Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

45

I am sorry to say, but your colleague is right. Of course, air friction acts in the same way. However, the friction is, in good approximation, proportional to the square of the velocity, $F=kv^2$. At terminal velocity, this force balances gravity, $$ m g = k v^2 $$ And thus $$ v=\sqrt{\frac{mg}{k}}$$ So, the terminal velocity of a ball 10 times as ...


44

Start by considering what is seen by the people watching you from the Earth. Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, $c$, so the quickest you could get to Kepler 186f would be if you were travelling at $c$ in which case it would take 490 years. In practice it would take longer than this because you have to accelerate from rest when you leave the ...


31

like even when light gets on the moon why does the space appears dark from the moon? For the same reason it appears dark from the Earth (when flying at an altitude of 80,000 feet or so): Image credit: View from the SR-71 Blackbird. The fact is, we can't 'see space' from the Earth's surface during the day because the atmosphere is 'in the way'- the ...


28

This diagram shows the Earth rotating round the Sun at it's orbital velocity $v$. That is the centre of the Earth is orbiting around the Sun at velocity $v$. NB the scale is rather fanciful - don't take it literally! I'll also assume the orbit is circular, and for convenience I'll ignore the Earth's rotation i.e. assume it's tidally locked. To calculate ...


23

Olin Lanthrop suggested a plausible approach but there was a lot of (inaccurate) guessing in his answer. I was going to write this as a comment to his answer but it got too long. Note - in the below I round to no more than 2 significant figures - the nature of the problem doesn't support more. Let's take the famous Sherman tank as our example. A brief ...


20

Ball 1 will drop faster in air, but both balls will drop at the same speed in vacuum. In vacuum, there is only the gravitational force on each ball. That force is proportional to mass. The accelleration of a object due to a force is inversely proportional to its mass, so the mass cancels out. Each ball will accellerate the same, which is the ...


19

As you have probably noticed, the moon is tidally locked with the earth so that we always see the same side. You can look up in the sky and watch sunlight move across the moon's face. From the surface of the moon this change in illumination would look just like the day/night cycle on Earth ... except that it's roughly a month long. Until the advent of radar ...


16

I took a look at the clip and my take on it that the object of the exercise was not to slow down the tank, but to move it sideways and land in the lake a half a mile away. Hannibal says, "rotate the main gun to 82ยบ" which I take to be sticking out sideways. Background Information The facts I could find were: M1A2 Abrams ...


15

The factor of two is correct as far as the integral goes; it comes from the unphysical situation of having your test mass exactly on the thin shell. Intuitively, you get the average of the "just outside" result (as if mass is concentrated at the centre) and the "just inside" result of zero. A more physical thing to do would be to `regulate' the calculation ...


11

In a nutshell, the problem with OP's choice of operators $\hat{p}_j$ and $\hat{H}$ is that they are not selfadjoint wrt. to the pertinent measure $\mu$. In other words, the usual integration by part method to prove selfadjointness does not work. Here are some more details. Let us put the constants $m=1=R$ for simplicity. Then the Lagrangian reads ...


11

Do the math. I'm no military expert, so I'll guess at some parameters, but I think it will show the effect is so small that it doesn't matter even if the numbers were considerably more favorable. Let's say the tank weighs 50 tons, which I think is rather light for a tank. That's 100,000 pounds, which puts its mass at 45,000 kg. I don't know what the mass ...


11

Other answers & comments cover the difference in acceleration due to friction, which will be the largest effect, but don't forget that if you are in an atmosphere there will also be buoyancy to consider. The buoyancy provides an additional upward force on the balls that is equal to the weight of the displaced air. As it is the same force on each ball, ...


10

tl;dr: Velocity required: 1680 m/s Time to hit you: 6500 seconds Part 1: Velocity required (Using Google search values) Radius of moon = 1737.4 kilometers Mass of moon = 7.34767309E22 kilograms Assuming perfectly circular motion of the bullet, and no air resistance, and ignoring gravitational effects of other planets / objects in space, and using simple ...


10

Let's simplify. Let's eliminate the Moon. Let's get rid of the Sun temporarily. Let's replace the Earth with an equivalent mass-and-density perfect sphere of iron that is neither moving linearly nor spinning or revolving in any way. We place two 1KG iron test masses on opposite sides of the Iron Earth, suspended 1 M above the surface by identical ...


10

I doubt if your textbook makes it explicit, but the only sacred tenet in here is to respect dimensional homogeneity. One can make no sense of the sum of quantities with different dimensions.


