Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Getting to Cambridge: STEP by STEP! watch

Announcements
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drandy76)
    It can be considered to have 0 dimensions, he traded penis size for maths intuition


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    This is so funny
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    physicsmaths and Zacken


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zvm8SjCNKgE

    From 6:24 and onwards, is the way he is doing it correct? Shouldn't he be using the Quotient Rule? I have no idea what he's done there.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Infinity999)
    physicsmaths and Zacken


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zvm8SjCNKgE

    From 6:24 and onwards, is the way he is doing it correct? Shouldn't he be using the Quotient Rule? I have no idea what he's done there.
    What the **** is this guy doing? His "simplification" at 6:23 is all wrong, he shouldn't be allowed to do maths...
    Offline

    8
    (Original post by Infinity999)
    physicsmaths and Zacken


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zvm8SjCNKgE

    From 6:24 and onwards, is the way he is doing it correct? Shouldn't he be using the Quotient Rule? I have no idea what he's done there.
    WTF!!
    Offline

    8
    (Original post by Infinity999)
    physicsmaths and Zacken


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zvm8SjCNKgE

    From 6:24 and onwards, is the way he is doing it correct? Shouldn't he be using the Quotient Rule? I have no idea what he's done there.
    If this is the Max. Power Transfer Theorem, there is a step where you use the quotient rule. What on earth is he doing there?
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by Zacken)
    What the **** is this guy doing? His "simplification" at 6:23 is all wrong, he shouldn't be allowed to do maths...
    Laughing so hard right now
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EricPiphany)
    Laughing so hard right now
    I was hoping it'd be a joke video or something. :erm:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zacken)
    I was hoping it'd be a joke video or something. :erm:
    Unfortunately, this guys teaches at my school and said I couldn't get into Oxbridge.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Infinity999)
    Unfortunately, this guys teaches at my school and said I couldn't get into Oxbridge.
    Bloody hell... anyway:

    \displaystyle P = \frac{\epsilon^2 R}{(R+r)^2} \Rightarrow \frac{ \mathrm{d}P }{ \mathrm{d}R } = \frac{(R+r)^2\frac{ \mathrm{d} }{ \mathrm{d}R } \left(\epsilon^2 R\right) - \epsilon^2 R\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}R } \left((R+r)^2\right)}{(R+r)^4}
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Marxist)
    If this is the Max. Power Transfer Theorem, there is a step where you use the quotient rule. What on earth is he doing there?
    It is wrong and my maths teacher said the same. This is the max power theorem, yes. I am ahead of the class so I asked him to do it.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Infinity999)
    It is wrong and my maths teacher said the same. This is the max power theorem, yes. I am ahead of the class so I asked him to do it.
    go slap his **** tommorow.
    :rofl:
    Offline

    8
    (Original post by Infinity999)
    It is wrong and my maths teacher said the same. This is the max power theorem, yes. I am ahead of the class so I asked him to do it.
    Okay so you're looking for the maximum; after I did the quotient rule, my final results turns out to be R=r after setting dP/dR=0. If you get this, then there should be no problem. And you can meet your conclusion.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Marxist)
    Okay so you're looking for the maximum; after I did the quotient rule, my final results turns out to be R=r after setting dP/dR=0. If you get this, then there should be no problem. And you can meet your conclusion.
    Right, that makes sense now. I got the same result as Zacken did for the derivative. And would I need to do the second derivative to show that it is a maximum?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Infinity999)
    And would I need to do the second derivative to show that it is a maximum?
    Yeah, that'd be a good idea.
    Offline

    8
    (Original post by Infinity999)
    Right, that makes sense now. I got the same result as Zacken did for the derivative. And would I need to do the second derivative to show that it is a maximum?
    Use R sub s = R sub l instead, makes life easier!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zacken)
    Yeah, that'd be a good idea.
    Thanks!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Marxist)
    Use R sub s = R sub l instead, makes life easier!
    Thanks! Oh, I see what you mean. One for internal and one for sum?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Infinity999)
    Thanks!
    He's replied to my comment. :lol:
    Offline

    8
    (Original post by Infinity999)
    Thanks! Oh, I see what you mean. One for internal and one for sum?
    No, 'the source resistance' and 'to a load with resistance' is what they're for.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Marxist)
    No, 'the source resistance' and 'to a load with resistance' is what they're for.
    Oh... my bad. I think I get it now.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.