You explained part of the problem, but not why it follows those paths. That takes mathematics, and you did not use any. Memorizing animations might seem a way to learn processes and use them later, but equations, measurements and precise models are better. You could have at least shown the equations, and more, provided links to background and deeper material. So you are propagating a way of explaining that mostly wastes a lot of time. It also hints that actually using this is outside the skills and interests of the viewers.
Just now 841,655 viewers. If they watch 10 minutes of this each, that is 140,275.833 hours. If you stood in a classroom and taught so casually and cutely, then it is just “science entertainment”. And you only hurt a few by being lazy about sharing solid leads to deeper materials.
The world GDP per capita (counting all people the same) is about $15 an hour. Those hours come to just over $2.1 million dollars. It was entertaining, sort of. And it hinted at deeper and usable knowledge, but you gave none. Please at least give references and links and make an attempt to be serious about the value of people’s time.
Thank you. I did learn something, but now I have to go spend more hours searching to guess what the real ways the superposition of the waves is handled, and try to find anyone who shows how to calculate the paths – all in a consistent framework. Apparently, you know those things, but you only scattered, and did not guide to immediately usable tools.
An hour or two of your time to carefully gather and share the solid references and basic information could, potentially, save hundreds of thousands or millions of hours – depending on your popularity. Best wishes.