Kinematics Part 2: Vertical Motion

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 14 січ 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ • 393

  • @ProfessorDaveExplains
    @ProfessorDaveExplains  6 років тому +470

    You guys! I'm so sorry, I screwed up the equation at 5:30, final velocity should be on the left and initial velocity should be on the right. When written out correctly the arithmetic will work out to the number given, however. Sorry about that!

    • @MysticNach
      @MysticNach 6 років тому +60

      Professor Dave Explains thank you, I was going crazy for a bit lol

    • @masdfghjlwcmr
      @masdfghjlwcmr 6 років тому +12

      That explains why. Whahaha thank you

    • @defritzel
      @defritzel 6 років тому +10

      my lord. had my wife and son trying to figure out the math on that one. Thought I was going crazy!!

    • @menacereconnaissance7406
      @menacereconnaissance7406 6 років тому +8

      all people made mistakes

    • @Renagade01
      @Renagade01 5 років тому +5

      ahmmmm im stupid at p6 so im just gonna ask what youre sayying here is that it must be around 65.4 or something in 5:30 ? am i right XD?? haahah ahaha i also tried to calculate......but anyways a really great help

  • @theodoresweger4948
    @theodoresweger4948 4 роки тому +471

    I like that statement," we tend to spend most of our time of earth."

    • @arielnwalton2644
      @arielnwalton2644 3 роки тому +14

      That stood out to me aswell.

    • @kasperchristensen8416
      @kasperchristensen8416 3 роки тому +8

      _The ISS crew has entered the chat ..._

    • @Occ881
      @Occ881 10 місяців тому

      Is we tend to spend most of our time on the Earth,not of the earth

    • @luvochiya4134
      @luvochiya4134 9 місяців тому

      😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

    • @aboobakarmohammed1242
      @aboobakarmohammed1242 8 місяців тому +4

      This video is meant for long time validity it seems lol

  • @kellyc2915
    @kellyc2915 3 роки тому +9

    Thanks!

  • @alexanderl7059
    @alexanderl7059 8 років тому +253

    I'm not even learning this in school right now but I still watch these to learn new things!

  • @cja12345
    @cja12345 3 роки тому +59

    bro you are literally so amazing man. Strugglig for the past week on kinematics and now I understand it in less than an hour. Subscribed.

  • @francisgregoryku1689
    @francisgregoryku1689 6 років тому +155

    PROFESSOR DAVE MAHH MAYYNN saving me in chem last year and saving me in physics this year

  • @ichione732
    @ichione732 6 років тому +13

    Professor Dave your'e videos are really informative even our science teacher uses your videos as reference in our whole 4th quarter which is about physics I don't even need my module anymore just your'e videos keep up the outstanding work and hoping for more content in the future. greetings from Tagum City! gikan sa pinakagwapo

  • @shariffahpateyahazvi8718
    @shariffahpateyahazvi8718 6 років тому +16

    its a pity i didnt have you during my high school but am greatfull i have you now in
    university where we still take physics and chemistry for our molecular biology and genetics bachelor degree

  • @tochoXK3
    @tochoXK3 2 роки тому +25

    4:03 An alternative to using the quadratic formula is calculating how far the rock will go up, then calculating how long it will take to fall from this height to -100m.
    Then, the velocity is 0.
    (This alternative isn‘t strictly better)

    • @BBCxJEAN
      @BBCxJEAN Рік тому +1

      it is.

    • @syncradar
      @syncradar Рік тому

      ​@@BBCxJEANHow?

    • @Firnas_7
      @Firnas_7 10 місяців тому

      in this way why my time is 4.63 sec while in the video it is 5.65

    • @shootandfish2
      @shootandfish2 4 місяці тому

      @@Firnas_7 Need to add the time rock is in air for the initial upward motion (I got 1.02 sec plus the 4.63 sec =5.65 sec)

  • @angeliemaebonaobra4448
    @angeliemaebonaobra4448 7 років тому +37

    Thank you so much professor Dave

  • @sahilpatel5298
    @sahilpatel5298 5 років тому +5

    Literally save so much time and gained more knowledge than a whole month of spending of kinematic at my college. WOWW

  • @MichaelJones-ek3vx
    @MichaelJones-ek3vx 2 місяці тому +1

    Relearning physics and math at seventy-five 3:44 creates order internally. After the election, I need that.

