Addition of Vectors By Means of Components - Physics
Credibility score: 71/100 — Mostly Credible. Mixed credibility - some claims are solid, others need verification.
BSmeter analyzed "Addition of Vectors By Means of Components - Physics" and rated it 71/100 for credibility (a BS score of 29/100 — mostly credible), on 2026-09-01. Its weakest claim — "Says 'find the left of the hypotenuse' — Pythagorean theorem gets mangled into nonsense." — scored 20/100 and was flagged as confidence mismatch. 28 claims were checked against the video transcript. Scores are produced by BSmeter's AI analysis of the transcript, not independent human verification.
Of 28 claims analyzed: 1 scored under 40, 2 between 40 and 69, and 25 at 70 or above.
Claims analyzed
Vector = magnitude + direction, adds straight when parallel — No Frame (75/100)
At 0:30
Clean definition, matches every textbook. Straight physics, no trick.
Why this score: Defines vector correctly then shows parallel addition works by simple arithmetic. Nothing omitted, nothing exaggerated. Green pill.
Original quote: “in this video we're going to talk about how to add vectors so a vector is a quantity that has magnitude and direction so let's say if we have a force vector that's 100 newtons directed towards the east the magnitude is the size of the force it's 100 newtons and the direction is east and let's say…”
North-south numbers: 120 – 80 = 40 N, but direction not stated — Missing Context (45/100)
At 0:36
Calculation correct, yet never names which way the 40 N points. Leaves the student hanging.
Why this score: The sign convention established earlier implies north is positive, so result should be 40 N north, but speaker stops mid-sentence. Omission creates a gap.
Original quote: “now what if we have a force that's 80 newtons directed north and another one that's 120 direct itself so 120 minus 8 is 40. so the net force is going to be 40 itself and if you recall”
Opposite directions: net = difference, direction follows larger vector — No Frame (75/100)
At 1:02
Arithmetic checks out, direction logic stated plainly. No hidden assumptions.
Why this score: Demonstrates both outcomes: when east wins (80 N) and when west wins (30 N). Transparent sign convention throughout.
Original quote: “so this is positive 200 because it's directed towards the right this is negative 120 because it's directed towards the left if you add these two you should get a net force of positive 80. now it's going to be smaller than the original one but it's still directed east because this vector is greater…”
Perpendicular vectors need Pythagorean hypotenuse; says 'third newton' — Confidence Mismatch (45/100)
At 1:53
Method is right, but 'third newton' is clearly a slip — numbers don't match earlier examples.
Why this score: Speaker meant '30 N east' or similar; the typo undercuts the authority of the perpendicular section before it even begins.
Original quote: “this is north south east west now sometimes you may need to add two vectors that are not parallel or anti-parallel to each other so let's say if we have a third newton force vector directed east and a 40 newton force vector directed north what is the resultant force vector if you have two vectors…”
Says 'find the left of the hypotenuse' — Pythagorean theorem gets mangled into nonsense. — Confidence Mismatch (20/100)
At 2:33
Mortal, that sentence makes zero sense. You meant 'length' — 'left' is a direction, not a measurement. 💀
Why this score: The speaker is teaching a correct method but botched the wording so badly the explanation becomes mathematically incoherent. The Pythagorean theorem finds the length of the hypotenuse, not its 'left.'
Original quote: “if you have two vectors that are perpendicular to each other you could find the resultant force vector by finding the left of the hypotenuse of the right triangle that is formed”
Pythagorean theorem applied correctly — magnitude of resultant = √(F1² + F2²). — No Frame (75/100)
At 2:53
Straight math, no tricks. Works for perpendicular vectors.
Why this score: This is textbook physics — when vectors are at 90°, their resultant magnitude is the hypotenuse of the right triangle they form.
Original quote: “the resulting force vector is going to be the square root of f1 squared plus f2 squared”
Magnitude calculated as 50 N — correct arithmetic result. — No Frame (75/100)
At 3:20
√(900 + 1600) = 50. The numbers work.
Why this score: Basic arithmetic: 30² + 40² = 900 + 1600 = 2500, square root is 50. No framing tricks.
Original quote: “so the resultant force is going to be 50 newtons”
tan θ = opposite/adjacent applied correctly for direction angle. — No Frame (75/100)
At 3:40
Standard arctangent setup. Direction angle = arctan(40/30).
Why this score: The speaker correctly identifies the components and applies the tangent definition for the angle.
