considering what basically a sphere is, where general relativity is taught by lecturing about newtonian gravity and lagrangian mechanics for a substantial time before again considering 4-tensor is etc. Oh!, just happens to be quite similar to our universe where we resideIn essence, I just wan to say that everybody has his own method of lecturing and teaching from which the person feels he can make his pupil understand something in the best way
Yes, I understand this, but come on... he's talking about the Navier-Stokes equations, but then interjects by explaining that there is such a principle as the conservation of momentum. Don't you think this is a bit out of place? I mean, that would be like if you taught what quaternions are before teaching what the imaginary number is.
I think explaining the basic equations was ok if he maintained the theme for the entire vid. But he dropped a bomb at "The Equation" slide
He wants more youtube views = more money xD
it looks like these guys arent giving a lecture. it looks like they are giving a verbal presentation for an in subject assignment.
I imagine they were required to explain these things as a part of the marking criteria or something.
the millenium prize for the navier stokes equation is given if you prove existence of the solution and if you prove the uniqueness of the solution that you've proven existence of... Nobody said anything about finding an explicit solution... in fact finding an explicit solution may not even be possible.
09:25 the statement about pressure seems to be wrong...
Gurpuret what is the correct statement about preassure in the Navier Stokes equation?
More area in the pipe should imply higher static pressure because of slowing down of fluid through that section....I am trying to think in terms of Bernauli.....
Correctish! Fluids flow along streamlines of negative dp/dx. In other words, if you have a high total pressure part of a pipe and low part, fluid will necessarily flow from the high to the low. That being said, dynamic pressure is just a function of density at flow speed, so for an incompressible fluid, a faster section of the flow (like in the video) will have higher DYNAMIC pressure, despite having lower total pressure.
yeah is actually the opposite of what he says
Lol, the format of ppt is really funny....haha...
At minute 12:50 Those are not the NAvier Stokes eqns of the millenium prize. I do not see the mixed derivatives which really makes the difference, the difficulty of the system to have a solution!! But the millenium prize is about demonstratingte existence and uniqueness of a solution to the navier stokes equations, not to solve them....
i wish i read the comments first.
thats me while presenting seminar during graduation.
is very good approaching the equations
Like asking you a mathematical proof of big bang.
That T is just a transpose, i guess
Smdh, is this a student?
Bad info, bad presentation
i came here after gifted
Amit Chetri same
This is why we need the dislike button
pffff not clear at all