  • @ianstuder8970
    @ianstuder8970 Рік тому +1

    Napped for a week and missed everything, watched this at 2am the day before the test, and then proceeded to finish first and get a 100. Luv u dave ❤

  • @clumsyhes2103
    @clumsyhes2103 4 роки тому +3

    3:42 watch your head, bud! that rock is going to hit you! you won't be able to study physics anymore if you get bonked on the head with that rock! oh nooo! :o

  • @Paw-Patrol-Lover
    @Paw-Patrol-Lover 6 років тому +5

    You may be my life saver Professor Dave. Yours may be simple but easy to learn as well.
    Thanks, hope I do well for my quiz tomorrow.
    (Also the Horizontal Motion is part)
    I understand the simple mistake on 5:30, but hey mistakes happens. And the answer was still the same when I calculated it.
    Thanks.

    • @Paw-Patrol-Lover
      @Paw-Patrol-Lover 6 років тому +2

      Also at the checking comprehension, can the answer be -321.5 meters, because when I calculated, the result I had was about -321.489 meters, so I just rounded off to the nearest tenths.

    • @jerasong2196
      @jerasong2196 6 років тому

      Hi Dale.

  • @ranjeetsohanpal752
    @ranjeetsohanpal752 6 років тому +17

    I like that you put a comprehension question in the end which helps us to revise the topic we have just learnt from you,Love you Dave,Stay Awesome.😊

  • @aresemasahilu2411
    @aresemasahilu2411 5 років тому +4

    you are the cause to love physics thanks

  • @Firnas_7
    @Firnas_7 10 місяців тому +2

    the cliff is -321.489 m tall🗿
    (since it is a cliff the length can not be negative number so that is why it becomes 321.489)

  • @shootandfish2
    @shootandfish2 4 місяці тому +1

    I agree with the comment of avoiding the quadratic eq by solving in 2 parts. I got 5.1 meters up in 1.02 sec, now v initial = 0 and drop is -105.1 m. my answers agreed with yours to the hundredth. Otherwise, excellent video. Currently tutoring college nephew, it's been over 45 yrs since I had University Physics.

  • @TechWizeGuy
    @TechWizeGuy 7 років тому +7

    Your videos are just awesome

  • @mariiict2255
    @mariiict2255 6 років тому +6

    Thank you very much! This made it a lot easier to understand 😄.

  • @DANGERBOY-qz8wy
    @DANGERBOY-qz8wy Рік тому +7

    I'm kinda confused in 2:49 because how did you manage to obtain 4.5s since what I did is (t^2 = 20.4s^2 Don't we just have to square second and time and remove the power so they would be quite equal)??? Since if we didn't square time then it would mean T^2 = 4.5s? which puzzles me.

    • @raton324
      @raton324 Рік тому +6

      you do √20.4 not 20.4*20.4

  • @arzalalbuchari7095
    @arzalalbuchari7095 3 роки тому +2

    that feeling of dread when you instantly realize you forgot how to multiply decimals

  • @ionloghin2172
    @ionloghin2172 6 років тому +7

    Once again you have saved my future, thanks for making this look easy because it really is.

  • @AngelTaylorgang809
    @AngelTaylorgang809 2 роки тому

    I saw professor dave whipping a model x performance not too long ago in san Diego. I'm glad he's doing good. He deserves it

  • @TheAce736
    @TheAce736 3 місяці тому

    "But with vertical motion, down will always be negative.” sobs in gdscript

  • @ib-physics-exams
    @ib-physics-exams 3 роки тому +4

    Thank you for all your beneficial high quality videos. I often mirror many of your physics videos in most of my lessons to my students .