Original quote: “to find the angle it's going to be our tangent the opposite side which is the y value of 40 over the adjacent side which is the x value of 30”
arctan(40/30) ≈ 53.1° — correct calculation. — No Frame (75/100)
At 4:22
arctan(4/3) rounds to 53.13°. Math is solid.
Why this score: The angle calculation is accurate — tan(53.13°) ≈ 1.333, matching 40/30.
Original quote: “the arc tangent of 40 over 30 is 53.1 degrees”
53.1° is the exact direction of the resultant vector — No Frame (75/100)
At 4:30
Straight calculation — tan⁻¹(40/30) lands on 53.1° every time.
Why this score: No framing trick here. The math is exact, the statement matches the numbers shown, and he doesn't inflate the certainty.
Original quote: “the arc tangent of 40 over 30 is 53.1 degrees so we can say that the resultant force vector has a magnitude of 50 newtons and a direction of 53.1 degrees relative to the x-axis”
5-12-13 triangle means the hypotenuse 'has to be' 130 — No Frame (75/100)
At 5:15
Recognizes the scaled 5-12-13 right triangle — 50-120-130 is exact.
Why this score: He states a geometric fact, not a leap of faith. The numbers are textbook 5-12-13 scaled by 10, so the certainty is earned.
Original quote: “so notice that it's in quadrant three now if you're familiar with the 5 12 13 triangle then the hypotenuse has to be 130”
√(50² + 120²) will 'turn out to be' 130 newtons — No Frame (75/100)
At 5:35
Pythagorean theorem applied to the legs — 130 N is the direct result.
Why this score: No embellishment. The arithmetic is transparent and the outcome is deterministic once the legs are given.
Original quote: “so the resultant force vector is going to be the square root of 50 squared plus 120 squared and that's going to turn out to be 130 newtons”
tan⁻¹(120/50) gives a reference angle of 67.4° — No Frame (75/100)
At 5:55
Reference angle calculation is precise — 67.4° is correct to one decimal.
Why this score: The step is standard and the value matches the arctangent of the ratio. Nothing dressed up.
Original quote: “our tan 120 over 50 will give you a reference angle of 67.4”
Adds 180 to reference angle, assumes quadrant 3 — No Frame (75/100)
At 6:30
Walks through the quadrant rule in real time — textbook move, no sleight of hand.
Why this score: Speaker correctly identifies the 180° offset for quadrant 3 and applies it without skipping steps or hiding assumptions. Standard physics procedure, delivered plainly.
Original quote: “so here's the reference angle it's inside the triangle now what we need is the angle relative to the positive x-axis so if this is 180 then the resultant vector is 180 plus 67.4 relative to the x-axis”
States 247.4° and 130 magnitude as final answer — No Frame (75/100)
At 7:00
Gives both magnitude and direction in one breath — exactly what the problem asked for.
Why this score: Result is presented with both values and units, matching the expected format. No exaggeration, no missing pieces.
Original quote: “so it's at an angle of 247.4 so therefore this is the resultant force vector which has a magnitude of 130 but an angle of 247.4 degrees so that's the answer”
Quadrant 4 rule: 360° - 53.1° = 306.9° — No Frame (75/100)
At 7:57
Correctly identifies quadrant 4 and subtracts from 360° — textbook quadrant logic.
Why this score: East is +x, south is -y, so quadrant 4. 360° - 53.1° lands exactly on the standard position angle. No errors.
Original quote: “the first force vector is positive it's directed east the second one is directed south so therefore the resultant force vector is in quadrant four now if this angle is 53.1 to find the angle relative to the positive x-axis it's going to be 360 minus 53.1”
Labels directions 'positive' and 'south' to set quadrant — No Frame (75/100)
At 8:30
Straight coordinate system setup — no trick, just defining axes.
Why this score: Assigning positive x east and positive y north is standard physics convention. The speaker is simply establishing the reference frame before calculating the resultant angle.
Original quote: “the first force vector is positive it's directed east the second one is directed south so therefore the resultant force vector is in quadrant four”
Calculates 306.9° by subtracting reference angle from 360 — No Frame (75/100)
At 8:36
Correct quadrant four angle rule — 360 minus the reference angle.
Why this score: The math is textbook. Nothing hidden, nothing exaggerated. He's applying the standard rule for expressing direction when the resultant lands in quadrant four.
Original quote: “if this angle is 53.1 to find the angle relative to the positive x-axis it's going to be 360 minus 53.1”
Gives angle rules for quadrants 2 and 3 — No Frame (75/100)
At 9:07
Standard quadrant rules, delivered clearly and without embellishment.
