# Tag Info

1

Any linear force not going through the centre of mass will create torque, which I hope you know, is related to how far from the centre of mass the line of force is. So, if you manage to hit the object exactly at its centre of mass, i.e. the line of force is directly passing through the centre of mass, then it will show NO ROTATION. It will go straight ahead ...

0

If not influenced by any other forces then after pushing It will move in a straight line and most likely rotating as it goes. It would be real hard to push it without giving it some kind of rotation but it will always move in a straight line.

1

Assuming I understand your question correctly, the reason for your confusion is that gravitational waves do not cause a uniform compression and expansion of spacetime. They compress it in one direction and stretch it in another. Suppose you are looking at the Earth while a gravitational wave is passing through it. In this diagram the gravitational wave is ...

2

If you give a tangential force it would rotate. If you give a force at centroid, it will move in straight line. Along anyother point, between tangent and centroid , it will show joint motion.

0

TL:DR; There is no "classical" explanation... The speed of light is given by: $$c = {1 \over {\sqrt {\mu_0\epsilon_0}}}$$ $\mu_0 =$ permeability of free space, $\epsilon_0 =$ permettivity of free space So this simple equation shows that the speed of light depends on the ability of free space (i.e., the vaccuum) to support electric and magnetic ...

0

Speed of any wave is property of the medium through which it travels. So, it is property of empty space that electromagnetic waves travel at a certain speed (no more, no less). The vacuum is not a medium. With a medium the propagation speed is related to the bulk and/or Young's modulus depending on the wave type. That's why it's a property of the ...

1

The problem is that classically, a constant force leads to a constant acceleration, due to Newton's second law. Relativistically, though, it's more correct to use the momentum form of Newton's second law: $$\vec{F} = \frac{d\vec{p}}{dt},$$ with the relativistic momentum defined $$p = \frac{mv}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}.$$ As $v$ gets closer and closer to ...

1

In 1997 the Hubble discovered a large numbers of intergalactic stars. Others have since been discovered. It is now believed that about 1/2 of the stars in the universe may well be rogue stars that are located in intergalactic space. The AVERAGE density of intergalactic space is still very small, however, because of its immense size.

1

Your idea is theoretically possible. Answering the question's title, it depends on what kind of wave you use to transmit video information. I'll assume electromagnetic waves (e.g. radio wave, microwave, etc.). I can't say what frequency (and hence type) of electromagnetic wave is ideal for the job, as there are several factors to consider and calculate, ...

1

Even if faster than light travel were possible you would have to travel millions (total guess) of times faster than the speed of light just to catch up with that light that was emitted from Earth so long ago. The funny thing is, we can do it to other worlds.

1

The question is where is anything going to go if everything is changing direction based on where everything else is. A computational method effectively depends on an evolution of Euler's approximations which introduces error based on step size and the grouping of bodies into clusters for utilization of centers of mass. (as well as stimulated low probability ...

2

There are two things here that aren't quite right. The speed of light is the same for all observers. The speed that light travels is invariant for any observers in any reference frames observing the same beam of light. I can move at 100 meters per second (as measured in one reference frame) in one direction, while you move 256 meters per second (as ...

3

Think of a star as a big globe with ideal gas inside. Gravity acts as a force compressing the globe, the more it compress, the more energy goes to thermal part since $$dE = TdS-PdV$$ so a shrinking volume decreases $PdV$ term ($P$ is negative in this case, otherwise the system would be expanding), and for $dE=0$ because no reactions are occurring and no ...

3

I believe what he's pointing out is that energetic particles have sufficient kinetic energy to counter the pull of gravity, but as the star cools, the net kinetic energy decreases until the particles cannot go "up," or away from the centroid of mass. At that point, the star's mass collapses inward. The total mass is probably less than before, since the ...

2

There is a fundamental reason why it might be very, very difficult (not even mentioning the engineering). As you start approaching the speed of light, it becomes harder and harder to accelerate. At 0.5c, this would definitely become a factor. Accelerating from 1%c to 2%c is much easier than accelerating from 50%c to 51%.

Top 50 recent answers are included