  • @angelicarosales5979
    @angelicarosales5979 4 роки тому +2

    Thank you for the information Professor Dave! Very helpful in my science class.

  • @kavita3689
    @kavita3689 4 роки тому +1

    sir i am really impressed by your videos.these are really helpful

  • @GK-TECH24
    @GK-TECH24 Місяць тому

    Dear Pr. I have one question for u ... here is my question:-
    When a ball is thrown from a top of building upward and reached the ground why the decent velocity isn't negative and why the time in the first case where the ball reach the thrown point isn't considered ?

  • @Decco6306
    @Decco6306 4 роки тому +6

    This is why i love physics
    its makes your mathematics classes that seem useless and applies them to the real world, to make it feel like all this effort means something, I think that mathematics and physics should be taught as the same class so that the students have an appreciation for the use case of mathematics. Most students that i know never took physics and only Math, and now hate math because the average person is not creative enough to apply mathematics to the real world. That would mean they would have to make these discoveries themselves, that took geniuses to do.

    • @hareecionelson5875
      @hareecionelson5875 4 роки тому

      I remember the first time I realised by myself that the equation for time is just a quadratic formula, I was so excited. Really helped in exams being able to write "s=ut + 1/2at^2, so use quadratic formula with t = etc etc"
      other people would solve for v first and then use v=u+at because it's simpler, but leaves more room for making mistakes and rounding errors

  • @tommijones8095
    @tommijones8095 5 років тому +11

    When you changed the variables from the original ones it completely confused me.

  • @AyaMohamed-ij6hu
    @AyaMohamed-ij6hu 7 років тому +2

    you are a lifesaver. Thank you

  • @AmanSingh-db3nr
    @AmanSingh-db3nr 4 роки тому +2

    Sir I am a big fan of you ,your way of teaching is awesome and so simple that one can easily understand everything😊😊👌👍

  • @jsam2787
    @jsam2787 5 років тому +1

    Nice work Sir

  • @reemmhmad1451
    @reemmhmad1451 2 роки тому +1

    I loved the introoo

  • @leenss536
    @leenss536 3 роки тому

    PROFESSOR DAVE I LOVE YOUU😫

  • @yosefrabinow9788
    @yosefrabinow9788 5 років тому +1

    thanks this video really helped me

  • @mem8190
    @mem8190 3 роки тому +7

    Excuse me Professor Dave, at 5:43 I got a different answer which is -65.4 because I transferred the 10 to the other side, could you please explain how you got your answer for more clarification? thank you so much 💙.

    • @fizsing2615
      @fizsing2615 2 роки тому +1

      yea i got the same answer, i cant understand why it is that way

    • @vigzz9569
      @vigzz9569 2 роки тому

      Dude please same why did he flip equation!!!

    • @xodusgraphicdesigns3384
      @xodusgraphicdesigns3384 2 роки тому +1

      He wrote the wrong equation . On screen it said : Initial Velocity = Final Velocity + Acceleration x Time. However it should have said Final Velocity = Initial Velocity + Acceleration x Time. Use that and you will get the same answer as him.

    • @JuanGabrielLuna-zd9pn
      @JuanGabrielLuna-zd9pn 3 місяці тому

      He did not wrote the equation wrong. The answer is simply wrong. He used Vi=Vf+at to find Vf. Use algebra.

  • @alexts94
    @alexts94 2 роки тому

    God bless you Dave.

  • @arpitarora8600
    @arpitarora8600 7 років тому +2

    thank u so much prof, for such a brief explanation. i

  • @lifeofluxury6823
    @lifeofluxury6823 3 роки тому

    Thanks Prof, you the best

  • @y7u_597
    @y7u_597 3 місяці тому

    ❤❤❤❤keep up the good work you legend❤❤❤❤❤

  • @FreeVerse
    @FreeVerse 2 роки тому

    Thank you!

