Monday, February 1, 2010

Project Over Dynamics Embed


  1. Very good and informative. Unfortunately, I don't like the fact that you actually worked a apecific problem. I think that you should be more general, not limited to just that situation. Also, I am highly doubting the fact that the mu=1, which is huge. If that is what your research suggests then fine, but if you made up that number, I think you should do a little more.

  2. Wikipedia! Thanks... I will take this into concideration on my next draft

  3. The style of the presentation is informative and smooth, however, I would prefer a general introduction on the concepts and formulae involved before getting into a specific problem, for that provides a look at 'the big picture'. Look for minor misspellings such as "tanget" for "target", "centripital" for "centripetal", etc. If superscripting and subscripting is not possible, try to write the full name of the variable (i.e. "Friction" instead of "Ff", "acceleration" instead of "ac"). Perhaps not everyone will recognize "D" as "diameter". Some of the math, due to lack proper notation, become a little confusing without the use of parentheses, especially for someone without previous knowledge of the formulae. Some consistency between variables would be great. For example: avoid switching back and forth between u and Mu (for the coefficient of friction). The free-body-diagram for Fg shows only Fn (there is a line going straight down, and the note says Fg is not straight down, because it supposedly has two components - what is the straight line, then? If that is the y component, where is the x component?) The use of trigonometry needs some further explanation as well. As the above commenter has pointed out, the coefficient being 1 is quite unrealistic - most of the time, it is a decimal number between zero and 1. Other than these small issues, I think the presentation is great/interesting and has a lot of potential. I like the idea of embedding a YouTube video. Though not new, it's enriching.

  4. This is very strong, and looks like you put a lot of effort into it. Great level of detail, and the presentation is very smooth throughout. Suggestions would be to enlarge the FBD at the start as I'm unable to clearly view them. I'm also surprised that I didn't see any rotational physics regarding the bike turning. Bikers tilt during a turn causing a centripetal acceleration which makes the bike turn (i think). Last bit of suggest would be the ending , it seems a bit abrupt. Possibly add a few bubbles for a conclusion. Overall, a respectable piece of work.

    P.S what program did you use to make the presentation? It's really good.

  5. You did a great job with your Prezi, the presentation is very nice.
    With respect to the project, it is not clear what your question is as there is no introduction in your blog posting.
    Your project looks like a quantitative physics problem with multiple variables. Though I do not think this is a bad thing, it would be great if you could focus on fewer aspects.
    One idea is to discuss some the physics principles on one or two things max! Some ideas are turning on a curve or friction on different surfaces or going up a slope. Select one or two items please.