Why this score: He's listing the four standard formulas that every physics student memorizes. No sleight of hand, just the method.
Original quote: “now if you know the resultant force vector is going to be in quadrant two then to find that angle it's going to be 180 minus the reference angle if it's in quadrant three we cover this one already it's 180 plus the reference angle”
Switches to non-aligned vectors, sets up 100 N east + 150 N at 30° — No Frame (75/100)
At 9:50
Clean transition into the general case — no loaded language or missing pieces.
Why this score: He's correctly identifying when component addition is actually required. The numbers (100 N, 150 N, 30°) are just placeholders for the upcoming calculation, nothing deceptive.
Original quote: “now sometimes you may need to add vectors that are not parallel or perpendicular to each other so let's say if we want to add this vector which is a 100 inch directed east plus another vector let's say it has a magnitude of 150 but it's directed at 30 degrees above the x-axis”
Switches 'inch' to 'newtons' mid-sentence — inconsistency in units. — No Frame (75/100)
At 10:30
Calls the first vector '100 inch' then switches to '100 newtons' without correction.
Why this score: The speaker started with one unit and corrected to the correct force unit without acknowledging the slip. Not a lie, just a slip of the tongue that gets fixed.
Original quote: “that are not parallel or perpendicular to each other so let's say if we want to add this vector which is a 100 inch directed east plus another vector let's say it has a magnitude of 150 but it's directed at 30 degrees above the x-axis”
States the component formulas correctly — no tricks here. — No Frame (75/100)
At 11:06
Gives the standard trig definitions for components and resultant magnitude and direction.
Why this score: The formulas are textbook correct and match the method shown in the web sources. Straight teaching, no framing.
Original quote: “f of x is equal to f cosine theta and f of y is f sine theta f you can find it by using pythagorean theorem it's f of x squared plus f of y squared and the angle theta is the arc tangent of f of y divided by f of x”
cos(0) = 1 so Fx = 100 — textbook definition, no trick — No Frame (75/100)
At 12:30
Straight math, no embellishment. Cosine zero is one — everyone knows that.
Why this score: This is just the definition of cosine at zero. Nothing hidden, nothing sold, nothing twisted. Pure calculation.
Original quote: “f one x is gonna be a hundred cosine of zero cosine of zero is one so a hundred times one is simply a hundred”
150 cos 30° = 129.9 — calculator output presented as fact — No Frame (75/100)
At 12:48
Rounding to one decimal is fine — standard physics rounding.
Why this score: The calculation is exact: 150 × √3/2 = 129.9038..., so 129.9 N is correct and honest.
Original quote: “f2x is 150 times cosine of 30 degrees... this will give you as a decimal 129.9 newtons”
150 sin 30° = 75 — clean, exact, no rounding — No Frame (75/100)
At 13:00
Sin 30° is exactly 0.5 — zero wiggle room, zero rounding issues.
Why this score: Exact value, exact result. Nothing to critique here except that it's textbook perfect.
Original quote: “f2y that's going to be 150 times sine 30 which is just 75”
100 + 129.9 = 229.9 — adding components directly — No Frame (75/100)
At 13:13
Basic arithmetic. Nothing fancy, nothing hidden.
Why this score: They're just adding the two x-components. The method is correct and the arithmetic checks out.
Original quote: “sum of the forces in the x direction is going to be a hundred plus 129.9 so that's going to be 229.9”
Magnitude = √(Fx² + Fy²) — Pythagorean theorem applied — No Frame (75/100)
At 14:14
Textbook definition of vector magnitude. No deception here.
Why this score: They're correctly applying the Pythagorean theorem to the resultant vector. The method is standard and accurate.
Original quote: “resultant force vector is the hypotenuse and to find it it's going to be the square root of f of x squared plus f of y squared”
Arc tan of y over x gives 18.1° — textbook move, no tricks — No Frame (75/100)
At 14:36
Straight physics method, no loaded words or hidden assumptions.
Why this score: He's simply walking through the standard component method — arctan of the ratio. Nothing omitted, nothing exaggerated. The numbers line up with the method.
Original quote: “so you should get 241.8 so that's the resulting force vector that's the magnitude of it now that we have the magnitude we need to find the angle so it's going to be arc tangent f of x i mean f of y which is 75 divided by f of x which is 229.9 so the angle which is already in quadrant one is 18.1…”
See the full analysis with timestamps →