  • @Nicole-ez7pm
    @Nicole-ez7pm 3 роки тому

    3:20 is FIRE

  • @seemakulkarni2622
    @seemakulkarni2622 5 років тому +1

    Fantastic!
    Am very thankful to my sister for suggesting me to see this video 😊

  • @kathleenilagan4636
    @kathleenilagan4636 6 років тому +5

    Hi! Help me understand how did you get the 4.5 from the -100 and -4.9

  • @ProGamer-ji5rn
    @ProGamer-ji5rn 4 роки тому

    sir thanks for your awesome videos

  • @xx_baav2
    @xx_baav2 9 місяців тому +1

    i have a question in 2:51 did you just divide it to get the value of t?

  • @chanpiggy3938
    @chanpiggy3938 Рік тому

    thankyou so much

  • @AnimeStarFight
    @AnimeStarFight 5 років тому

    Thank you

  • @cryztalresulta5851
    @cryztalresulta5851 Рік тому +2

    sorry but i cant get how how -4.9x² + 10.0x + 100 becomes 5.65 the answer

    • @leahgroh5610
      @leahgroh5610 9 місяців тому

      quadratic formula

    • @ellenmonay3273
      @ellenmonay3273 4 місяці тому

      With the quadratic formula my answers were reversed my positive was 3.6 seconds and my negative was -5.65. I am also confused

  • @mehmehhhh
    @mehmehhhh 3 місяці тому

    omg i love u so much actually

  • @kevinzhang9818
    @kevinzhang9818 6 років тому +1

    so nice guy and good explanation

  • @csanilkumar5415
    @csanilkumar5415 Рік тому

    Professor you are wrong
    GM ÷ r^2 = total displacement ÷ total time taken ^2
    Or g = d ÷ t^2
    Answer for your question
    GM ÷ r^2 = 642 .978m ÷ 8.1sec^2
    Therefore ,
    height of the cliff = 642.978m.

  • @helmetongrass1893
    @helmetongrass1893 Рік тому

    "SCP 5094 is not real"
    professor dave: hold my beer

  • @realityisenough
    @realityisenough 7 років тому +8

    I think the formula at 5:36 should be Vf=Vi+at not Vi=Vf+at? Maybe I'm wrong?

    • @ProfessorDaveExplains
      @ProfessorDaveExplains  7 років тому +16

      oh no! what a stupid mistake :( thanks for catching that!

    • @realityisenough
      @realityisenough 7 років тому +1

      Hey it made me look into it in more depth so it's drilled into my head now haha :p You can probably just shove an annotation box over it

    • @CarbonsHDTuts
      @CarbonsHDTuts 6 років тому

      So would the answer be -44.88m/s instead? Please if you could reply that would help alot, just to make sure I actually understand!

  • @AmanSingh-db3nr
    @AmanSingh-db3nr 4 роки тому

    Ok thanks very much sir!😊😊

  • @kugaththeplaguefather6332
    @kugaththeplaguefather6332 3 роки тому +1

    2:51 how time=4.5? sorry if this is a dumb question im quite new to physics

    • @carultch
      @carultch 3 роки тому +2

      The equation reduces to d = 1/2*a*t^2, since the initial velocity and initial position were zero.
      Given d = 100 m, a = 9.8 m/s^2 and the 1/2 factor, put them all together, and rearrange so t is the subject of the equation and get:
      t = sqrt(2*d/a)
      Plug in the data:
      t = sqrt(2*100/9.8)

  • @LiveGoodPhilippines888
    @LiveGoodPhilippines888 3 роки тому

    watching here sir

  • @alezaen7609
    @alezaen7609 3 роки тому

    Gravitational acceleration for objects moving downwards is +9.8m/s2 not -9.8m/S2 this value is for objects moving upwards

    • @ProfessorDaveExplains
      @ProfessorDaveExplains  3 роки тому +1

      The value of g is always negative. It does not change according to the motion of an object. Objects moving downward are moving in the negative direction.

