Відео

Hello can you review the book of arnold sommerfeld treatise atom and spectral line originally published in 1918.

A good approximation to the fine structure constant: α = 1/(641^φ*e^5)^(1/π) = 0,007297352568 φ = 1,6180339887... golden ratio, e = 2,7182818284... (Napier's constant, Euler's number) or α = 1/[5164926^(1/π)] = 0,007297352564 The universe is probably a fractal on the largest scale with the number of dimensions equal to π.

So what's the reason why in relativity appears the covariant and controvariant vectors? Because their multiplication Is a scalar invariant? Or because the Lorentz transformation stretch the ct'-x' axis?

Great teacher and scholar

Ur video is really really awesome

Great professor!!

WHY USING SUCH OLD TEXTBOOKS... THERE ARE MUCH BETTER MODERN ALTERNATIVES, WITH BETTER PEDAGOGICAL APPROACHES!!!

I'm asking out of curiosity, what are your thoughts on Multiverse and Parallel universe?

The video is cut

really nice way to understand it rather than just knowing that it is 1, 1 1, 121.....

Actually none of these books anyone can learn from without guidance

What a freehand circle! And you didn't even pause to let it sink in, just marched right past it. Somebody make this a meme..

I believe there is an error at about 25:20. You correctly state that Br becomes Bp, but you write down that Br stays Br. Please confirm or refute. Thank you.

Goldstein better than L and L? 😮

very interesting, thanks

Very bad presentation - you failed your coursework.

I have Gravitation on my shelf because I knew Robe4t Fprward and had a number of discussion about his rotating gradiometer and and I deo of mine for measuring the "speed of gravity". Forward's gradiometer and the Eotvos Experiment are the only instruments discussed in Gravitation. I feel about Quantum Mechanics by Simon the way you do about the one you hated.

Any mathematical perquisite book to drive into more advance physics

amazing video!!

amazing!!

Have you read Griffiths Quantum Mechanics?

I found the book Gravitation awesome; a masterpiece of a book where the physics takes center stage to motivate the development of the maths. But realistically I think it's a book that most professional physicists won't read cover to cover, and to master all of the content honestly will take decades. For me, its right up there with classic texts like Jackson's electrodynamics. On the other hand, I agree that there are better texts to quickly get people up to speed in the third decade of the 21st century.

Great video!

Hii are you okh ? I want to know 🥹

Bought the Groves book on your recommendation, and I know little or nothing from the military side of the project. Taking a look at it has turned into a read now, and I'm finding it a great one. So thanks for that.

I will grab a few of these books. I appreciate your recommendations, professor!!

All the books are great, I have most of them.

hope you're doing well, professor! your videos are very helpful :)

Sir, do u think University physics is good for beginners?

very good video helps me understand Carnot

What is wrong with contour integrals?

thank you

SORRY OFF TPOIC SOMETIMES I LOOK FOR FUCTIONAL SUBSTANCE OG TIME DIALATION

Been exploring the “ bigger picture “ of Lagrangian mechanics. This is one of the more interesting videos.

3:17 I don't get the justification for you adding in that last term..... please elaborate or provide some links.

Dr O'reilly...if you could have only 30 physics books of the highest quality that could cover the the subject of physics in such a way that your library would cover the widest coverage in the greatest depth what would you choose

Thanks for this video

I'm surprised you missed the notorious Statistical Mechanics by Huang

Why do we still have universities in an age of online video? The federal government should (1) hire the best professor in the country for each subject and pay them a lot of money to record a complete course. Maybe 2 or 3 of the best professors per course. Students could choose their favorite professor. (2) Same with text books. The writing should be supervised by experts at learning, early chapters should take into account the math that would be known at that time, and new math integrated into the lessons as needed. (3) Stop all federal loans and grants for all students and end college subsidies. Let the students learn for free from the new Federal University. (4) They can chat with one another for help. (5) All undergrad through masters should be done like this. Research Universities would only do research. Get the Ph.D. by applying after your M.A. Or hell, get your Ph.D. from a private / corporate research lab. (6) The old system should have been shit canned in the 1970s when VCRs became a thing. I get it - the 18 year olds want to attend the country club away from home on the taxpayers' dime.

Then there's Dirac's compact little monograph on General Relativity...

Very informative, great lectures! Thanks

One of the best videos I’ve seen some of the worst sound quality’s I’ve heard. …thank you nonetheless. Please keep making videos… please buy a boom stand. You probably only need about 12 or 13 foam squares to pad the room for sound… after that blankets will be fine in the corners and on sharp, dens or arbitrary objects. And old towels for the base of the door. Other than that great video thank you and please keep making videos. (Boom microphone will need the proper cord; avoid blu tooth mic 🎤 if you can and use a corded mic)…inexpensive.

It seems you’re more interested in history than phyics There is no point in recommending s book from hundred years ago just so u can name drop max born. Physics doesn’t work like that. You csn do that in religion and history becauee they are regressive fields. They are purer the further you go back in time, as a general rule. Whereas the general trend in the sciences is progression. So there is no value in name dropping a book from max born when atomic theory has developed considersbly since then It is much better to study from a canon of modern atomic theory, and a person might read born’s books and papers to glean various stories of discovery or just for tradition’s sake.

Splitting the atom = Nuclear fission. Because both the nucleons and the electrons move to form new atoms. In a chemical reaction, only electrons move. you make an awful lot of thoughtless comments on these subjects. “Split the atom” is clearly a perfectly fine way of describing fission

“Classical” in physics means: “Technically false or incomplete, but we teach it anyway due to either tradition or engineering usefulness”

Lol… no. Every single “law” you mentioned has been broken apart from the heisenberg principle

4:55 no, newtonian gravitation is not a _law_ of nature just an approximation. It doesn’t work for galactic scales. The theory of evolution _is_ just a theory. A theory is always just a theory.

Dermot can you make a video on the flat earth theory. I have always had a special inclination to it, as opposed to other disproven theories. because it is the “default” theory of the world a person would come to if he lived on this planet without giving too much thought on the question

3:40 not necessarily, Perhaps God’s engineering of the universe was done by a different method unknown to us, But our mathematical formulations serve as a good way of approximating his divine method, in some situations. To begin with, God is perfect, if he exists. So he would not use the imperfect method of mathematics to formulate his universe because Godel has proven as incapable of proving every true statement.

this is just a stream of consciousness with no precise direction or purpose What are u on about