this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2023
172 points (89.4% liked)

Videos

13965 readers
300 users here now

For sharing interesting videos from around the Web!

Rules

  1. Videos only
  2. Follow the global Mastodon.World rules and the Lemmy.World TOS while posting and commenting.
  3. Link directly to the video source and not for example an embedded video in an article.
  4. Don't be a jerk

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 33 points 8 months ago

For anyone still struggling with the intuition:

How many times does a circle rotate if you roll it around a tiny dot? 1

How many times does it rotate if you roll it around another circle the same size? Gotta be more than the dot, right?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 8 months ago (7 children)

I would've never gotten that! I started getting lost trying to think about the differences in circumferences and radii before they mentioned the right or wrong answers

[–] [email protected] 11 points 8 months ago

My only intuition was this: if you take two identical coins and rotate them together (like a pair of gears), it takes one rotation each to reach the starting point. If you now rotate your head along with one of the coins, it will appear standing still, while the other one will be rotating twice as fast.

I still would have guessed the answer was 6, though. It took me awhile to figure out how extrapolate this model to a 3:1 ratio. As it turns out, it still works, and you get 4, but evidence of that was far from obvious to me.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] bogdugg 15 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Watched the video and was still confused. Had to stare at the cardioid animation on the Wikipedia page for like 10 minutes before I could wrap my head around it.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 8 months ago

One thing that helped me intuit the "sidereal" result (4) was to consider what happens as the radius of circle B approaches 0. At least in my mind, it seems pretty clear that A has to undergo at least one rotation.

That said, I am unsure that I would have caught this as a test-taker. Derek's videos always have some "trick", putting me on guard, but in a testing scenario I would have seen the answer for 3 with no answer for 4, marked it down, and moved on quickly.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

VG video. Confused by the word 'revolve'? How many times does the Earth 'revolve' around the Sun in a year?

But, worse yet, there were THREE correct answers ... none listed!

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I did not watch this video but did read about this math. Visualize the larger circle unwrapped into a flat line, and the smaller circle sliding along the length of the line so its bottom point is fixed to the line. You'll see the small circle never rotates. Now slide the small circle with a point fixed onto the large circle in the same way, and you'll see the small circle makes one complete rotation. That rotation happens in addition to the rotations you get from dividing the larger circumference by the smaller circumference, so the answer is 4 in this case

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

Satellite operators have to use this equation for orbits.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (5 children)

Wouldn't it be 3 = 6π/2π ?

[–] [email protected] 22 points 8 months ago (4 children)

if the path had been straight yeah, but the path itself rotates 360 degrees, which gives us an extra rotation

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago

This is the comment that finally enlightened me

[–] ThrowawayPermanente 2 points 8 months ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

This finally made it click. Thanks

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago

Now that is mind-bending trickery! Having a degree in applied matha millennia ago did not help...

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

That's what you'd think, but there's an extra rotation involved in the act of the small circle moving around the larger circle rather than along a straight line, so it's (6π/2π) + 1

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I just watched the video, that's really interesting. Thanks for the explanation

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Watch the video, it's explained.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

This should have been an article. What's the summary?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I summarized it above, there's an extra rotation included when the outer circle moves along the inner circle, essentially falling a bit with every roll forward. If the outer circle rolled along a straight line of the same length as the circumference of the inner circle, it would only roll 3 times, but moving around the circle instead adds exactly one extra rotation. That other gent says this is used in calculating orbits too, where you're also moving forward while constantly falling

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I read an article about it. Everybody is doing a shit job of describing what happens. The outer circle naturally makes a full rotation as it travels around the inner one, as the path it follows goes around a full 360°, so that counts as one of the rotations it ends up making, which is in addition to the 3 due to travel around the circumference.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

thank you, that was the comment that explained it for me

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

Thanks for letting me know! It was too frustrating to not share.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Add the radius together. If the circle is inside. B-A 3-1 = 2.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] -2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

It’s in the video.

A circle with a radius of 2 and a circle with a radius of 3 would be 5 rotations.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

First you said add the radii together, then you gave an example subtracting them, but either way this is incorrect. You divide the larger radius by the smaller radius and add 1

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Not quite. With radius 2 and 3 circles, the outer circle would take 2.5 rotations to complete the revolution. You have to set the first circle radius to 1 (divide both radii by the lesser) and then add the radii to calculate the relative circumference of the circle drawn by the motion of the center of the outer circle, so the answer would be calculated like:

2/2 + 3/2 = 5/2 = 2.5

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

The center travels 2π per rotation but need to travel 8π because the path of the center of the small circle is a circle 4r the radius of the large circle plus the radius of the small circle. It would be three if the center of the small circle traveled along the edge of the larger circle but it's edge to edge.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm proud to say that I got 4 as the answer in the beginning. HOWEVER, the options threw me off, which made me watch the rest of the video :(

[–] Jakylla 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I was like "Hum... That should do like more than 3.5, but 4 at maximum..."

Then he shows options, and I was like "What ? There's nothing between 3.5 and 4"; then thought about it a bit more, and found Exactly 4 as an answer; then continued to watch the end of the video to see why my calculations were wrong (they wer'nt)

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago

This is crazy interesting!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

>/= 1

They didn't say anything about b's movements.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

This video is recommended by Tournesol:
[38🌻] Veritasium: The SAT Question Everyone Got Wrong

Tournesol is an open-source web tool by a non profit organization, aiming to evaluate the overall quality of the information in videos from community made comparisons, to fight against misinformation and dangerous content.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (2 children)

So I'm confused. I saw this and initially thought it was just a matter of circumference. Suppose the radius of circle A is 10 and the radius of circle B is twice that amount, so it's 20

The formula to find the circumference of a circle is C = 2πr

So for circle A;

2π10 = 62.831

And for circle B;

2π20 = 125.663

Then to find the difference in circumferences, divide them

125.663/62.831 = 2.000

Therefore, it should take two rotations to rotate one circle around the other

What am I getting wrong here?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago

There's one extra-rotation from an external perspective due to the revolution of one around the other. So the formula is r1 / r2 + 1.

This extra-rotation doesn't appear from the point of view of the circles, or if you consider the circles as two stationary gears

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago

You could just watch the vid you know

load more comments
view more: next ›