    • @alezaen7609
      @alezaen7609 3 роки тому

      No sir gravitational acceleration for objects moving upwards is -9.8ms-2 because it is moving against the gravity

    • @ProfessorDaveExplains
      @ProfessorDaveExplains  3 роки тому

      Again, it’s always negative.

    • @alezaen7609
      @alezaen7609 3 роки тому

      Why the gravitational acceleration for objects moving downwards is -9.8m/S2 please justify it sir

    • @alezaen7609
      @alezaen7609 3 роки тому

      Other UA-cam site's including my sir are saying that the value of g for objects moving downwards is approximately 10m/S2 while for objects moving upwards is approximately -10m/s2

  • @rheyalvinquilapio4056
    @rheyalvinquilapio4056 4 роки тому

    LAMAT KAAYO PROF. DAVHEE

  • @netk9300
    @netk9300 3 роки тому

    Thank you!!!

  • @BoZhaoengineering
    @BoZhaoengineering 2 роки тому

    Professor, if we use postion vector where origin at the man throwing the stone and pointing to the rock, during the process, the position vector is zero when rock travel back to which the man sits and going further down to ground. The position vector finally becomes - 100 m .

  • @wanadilhafifhdin9999
    @wanadilhafifhdin9999 6 років тому

    THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!!!

  • @marlongrau246
    @marlongrau246 2 роки тому +1

    I think we need to add the time of object thrown upward and the time of object when fallen to the ground.

    • @ProfessorDaveExplains
      @ProfessorDaveExplains  2 роки тому

      It's all done in one calculation. There is only one force acting upon the object.

  • @jasimmathsandphysics
    @jasimmathsandphysics 3 роки тому +1

    You could make down positive as long as you make up negative

  • @aldosanchez6305
    @aldosanchez6305 5 років тому

    thanks

  • @elizabetholu-ajayi3499
    @elizabetholu-ajayi3499 4 роки тому

    This video is really helpful :)

  • @neob.delacruz7862
    @neob.delacruz7862 3 роки тому

    Im from 🇵🇭 thank you professor Dave

  • @hnng1439
    @hnng1439 5 років тому +1

    Crush gud ni maam escuadro si professor dave explains

  • @maverickvillanueva9667
    @maverickvillanueva9667 2 роки тому

    My prof told me "If the object goes upward, the acceleration due to gravity is negative then Positive if downward" because gravitational pulls downward with the acceleration of constant (9.81m/s).

    • @ProfessorDaveExplains
      @ProfessorDaveExplains  2 роки тому +1

      Acceleration due to gravity is always negative. It pulls in the negative direction.

  • @grimreaper3607
    @grimreaper3607 2 місяці тому

    5:03 i cant understand at this point...how can u know where to assign the numbers

  • @tat5769
    @tat5769 4 роки тому

    Ty I hope that this helps me in class tommorow 👏😄

  • @elaizahjeanbatiancila9911
    @elaizahjeanbatiancila9911 6 років тому +1

    Professor Dave can you show me the whole solution on how did you get the time on the vertical solution when the initial velocity has a value and how you get the unit?? please

  • @dreemville11
    @dreemville11 4 місяці тому

    For the equation at 1:46, should there not be a initial position at the right hand side of the equation?

  • @tgjehovah3661
    @tgjehovah3661 2 роки тому

    am really appreciate u.........tanx in advance

  • @crazyboyz6065
    @crazyboyz6065 Місяць тому

    5:43 Isn’t it v= u + at?

  • @renanpongilio7062
    @renanpongilio7062 3 роки тому

    why for formula Vf = Vi +2ad is sometimes Vf2 = Vi2 +2ad?? Great channel by the way

    • @carultch
      @carultch 3 роки тому

      It's squared for both equations. The first copy of that equation is incorrect.

  • @myrrhagoyokpin8057
    @myrrhagoyokpin8057 3 роки тому

    for the first problem, why did we not take into account the initial position of the rock?

