It is a fabulous course.During the Entire Course I feel A Great Enthusiasm in my own.I loved this course..Thanks to profesor Louis A. Bloomfield & University of Virginia For there great contribution.
Mind blowing.. excellent study by Prof. Bloomfield. Hatsoff to you sir. Very excellent representation of physics concepts by taking interesting examples. Good Pesonalited Professor i have ever seen .
By EMMANUEL M•
I would appreciate it if in the forums the teacher/facilitator would also answer the questions we raised.
By RAVINDRA D S•
Thank you very much Mr. Bloomfield ... !!!
Great presentation, excellent demonstrations, indoor and outdoors and very assuring oratory skills. Appreciate all your efforts and looking forward to yet another opportunity to meet you virtually.
One small area of disagreement though ... I refer to your video "Week 3, Falling Balls I" (time frame 5:12) (How Things Work) topic on "Weight and Mass" of an object where you point out two items from the grocery store, namely the Chocolate Bar and the bag of Cookies.
Following information from US FDA regarding Food Labeling Guide, Net quantity of Contents Statement.
3. Should the net quantity of contents be stated in both grams and ounces?
Answer: Food labels printed must show the net contents in both metric (grams, kilograms, milliliters, liters) and U.S. Customary System (ounces, pounds, fluid ounces) terms. The metric statement may be placed either before or after the U.S. Customary statement, or above or below it. Each of the following examples is correct (additional examples appear in the regulations):
Net wt 1 lb 8 oz (680g)
Net wt 1 lb 8 oz 680 g
500 ml (1 pt 0.9 fl oz)
Net contents 1 gal (3.79 L)
For additional info, please refer to the following link for detailed info on what US FDA agrees to : http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/LabelingNutrition/ucm064877.htm#included
View above, I presume that the value of the grocery contents shown in Metric system is its Net Weight (not mass) and makes it easier to understand for people from countries that follow Metric system.
Let me know if I am wrong.
By David R•
Professor Bloomfield is full of enthusiasm and it's clear that he loves his work and his field. The course is highly accessible and explains physics in ways that most people can easily grasp. There are no equations, formulas, cryptic symbols or technical jargon to interfere with the learning process. Anyone can learn the principles conveyed in this course. My one suggestion is that I'd like to see a glossary that defines terms such as energy, force, momentum, weight, velocity etc. with the specific meanings that apply to the course and the distinctions between them. In everyday life, all of these words are interchangeable. Is there another word for synonym? Thanks to everyone involved, this was a very worthwhile program of study.
A very useful course in the context of physics and with the guidence of professor Lou Bloomfield. Thank you very much for this course is was really informative.
By Sudhaharan T•
It is an Amazing course to understand the physics in our everyday life. The professor has done an extremely good job!. A Great course!
By Chandrakiran c c•
It was really interesting to study all these concepts of physics by prof.lou bloomfield. thanyou for making these sessions amazing
By Chaima N•
C'est un excellent cours merci énormément notre cher professeur , vous êtes vraiment.
un grand respect
By ASAD K•
it is so much excited and lot of fun that i learned from Prof louis. Thanks sir love you sir.
By Rachana S•
very practical and enjoyable course while learning
By Dr. M D•
EXCELLENT TUTORIALS PROVIDED
By Rohan M R•
Good course nice explanation
By Rajendra D•
it was very good experience
By AJAY J•
Very Good Teacher
By Dr. P H K•
By Ms. H V•
By Venkatesh R•
By Ng W L•
It is good that the professor was able to connect physical laws to day-to-day events and phenomena and help laymen like myself understand them through simple, less technical explanations.
However, it would be better if the questions in the quizzes can be explained after attempts. Though I could retake the tests, sometimes, it is through sheer trial and error that I got some answers correct. In this way, true learning is not achieved.
It would be good if the answers to the quizzes could be re-explained with parts of the lesson vides to draw the links. Sometimes, that link is not obvious. It is not immediately clear which part of the lesson pertained to which quiz questions and that made reviewing the lessons after getting answers wrong not helpful.
I speak from a perspective of a student who has not taken physics since 14th grade.
This course was very informative and I loved how enthusiastically everything was presented but one thing that put me off was the length of the videos. I understand that you need to cover all the information but when I look at an upcoming video that is 30 minutes long, I don't feel as encouraged to start it. Maybe if you could separate those type of videos into smaller sections of 5-10 minute videos.
Another thing that bothered me was when I took a quiz and got something wrong but couldn't figure out why because it doesn't have an explanation and I didn't know which video to watch. Maybe they should give the video name and start time of explanation (e.g. How Would a Ball Fall on the Moon? (5:36)). If they did that, it would be easier to find an explanation to a question.
By Julie C•
I think this is a very good introductory class for physics. The explanations are clear, detailed, and examples shown in the videos are very useful. I genuinely recommend this class. However, one thing that must be improved: after each quizzes, there are no correct answers or explanations given. One only knows which question was correct, without the details of which answers was accurate and why. This caused me troubles in understanding some parts of the class that I did not understand at first: I had hoped that a correction of the quizzes would be given to truly master the contents of the class, but it was not the case, and it is something that would have tremendously helped me.
By Elias M•
A very clear, and well thought out course. I am brand new to physics and this was a fantastic way to get started. It walked me through information carefully, and I never felt lost or confused at any time. The questions and quizzes were well timed and relevant to the content, and really helped solidify information.
The only negative I can mention are some small issues with production, particularly with sound editing, but considering this was a volunteer operation and not part of a full time job I think it is perfectly forgivable.
The teacher clearly knows his stuff and is a really fun instructor, I thoroughly enjoyed this course and hope to see more of his work in the future!
By Marko S•
Good course when you want to get to know some basic mechanical physics. Examples are real world scenarios which makes everything much more relatable and exciting.
Course has very little math in it so it's easier to follow for beginners. But if you want some math exercises and examples then you need to find some other course/book to help you.
I think Louis hasn't visited the page for a while, because he hasn't given any comments in discussion forum for a while. There's some activity in the forum by community, but not the author of the course.
By Ngo T D•
Funny, wonderful, and enthusiastic teacher with real experiments. I think this course is useful for an introduction to physics, but not a too easy course for everyone. It will be at best if you have some ideas about physics, or at least some of the terms, so that you have familiar feeling about how physicists think. With a foundation of natural science, you will learn physics in a systematic way.
By Ranajit P C•
explanation of each topic is very good. i really impress by the basics explained by sir for each topic in very simple manner
By Tomi J A•
A good certificate-level introduction to classical mechanics.
By SREERAM K V S U•