4.4 Non-inertial Reference Frames
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 09. 2024
- MIT 8.01 Classical Mechanics, Fall 2016
View the complete course: ocw.mit.edu/8-0...
Instructor: Prof. Deepto Chakrabarty
License: Creative Commons BY-NC-SA
More information at ocw.mit.edu/terms
More courses at ocw.mit.edu
Coincidence: Non-intertial is a level in geometry dash. It is in 2.2 and this video’s title says 4.4, which is 2.2x2
This guy is writing in the opposite direction amazing!
A more elegant solution to this problem is to write the normal way IRL and just horizontally-flip the video after the fact. Most video lectures by UW professors do this technique to great effect
its easier to oversee that he is standing infront of mirror
@@arangates not mirror, glass
He's standing in front of a transparent whiteboard with the screen flipped
He is writing same way but our camer flips the image and as behind glass it seem laterally flip camera flips it again many yt channel do this
Mr chakraborty👏🏻 indian Roots glistening as always
Came here from Wiki's d'Alembert's principle..
Absolutely brilliant work from MIT OCW as always..
That was a really clear and concise explanation, just wished the derivations for the coriolis, transverse forces etc were also explained. Or at least publish the videos where he did. :(
Kenn, it’s covered in the 2.003SC course on Engineering Dynamics by Kim Vandiver. Excellent course.
thank you for the clear and brief explanation
This guy is so smart...
...I could never write backwards like that even normally, let alone when trying to explain GR
He is not writing backwards; the image is just flipped.
it looks like either F_physical or F_fict could also results in the same term in physical formula!!! and we have to consider the observation frames to know that term is from F_physical or F_fict.
at 2:15 calling it fictitious is a stretch, fictitious sounds like shouting who is turning the world around when you are on a merry go round. when you rotate a sling to cast a stone in an inertial frame, there IS a centrifugal force to so you need to exert a centripetal force to hold the stone, that is in every second you have to exert a micro tug towards you to compensate that "inertial force" trying to get away from you. if you dont like the words "inertial force", THEN call the damn fictitious force to non-inertial frame force, some people call it MY inertial force is an "uhhhh..... effect", because they are saying it like programmed robots.
S' frame doesnt move from S, therefore mA is zero. what S sees and feels is the SAME as what S' sees and feels, so why doesnt S frame see the centrifugal force while S' can?
the earth gravity is centripetal, the center of mass coor system view states that force MUST be equal and opposite in direction, that opposite is the centrifugal force. please reply on this matter prof
Hi @abcdef2069, MIT OCW is not a distance-learning program, we are not able to provide interaction or direct contact with MIT faculty, staff, or students. It's best to think of OCW as a free online library of course materials that you can study at your own pace.
For interactive study from MITx, you can browse options here: openlearning.mit.edu/courses-programs/mitx-courses/. Best wishes on your studies!
i never meant or dreamt of distance study, i just hope to have a short answer like most youtubers or video providers do to fix my brain. prof HERBERT GROSS, biezen, Dr Lewin provided some answers in the past. in any cases, someone watching this might provide some answers, thanks for reply
Fictious force or Pseudo Force !
the physical force is the one interacting directly on an object. Does the fictitious force interact directly on the object???
I think it does not. Not from this course, but I think it is something we use to make the forces cancel each other out like in the example of circular motion teacher has given. The objects speed in circular motion is uniform but its velocity isn't. In circular motion, centripetal force is fictitious but it somehow also makes the rotating object rotate on a specific orbit, prevent it from moving away or getting closer to the center of the motion. So that fictitious force happens to act on the direction of velocity in circular motion but not on the object. It is a bit complicated and I don't know it in great detail neither, but it is a fun point to discuss.
If you’re interested, this video provides a visual way of understanding non-inertial frames: czcams.com/video/bJMYoj4hHqU/video.html
Why is a prime equal to a minus A and not a PLUS A? Or does it not matter since they are vectors?
You are riding in an accelerating car (the non inertial frame) and throw a ball forward. The ball will be travelling forward at some small speed relative to you. However, a still observer on the ground will observe the ball travelling at some speed + the velocity of the car. So
v=v'+V
Differentiate and move around to
a'=a-A
respect
what does the the little "a" acceleration symbol stand for at 0:58?, because the professor said that it's the acceleration of the frame "S"! although he said that frame S is an inertial at the beginning. so by this, can the inertial frame be an accelerating frame?!
a' refers to the acceleration of the object as measured from frame S' and a is the acceleration as measured from the frame S. Capital A is the acceleration between frames S and S'
a is acceleration of object wrt S
wait.. is this man... writing everything backwards?
He writes normally, the board is recorded from behind and then the video is flipped. See lightboard.info to see how it is done.
@@mitocw cool)
Thts ..mit ...madam ....dont be shocked 😂🤣😍🤩
@@mitocw Thanks, for response
Sir your expert we know...But please Reduce speed and better speak good slang....
Students can't understand this type of SLANG...so ... Sir please teach in way such that a slow learner can get your concept....
Think of slow learner ...☹️
I think what he did was fine. This is a hard concept to understand, you're not a slow learner and he's not a fast teacher, this is just a super hard subject to wrap your head around.
thxs pajeet :3
Lmao