  • @Phoenixsquad77
    @Phoenixsquad77 Рік тому

    How was the quadratic equation applied in the first equation 5:36

  • @shimeliswansara3177
    @shimeliswansara3177 Рік тому

    How can we solve horizontal velocity when an object fall vertically

  • @forget-me-not8522
    @forget-me-not8522 4 роки тому

    Thank youuuuuuu

  • @angelfayebaculi4496
    @angelfayebaculi4496 5 років тому +2

    Hi sir, how did you get the 4.5 s at 2:48, I still can't figure it out how you got it

    • @ProfessorDaveExplains
      @ProfessorDaveExplains  5 років тому

      if you are having trouble with basic algebra, you will have to go to my algebra playlist and review the fundamentals. this series assumes basic ability in algebra.

  • @aboobakarmohammed1242
    @aboobakarmohammed1242 8 місяців тому

    3:42 simple way to get hurt lol

  • @nathalieperez8039
    @nathalieperez8039 6 років тому +1

    for the second the final velocity should be 65.37 because we had to add it over to the other side. right?

    • @ProfessorDaveExplains
      @ProfessorDaveExplains  6 років тому

      oh no, i think i put vf and vi in the wrong spots! the number in the answer is correct, but i seem to have screwed up the equation :(

    • @zigtim
      @zigtim 3 роки тому

      Thank you! I was driving myself crazy over this.

  • @CJAzuraPaulin
    @CJAzuraPaulin 10 місяців тому

    Thanks great video😊..but How to find its highest point and time at the highest point?

  • @carloschisenga.7794
    @carloschisenga.7794 8 місяців тому

    Is there any other way of solving that without using the quadratic formula?

  • @jaronrallos3844
    @jaronrallos3844 4 роки тому +1

    Hey Professor Dave, isn't upward motion for gravity -9.8m/s while downward motion is +9.8m/s? I'm very confused.

    • @ProfessorDaveExplains
      @ProfessorDaveExplains  4 роки тому +2

      Acceleration due to gravity is independent of the motion of any object, it's always negative because gravity always pulls things down to the ground.

  • @saatvinagarajan3302
    @saatvinagarajan3302 7 місяців тому

    Can we use this videos for a levels?

  • @soumyashreebiswal14
    @soumyashreebiswal14 4 роки тому +2

    Professor : *Teaches us with the best content possible for free, and then says "thanks for watching"*
    Me : We're so going to hell!
    Jokes apart, thanks a lot sir; I really appreciate your work! It has helped me a lot.

  • @crisdarren7308
    @crisdarren7308 2 роки тому

    im stucked in 2:42. how'd you get the 4.5s?

    • @raton324
      @raton324 Рік тому

      wtf, are you dumb or are you joking? 100/4.9=20.4, √20.4=4.5

  • @mahederalemu3756
    @mahederalemu3756 4 роки тому

    Where is the time which take up ward ? We should solve it in the formula of vf=vi +at

  • @vincejohnsongallardo1022
    @vincejohnsongallardo1022 6 років тому +1

    It helps me a bit to understand
    But thanks it was helpful

  • @soleangeltv1977
    @soleangeltv1977 4 роки тому +4

    Thanks Physics Jesus

  • @rashidfaheem9838
    @rashidfaheem9838 3 роки тому

    Need an explanation about, is 'g' is negative or positive when object is fallen on the ground?

  • @noahversusacat9855
    @noahversusacat9855 3 місяці тому

    I have a question, where did the 0.5 came from again?

  • @ZeusDaBoy
    @ZeusDaBoy 5 місяців тому

    the way i studied if i throw something down the g value is positive

  • @Raeyenn
    @Raeyenn 8 місяців тому

    how did you get 4.5s on the first problem, sir?

  • @asnairahbaraotong6208
    @asnairahbaraotong6208 4 роки тому

    Hello Professor Dave. Do you have an explanation about 3-dimensional motion?