10

To figure this out, you need to know about momentum ($p$). That's a combination of how fast something is moving ($v$, for velocity) and how much it weighs ($m$, for mass). You'll also need to understand algebra, which is just using a letter to mean some number you don't know yet. $$ p = m\cdot v $$ Momentum is conserved, which means the momentum from both ...


10

The superscript $^2$ in $1750\text{ mm}^2$ refers to a squaring of the units, not the number $1750$. A more transparent way to write this is $1750\text{ mm}\cdot\text{mm}$. The idea is now to multiply by $1$, but $1$ written in a clever way: $$1=\frac{1\text{ m}}{1000\text{ mm}}$$. Can you see how that number is conceptually equal to $1$? The top and ...


10

If you redraw your diagram as: It should be clear which capacitors are in parallel and which are in series.


10

The ways of rearranging a system is related to the entropy by $W=e^S$. The entropy is given by $S=\sum_i p_i \log p_i$ where $p_i$ is the probability of realising a given microstate. Hence $W = \prod_i \, p_i^{\,p_i}$


9

This problem is generally called propagation of error / uncertainty. You can google it and find a lot of info (I'd also recommend Taylor's "Introduction to Error Analysis"). Here's the gist of it, though. If you have independent measured quantities $x, y, z, \ldots$ with errors $ \sigma_x, \sigma_y, \sigma_z, \ldots$, then the error on a function ...


9

In addition to Ali's answer, here are some pictures which may be helpful in convincing people that the origin is not the only point inside the polygon where $\mathbf{E}=\mathbf{0}$. Letting the charges be located at $(\cos(2\pi k/N),\sin(2\pi k/N))$ for $k\in\{1,2,...,N\}$, we can generate plots of $|\mathbf{E}|^{-1}$ for various $N$. The zeros of ...


9

I was always told that to find whether or not a field is conservative, see if the curl is zero. This is almost always true, but not always true. I have now been told that just because the curl is zero does not necessarily mean it is conservative. Correct! To illustrate what's going on, let's do an example. Conside the following vector field: ...


9

The mistake you're making is that you're looking at the full acceleration when you should look at the relative one. At distance $R=1\mathrm{au}$ from the sun, the gravitational acceleration is given by $$ a_0 = \frac{GM_\odot}{R^2} $$ Assuming a spherical cow earth (in vacuum), at midday at the equator, we're one earth-radius $r$ closer to the sun, ie $$ ...


9

Yes your weight will change. The moon will have a bigger impact than the sun, so you need to look at the position of the moon to decide when you will be heaviest (basically - you are lighter when the moon is overhead, or on the opposite side of the earth; and heaviest when it is on the horizon. So a full moon rising makes you fat...) The effect (the ...


8

From the commentary to the question, the textbook in question appears to be a mathematics textbook rather than a physics textbook. In mathematics, any two elements of a vector space can be added to one another to yield another member of that space. This is one of the requisites of what it means for something to be a "vector" in mathematics. Specifically, a ...


8

$$M_{gal}=Rv^2/G$$ ($G=6.67\times10^{-11} (N*[m/kg]^2) $. Units of $v$ and $R$ are km/sec. and km., respectively) You gave G in MKS, then: R and v are m, m/s, $ m= (\frac {1}{10^3}) km$, that's why you got a wrong result: $ 10^3 * (10^3) ^2 = 10^9 $ that's the order of magnitude you are missing $$ 1.5*10^{11} *(3*10^4)^2/(6.6*10^{-11}) = ...


8

There are two parts to your question, and I'll address them individually, assuming that the room+ball system is an isolated system, i.e. no work is being done on the system, and no energy is being added / removed. Part I: How cold will it get? This depends on the size of the room, the materials that everything in the room is made of, the size and material ...


8

One can do the calculation(expand the potential to the second order around the center) and show that the center of the polygon is a minimum of potential. We are free to choose $V(\infty)=0$, if we do so, then it would be easy to show that the potential at the center of the polygon is positive. Combining the results above with the fact that the potential is ...


8

To show that this measure is Lorentz invariant you first need to explicitly write your integral as an integral over mass shell in 4D k-space. This could be done by inserting Dirac delta function $\delta[k^\mu k_\mu-m^2]$ and integrating over the whole 4D space. Then you could apply the following transformations: \begin{align} \theta(k_0)\cdot\delta[k^\mu ...


8

This vector potential can be written in every point on the plane except the origin as: $$ A_x = -\frac{\partial \psi}{\partial y}$$ $$ A_y = \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial x} $$ with $$\psi = \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}(x^2+y^2)$$ $A$ is not exact, because $\psi$ is singular at the origin. But this means that the magnetic field is zero at every point except ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible