Timeline for Why doesn't this formula work? [duplicate]
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 9, 2017 at 17:40 | history | closed |
Kyle Kanos Michael Seifert David Z |
Duplicate of Kinetic energy doesn't make sense [closed] | |
| May 9, 2017 at 17:17 | history | edited | Prahar | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 114 characters in body
|
| May 9, 2017 at 17:16 | answer | added | Prahar | timeline score: 0 | |
| May 9, 2017 at 14:54 | comment | added | Bill N | " the speed is $ at$". No, it's not. That's the change in velocity. | |
| May 1, 2017 at 18:21 | comment | added | nasu | This is a very complicated way to find the distance when you know the final and initial velocities. But if you do it right you find the same result. | |
| May 1, 2017 at 17:37 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ |
edited tags
|
|
| May 1, 2017 at 17:18 | review | Close votes | |||
| May 9, 2017 at 17:43 | |||||
| May 1, 2017 at 17:17 | answer | added | Floris | timeline score: 1 | |
| May 1, 2017 at 17:00 | history | edited | user154674 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 36 characters in body
|
| May 1, 2017 at 17:00 | comment | added | JMac | Possible duplicate of Kinetic energy doesn't make sense | |
| May 1, 2017 at 16:58 | history | edited | user154674 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 36 characters in body
|
| May 1, 2017 at 16:52 | history | asked | user154674 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |