Does mass affect the acceleration of an object in free fall
please give a sourceDoes mass affect the acceleration of an object in free fall?
if we are neglecting air friction, then mass has no effect on the rate of acceleration; all objects will accelerate near the surface of the earth at the rate of 9.81 m/s/s
the first answer is self-contradictory; aerodynamics will matter only if we consider the interaction between the moving object and air, and if we are considering those interactions, then the mass will certainly matter as well as the shape of the objectDoes mass affect the acceleration of an object in free fall?
Nope. Gravity and aerodynamics (the shape) will.
All objects (masses) fall (accelerate) to earth at the same rate, however, due to air resistence (friction) between the mass and the surrounding fluid (air) some will be slowed.
This is why a piano will hit the ground before a feather. The feather is aerodynamic (designed that way so birds can fly), and so there is higher pressure around it (just like an airplane wing), while the box-like piano is not aerodynamic and so it has lower pressure around it.
So, it is interesting to think that a 600 lb. piano will hit the ground before a 1000 lb. feather would. Yeah, that would be one big bird (hum, what is like a big bird and weighs a lot more than a piano? A plane!)
Sunday, December 27, 2009
What object in the solar system has a compostion similar to that of the gas giants?
my behindWhat object in the solar system has a compostion similar to that of the gas giants?
EggplantsWhat object in the solar system has a compostion similar to that of the gas giants?
Venus %26amp; the Sun come closest.
EggplantsWhat object in the solar system has a compostion similar to that of the gas giants?
Venus %26amp; the Sun come closest.
What object represents ';secrets'; in general to you?
i am doing a project, and for my centerpiece in this 3D art project, i have to use the theme secrets. i was thinking maybe i could make a 3D question mark, or something like that. but what are your ideas? what do secrets represent to you? any type of real-life object would be great, and multiple ideas would be awesome. Thanks!What object represents ';secrets'; in general to you?
A diary would be good because isn't that where most people keep their secrets.What object represents ';secrets'; in general to you?
a lock and key or a finger over lips in the ';Shhhh'; gesture
Pandora's box, or any type of box that is obviously locked.
A key.
A padlock.
A diary.
A closed door.
Good luck and God bless,
newsiesno1
I would say to make Pandoras Box, since the whole story was about Pandora being curious about the secrets within the box.acne facial coconut oil
A diary would be good because isn't that where most people keep their secrets.What object represents ';secrets'; in general to you?
a lock and key or a finger over lips in the ';Shhhh'; gesture
Pandora's box, or any type of box that is obviously locked.
A key.
A padlock.
A diary.
A closed door.
Good luck and God bless,
newsiesno1
I would say to make Pandoras Box, since the whole story was about Pandora being curious about the secrets within the box.
How do you plot a four dimensional object on a three dimensional grid?
plot it on a four dimentional grid and remove a dimentionHow do you plot a four dimensional object on a three dimensional grid?
Say for example you have drawn a cube on your grid paper, to plot the 4th dimension all you need to do is plot how the cube changes over a time scaleHow do you plot a four dimensional object on a three dimensional grid?
what is ur definition of the 4th dimension? is it time or inside/outside? Try:
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/newton/ask鈥?/a>
is there such thing as 4d? only x,y and z are axes i know of
dont plot...
just explain...
Say for example you have drawn a cube on your grid paper, to plot the 4th dimension all you need to do is plot how the cube changes over a time scaleHow do you plot a four dimensional object on a three dimensional grid?
what is ur definition of the 4th dimension? is it time or inside/outside? Try:
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/newton/ask鈥?/a>
is there such thing as 4d? only x,y and z are axes i know of
dont plot...
just explain...
What is the Definition of a real object?
Remember the chicken discussion in The Maxtrix. I liked that explanation.
What is reality? It is something we feel, smell, taste, see, or hear? But then again, all these sensations are electrical impulses that is relayed to our brain and our brain interpret those impulses. If that is true then something that is real is really our interpretation of impulses.
Let me ask, if a person with schizophrenia is hallucinating about a flower pot in front of him and everyone else around him doesn't see it. Does that mean its not real. It may not be real to everyone else but it is very really to that schizophrenic person.
Which brings me to my next point. I think reality is based on consensual and shared interpretations. If 100 people can agree that a red table is a red table then its a red table. well then again if you were color blind you wouldn't see red :). Now lets say another alien species which could see infrared saw that table. Our interpretation and the alien's interpretation of color would be very different. Lets take another example: a photograph. To most people a photograph can be easily identified. However, to a tribe in Borereo the photograph may represent a captured soul. In this instance culture definitely affects our interpretation of reality.
So to define what a real object is not very easy or even possible to do.
I also thought it was funny to describe the fourth dimension as time in defining an object. I mean what exactly does that mean. My table or photograph ain't got a clock on it last time i checkedWhat is the Definition of a real object?
Real objects are antithesis of imaginary objectsWhat is the Definition of a real object?
Go stand in front of a mirror.
You will see two of yourself.
The one you can touch is the real object.
its matter that u can feel...
Depends on your context. In optics, a real object is one that is physical and not an image.
I go back to Morpheus' explanation in the Matrix:
What is real? How do you define real? If it is something you can see, taste, or touch, then real is simply electrical signals interpreted by your brain.
You have to be careful with this question too, because it is awfully close to philosophy. Those quacks can spend hours on end arguing whether or not the chair in the middle of the room is actually there.
So, steering clear of philosophy, I would have to go with this: a real object is one that is under the influence of the laws of this Universe. In other words, it has to obey the laws.
The point(s) from which light rays diverge as they enter a lens or mirror.
any object that can be defined with for dimensions - three of space and one of time
A real object is one that doesn't go away just because you stop believing in it.
A real object is one that can be sensed with one or more senses or by their extensions.
The senses are touch, taste, smell, sight and hearing. Any instrument through which you can observe using one or more senses is an extension of the senses.
Any object or any existence that shows the characteristicness of limitation/limtless oriented dimentional application of height breadth width whose totality is nothing but the system of tangible/ non-tangible system as of massive substantiality as of mass or micro mass of matter or infinite system of space based on the basis of potential vacuity system having been involved in the same way as of described above[application] should be regarded as real object, beside this even space exist as real potentioal existence, because it exists as real existenc only unsubstantialy, %26amp; It should not be confused that it is non-existence entity because it exist as real, open [unlike closed systems as of mass or matter!!
What is reality? It is something we feel, smell, taste, see, or hear? But then again, all these sensations are electrical impulses that is relayed to our brain and our brain interpret those impulses. If that is true then something that is real is really our interpretation of impulses.
Let me ask, if a person with schizophrenia is hallucinating about a flower pot in front of him and everyone else around him doesn't see it. Does that mean its not real. It may not be real to everyone else but it is very really to that schizophrenic person.
Which brings me to my next point. I think reality is based on consensual and shared interpretations. If 100 people can agree that a red table is a red table then its a red table. well then again if you were color blind you wouldn't see red :). Now lets say another alien species which could see infrared saw that table. Our interpretation and the alien's interpretation of color would be very different. Lets take another example: a photograph. To most people a photograph can be easily identified. However, to a tribe in Borereo the photograph may represent a captured soul. In this instance culture definitely affects our interpretation of reality.
So to define what a real object is not very easy or even possible to do.
I also thought it was funny to describe the fourth dimension as time in defining an object. I mean what exactly does that mean. My table or photograph ain't got a clock on it last time i checkedWhat is the Definition of a real object?
Real objects are antithesis of imaginary objectsWhat is the Definition of a real object?
Go stand in front of a mirror.
You will see two of yourself.
The one you can touch is the real object.
its matter that u can feel...
Depends on your context. In optics, a real object is one that is physical and not an image.
I go back to Morpheus' explanation in the Matrix:
What is real? How do you define real? If it is something you can see, taste, or touch, then real is simply electrical signals interpreted by your brain.
You have to be careful with this question too, because it is awfully close to philosophy. Those quacks can spend hours on end arguing whether or not the chair in the middle of the room is actually there.
So, steering clear of philosophy, I would have to go with this: a real object is one that is under the influence of the laws of this Universe. In other words, it has to obey the laws.
The point(s) from which light rays diverge as they enter a lens or mirror.
any object that can be defined with for dimensions - three of space and one of time
A real object is one that doesn't go away just because you stop believing in it.
A real object is one that can be sensed with one or more senses or by their extensions.
The senses are touch, taste, smell, sight and hearing. Any instrument through which you can observe using one or more senses is an extension of the senses.
Any object or any existence that shows the characteristicness of limitation/limtless oriented dimentional application of height breadth width whose totality is nothing but the system of tangible/ non-tangible system as of massive substantiality as of mass or micro mass of matter or infinite system of space based on the basis of potential vacuity system having been involved in the same way as of described above[application] should be regarded as real object, beside this even space exist as real potentioal existence, because it exists as real existenc only unsubstantialy, %26amp; It should not be confused that it is non-existence entity because it exist as real, open [unlike closed systems as of mass or matter!!
If I have a heavy object and a light object and I drop it from the same height which would hit the ground 1st?
A heavy object and a light object are dropped from rest at the same time .If air resistance is negligible , the heavier object will reach the ground :
1)before the lighter one
2) at the same time as the ligher object
3) after the lighter object
4) at the same time as the lighter object but will experience greater acceleration
Hoping to get an answer as soos as possibleIf I have a heavy object and a light object and I drop it from the same height which would hit the ground 1st?
(2)
The mass of an object has no influence on the acceleration imparted on it by a uniform gravity field.
If the two objects are geometrically similar, they'd experience the same frictional drag on them during their fall.
In fact, on Apollo 15, a moon-walking astronaut dropped a hammer and a falcon feather from the same height at the same time. In the vacuum of space (no air on the moon) both hit the lunar dust at the same time. It was just a PR stunt, but it is a vivid illustration to the truth of the physics behind it.If I have a heavy object and a light object and I drop it from the same height which would hit the ground 1st?
2
no. 2
1)before the lighter one
2) at the same time as the ligher object
3) after the lighter object
4) at the same time as the lighter object but will experience greater acceleration
Hoping to get an answer as soos as possibleIf I have a heavy object and a light object and I drop it from the same height which would hit the ground 1st?
(2)
The mass of an object has no influence on the acceleration imparted on it by a uniform gravity field.
If the two objects are geometrically similar, they'd experience the same frictional drag on them during their fall.
In fact, on Apollo 15, a moon-walking astronaut dropped a hammer and a falcon feather from the same height at the same time. In the vacuum of space (no air on the moon) both hit the lunar dust at the same time. It was just a PR stunt, but it is a vivid illustration to the truth of the physics behind it.If I have a heavy object and a light object and I drop it from the same height which would hit the ground 1st?
2
no. 2
Does anyone know the name of this object?
Somehow I cannot remember the name of this thing: It's a cylinder with mirrors %26amp; colorful beads inside, and when you peek through the hole the reflection of the beads create beautiful optical illusions.Does anyone know the name of this object?
kaleidoscopeDoes anyone know the name of this object?
kaleidoscope
http://www.esupply.co.uk/images/kaleidos鈥?/a>
Kaleidoscope?
yea its called a kaleidoscope
kaleidoscope - Pure magic in a tube.....I love them!
kaleidoscopeDoes anyone know the name of this object?
kaleidoscope
http://www.esupply.co.uk/images/kaleidos鈥?/a>
Kaleidoscope?
yea its called a kaleidoscope
kaleidoscope - Pure magic in a tube.....I love them!
Can the gravitational potential energy of an object ever be negative? ?
Please explain how.Can the gravitational potential energy of an object ever be negative? ?
Within Newtonian mechanics, gravity is described by a central conservative force field of the form: -
F = -dV/dr
The negative sign indicates that the force of gravity is an attractive one - towards the centre! Thus, the negative sign is a 'sign convention'!!!
Thus, Newton found the equation of universal gravitational attraction to be: -
F(r) = -G.m.M/r虏
Hence, by integration we can find the gravitational potential at a point V(r) as: -
V(r) = -G.m.M/r
It can also be shown that for a uniform sphere of mass 'M' and radius 'R', that at a distance 'r', from the centre, the potential V(r) is given by: -
V(r) = -G.m.M.(3.R虏 - r虏)/(2.R鲁)
Thus, the gravitational potential energy always has a negative sign within Newtonian theory and has a maximum value at the centre of a gravitating sphere of mass 'M' (see Reference 1).
However, Newton has not had the last 'word' upon gravitational theory!
After publishing his General Theory of Relativity in 1915, Einstein explored the consequences of his gravitational field equation.
G = 8蟺T
In a paper titled 'Kosmologische Betrachtungen zur allgemeinen Relativitatsctheorie' (Cosmological Considerations on the General Theory of Relativity) published in 1917, Einstein found that to model a steady state universe, which was the then favoured model, he had to bastardise his field equation into the parameterised form: -
G(渭谓) - 位g(渭谓) = -魏(T(渭谓) - 陆g(渭谓)T)
Where the constant(?) '位' is the cosmological constant or a 'fudge factor' that Einstein introduced to make his field equation work for a steady state universe. When Edwin Hubble discovered, in 1925, that the universe was expanding, Einstein commented that this constant was the greatest blunder of his life. It seems that Einstein ignored the implications, implicit, within his field equation that the universe is expanding (see Reference 2) !
However, a modern interpretation of this constant is that it represents a repulsive aspect to the gravitational force. The repulse force could be viewed as anti-gravity!
Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia comments, 'In 1998, observations of type Ia supernovae (';one-A';) by the Supernova Cosmology Project at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and the High-z Supernova Search Team suggested that the expansion of the universe is accelerating'. this acceleration is attributed to the presence of 'dark energy'. However, Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia further comments, 'The simplest explanation for dark energy is that it is simply the ';cost of having space';: that is, a volume of space has some intrinsic, fundamental energy. This is the cosmological constant, sometimes called Lambda (hence Lambda-CDM model) after the Greek letter 位, the symbol used to mathematically represent this quantity. Since energy and mass are related by E = mc虏, Einstein's theory of general relativity predicts that it will have a gravitational effect. It is sometimes called a vacuum energy because it is the energy density of empty vacuum.....The cosmological constant has negative pressure equal to its energy density and so causes the expansion of the universe to accelerate.'
By Newtonian analogy, a repulsive form of gravity must have a positive potential value!
I hope this is of some help!Can the gravitational potential energy of an object ever be negative? ?
Whether it is positive or negative depends upon what is taken as reference point. Consider a stone of mass m on earth of mass M. Assume that there is nothing else in the world. Where ever I take it, there will be some finite force acting on it due to earth towards its centre. I will have to do some work for taking it to infinite distance or very large distance from earth. If that hypotetical point is taken as zero for potential energy. Then it is obvious that the object will lose potential energy as it comes to any distance from earth, say r. The objectwill gain kineic energy equal to the loss of potential energy. Because that point is taken as zero the potential energy of the stone at distance r will be -GMm/r.
Within Newtonian mechanics, gravity is described by a central conservative force field of the form: -
F = -dV/dr
The negative sign indicates that the force of gravity is an attractive one - towards the centre! Thus, the negative sign is a 'sign convention'!!!
Thus, Newton found the equation of universal gravitational attraction to be: -
F(r) = -G.m.M/r虏
Hence, by integration we can find the gravitational potential at a point V(r) as: -
V(r) = -G.m.M/r
It can also be shown that for a uniform sphere of mass 'M' and radius 'R', that at a distance 'r', from the centre, the potential V(r) is given by: -
V(r) = -G.m.M.(3.R虏 - r虏)/(2.R鲁)
Thus, the gravitational potential energy always has a negative sign within Newtonian theory and has a maximum value at the centre of a gravitating sphere of mass 'M' (see Reference 1).
However, Newton has not had the last 'word' upon gravitational theory!
After publishing his General Theory of Relativity in 1915, Einstein explored the consequences of his gravitational field equation.
G = 8蟺T
In a paper titled 'Kosmologische Betrachtungen zur allgemeinen Relativitatsctheorie' (Cosmological Considerations on the General Theory of Relativity) published in 1917, Einstein found that to model a steady state universe, which was the then favoured model, he had to bastardise his field equation into the parameterised form: -
G(渭谓) - 位g(渭谓) = -魏(T(渭谓) - 陆g(渭谓)T)
Where the constant(?) '位' is the cosmological constant or a 'fudge factor' that Einstein introduced to make his field equation work for a steady state universe. When Edwin Hubble discovered, in 1925, that the universe was expanding, Einstein commented that this constant was the greatest blunder of his life. It seems that Einstein ignored the implications, implicit, within his field equation that the universe is expanding (see Reference 2) !
However, a modern interpretation of this constant is that it represents a repulsive aspect to the gravitational force. The repulse force could be viewed as anti-gravity!
Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia comments, 'In 1998, observations of type Ia supernovae (';one-A';) by the Supernova Cosmology Project at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and the High-z Supernova Search Team suggested that the expansion of the universe is accelerating'. this acceleration is attributed to the presence of 'dark energy'. However, Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia further comments, 'The simplest explanation for dark energy is that it is simply the ';cost of having space';: that is, a volume of space has some intrinsic, fundamental energy. This is the cosmological constant, sometimes called Lambda (hence Lambda-CDM model) after the Greek letter 位, the symbol used to mathematically represent this quantity. Since energy and mass are related by E = mc虏, Einstein's theory of general relativity predicts that it will have a gravitational effect. It is sometimes called a vacuum energy because it is the energy density of empty vacuum.....The cosmological constant has negative pressure equal to its energy density and so causes the expansion of the universe to accelerate.'
By Newtonian analogy, a repulsive form of gravity must have a positive potential value!
I hope this is of some help!Can the gravitational potential energy of an object ever be negative? ?
Whether it is positive or negative depends upon what is taken as reference point. Consider a stone of mass m on earth of mass M. Assume that there is nothing else in the world. Where ever I take it, there will be some finite force acting on it due to earth towards its centre. I will have to do some work for taking it to infinite distance or very large distance from earth. If that hypotetical point is taken as zero for potential energy. Then it is obvious that the object will lose potential energy as it comes to any distance from earth, say r. The objectwill gain kineic energy equal to the loss of potential energy. Because that point is taken as zero the potential energy of the stone at distance r will be -GMm/r.
What object do you think is a design classic?!?
For example the BIC pen.
Please be specific ( name and brand of the object )What object do you think is a design classic?!?
How about the wheel? A perfect design...timeless, still in use, a perfect form...never ending.What object do you think is a design classic?!?
I 100% agree with 'Phd.' The Canon T90 is really beautiful and tactile object. I regret trading mine in for a Contax TVS good though it is. My choice of design classic would be the Triumph Bonneville T120 circa 1969.
MY BODY.
The 1966 and 1967 Ford Thunderbirds!
Hackney carriage!! Genius!! Also the red telephone box and the original mini cooper (not the s**t one made by BMW)
Hula hoops - by Whamo
A Chesterfield sofa.
VW Golf mark 1... first hot hatch(or first good hot hatch!!lol)
The etch a sketh by ohio Arts
E type Jag
Still film cameras that are design classics:
1. The Asahi Pentax Spotmatic (';just hold a Pentax'; was a spot-on ad campaign slogan)
2. The Canon T90. Breathtakingly beautful, and with a breadth of functionality (multiple spot metering, flash spot metering) that is rarely equalled even today amonst the autofocus and the digital stables.
3. Moving on to autofocus film cameras, the EOS 1n is simply so good, though understated as an object to hold and admire. It does a vast range of tasks, and is so robust you could drive a nail in with it. More specifically, the EOS 1n RS version with pellicle non-moving mirror and 10 frames per second is a big beast that growls quietly at the top table!acne facial coconut oil
Please be specific ( name and brand of the object )What object do you think is a design classic?!?
How about the wheel? A perfect design...timeless, still in use, a perfect form...never ending.What object do you think is a design classic?!?
I 100% agree with 'Phd.' The Canon T90 is really beautiful and tactile object. I regret trading mine in for a Contax TVS good though it is. My choice of design classic would be the Triumph Bonneville T120 circa 1969.
MY BODY.
The 1966 and 1967 Ford Thunderbirds!
Hackney carriage!! Genius!! Also the red telephone box and the original mini cooper (not the s**t one made by BMW)
Hula hoops - by Whamo
A Chesterfield sofa.
VW Golf mark 1... first hot hatch(or first good hot hatch!!lol)
The etch a sketh by ohio Arts
E type Jag
Still film cameras that are design classics:
1. The Asahi Pentax Spotmatic (';just hold a Pentax'; was a spot-on ad campaign slogan)
2. The Canon T90. Breathtakingly beautful, and with a breadth of functionality (multiple spot metering, flash spot metering) that is rarely equalled even today amonst the autofocus and the digital stables.
3. Moving on to autofocus film cameras, the EOS 1n is simply so good, though understated as an object to hold and admire. It does a vast range of tasks, and is so robust you could drive a nail in with it. More specifically, the EOS 1n RS version with pellicle non-moving mirror and 10 frames per second is a big beast that growls quietly at the top table!
What object can be a parallelogram?
I am doing a geometry project and I need to get a picture of something outside that is a shape of a parallelogramWhat object can be a parallelogram?
get a cardboard box, squash it into a parallelogram, then take a picture of it outside
2 sets of changing junctions on railways are near enough parallelogram
natural occuring parallelograms are really hard to find
but anything that is square is techinically a parallelogram but if you want a parallelogram then it'll be much harderWhat object can be a parallelogram?
technically anything square or rectangular is also a parallelogram ... but let's think of something with only 2 parallel sides.
how about a child's swing? the seat is parallel to the bar at the top, and the other 2 sides are not parallel - making a trapezium.
...and I just thought of a better one: most car windows are rough parallelograms.
A picture frame is one. Another is a book or a piece of computer paper.
As others have said, all squares and rectangles are technically parallelograms.
If you're looking for examples that don't have right angles, there are the diamonds in the Mitsubishi logo, some stair railings (the kind that have a lower bar parallel with the hand rail), and those common pink rubber erasers that are tapered on each end.
Buildings can be parallelograms.
Rectangles and squares are subclasses of parallelograms, so I'm sure you could find plenty of those. Although, I'm having trouble thinking of anything which is a general parallelogram, and not a rectangle.
A parallelogram is a four-sided figure in which opposite sides are parallel. Each side of a parallelogram is also equal in length to its opposite side. The area of a parallelogram is equal to the length of the base times the shortest distance to the opposite side. if you go to this web site you can see pictures of geometry in real life, if you scroll down the page you will see PARALLEOGRAMS on a building.http://library.thinkquest.org/C006354/pi鈥?/a>
get a cardboard box, squash it into a parallelogram, then take a picture of it outside
2 sets of changing junctions on railways are near enough parallelogram
natural occuring parallelograms are really hard to find
but anything that is square is techinically a parallelogram but if you want a parallelogram then it'll be much harderWhat object can be a parallelogram?
technically anything square or rectangular is also a parallelogram ... but let's think of something with only 2 parallel sides.
how about a child's swing? the seat is parallel to the bar at the top, and the other 2 sides are not parallel - making a trapezium.
...and I just thought of a better one: most car windows are rough parallelograms.
A picture frame is one. Another is a book or a piece of computer paper.
As others have said, all squares and rectangles are technically parallelograms.
If you're looking for examples that don't have right angles, there are the diamonds in the Mitsubishi logo, some stair railings (the kind that have a lower bar parallel with the hand rail), and those common pink rubber erasers that are tapered on each end.
Buildings can be parallelograms.
Rectangles and squares are subclasses of parallelograms, so I'm sure you could find plenty of those. Although, I'm having trouble thinking of anything which is a general parallelogram, and not a rectangle.
A parallelogram is a four-sided figure in which opposite sides are parallel. Each side of a parallelogram is also equal in length to its opposite side. The area of a parallelogram is equal to the length of the base times the shortest distance to the opposite side. if you go to this web site you can see pictures of geometry in real life, if you scroll down the page you will see PARALLEOGRAMS on a building.http://library.thinkquest.org/C006354/pi鈥?/a>
An object has a uniform acceleration a, after a time t, its final velocity is v?
how would i sketch a graph of velocity against time for this object, using the info provided. Please help, thanks.An object has a uniform acceleration a, after a time t, its final velocity is v?
if the object has uniform acceleration, then the object's velocity increases at a uniform rate.
therefore the line will be diagonal (positive). like this ';/';
x-axis is ';t'; and y-axis is ';v';.
at time t (mark it anywhere on the x-axis), draw a vertical line until u reach the diagonal line. then from there, draw a horizontal line to the y-axis, mark that v.
hope tht helpsAn object has a uniform acceleration a, after a time t, its final velocity is v?
The equation is v = u + at
Mark on an x-y coorinate system (page) the value of 'u' on the y axis - call it OP. The origin being O. Call the y-axis 'Velocity'.
Mark on the x axis the values of 't' - better still call it the t-axis and write 'Time' under it.
Through P draw a line PQ to the right whose slope is 'a'.
Ensure that units are compatible with each other.
For example u and v should be in say metres per second and t should be in seconds and acceleration should be in metres per second per second.
Chose any point on PQ call it Q'. Drop a perpendicular from Q' onto the t axis and call the point of intersection R', which is a distance of
OR' from the origin.
The length of Q'R' gives the velocity at the time t = OR'
V=at+v0,is similar to y=mx+b
if the object has uniform acceleration, then the object's velocity increases at a uniform rate.
therefore the line will be diagonal (positive). like this ';/';
x-axis is ';t'; and y-axis is ';v';.
at time t (mark it anywhere on the x-axis), draw a vertical line until u reach the diagonal line. then from there, draw a horizontal line to the y-axis, mark that v.
hope tht helpsAn object has a uniform acceleration a, after a time t, its final velocity is v?
The equation is v = u + at
Mark on an x-y coorinate system (page) the value of 'u' on the y axis - call it OP. The origin being O. Call the y-axis 'Velocity'.
Mark on the x axis the values of 't' - better still call it the t-axis and write 'Time' under it.
Through P draw a line PQ to the right whose slope is 'a'.
Ensure that units are compatible with each other.
For example u and v should be in say metres per second and t should be in seconds and acceleration should be in metres per second per second.
Chose any point on PQ call it Q'. Drop a perpendicular from Q' onto the t axis and call the point of intersection R', which is a distance of
OR' from the origin.
The length of Q'R' gives the velocity at the time t = OR'
V=at+v0,is similar to y=mx+b
Do you know how i can convert pressure or force excerted on an object to electricty?
could you please tell me the method as well as equipment and if possible your referenceDo you know how i can convert pressure or force excerted on an object to electricty?
this is a strange ability of some materials called piezoelectric crystals (quarz or ceramics for example).
if you apply some force to them will generate electricity and the other way round,the electricity is converted to deformation of the crystal.this method is applied in eco tomography.for reference you could read biophysic book .
I found this for you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piezoelectr鈥?/a>Do you know how i can convert pressure or force excerted on an object to electricty?
Piezoelectric is the word to use in an internet search.
Examples of the effect:
1. winter green lifesavers; bite one in front of a mirror in the dark
2. the igniter on a gas stove; a hammer in the igniter hits a ceramic that triggers the spark
this is a strange ability of some materials called piezoelectric crystals (quarz or ceramics for example).
if you apply some force to them will generate electricity and the other way round,the electricity is converted to deformation of the crystal.this method is applied in eco tomography.for reference you could read biophysic book .
I found this for you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piezoelectr鈥?/a>Do you know how i can convert pressure or force excerted on an object to electricty?
Piezoelectric is the word to use in an internet search.
Examples of the effect:
1. winter green lifesavers; bite one in front of a mirror in the dark
2. the igniter on a gas stove; a hammer in the igniter hits a ceramic that triggers the spark
The distance that a free falling object falls is directly proportional to the square of the time it falls.?
If an object fell 81 feet in 4 seconds, how far will it have fallen by the end of 7 seconds?The distance that a free falling object falls is directly proportional to the square of the time it falls.?
Distance that it will have fallen by the end of 7 seconds.
= u*t+0.5*at^2
= [0*t+0.5*10*(7^2)] feet
= 245 feet
This means it will travels an additional distance of (245-81)feet = 164 feet between 4 seconds and 7 seconds.The distance that a free falling object falls is directly proportional to the square of the time it falls.?
Sure, at the outset you need to select any various seconds
Distance that it will have fallen by the end of 7 seconds.
= u*t+0.5*at^2
= [0*t+0.5*10*(7^2)] feet
= 245 feet
This means it will travels an additional distance of (245-81)feet = 164 feet between 4 seconds and 7 seconds.The distance that a free falling object falls is directly proportional to the square of the time it falls.?
Sure, at the outset you need to select any various seconds
What is the weight of an object that has a mass of 3kg?
Like everyone told you , it depends on gravitational constant. At sea level it is 9.81 m/s^2 , so the object weighs 3 kg. If you take that same object and measure it on the north pole or on top of Mt Everest, it will be different because the gravity on Mt Everest is slightly less than at sea level so say the 3 kg mass might only weigh 2.95 kg or so.What is the weight of an object that has a mass of 3kg?
The weight of an object is the force with which the earth pulls it towards itself. Thus, the weight is = mg where g is the acceleration due to gravity = 9.8 ms^-2.
= 3 * 9.8 newton.What is the weight of an object that has a mass of 3kg?
Weight = Mass * Gravity acceleration = 3kg* 9.8m/s^2= 29.4N
W = m x g
=%26gt;W = 3 x 9.8 = 29.4 Newton
29.4 Newtons
the mass times what ever the strength of the gravity of the planet you are on is
= 3 kg * 9.8 m/s^2.
:D
The weight of an object is the force with which the earth pulls it towards itself. Thus, the weight is = mg where g is the acceleration due to gravity = 9.8 ms^-2.
= 3 * 9.8 newton.What is the weight of an object that has a mass of 3kg?
Weight = Mass * Gravity acceleration = 3kg* 9.8m/s^2= 29.4N
W = m x g
=%26gt;W = 3 x 9.8 = 29.4 Newton
29.4 Newtons
the mass times what ever the strength of the gravity of the planet you are on is
= 3 kg * 9.8 m/s^2.
:D
Is there a way to channel energy that the human body has stored into a mass or some type of flashing object?
into a ';mass'; yes... they call that fat
flashing object? science would say no
parts of the body? they would call that chi and look at buddhist monks the shaolinIs there a way to channel energy that the human body has stored into a mass or some type of flashing object?
Try ATP. That seems to work well for energy storage in us.acne facial coconut oil
flashing object? science would say no
parts of the body? they would call that chi and look at buddhist monks the shaolinIs there a way to channel energy that the human body has stored into a mass or some type of flashing object?
Try ATP. That seems to work well for energy storage in us.
Examine how a value of an object or a person could be associated with elements connected to time?
Usually, expressways and roads. Will raise the value of land. Due, to the possible growth. To the area. Sure, this was the reason the value went down?Examine how a value of an object or a person could be associated with elements connected to time?
A sports star that has only so many years to play on a team. An innovative CEO that will be retiring leaves the company with future leadership uncertainty.
A sports star that has only so many years to play on a team. An innovative CEO that will be retiring leaves the company with future leadership uncertainty.
Describe the difference between object oriented programming and non-object oriented programming?
About 25 years.
(Do your homework yerself...)Describe the difference between object oriented programming and non-object oriented programming?
In an Object Oriented Language, the program can be described as a set of interactions between any number of objects. For instance, the window in which graphics and animation appears is an object which must be given a graphics object to display. Objects have properties which describe them and methods which change the properties of themselves or other objects.
In a non-object oriented language, the program is described by a main body of code which calls subroutines based on user input and internal evaluations of variables.
(Do your homework yerself...)Describe the difference between object oriented programming and non-object oriented programming?
In an Object Oriented Language, the program can be described as a set of interactions between any number of objects. For instance, the window in which graphics and animation appears is an object which must be given a graphics object to display. Objects have properties which describe them and methods which change the properties of themselves or other objects.
In a non-object oriented language, the program is described by a main body of code which calls subroutines based on user input and internal evaluations of variables.
What is the name given to change in speed or direction of an object?
science questionWhat is the name given to change in speed or direction of an object?
. Acceleration and Vector?What is the name given to change in speed or direction of an object?
acceleration!
velocity is rate of change of displacement!
direction??? I have no idea!
change in speed?
acceleration, deceleration.
change in direction?
vector.
It is known as velocity.It is a vector quantity
SI unit=displacement /time taken.
. Acceleration and Vector?What is the name given to change in speed or direction of an object?
acceleration!
velocity is rate of change of displacement!
direction??? I have no idea!
change in speed?
acceleration, deceleration.
change in direction?
vector.
It is known as velocity.It is a vector quantity
SI unit=displacement /time taken.
What is the weight of an object with a mass of 10kg?
98NWhat is the weight of an object with a mass of 10kg?
WEIGHT is affected by gravity while MASS isnt. The formula for weight is WEIGHT=mg, with m being MASS and g for FREE FALL ACCELERATION, which for the earth is 9.81. There fore it is 98.1 Newton.
WEIGHT is affected by gravity while MASS isnt. The formula for weight is WEIGHT=mg, with m being MASS and g for FREE FALL ACCELERATION, which for the earth is 9.81. There fore it is 98.1 Newton.
What is the fastest man propelled object.?
The use of a bat, club etc... is allowed. No magnets, engines, solar power etc... allowed.
for instance a tennis serve, hitting a baseball, kicking a football etc...What is the fastest man propelled object.?
Your question is too vague
You will have to do some digging and reading here
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en%26amp;q=What鈥?/a>
I was going to say a rifle bullet, but if the whip goes beyond mach1 then the bullet is nowhere near!
But! I did make a fire once, and the flame front went more than 1000 meter per second! That was pretty fast. If my car could move like that, hmmmm
Hope this properly answers your question
Hope this properly answers your questionWhat is the fastest man propelled object.?
Don't know for sure.. but I would say the tip of a whip...
The crack of a whip is the break in the sound barrier.. on the ground the speed of sound is 769mph
Some whips can even travel faster than that... but I don't know if this is what you are looking for.. you might be looking for something like a projectile...
Well, an astronaut lost a set of tools during the latest Hubble Space Telescope mission. Assuming he launched it with less than an inch/second velocity it's still traveling somewhere around 24,000miles per hour through space.
Your examples are too restricted, IMO. What about cracking a whip? The cracking sound comes from the tip of the whip briefly breaking the sound barrier.
I think it's throwing a baseball
I would say golf club to balll,, Or if sling shot is an option,,, definately the sling shot
I think sports-wise it's jai alai. The speed of the ball approaches 200 mph.
Jai Alai is the fastest ball sport. They have speeds up to 188 mph...so yeah
i would guess a whip, because it breaks the sound barrier
for instance a tennis serve, hitting a baseball, kicking a football etc...What is the fastest man propelled object.?
Your question is too vague
You will have to do some digging and reading here
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en%26amp;q=What鈥?/a>
I was going to say a rifle bullet, but if the whip goes beyond mach1 then the bullet is nowhere near!
But! I did make a fire once, and the flame front went more than 1000 meter per second! That was pretty fast. If my car could move like that, hmmmm
Hope this properly answers your question
Hope this properly answers your questionWhat is the fastest man propelled object.?
Don't know for sure.. but I would say the tip of a whip...
The crack of a whip is the break in the sound barrier.. on the ground the speed of sound is 769mph
Some whips can even travel faster than that... but I don't know if this is what you are looking for.. you might be looking for something like a projectile...
Well, an astronaut lost a set of tools during the latest Hubble Space Telescope mission. Assuming he launched it with less than an inch/second velocity it's still traveling somewhere around 24,000miles per hour through space.
Your examples are too restricted, IMO. What about cracking a whip? The cracking sound comes from the tip of the whip briefly breaking the sound barrier.
I think it's throwing a baseball
I would say golf club to balll,, Or if sling shot is an option,,, definately the sling shot
I think sports-wise it's jai alai. The speed of the ball approaches 200 mph.
Jai Alai is the fastest ball sport. They have speeds up to 188 mph...so yeah
i would guess a whip, because it breaks the sound barrier
What is the weight of an object that has a mass of 3kg?
W=mg=3 kg(9.8 m/s^2)=29.4 Nacne facial coconut oil
The kinetic energy of a moving object that was accelerated under ideal comditions for a resting position is ?
a) equal to the work done by friction on the object
b)unrelated to the work done on the object
c) equal to the work done on the object
d) greater than the work done on the objectThe kinetic energy of a moving object that was accelerated under ideal comditions for a resting position is ?
The work-energy principle says that the work done on an object equals the change in total energy of the object. So the answer is C, I don't know what the guy above me was thinking. (I assume that ideal conditions means there is no friction)The kinetic energy of a moving object that was accelerated under ideal comditions for a resting position is ?
D
b)unrelated to the work done on the object
c) equal to the work done on the object
d) greater than the work done on the objectThe kinetic energy of a moving object that was accelerated under ideal comditions for a resting position is ?
The work-energy principle says that the work done on an object equals the change in total energy of the object. So the answer is C, I don't know what the guy above me was thinking. (I assume that ideal conditions means there is no friction)The kinetic energy of a moving object that was accelerated under ideal comditions for a resting position is ?
D
Every time I try to download anything on my dads computer it says object has been blocked how do I fix this?
My dad doesnt have any content software and mozilla says object has been blocked internet explorer cant load the page. I mean I cant even download flash player or windows media player. This is horrible how do I unblock it. Is there a chance my dads norton antyvirus or zone alarm might be doing this? If so how do I fix it. If not what do I do?Every time I try to download anything on my dads computer it says object has been blocked how do I fix this?
he's blocking it for a reason...talk to your dad and tell him what you want to download and if he agrees then he can help you to do it!Every time I try to download anything on my dads computer it says object has been blocked how do I fix this?
If it's your dad's machine, I suggest you NOT try to subvert any protection he's put in place. That would be like ripping out the ignition switch of his car because he won't give you the keys.
If you want to take a chance messing up someone's computer, possibly to the point of losing all the data and software on it, confine the adventure to your own.
I think you should ask your father if he could do it if not then someone had to change the configuration in the security area.
he's blocking it for a reason...talk to your dad and tell him what you want to download and if he agrees then he can help you to do it!Every time I try to download anything on my dads computer it says object has been blocked how do I fix this?
If it's your dad's machine, I suggest you NOT try to subvert any protection he's put in place. That would be like ripping out the ignition switch of his car because he won't give you the keys.
If you want to take a chance messing up someone's computer, possibly to the point of losing all the data and software on it, confine the adventure to your own.
I think you should ask your father if he could do it if not then someone had to change the configuration in the security area.
From the velocity of an object find the displacement from a given starting point.?
The velocity is V = 2 cos(t) + 3 sin(t)
Find the displacement from the starting point at:
1) 蟺/2
2) 蟺
3) 2蟺
please help (with workings) thank you very much!From the velocity of an object find the displacement from a given starting point.?
Let s(t) be the displacement from starting point. Then,
s(t) = Integral(0 to t)[Vdt] = Integral(0 to t)[{2 cos(t) + 3 sin(t)}dt] or
= [2sin (t)],0 to t - 3cos(t)], o to t or
= 2sin (t) - [1-3 cos(t)] = 2 sin(t) + 3 cos(t) -1. So answers are:
1) 2+0-1 = 1; 2) 0-3-1 = -4; 3) 0+3-1 = 2From the velocity of an object find the displacement from a given starting point.?
v=2cos(t)+3sin(t)
we know s=integral of vdt from 0 to t
i think i can skip the integration part
when we integrate we get s=2sin(t)-3cos(t)
since it is displacement, a vector quantity we can use the resulting function for displacement for finding displacement
if it had been distance it would have to be i think modulus of v integrated w.r.t to time
just putting in values
1)2*1-3*0=2
2)2*0-3*(-1)=3
3)2*0-3*1= -3 means a displacement in opp. direction when considered wrt to earlier 2 displacements
Find the displacement from the starting point at:
1) 蟺/2
2) 蟺
3) 2蟺
please help (with workings) thank you very much!From the velocity of an object find the displacement from a given starting point.?
Let s(t) be the displacement from starting point. Then,
s(t) = Integral(0 to t)[Vdt] = Integral(0 to t)[{2 cos(t) + 3 sin(t)}dt] or
= [2sin (t)],0 to t - 3cos(t)], o to t or
= 2sin (t) - [1-3 cos(t)] = 2 sin(t) + 3 cos(t) -1. So answers are:
1) 2+0-1 = 1; 2) 0-3-1 = -4; 3) 0+3-1 = 2From the velocity of an object find the displacement from a given starting point.?
v=2cos(t)+3sin(t)
we know s=integral of vdt from 0 to t
i think i can skip the integration part
when we integrate we get s=2sin(t)-3cos(t)
since it is displacement, a vector quantity we can use the resulting function for displacement for finding displacement
if it had been distance it would have to be i think modulus of v integrated w.r.t to time
just putting in values
1)2*1-3*0=2
2)2*0-3*(-1)=3
3)2*0-3*1= -3 means a displacement in opp. direction when considered wrt to earlier 2 displacements
What law states that an unbalanced force acting on an object equals the object's mass times it's accerleration
F = m a . Is the 2掳 Newton's law.
Hello...What is the direct object in the following sentence? We were waiting in line for three hour?
I am pretty struggle with that. I have to pick one of those..
answers is line, waiting, hour, or no direct object in that sentence.Hello...What is the direct object in the following sentence? We were waiting in line for three hour?
It is not line because line is in a prepositional phrase. Hour is also in a prepositional phrase. It would either be waiting or no direct object.
answers is line, waiting, hour, or no direct object in that sentence.Hello...What is the direct object in the following sentence? We were waiting in line for three hour?
It is not line because line is in a prepositional phrase. Hour is also in a prepositional phrase. It would either be waiting or no direct object.
What is the most valuable object on earth?
I would call it more of a resource than an object, but I would have to say water. We couldn't live without it.What is the most valuable object on earth?
the rick james bible Report Abuse
What is the most valuable object on earth?
Human life among living beings is considered most valuable.
For a youngman the most valuable object on earth seems to be a youthful woman . For young women it is their jewellery .
For sustenance of lving beings, the most valuable objects are
water, earth, air,sunrays,...
Value lies in wanting. If we all want to have diamonds then diamonds become valuable and if we collectively decide to not want then anymore they are worthless. Imagine coal in the 19th century, petroleum in the 20th century and IT in the 21st century make the most valuable corporations. It is because of what we want.
But speaking spiritually, the soul is the most precious of them all.
HOLE. everything in this world comes and rely to holes...think about it!!!!!!!
The King James Bible
human beings?
in this earth:- air, water, ozone(O3) layer,...............(many more things are valuable which are useful to leave here)...............
humans. with out humans there would no internet.acne facial coconut oil
the rick james bible Report Abuse
What is the most valuable object on earth?
Human life among living beings is considered most valuable.
For a youngman the most valuable object on earth seems to be a youthful woman . For young women it is their jewellery .
For sustenance of lving beings, the most valuable objects are
water, earth, air,sunrays,...
Value lies in wanting. If we all want to have diamonds then diamonds become valuable and if we collectively decide to not want then anymore they are worthless. Imagine coal in the 19th century, petroleum in the 20th century and IT in the 21st century make the most valuable corporations. It is because of what we want.
But speaking spiritually, the soul is the most precious of them all.
HOLE. everything in this world comes and rely to holes...think about it!!!!!!!
The King James Bible
human beings?
in this earth:- air, water, ozone(O3) layer,...............(many more things are valuable which are useful to leave here)...............
humans. with out humans there would no internet.
What is the most valuable OBJECT in the White House?
(People not included)What is the most valuable OBJECT in the White House?
the football
it is a briefcase which allows the president to launch a nuclear strike should the US be attacked when he is away, that is why wherever he goes you see a soldier following him with a briefcase, it is nicknamed the football.What is the most valuable OBJECT in the White House?
The secret of who outed Valerie Plame.
The bed president Lincoln slept in(?)
The House
the football
it is a briefcase which allows the president to launch a nuclear strike should the US be attacked when he is away, that is why wherever he goes you see a soldier following him with a briefcase, it is nicknamed the football.What is the most valuable OBJECT in the White House?
The secret of who outed Valerie Plame.
The bed president Lincoln slept in(?)
The House
Given the weight of an object and the height from which it is dropped, can I calculate the impact velocity.?
I assume no air friction.
I am trying to understand impact velocity and force......Given the weight of an object and the height from which it is dropped, can I calculate the impact velocity.?
The weight doesn't matter. Since we're neglecting air resistance, all objects fall the same. You can just use conservation of energy to calculate the velocity.
Initial potential energy = mgh
=
Final kinetic energy = 1/2 mv^2
Solve for velocity (as promised, masses cancel):
v = sqrt (2gh)
So if you know height, and you know the acceleration due to gravity (9.8 m/s^2 at earth's surface), you can plugnchug to get the speed at impact.Given the weight of an object and the height from which it is dropped, can I calculate the impact velocity.?
The weight makes no difference. g equals 32 feet per second per second. If you drop an object from 1000 feet high, Divide 1000 by 16, this is the distance the object will fall in the first second, you get 62.5. Find the square root of this number, it is 7.90, this is the time, in seconds that the object will fall. Multiply this by 32, you get 252,98, this is the velocity in feet per second that the object hits the ground. You can easily convert this into MPH by dividing 252,98 by 88, the distance in feet that an object travels in one second if it is moving at 60MPH, you get 2,874, multiply this by 60 and you get 172.5 MPH.
Potential Energy (PE) = mgh = Mass(kg) x 9.81m/s虏 x h (m)
This will give you PE in Joules (J).
As Energy cannot be created or destroyed, on falling and accelerating, the PE converts to Kinetic Energy (KE).
(Same as PE in Joules).
The impact velocity (v) will be, v = 鈭?KE/m.
(i.e. The square root of (2 x Ke) 梅 mass (kg).
The answer will be in metres per second (m/s)
something of mass 10Newtons falls to earth a speed of 10m/s 1N = 100grams
then you have the distance travelled and the speed of it at impact
I am trying to understand impact velocity and force......Given the weight of an object and the height from which it is dropped, can I calculate the impact velocity.?
The weight doesn't matter. Since we're neglecting air resistance, all objects fall the same. You can just use conservation of energy to calculate the velocity.
Initial potential energy = mgh
=
Final kinetic energy = 1/2 mv^2
Solve for velocity (as promised, masses cancel):
v = sqrt (2gh)
So if you know height, and you know the acceleration due to gravity (9.8 m/s^2 at earth's surface), you can plugnchug to get the speed at impact.Given the weight of an object and the height from which it is dropped, can I calculate the impact velocity.?
The weight makes no difference. g equals 32 feet per second per second. If you drop an object from 1000 feet high, Divide 1000 by 16, this is the distance the object will fall in the first second, you get 62.5. Find the square root of this number, it is 7.90, this is the time, in seconds that the object will fall. Multiply this by 32, you get 252,98, this is the velocity in feet per second that the object hits the ground. You can easily convert this into MPH by dividing 252,98 by 88, the distance in feet that an object travels in one second if it is moving at 60MPH, you get 2,874, multiply this by 60 and you get 172.5 MPH.
Potential Energy (PE) = mgh = Mass(kg) x 9.81m/s虏 x h (m)
This will give you PE in Joules (J).
As Energy cannot be created or destroyed, on falling and accelerating, the PE converts to Kinetic Energy (KE).
(Same as PE in Joules).
The impact velocity (v) will be, v = 鈭?KE/m.
(i.e. The square root of (2 x Ke) 梅 mass (kg).
The answer will be in metres per second (m/s)
something of mass 10Newtons falls to earth a speed of 10m/s 1N = 100grams
then you have the distance travelled and the speed of it at impact
The average accelaration of an object is defined to be the what?
distance it travels divided by the time it takes
change in its velocity divided by the time it takes
change in its speed divided by the time it takes
average of the accelaration during the two halves of the tripThe average accelaration of an object is defined to be the what?
Average acceleration is equal to the change in velocity divided by the time, so your second answer.
change in its velocity divided by the time it takes
change in its speed divided by the time it takes
average of the accelaration during the two halves of the tripThe average accelaration of an object is defined to be the what?
Average acceleration is equal to the change in velocity divided by the time, so your second answer.
What are three ways an object can be given static electricity?
Rubbing
Using magnets
Placing the object in a circuit
Using magnets
Placing the object in a circuit
Why do Bible-clinging conservatives object to taxation?
According to the New Testament didn't Lord Jesus taught you to give to Obama what is Obama's :
';Show me the money used for paying the tax. They brought him a US dollar and he asked them. Whose image is this? And whose inscription? US President's they replied. Then he said to them. Give to Caesar what is Caesar's';Why do Bible-clinging conservatives object to taxation?
Oh boy... the answers to this ought to be funny.Why do Bible-clinging conservatives object to taxation?
Thanks once more for continuing a stereotype that has negative connotations.
We (conservatives) know that we are going to be expected to pay taxes. This is what citizens do in a free society. Yet, at the same time, there IS a limit to how much is fair to be taxed. If the current administration wishes to tax the population for doing well and prospering, then is that not lowering the incentive to work harder, create and desire to grow a businesss or for industries to then stifle their own growth so that they won't be taxed but so much? If the administration wishes to see further out-sourcing, then by all means, keep upping the tax rate.
But the taxes need to apply to all, even the snobby liberals. NO loopholes, ok?
If you read the lead in to that scene, you'll find that the Sadducee's, or was it Pharisees, anyway, were out to trick him, so they could get him arrested. It's been a long time since I've read the Bible or been around any Bible-clinging conservatives. But for sure Obama and the Caesar's are worlds apart as to the ability to wield power. Obama has zero control over money. He's just a spokesperson.
This ';Bible-Clinging Conservative'; doesn't object to taxation.... just the rate at which we are taxed and for what.... I mean seriously we might as well be paying for Nero's palace the way we are going... As long as taxes are going to infrastructure, parks, education, law enforcement and state/national defense I have no problem with taxes because they go to the common good.... But why the hell do I have a percentage of my pay check taken out for things I will never even think about using let alone use?
The really hilarious thing about right wingers is that they ';hate taxes'; - but they get to pay the taxes for the HUGE Super Rich - like Chase Bank which doesn't pay taxes. So toothless, trailer dwelling, religious fanatic republican types get to pay the taxes for these totally worthless rich guys! And that's on top of the Bush give-aways to the rich.
And the funniest part is that the right wingers see this as ';freedom';.
Selling the right wing dolts of America on the idea that they 'don't have to pay taxes' is one of the greatest phony sales jobs the republicans ever did.
Jesus didn't instruct anyone to stop objecting. He instructed them to pay (as opposed to the alternative, not paying, which is what they were hoping to hear). It's interesting because the Jews were taught that it was not proper to pay tribute, that all tribute belonged to the temple. Jesus instructed them to pay both Caesar's and the temple's tribute.
Jim, http://www.bible-reviews.com
The reason is because even though modern American conservatives try to tie their beliefs and the Bible together, the link actually doesn't exist. If you look at what Jesus (not Christianity) taught, you will see that he was everything bible-clinging conservatives hate- a lover of peace, tolerance and equality, someone who was against wealth being concentrated in a handful of individuals, and, above all else, someone who was completely against those who use religion and God to put others down.
Conservatives in America want a ';traditional'; society with a powerful military- that means no gays, no abortions, no drugs, no welfare, but a big military and a strong police force. Conservatives want taxation and a bigger government just as much as liberals, just they want the taxes to go to different places. The US's military budget makes up 50% of the entire worlds (we spend close to $500,000,000,000 a year on military) and yet they still have the audacity to shout for lower taxes- ha!
It's not objections to taxation. We agree with our founding fathers and understand that ';Government is at its best a necessary evil, and at its worst an insufferable one.'; We oppose unnecessary, unfair, outrageous taxation without discussion or reason. Taxation without representation is a motto that has full right to come back into play with these elected officials acting in their own best interests and political favors instead of in the best or even common interest of those they were elected to represent.
Where did you get the idea that we are against taxation? We are against PUNITIVE taxation... Taxation that is only there because some are ';able to afford it';.. also the fact that those that didn't pay any tax got a ';tax rebate'; How does one qualify for a rebate they did not pay anything for?
“Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.” So Jesus said, ';Pay your taxes and quit your whining.';
';There's only one thing a conservative hates more than fair taxation. And that's a fair fight.';
I don't object to taxation, it is excessive taxation due to excessive spending that I object too, you should be upset about it too. We need to stop supporting our parties more than we do the good of America, and our fellow Americans.
i think the point is if whoever wants this world badly enough, let them have it. we have something better waiting anyway.
and it is over taxation that is the problem, not taxation.
Bible-clinging. you sound like a bigot.
You miss the point of that passage entirely. It is ment to say that Caesar will be judged by God for his greed. In other words Caesar will get punished in the end
Long live President Caesar!
What do you think we left England for. We are being over taxed now and it will get worse. We do have to pay bills other than to the tax man. Wake up.
I havent read the bible since I was a kid and I am conservative.
F you and your pussy cant take care of yourself attitude.
We should repeal the 16th Amendment.
Taxes should be up to each state, not on the federal level.
But, I do appreciate your humor.
We object to over taxation and unfair taxation!
I have NO IDEA....
They would be the FIRST to PROCLAIM to be ';Hard Working Tax Payers';!!! To prove how ';American'; they are.
YET they are the FIRST to COMPLAIN about taxes.
Sounds like you are trying to kill two birds with on stone. Christan and conservatives.
Nice fiction there!
Plus, it's not Obama's money!
For that matter why do you oppose it?
Tax money is being foolishly spent. That is what I object to
The problem is, our money is not Obama's .
you work for free, do ya???
I'm conservative and I'd do my damndest to cut Caesar's eff'n arm hand off for trying to take the proceeds of my labor.
So screw the Bible and Caesar at the same time.
Pigeonhole that.
';Show me the money used for paying the tax. They brought him a US dollar and he asked them. Whose image is this? And whose inscription? US President's they replied. Then he said to them. Give to Caesar what is Caesar's';Why do Bible-clinging conservatives object to taxation?
Oh boy... the answers to this ought to be funny.Why do Bible-clinging conservatives object to taxation?
Thanks once more for continuing a stereotype that has negative connotations.
We (conservatives) know that we are going to be expected to pay taxes. This is what citizens do in a free society. Yet, at the same time, there IS a limit to how much is fair to be taxed. If the current administration wishes to tax the population for doing well and prospering, then is that not lowering the incentive to work harder, create and desire to grow a businesss or for industries to then stifle their own growth so that they won't be taxed but so much? If the administration wishes to see further out-sourcing, then by all means, keep upping the tax rate.
But the taxes need to apply to all, even the snobby liberals. NO loopholes, ok?
If you read the lead in to that scene, you'll find that the Sadducee's, or was it Pharisees, anyway, were out to trick him, so they could get him arrested. It's been a long time since I've read the Bible or been around any Bible-clinging conservatives. But for sure Obama and the Caesar's are worlds apart as to the ability to wield power. Obama has zero control over money. He's just a spokesperson.
This ';Bible-Clinging Conservative'; doesn't object to taxation.... just the rate at which we are taxed and for what.... I mean seriously we might as well be paying for Nero's palace the way we are going... As long as taxes are going to infrastructure, parks, education, law enforcement and state/national defense I have no problem with taxes because they go to the common good.... But why the hell do I have a percentage of my pay check taken out for things I will never even think about using let alone use?
The really hilarious thing about right wingers is that they ';hate taxes'; - but they get to pay the taxes for the HUGE Super Rich - like Chase Bank which doesn't pay taxes. So toothless, trailer dwelling, religious fanatic republican types get to pay the taxes for these totally worthless rich guys! And that's on top of the Bush give-aways to the rich.
And the funniest part is that the right wingers see this as ';freedom';.
Selling the right wing dolts of America on the idea that they 'don't have to pay taxes' is one of the greatest phony sales jobs the republicans ever did.
Jesus didn't instruct anyone to stop objecting. He instructed them to pay (as opposed to the alternative, not paying, which is what they were hoping to hear). It's interesting because the Jews were taught that it was not proper to pay tribute, that all tribute belonged to the temple. Jesus instructed them to pay both Caesar's and the temple's tribute.
Jim, http://www.bible-reviews.com
The reason is because even though modern American conservatives try to tie their beliefs and the Bible together, the link actually doesn't exist. If you look at what Jesus (not Christianity) taught, you will see that he was everything bible-clinging conservatives hate- a lover of peace, tolerance and equality, someone who was against wealth being concentrated in a handful of individuals, and, above all else, someone who was completely against those who use religion and God to put others down.
Conservatives in America want a ';traditional'; society with a powerful military- that means no gays, no abortions, no drugs, no welfare, but a big military and a strong police force. Conservatives want taxation and a bigger government just as much as liberals, just they want the taxes to go to different places. The US's military budget makes up 50% of the entire worlds (we spend close to $500,000,000,000 a year on military) and yet they still have the audacity to shout for lower taxes- ha!
It's not objections to taxation. We agree with our founding fathers and understand that ';Government is at its best a necessary evil, and at its worst an insufferable one.'; We oppose unnecessary, unfair, outrageous taxation without discussion or reason. Taxation without representation is a motto that has full right to come back into play with these elected officials acting in their own best interests and political favors instead of in the best or even common interest of those they were elected to represent.
Where did you get the idea that we are against taxation? We are against PUNITIVE taxation... Taxation that is only there because some are ';able to afford it';.. also the fact that those that didn't pay any tax got a ';tax rebate'; How does one qualify for a rebate they did not pay anything for?
“Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.” So Jesus said, ';Pay your taxes and quit your whining.';
';There's only one thing a conservative hates more than fair taxation. And that's a fair fight.';
I don't object to taxation, it is excessive taxation due to excessive spending that I object too, you should be upset about it too. We need to stop supporting our parties more than we do the good of America, and our fellow Americans.
i think the point is if whoever wants this world badly enough, let them have it. we have something better waiting anyway.
and it is over taxation that is the problem, not taxation.
Bible-clinging. you sound like a bigot.
You miss the point of that passage entirely. It is ment to say that Caesar will be judged by God for his greed. In other words Caesar will get punished in the end
Long live President Caesar!
What do you think we left England for. We are being over taxed now and it will get worse. We do have to pay bills other than to the tax man. Wake up.
I havent read the bible since I was a kid and I am conservative.
F you and your pussy cant take care of yourself attitude.
We should repeal the 16th Amendment.
Taxes should be up to each state, not on the federal level.
But, I do appreciate your humor.
We object to over taxation and unfair taxation!
I have NO IDEA....
They would be the FIRST to PROCLAIM to be ';Hard Working Tax Payers';!!! To prove how ';American'; they are.
YET they are the FIRST to COMPLAIN about taxes.
Sounds like you are trying to kill two birds with on stone. Christan and conservatives.
Nice fiction there!
Plus, it's not Obama's money!
For that matter why do you oppose it?
Tax money is being foolishly spent. That is what I object to
The problem is, our money is not Obama's .
you work for free, do ya???
I'm conservative and I'd do my damndest to cut Caesar's eff'n arm hand off for trying to take the proceeds of my labor.
So screw the Bible and Caesar at the same time.
Pigeonhole that.
If the velocity of an object is zero, does it mean that the acceleration is zero?
Support your answer with an example.
a. no, and an example would be an object coming to a stop
b. yes, because of the way in which velocity is defined
c. yes, because of the way in which acceleration is defined
d. no, and an example would be an object starting from rest
please and thankyou(:If the velocity of an object is zero, does it mean that the acceleration is zero?
d
If v=0 means that a=0, anything that ever stops would never be able to get started again.acne facial coconut oil
a. no, and an example would be an object coming to a stop
b. yes, because of the way in which velocity is defined
c. yes, because of the way in which acceleration is defined
d. no, and an example would be an object starting from rest
please and thankyou(:If the velocity of an object is zero, does it mean that the acceleration is zero?
d
If v=0 means that a=0, anything that ever stops would never be able to get started again.
Cite 4 examples to show that it is impossible for an object to have acceleration without its speed changing?
you'll excuse me, but,
if you tie a ball on a string and swing it around you in a circle, it is constantly accelerating (changing direction) but maintaining a constant speed.
it would seem that your request is wrong before you start.Cite 4 examples to show that it is impossible for an object to have acceleration without its speed changing?
The definition of acceleration is either first derivative of speed versus time or the variation of speed divided by variation in time.If the change of speed=0, then the acceleration is also zeroCite 4 examples to show that it is impossible for an object to have acceleration without its speed changing?
its impossible to have nonzero acceleration with no velocity vector change, but there can be constant speed. if accel is not zero then velocity is not constant
I think you mean velocity, not speed. As linlyons said above, otherwise your question is fundamentally wrong. Velocity being a vector takes direction into account so that in that example, even though speed is technically constant velocity is not as it is constantly changing direction.
Acceleration by definition is the rate of CHANGE of velocity. If velocity was constant, it would not change...so there would be no acceleration.
if you tie a ball on a string and swing it around you in a circle, it is constantly accelerating (changing direction) but maintaining a constant speed.
it would seem that your request is wrong before you start.Cite 4 examples to show that it is impossible for an object to have acceleration without its speed changing?
The definition of acceleration is either first derivative of speed versus time or the variation of speed divided by variation in time.If the change of speed=0, then the acceleration is also zeroCite 4 examples to show that it is impossible for an object to have acceleration without its speed changing?
its impossible to have nonzero acceleration with no velocity vector change, but there can be constant speed. if accel is not zero then velocity is not constant
I think you mean velocity, not speed. As linlyons said above, otherwise your question is fundamentally wrong. Velocity being a vector takes direction into account so that in that example, even though speed is technically constant velocity is not as it is constantly changing direction.
Acceleration by definition is the rate of CHANGE of velocity. If velocity was constant, it would not change...so there would be no acceleration.
This force acts opposite of the direction of dislacement of the object?
Tension
Normal
Spring
FrictionThis force acts opposite of the direction of dislacement of the object?
friction...A universal force that resists the relative motion or tendency to such motion of two bodies in contactThis force acts opposite of the direction of dislacement of the object?
Although friction is, indeed, a force which resists the relative motion of two bodies in contact, it is NOT the correct answer to your question. Report Abuse
friction always acts directly opposite the direction of movement
The elastic force caused by a spring always acts in the direction opposite that of he displacement of the object from equilibrium.
If you stretch a spring out, the spring will want to pull itself back together to its equilibrium position.
If you try to compress a spring, the spring will try to expand itself back out to its equilibrium position.
(The answer is NOT the frictional force. The force of friction acts in the direction opposite that of the rate of change in displacement...AKA the objects velocity, not the displacement.)
a falling tree is a great example of this. as it falls the trunk goes in the opposite direction
Normal
Spring
FrictionThis force acts opposite of the direction of dislacement of the object?
friction...A universal force that resists the relative motion or tendency to such motion of two bodies in contactThis force acts opposite of the direction of dislacement of the object?
Although friction is, indeed, a force which resists the relative motion of two bodies in contact, it is NOT the correct answer to your question. Report Abuse
friction always acts directly opposite the direction of movement
The elastic force caused by a spring always acts in the direction opposite that of he displacement of the object from equilibrium.
If you stretch a spring out, the spring will want to pull itself back together to its equilibrium position.
If you try to compress a spring, the spring will try to expand itself back out to its equilibrium position.
(The answer is NOT the frictional force. The force of friction acts in the direction opposite that of the rate of change in displacement...AKA the objects velocity, not the displacement.)
a falling tree is a great example of this. as it falls the trunk goes in the opposite direction
In grammar, what is the difference between a complement and an object?
modern linguists hold that object is the constituent in a sentence that could be changed into a passive voice, for example ,in the phrase';change train ';,train is a complement rather than an object,because we can't say that train is changed.It seems quite baffling as we usually regard the part following a verb as an object
A lens of focal length f produces an image of an object located 30 cm on one side of it at a distance of 60 cm?
A lens of focal length f produces an image of an object located 30 cm on one side of it at a distance of 60 cm on the other side. If the lens is replaced by another of 3f/4, where would the image form? If the image has to form at the earlier position by what distance should the object be shiftedA lens of focal length f produces an image of an object located 30 cm on one side of it at a distance of 60 cm?
Here, u= - 30 and v = 60 where u=object distance v=image distance
Using lens formula,
1 / v -1 / u = 1 / f
1 / 60 -(- 1/ 30) = 1/f
which gives f = 20 cm
Now 3 /4 f = 3/4 * 20 = 15 cm
Using lens formula again,
1/v - (- 1/30) = 1/15
we get v = + 30 cm
i.e. image is formed at distance of 30 cm at other side of lens
For image to form at v = + 60 cm (earlier position)
1/60 - 1/u = 1/15 (by lens formula again)
u = - 20 cm
Earlier object was at u = -30 cm
So the object should be shifted by 10 cm towards the lens
Hope it helped!!!!A lens of focal length f produces an image of an object located 30 cm on one side of it at a distance of 60 cm?
1/o+1/i=1/f
1/30+1/60=1/20
f=20
3(20)/4=15
1/30+1/i=1/15
i=30
for the second part
1/o+1/60=1/15
o=20
which means the object should be shifted 10 cm to the right, towards the lens.
Here, u= - 30 and v = 60 where u=object distance v=image distance
Using lens formula,
1 / v -1 / u = 1 / f
1 / 60 -(- 1/ 30) = 1/f
which gives f = 20 cm
Now 3 /4 f = 3/4 * 20 = 15 cm
Using lens formula again,
1/v - (- 1/30) = 1/15
we get v = + 30 cm
i.e. image is formed at distance of 30 cm at other side of lens
For image to form at v = + 60 cm (earlier position)
1/60 - 1/u = 1/15 (by lens formula again)
u = - 20 cm
Earlier object was at u = -30 cm
So the object should be shifted by 10 cm towards the lens
Hope it helped!!!!A lens of focal length f produces an image of an object located 30 cm on one side of it at a distance of 60 cm?
1/o+1/i=1/f
1/30+1/60=1/20
f=20
3(20)/4=15
1/30+1/i=1/15
i=30
for the second part
1/o+1/60=1/15
o=20
which means the object should be shifted 10 cm to the right, towards the lens.
Photographers: how do i get a blurred backround with a focused object?
i have black and white photography, and i really need helpPhotographers: how do i get a blurred backround with a focused object?
The opening of the lens is called the aperture. The aperture size is controlled by the ';f-stop'; setting. The smaller the f-stop, the larger the aperture. The maximum aperture for a given lens might commonly be f/1.8, f/2.8, f/4, or something in that range.
Using a larger aperture will give you a shallower depth-of-field. Remember that you will need to adjust your shutter or film/sensor speed to compensate for the extra light the larger aperture is letting in.
Depth of field is also controlled by the length of the lens (telephotos give shallower DOF), the distance from the subject (closer gives shallower DOF), and the size of the sensor on a digicam (larger gives shallower DOF).
This online calculator may help:
http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.htmlPhotographers: how do i get a blurred backround with a focused object?
You need a lense with a large aperature, this is represented by the ';f/#'; a smaller number is a bigger aperature. also it helps to have you're subject closer to you than it is to the background. However if you have a picture already you can accomplish this in photoshop (it's rather advanced though and it looks fake in many instances)
simple, shortened answer: small f stop number
You need a lens that will give a large opening and you need to be able to control it. A large opening gives a shallow depth of field. You will then use the shutter speed to control the exposure, so it will be shorter. When you focus on the foreground, the background will blur out.
If you can't control lens opening on your camera, you can't do it, although you can with automatic shutter speed.
If you have a digital camera, there is usually a feature called ';macro';. That is what you want to use to get that kind of result.
It's quite difficult to do that on a point-and-shoot digital camera because the focal lengths are so small. On a DSLR, use the largest aperture you can, fill in the screen with your subject and keep your subject away from the background (you want the two to be at different distances, so you can focus on one and have the other one out of focus).
On a point-and-shoot digicam, if you use zoom and/or macro, you can sometimes get this effect.
I got this example of a macro shot that shows this effect well (though it's a tutorial on a different subject)
Go to expoimaging.net and order their ExpoAperture2 Depth of Field Calculator. You can read a review of it at shutterbug.com - just type expoaperture in the Search box.
This tool will help you fully understand Depth of Field.
The opening of the lens is called the aperture. The aperture size is controlled by the ';f-stop'; setting. The smaller the f-stop, the larger the aperture. The maximum aperture for a given lens might commonly be f/1.8, f/2.8, f/4, or something in that range.
Using a larger aperture will give you a shallower depth-of-field. Remember that you will need to adjust your shutter or film/sensor speed to compensate for the extra light the larger aperture is letting in.
Depth of field is also controlled by the length of the lens (telephotos give shallower DOF), the distance from the subject (closer gives shallower DOF), and the size of the sensor on a digicam (larger gives shallower DOF).
This online calculator may help:
http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.htmlPhotographers: how do i get a blurred backround with a focused object?
You need a lense with a large aperature, this is represented by the ';f/#'; a smaller number is a bigger aperature. also it helps to have you're subject closer to you than it is to the background. However if you have a picture already you can accomplish this in photoshop (it's rather advanced though and it looks fake in many instances)
simple, shortened answer: small f stop number
You need a lens that will give a large opening and you need to be able to control it. A large opening gives a shallow depth of field. You will then use the shutter speed to control the exposure, so it will be shorter. When you focus on the foreground, the background will blur out.
If you can't control lens opening on your camera, you can't do it, although you can with automatic shutter speed.
If you have a digital camera, there is usually a feature called ';macro';. That is what you want to use to get that kind of result.
It's quite difficult to do that on a point-and-shoot digital camera because the focal lengths are so small. On a DSLR, use the largest aperture you can, fill in the screen with your subject and keep your subject away from the background (you want the two to be at different distances, so you can focus on one and have the other one out of focus).
On a point-and-shoot digicam, if you use zoom and/or macro, you can sometimes get this effect.
I got this example of a macro shot that shows this effect well (though it's a tutorial on a different subject)
Go to expoimaging.net and order their ExpoAperture2 Depth of Field Calculator. You can read a review of it at shutterbug.com - just type expoaperture in the Search box.
This tool will help you fully understand Depth of Field.
I can't remember what they call the concept that every object has a perfect example.?
In philosophy class years ago I remember reading a paper about how everything has a prime example of itself. For example a there are many variations of a chair but there is one perfect example of a chair. Although the prime example doesn't really exist it's like a template, an abstract idea of what a perfect representation of said object would be.
I can't remember more about it and it's killing me.I can't remember what they call the concept that every object has a perfect example.?
Plato's theory of forms?acne facial coconut oil
I can't remember more about it and it's killing me.I can't remember what they call the concept that every object has a perfect example.?
Plato's theory of forms?
I just heard a creaking noise outsie myv window and im scared. it was like something was moving an object, my
parents are in bed. what do i doI just heard a creaking noise outsie myv window and im scared. it was like something was moving an object, my
Go wake them.I just heard a creaking noise outsie myv window and im scared. it was like something was moving an object, my
it's probably just a hobo... go get a stick/other blunt object and DEFEND YOUR TERRITORY
on a more serious note, lock doors etc, maybe call the cops if there's really someone there
Wake one of them up to check it out, better safe then sorry....
Daddy told you how to use his shotgun. Shoot ask questions later.
watch out its the boogie man
Wake your parents up so they can check on it for you
creaking sound might come from the wall or the trees. Something was moving? most probably the wind's blowing and thus the tress moved. Dont worry a thing. Go to bed. Good night
if your that scared, than why bother posting it on here, theres nothing anyone can do on here, call out for help , or ring the police , and wake your parents up .
i wound answer this question but your probably already dead!
Go wake them.I just heard a creaking noise outsie myv window and im scared. it was like something was moving an object, my
it's probably just a hobo... go get a stick/other blunt object and DEFEND YOUR TERRITORY
on a more serious note, lock doors etc, maybe call the cops if there's really someone there
Wake one of them up to check it out, better safe then sorry....
Daddy told you how to use his shotgun. Shoot ask questions later.
watch out its the boogie man
Wake your parents up so they can check on it for you
creaking sound might come from the wall or the trees. Something was moving? most probably the wind's blowing and thus the tress moved. Dont worry a thing. Go to bed. Good night
if your that scared, than why bother posting it on here, theres nothing anyone can do on here, call out for help , or ring the police , and wake your parents up .
i wound answer this question but your probably already dead!
Confused, how can an object have a=0 but still have a positive Force?
I'm somewhat confused trying to understand 鈭慒=M*A .
For example, If an elevator moves upward at at constant velocity V, then it has no acceleration (a=0) and the sum of all forces should equal to zero 0.
鈭慒 = F[Engine] - F[gravity] = 0.
But wouldn't that mean that the elevator is stationary and not moving !?!? If its moving upwards doesn't it need a Net positive Force? In that case how would acceleration still be 0? --ConfusedConfused, how can an object have a=0 but still have a positive Force?
Don't confuse velocity and acceleration. You can move without accelerating. You can't START moving or STOP moving without accelerating, but you can keep moving at a constant velocity with no force and no acceleration. Picture throwing a ball in outer space. It'll just keep on moving forever with no forces on it at all after you let go.
That's what's happening in the elevator. It accelerates up to a certain speed, then the engine exactly balances out gravity so it doesn't change that speed. During that period when the speed remains constant, there is no acceleration and no net force. But there is velocity.Confused, how can an object have a=0 but still have a positive Force?
';Constant velocity'; means no net force, no acceleration. As Newton's First Law says, in the absence of an external force, an object in motion will continue in motion in the same straight line.
It takes a nonzero force to go from v = 0 to a nonzero velocity. That's an acceleration. But it doesn't take any net force to maintain a constant velocity.
Newton was quite brilliant to realize this, given that in our world, things tend to stop unless you keep applying a force. But Newton's description of what is happening there is that there is a frictional force, and to maintain constant velocity you must apply a force to cancel out the friction and make the net force = 0.
because acceleration and Velocity are two separate thing, velocity riles on acceleration for changes, but no matter what the velocity it dose not affect the acceleration.
think of an object in space, it can stay moving forever with no net forces on it, ie. have a constant velocity but no acceleration.
same with your elevator with the equation of F1-F2=Ma, a=0
you end up with F1=F2 so there is a positive movement, but no acceleration (change in the ratio of Velocity)
Objects don't need a force to act on them in order to move. By Newton's first law, objects that have no net force acting on them either stay at rest or move with a constant velocity.
For example, If an elevator moves upward at at constant velocity V, then it has no acceleration (a=0) and the sum of all forces should equal to zero 0.
鈭慒 = F[Engine] - F[gravity] = 0.
But wouldn't that mean that the elevator is stationary and not moving !?!? If its moving upwards doesn't it need a Net positive Force? In that case how would acceleration still be 0? --ConfusedConfused, how can an object have a=0 but still have a positive Force?
Don't confuse velocity and acceleration. You can move without accelerating. You can't START moving or STOP moving without accelerating, but you can keep moving at a constant velocity with no force and no acceleration. Picture throwing a ball in outer space. It'll just keep on moving forever with no forces on it at all after you let go.
That's what's happening in the elevator. It accelerates up to a certain speed, then the engine exactly balances out gravity so it doesn't change that speed. During that period when the speed remains constant, there is no acceleration and no net force. But there is velocity.Confused, how can an object have a=0 but still have a positive Force?
';Constant velocity'; means no net force, no acceleration. As Newton's First Law says, in the absence of an external force, an object in motion will continue in motion in the same straight line.
It takes a nonzero force to go from v = 0 to a nonzero velocity. That's an acceleration. But it doesn't take any net force to maintain a constant velocity.
Newton was quite brilliant to realize this, given that in our world, things tend to stop unless you keep applying a force. But Newton's description of what is happening there is that there is a frictional force, and to maintain constant velocity you must apply a force to cancel out the friction and make the net force = 0.
because acceleration and Velocity are two separate thing, velocity riles on acceleration for changes, but no matter what the velocity it dose not affect the acceleration.
think of an object in space, it can stay moving forever with no net forces on it, ie. have a constant velocity but no acceleration.
same with your elevator with the equation of F1-F2=Ma, a=0
you end up with F1=F2 so there is a positive movement, but no acceleration (change in the ratio of Velocity)
Objects don't need a force to act on them in order to move. By Newton's first law, objects that have no net force acting on them either stay at rest or move with a constant velocity.
Terminal velocity of an object falling in a liquid (no numericals involved!)?
I'm doing a lab practical atm; I need an answer for this within about 30 minutes.
Easy 10 points for the most convenient method =p
I need to find one way to investigate the terminal speed of a ball falling through liquids of varying viscosity. We'll decide on the independent variable once we know how to identify when the ball has reached Terminal Velocity.Terminal velocity of an object falling in a liquid (no numericals involved!)?
what you want are:
1. clear tube in which to conduct the experiment.
2. calibrated ruler on the far side of the tube.
3. clock/watch used for competition with a 1/100th of a second hand.
4. camera to monitor the action.
when you see the distance the ball travels remains the same for a time period, it's at terminal velocity.
there is a problem of perspective.
possibly, for more viscus liquids, you could move the tube so that the ball remains level with the camera.
during acceleration, that could cause a problem.
at terminal velocity, it will not.
5. you might want a mirror on the far side,
Easy 10 points for the most convenient method =p
I need to find one way to investigate the terminal speed of a ball falling through liquids of varying viscosity. We'll decide on the independent variable once we know how to identify when the ball has reached Terminal Velocity.Terminal velocity of an object falling in a liquid (no numericals involved!)?
what you want are:
1. clear tube in which to conduct the experiment.
2. calibrated ruler on the far side of the tube.
3. clock/watch used for competition with a 1/100th of a second hand.
4. camera to monitor the action.
when you see the distance the ball travels remains the same for a time period, it's at terminal velocity.
there is a problem of perspective.
possibly, for more viscus liquids, you could move the tube so that the ball remains level with the camera.
during acceleration, that could cause a problem.
at terminal velocity, it will not.
5. you might want a mirror on the far side,
If money was no object what would you do today?
Hello all
just sat here planing my day (gardening)
its a lovely day the kind when you wish you had plenty of money and you could just do something spur of the moment
I would be on the first plane to kentucky (bluegrass) to meet my friend and make her day.
WHAT WOULD YOU GUYS DO ??????
Thanks for any sensible answers
and enjoy your dayIf money was no object what would you do today?
I have a sexy friend in England. The first thing I would do is hop on a private jet and fly away to be with this sweet talking man. Wow my heart is beating 1000 just thinking about it. whewIf money was no object what would you do today?
I would firstly remember that the world is in the end of days and that this wealth will oneday be distroyed, so I would put the some of this wealth into Gold and platinum.
I would place a great deal into Indian Ruppees because this will be one of the only viable currencies left after the great ecomomic collapse that is to come about ec 2012.
I would give a great deal to the sisters of Mother Therese in calcutta
I'd like to think I'd be able to buy a massive plane, load it full of aid of all kinds and drop it all over the Gaza Strip to at least TRY and help the Palestinian prisoners...then I'd refill and do the same for all the other oppressed, desperate races around the world that aren't in the forefront of my mind.
After that, personal possessions would seem somewhat meaningless for me :
|Can't do it all in a day but I would
1.Have a few plastic surgery bits done so I look great for my......
2.6 month travels to Asia then to....
3.Buy a houseboat (and furnish) in Amsterdam then....
4.Sort my friends and family out and then......
5.Bugger off to Asia on and off and also enjoy my home during travelling.I would also like to.....
6.Help animal charities out as well and maybe start off some of my own and get involved.!!!
I worked my lottery winnings out a long time ago and am now ready and waiting to put my plan in to action!!!!!
I'd buy a Yamaha Midnight Star XV1900 right away!
Then I'd start a road trip to Santiago, which is 600 miles away, to go see a friend I havent' seen in two years (he's a Navy Infantry vet, we've been deployed together for some weeks in 2006, and he visited in late 2007). And we'd be getting drunk for two weeks straight.
I'd fly to Madinah. Half an hour to get ready, half an hour in the airport. I could be there in less than two hours!
A few hours later, I'd be on another plane, to visit my children and grandchildren in America.
You have a good day, too, God willing.
I would be somewhere on a deserted island in the Pacific Ocean,with some music on,a survival kit and some food for a month, and wearing just a smile on my face.Absolute bliss and paradise....
I would turn pro bodybuilder,hire a world class personal trainer and purchase everything i need to compete with some of the most hulk-looking bodybuilders across the world.
I don't think I'd honestly do anything different. I'd spend as much of my time as I could with the girl that I love. Though assuming I didn't have to worry about money anymore.. I wouldn't go to work.
Build an ecological town in Cornwall with community houses and centralised services (as depicted in my novel Stronghold: Exodus coming soon)
I would get everybody up to a standard of living where they weren't struggling to survive and starving to death.
Destroy every religious text, be it bible or whatever
Feed all the Poor...
Clothe them....
Find them homes...
then for some selfishness...
-House
-Awesome TV
-Car
-Useless Crap
Buy a ten gazillion pounds engagement ring for Myth Buster.
Buy a house in San Simeon and walk on the beach.
http://www.sansimeonchamber.org/
Buy Megan Fox
get a good computer
get some strippers!!! lol
pretty much
id go round the world in a camper, or maybe on a motorbike,
Pack my family up %26amp; head to Europe:-)
hmm play video games, eat food and stuff and have sex
big house, fat car, and the one i love
I would fill all my friend's cars up with lots of petrol, get a little convoy together, and go to the beach for the day. It would be ace!
x o x o
I would be outside, sat outside a nice pub or walking my dog.
(It's not often we get sunny days like this in England)
just sat here planing my day (gardening)
its a lovely day the kind when you wish you had plenty of money and you could just do something spur of the moment
I would be on the first plane to kentucky (bluegrass) to meet my friend and make her day.
WHAT WOULD YOU GUYS DO ??????
Thanks for any sensible answers
and enjoy your dayIf money was no object what would you do today?
I have a sexy friend in England. The first thing I would do is hop on a private jet and fly away to be with this sweet talking man. Wow my heart is beating 1000 just thinking about it. whewIf money was no object what would you do today?
I would firstly remember that the world is in the end of days and that this wealth will oneday be distroyed, so I would put the some of this wealth into Gold and platinum.
I would place a great deal into Indian Ruppees because this will be one of the only viable currencies left after the great ecomomic collapse that is to come about ec 2012.
I would give a great deal to the sisters of Mother Therese in calcutta
I'd like to think I'd be able to buy a massive plane, load it full of aid of all kinds and drop it all over the Gaza Strip to at least TRY and help the Palestinian prisoners...then I'd refill and do the same for all the other oppressed, desperate races around the world that aren't in the forefront of my mind.
After that, personal possessions would seem somewhat meaningless for me :
|Can't do it all in a day but I would
1.Have a few plastic surgery bits done so I look great for my......
2.6 month travels to Asia then to....
3.Buy a houseboat (and furnish) in Amsterdam then....
4.Sort my friends and family out and then......
5.Bugger off to Asia on and off and also enjoy my home during travelling.I would also like to.....
6.Help animal charities out as well and maybe start off some of my own and get involved.!!!
I worked my lottery winnings out a long time ago and am now ready and waiting to put my plan in to action!!!!!
I'd buy a Yamaha Midnight Star XV1900 right away!
Then I'd start a road trip to Santiago, which is 600 miles away, to go see a friend I havent' seen in two years (he's a Navy Infantry vet, we've been deployed together for some weeks in 2006, and he visited in late 2007). And we'd be getting drunk for two weeks straight.
I'd fly to Madinah. Half an hour to get ready, half an hour in the airport. I could be there in less than two hours!
A few hours later, I'd be on another plane, to visit my children and grandchildren in America.
You have a good day, too, God willing.
I would be somewhere on a deserted island in the Pacific Ocean,with some music on,a survival kit and some food for a month, and wearing just a smile on my face.Absolute bliss and paradise....
I would turn pro bodybuilder,hire a world class personal trainer and purchase everything i need to compete with some of the most hulk-looking bodybuilders across the world.
I don't think I'd honestly do anything different. I'd spend as much of my time as I could with the girl that I love. Though assuming I didn't have to worry about money anymore.. I wouldn't go to work.
Build an ecological town in Cornwall with community houses and centralised services (as depicted in my novel Stronghold: Exodus coming soon)
I would get everybody up to a standard of living where they weren't struggling to survive and starving to death.
Destroy every religious text, be it bible or whatever
Feed all the Poor...
Clothe them....
Find them homes...
then for some selfishness...
-House
-Awesome TV
-Car
-Useless Crap
Buy a ten gazillion pounds engagement ring for Myth Buster.
Buy a house in San Simeon and walk on the beach.
http://www.sansimeonchamber.org/
Buy Megan Fox
get a good computer
get some strippers!!! lol
pretty much
id go round the world in a camper, or maybe on a motorbike,
Pack my family up %26amp; head to Europe:-)
hmm play video games, eat food and stuff and have sex
big house, fat car, and the one i love
I would fill all my friend's cars up with lots of petrol, get a little convoy together, and go to the beach for the day. It would be ace!
x o x o
I would be outside, sat outside a nice pub or walking my dog.
(It's not often we get sunny days like this in England)
If you put an object in space and spin it really fast would it ever stop spinning?
think about this one..
or if you think it will stop spinning how long will it spin?
... there has to be some air in space, but Very little. based on what i think. and air = frictionIf you put an object in space and spin it really fast would it ever stop spinning?
It will spin for a very very long time.
Random molecules hitting it will cause it to lose a bit of momentum, as will cosmic rays.
A lot depends on the shape. If it is a disc spinning like a frisbee, then random molecules will have little effect, as they will just bounce off the spinning surface, and will not change it by much.
.If you put an object in space and spin it really fast would it ever stop spinning?
Never stop spinning as long as no resistance.
i dont think so because look at satellites that orbit earth for so many years that remain constant
or if you think it will stop spinning how long will it spin?
... there has to be some air in space, but Very little. based on what i think. and air = frictionIf you put an object in space and spin it really fast would it ever stop spinning?
It will spin for a very very long time.
Random molecules hitting it will cause it to lose a bit of momentum, as will cosmic rays.
A lot depends on the shape. If it is a disc spinning like a frisbee, then random molecules will have little effect, as they will just bounce off the spinning surface, and will not change it by much.
.If you put an object in space and spin it really fast would it ever stop spinning?
Never stop spinning as long as no resistance.
i dont think so because look at satellites that orbit earth for so many years that remain constant
What are some examples of functioning (online) , hierarchical, relational, and object-oriented databases?
1) Hierarchical databases:
In a hierarchical database, records contain groups of parent/child relationships, similar to a tree structure. In a hierarchical database, every record is either at the top of a hierarchy (a root record) or is the child of another record in the hierarchical database. An example of hierarchical data could be displaying the hierarchy of departmental responsibility or 'who reports to whom'. In an XML-like database, the tables are hierarchical. In Relational Database model, an example of hierarchical data could be displaying the hierarchy of departmental responsibility or 'who reports to whom'. The bibliographic database Cancerlit uses a hierarchical database. Lotus Notes is the most popular hierarchical database managment system in use today.
Many companies and other organizations support their operations by maintaining two databases, a hierarchical database and a relational one.
2). Relational Databases:
The most popular databases today are Relational Database Management Systems (RDBMS). There is good reason for this. They are easy to use and are normally efficient. However, object database servers may someday overtake the relational database servers.
Examples of these kinds of database applications are accounts payable, accounts receivable, order processing, and inventory control. Because these types of applications contain relatively simple data relationships and schema design, relational database management systems (RDBMs) are better suited for these applications.
2) OO databases:
Information analysis applications focus on providing the capability to navigate through and analyze large volumes of data. Examples of these applications are CAD/CAM/CAE, production planning, network planning, and financial engineering. These types of applications are very dynamic and their database schemas are very complex. This type of application requires a tightly-coupled language interface and the ability to handle the creation and evolution of schema of arbitrary complexity without a lot of programmer intervention.
Object-oriented databases support these features to a great degree and are therefore better suited for the information analysis type of applications. Object database servers use an Object Query Language (OQL) as a standard language for communication. OODBs are also used in applications handling BLOBs (binary large objects) such as images, sound, video, and unformatted text. OODBs support diverse data types rather than only the simple tables, columns and rows of relational databases.
Northwest Natural Gas uses an OODB for a customer information system. Ameritech Advanced Data Services uses an OODB for a comprehensive management information system that currently includes accounting, order entry, pricing, and pre-sales support.acne facial coconut oil
In a hierarchical database, records contain groups of parent/child relationships, similar to a tree structure. In a hierarchical database, every record is either at the top of a hierarchy (a root record) or is the child of another record in the hierarchical database. An example of hierarchical data could be displaying the hierarchy of departmental responsibility or 'who reports to whom'. In an XML-like database, the tables are hierarchical. In Relational Database model, an example of hierarchical data could be displaying the hierarchy of departmental responsibility or 'who reports to whom'. The bibliographic database Cancerlit uses a hierarchical database. Lotus Notes is the most popular hierarchical database managment system in use today.
Many companies and other organizations support their operations by maintaining two databases, a hierarchical database and a relational one.
2). Relational Databases:
The most popular databases today are Relational Database Management Systems (RDBMS). There is good reason for this. They are easy to use and are normally efficient. However, object database servers may someday overtake the relational database servers.
Examples of these kinds of database applications are accounts payable, accounts receivable, order processing, and inventory control. Because these types of applications contain relatively simple data relationships and schema design, relational database management systems (RDBMs) are better suited for these applications.
2) OO databases:
Information analysis applications focus on providing the capability to navigate through and analyze large volumes of data. Examples of these applications are CAD/CAM/CAE, production planning, network planning, and financial engineering. These types of applications are very dynamic and their database schemas are very complex. This type of application requires a tightly-coupled language interface and the ability to handle the creation and evolution of schema of arbitrary complexity without a lot of programmer intervention.
Object-oriented databases support these features to a great degree and are therefore better suited for the information analysis type of applications. Object database servers use an Object Query Language (OQL) as a standard language for communication. OODBs are also used in applications handling BLOBs (binary large objects) such as images, sound, video, and unformatted text. OODBs support diverse data types rather than only the simple tables, columns and rows of relational databases.
Northwest Natural Gas uses an OODB for a customer information system. Ameritech Advanced Data Services uses an OODB for a comprehensive management information system that currently includes accounting, order entry, pricing, and pre-sales support.
Do fundamentalists (or the people that others identify as that) object to being called by that name?
The term Fundamentalist is not a negative term. It simply means someone who thinks that the Bible should be thought of as literal history. The Bible is the fundamental source of their religion.
However, because people think Fundamentalists are crazy, it has slowly taken on a negative connotation. So now, many people use Fundamentalist and Fanatic as synonyms, but originally it was a more positive term.
As a Catholic, I find this very amusing. Sorry, but I do.Do fundamentalists (or the people that others identify as that) object to being called by that name?
I do not object to being called that....so long as it is understood that I do not take every word of Scripture literally, and that I do not necessarily agree with everyone who might be labeled fundamentalist on every subject.
The word denotes particular beliefs, so it is classifier (much as a denomination, or political party, is a classification).
Most use the term without having any idea what it actually means. So they use it incorrectly....but generally, from what those people would mean....yes I am a fundamentalist (and its fine to call me such).
In my case, in reality, I am very Conservative as to Scripture....but by definition I am not a fundamentalist (and a real fundamentalist would point that out if they knew my particular theology).Do fundamentalists (or the people that others identify as that) object to being called by that name?
I think I am fundamentalist. I am a Missouri-Synod Lutheran. I don't consider myself protestant because I don't agree with the non-Catholic, non-Lutheran viewpoints on Baptism and Holy Communion. No, I don't mind being called that. However, it is a broad term that is uncomfortably thrown over various groups of people that may not describe accurately all the groups.
Well I usually call them something else but I'm not allowed to say it here.....*innocent/devious look*
I prefer the term bible literalist-----fundamentalist or ';fundie'; is an offensive and unnecessary term of hate---
No. I consider it to be a compliment and recognition of a sincere belief structure.
i don't care what people call me...they called Jesus names.....what makes me any better....to follow Jesus means to go through his joys and pains....
I am under the impression that they are proud of that title
I do not.
I do not like name tags.
I prefer to call them fanatics
cream.
Nope no objection -- I have a personal realtionship with God.. Through Christ Jesus :)
However, because people think Fundamentalists are crazy, it has slowly taken on a negative connotation. So now, many people use Fundamentalist and Fanatic as synonyms, but originally it was a more positive term.
As a Catholic, I find this very amusing. Sorry, but I do.Do fundamentalists (or the people that others identify as that) object to being called by that name?
I do not object to being called that....so long as it is understood that I do not take every word of Scripture literally, and that I do not necessarily agree with everyone who might be labeled fundamentalist on every subject.
The word denotes particular beliefs, so it is classifier (much as a denomination, or political party, is a classification).
Most use the term without having any idea what it actually means. So they use it incorrectly....but generally, from what those people would mean....yes I am a fundamentalist (and its fine to call me such).
In my case, in reality, I am very Conservative as to Scripture....but by definition I am not a fundamentalist (and a real fundamentalist would point that out if they knew my particular theology).Do fundamentalists (or the people that others identify as that) object to being called by that name?
I think I am fundamentalist. I am a Missouri-Synod Lutheran. I don't consider myself protestant because I don't agree with the non-Catholic, non-Lutheran viewpoints on Baptism and Holy Communion. No, I don't mind being called that. However, it is a broad term that is uncomfortably thrown over various groups of people that may not describe accurately all the groups.
Well I usually call them something else but I'm not allowed to say it here.....*innocent/devious look*
I prefer the term bible literalist-----fundamentalist or ';fundie'; is an offensive and unnecessary term of hate---
No. I consider it to be a compliment and recognition of a sincere belief structure.
i don't care what people call me...they called Jesus names.....what makes me any better....to follow Jesus means to go through his joys and pains....
I am under the impression that they are proud of that title
I do not.
I do not like name tags.
I prefer to call them fanatics
cream.
Nope no objection -- I have a personal realtionship with God.. Through Christ Jesus :)
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Whats a good symbol/object that represents the iraq war?
im doing a project for history and i need one, its going to be a 3d object. for the current war in iraq, any suggestions?Whats a good symbol/object that represents the iraq war?
A gas canWhats a good symbol/object that represents the iraq war?
Lessons in Mission Impossible One -Two and Three.
Luke 22.34,61
Decode this lyrics '; Goldfinger';
With ';Crocodile Rock';
Luke 24.47-49
How does a crocodile look like?
Playing '; Solitaire';
Matt 7. 15-27
What do you think?
Iraqis stomping on pictures of Saddam Hussein :)
The falling golden statue of Saddam
build or draw an oil rig with blood spurting out of it
A gas canWhats a good symbol/object that represents the iraq war?
Lessons in Mission Impossible One -Two and Three.
Luke 22.34,61
Decode this lyrics '; Goldfinger';
With ';Crocodile Rock';
Luke 24.47-49
How does a crocodile look like?
Playing '; Solitaire';
Matt 7. 15-27
What do you think?
Iraqis stomping on pictures of Saddam Hussein :)
The falling golden statue of Saddam
build or draw an oil rig with blood spurting out of it
Weight components of an object on an inclined plane?
My textbook states that the the weight components of an object on an inclined plane are (cos)(angle)x weight and (sin)(angle)x weight. Can you tell me how this is derived?Weight components of an object on an inclined plane?
To understand this you have to look at a picture. I can't really dray one so you'll have to draw it yourself as I explain.
1) Draw a right triangle (your inclined plane) with the smallest angle on the left and the 90 degree angle on the right. (The smallest angle is the one that is used to derive the components)
2)Then draw an object on the inclined plane. Then draw the force of gravity on the object by drawing an arrow going straight down from the object. Label this arrow ';weight.';
3) Next force is the Normal Force. This arrow is perpendiuclar to the inclined plane, going up, and is labeled ';Fn';
4) The components of the weight are the final forces on the object (assuming there's no friction). The sin (angle) x weight is the arrow that is parallel to the plane going down toward the ground, and the cos (angle) x weight is the one that opposes the normal force.
5)The cos (angle) x weight component is equal to the Normal Force. After you draw these arrows then you can make triangles. From these triangle you find out why the components are what they are. However, if you do it this way you need to make sure the arrows are the correct relative lengths. The ';Wieght'; Force must be a projection onto the components of itself so it will become the hypotenuse of the triangles formed.
Hope this helps. Good Luck!Weight components of an object on an inclined plane?
Draw a plane with a weight on it. Then draw the force vectors, one down the plane, one normal to it pointing down. Connect the vecotrs to make a triangle. The hypotenuse (which you just drew) is equal to the sum of the vecotrs. Now can you see how the component formulas are derived?
To understand this you have to look at a picture. I can't really dray one so you'll have to draw it yourself as I explain.
1) Draw a right triangle (your inclined plane) with the smallest angle on the left and the 90 degree angle on the right. (The smallest angle is the one that is used to derive the components)
2)Then draw an object on the inclined plane. Then draw the force of gravity on the object by drawing an arrow going straight down from the object. Label this arrow ';weight.';
3) Next force is the Normal Force. This arrow is perpendiuclar to the inclined plane, going up, and is labeled ';Fn';
4) The components of the weight are the final forces on the object (assuming there's no friction). The sin (angle) x weight is the arrow that is parallel to the plane going down toward the ground, and the cos (angle) x weight is the one that opposes the normal force.
5)The cos (angle) x weight component is equal to the Normal Force. After you draw these arrows then you can make triangles. From these triangle you find out why the components are what they are. However, if you do it this way you need to make sure the arrows are the correct relative lengths. The ';Wieght'; Force must be a projection onto the components of itself so it will become the hypotenuse of the triangles formed.
Hope this helps. Good Luck!Weight components of an object on an inclined plane?
Draw a plane with a weight on it. Then draw the force vectors, one down the plane, one normal to it pointing down. Connect the vecotrs to make a triangle. The hypotenuse (which you just drew) is equal to the sum of the vecotrs. Now can you see how the component formulas are derived?
What is the weirdest object you've ever had to take ?
your sock off for because it was uncomfortable? I found popcorn (not sure how that got there).What is the weirdest object you've ever had to take ?
ewwwwww. i was gonna say a bead but then jacks answer made me remember something even worse. i also stepped in an ant bed. a HUGE ant bed. my leg sunk in to like the middle of my shin! thank god i had pants on. i pulled my leg out and there were like, little larva all over my leg and shoe. there were ants all in my shoe. it sucked!What is the weirdest object you've ever had to take ?
i really have been thinking and i cant think of anything, that means you have a good question on your hands, cuz usually i have a answer to everything. Im gonna keep thinking cuz now this is gonna irritate me.
A roach. No joke! I walked around with it in my shoe all day, thinking it was just a piece of mulch.
I screamed so loud when I found out what it was, I swear I must have shattered glass.
i was playing football in highschool and we stepped in an ant bed it was bad i thought i was going to have to take my pants off lol
nothing interesting , just sock fuzz
It was some kind of seed. No idea how it got there.
Nothing weird....lol
A quarter.
In a BRAND NEW pair of socks, fresh from the package.
ewwwwww. i was gonna say a bead but then jacks answer made me remember something even worse. i also stepped in an ant bed. a HUGE ant bed. my leg sunk in to like the middle of my shin! thank god i had pants on. i pulled my leg out and there were like, little larva all over my leg and shoe. there were ants all in my shoe. it sucked!What is the weirdest object you've ever had to take ?
i really have been thinking and i cant think of anything, that means you have a good question on your hands, cuz usually i have a answer to everything. Im gonna keep thinking cuz now this is gonna irritate me.
A roach. No joke! I walked around with it in my shoe all day, thinking it was just a piece of mulch.
I screamed so loud when I found out what it was, I swear I must have shattered glass.
i was playing football in highschool and we stepped in an ant bed it was bad i thought i was going to have to take my pants off lol
nothing interesting , just sock fuzz
It was some kind of seed. No idea how it got there.
Nothing weird....lol
A quarter.
In a BRAND NEW pair of socks, fresh from the package.
Does any body know of a regulation that prohibit an object being placed going down the stairs such as a cable?
OSHA Regulations about cables/obstacles being placed intentionally going down the stairs or across the steps? This happened in Florida...
danrathersdrunkagain has answered it but i cannot find in on the web. if you could please send me a link it would be greatly appreciated.
the answer was OR1743-86. No cable shall be run down the stairs, thus causing a tripping hazard.
but i cannot find it anywhere.
thanks....Does any body know of a regulation that prohibit an object being placed going down the stairs such as a cable?
run the cable down the underneath of the stairs.Does any body know of a regulation that prohibit an object being placed going down the stairs such as a cable?
The OSHA reg is easy to find:
1910.22(b)(1)
Where mechanical handling equipment is used, sufficient safe clearances shall be allowed for aisles, at loading docks, through doorways and wherever turns or passage must be made. Aisles and passageways shall be kept clear and in good repairs, with no obstruction across or in aisles that could create a hazard.
You may think this section only applies to aisles, but I have seen it applies to stairs.
I have seen cables go down the steps inside a conduit, but if you do that the open part of the stair is still wide enough according to the rules. That is usually the problem.
danrathersdrunkagain has answered it but i cannot find in on the web. if you could please send me a link it would be greatly appreciated.
the answer was OR1743-86. No cable shall be run down the stairs, thus causing a tripping hazard.
but i cannot find it anywhere.
thanks....Does any body know of a regulation that prohibit an object being placed going down the stairs such as a cable?
run the cable down the underneath of the stairs.Does any body know of a regulation that prohibit an object being placed going down the stairs such as a cable?
The OSHA reg is easy to find:
1910.22(b)(1)
Where mechanical handling equipment is used, sufficient safe clearances shall be allowed for aisles, at loading docks, through doorways and wherever turns or passage must be made. Aisles and passageways shall be kept clear and in good repairs, with no obstruction across or in aisles that could create a hazard.
You may think this section only applies to aisles, but I have seen it applies to stairs.
I have seen cables go down the steps inside a conduit, but if you do that the open part of the stair is still wide enough according to the rules. That is usually the problem.
If money were no object what would you give your best friend?
I'd give them a new car. hers is falling apart and always stalling at intersectionsIf money were no object what would you give your best friend?
A visit from us.If money were no object what would you give your best friend?
I'd send my mom, who is unquestionably my best friend, to one of those very fancy spas for a month to get away from it all. Yoga, seaweed wraps, full body massages, facials...the whole nine yards. I went to a spa on the Dead Sea for three days and came out so relaxed I felt like a deboned chicken.
If money were truly no object, I'd make a whopping big charity donation in his name
What ever they wanted to have. It also depends on the friend and what i am giving to them.
Their mortgage papers (as in, paid off), a new van, and a year's worth of cat food and vet bills.
I would give them their own island that would be totally self sufficient. It would have all the best technology and servants (prepaid) to allow them to live their life in leisure.
I would get myself something first if money was no object.
I'd get him an XBox 360 cuz he hates the 360.
$50 to get lost
a house, a car, some cash, and my continuing friendship.
anything that they wanted
the plane he wants
i'd give myy bestfriend everthing....
~BFFS FO LYFE~
front row seats to a jonas brothers concert and meet and greet and backstage passes
Her own house so she wouldnt move
A swift kick in the butt...and tell her to get a job!...She's always wanting money and won't try to get a job, says ';it will interfere with her social life!';...Lord helps those who help themselves...
id give them a vacation for life. you asked.
a house idk anything they wanted
i agree with you she does need itacne facial coconut oil
A visit from us.If money were no object what would you give your best friend?
I'd send my mom, who is unquestionably my best friend, to one of those very fancy spas for a month to get away from it all. Yoga, seaweed wraps, full body massages, facials...the whole nine yards. I went to a spa on the Dead Sea for three days and came out so relaxed I felt like a deboned chicken.
If money were truly no object, I'd make a whopping big charity donation in his name
What ever they wanted to have. It also depends on the friend and what i am giving to them.
Their mortgage papers (as in, paid off), a new van, and a year's worth of cat food and vet bills.
I would give them their own island that would be totally self sufficient. It would have all the best technology and servants (prepaid) to allow them to live their life in leisure.
I would get myself something first if money was no object.
I'd get him an XBox 360 cuz he hates the 360.
$50 to get lost
a house, a car, some cash, and my continuing friendship.
anything that they wanted
the plane he wants
i'd give myy bestfriend everthing....
~BFFS FO LYFE~
front row seats to a jonas brothers concert and meet and greet and backstage passes
Her own house so she wouldnt move
A swift kick in the butt...and tell her to get a job!...She's always wanting money and won't try to get a job, says ';it will interfere with her social life!';...Lord helps those who help themselves...
id give them a vacation for life. you asked.
a house idk anything they wanted
i agree with you she does need it
What is the lighted object in the horizon of mars in the first phoenix pics?
I don't see any lighted object on the horizon in any of the Phoenix pictures. I do know that the Mars rover Opportunity found its own heat shield laying on the ground, and it looked like a bright object on the horizon in some of the first pictures from far away, but I don't see anything like that in the Phoenix pictures.
(EDIT) OK, I see the spot you are talking about. It looks a bit like an image defect to me, be we will see when they take more images of the same location later. It *could* be the heat shield, but since this is not a rover, it can't go over there for a close look.
(2nd EDIT) I see they have located the heat shield and parachute from orbit. See the second source. Assuming that this overhead picture is oriented as usual, with North toward the top, then these objects are south of the lander. But that doesn't seem to be the right direction to correspond with the bright object in the distance, assuming Azimuth 360 is north.What is the lighted object in the horizon of mars in the first phoenix pics?
it looks like either a hot pixel or a radiation hit.
this is clearer in the full-resolution image, which shows a vertical streak of several fully white pixels.What is the lighted object in the horizon of mars in the first phoenix pics?
????????
Thats a picture defect.
It's a beer can. Left by tourists.
(EDIT) OK, I see the spot you are talking about. It looks a bit like an image defect to me, be we will see when they take more images of the same location later. It *could* be the heat shield, but since this is not a rover, it can't go over there for a close look.
(2nd EDIT) I see they have located the heat shield and parachute from orbit. See the second source. Assuming that this overhead picture is oriented as usual, with North toward the top, then these objects are south of the lander. But that doesn't seem to be the right direction to correspond with the bright object in the distance, assuming Azimuth 360 is north.What is the lighted object in the horizon of mars in the first phoenix pics?
it looks like either a hot pixel or a radiation hit.
this is clearer in the full-resolution image, which shows a vertical streak of several fully white pixels.What is the lighted object in the horizon of mars in the first phoenix pics?
????????
Thats a picture defect.
It's a beer can. Left by tourists.
What happens when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
i remember the joker quoting this in the dark knight and this intrigued me since thenWhat happens when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
a mighty big explosion. But seriously there are neither unstoppable forces nor immovable objects. These can be ';approximations';, and in any collision, you would find out which one is a closer approximation. This is a very common expression - like ';between a rock and a hard place';. It is not to be taken literally.What happens when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
The immovable object stays still.
The unstoppable force bounces back and goes in the opposite direction.
It isn't that hard to understand.
a mighty big explosion. But seriously there are neither unstoppable forces nor immovable objects. These can be ';approximations';, and in any collision, you would find out which one is a closer approximation. This is a very common expression - like ';between a rock and a hard place';. It is not to be taken literally.What happens when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
The immovable object stays still.
The unstoppable force bounces back and goes in the opposite direction.
It isn't that hard to understand.
Can there be any damage to the body from a computer, T.V., or Nintendo screen whatever screen object.?
Just out of curiosity. Please also include mental damage.Can there be any damage to the body from a computer, T.V., or Nintendo screen whatever screen object.?
If you're too close to any sort of screen, or staring at it for a prolonged period of time, vision impairments may occur.
The website I listed below has an interesting article on the effects of staring at a computer all day, resulting in a condition called Computer Vision Syndrome (CVS).
If you're too close to any sort of screen, or staring at it for a prolonged period of time, vision impairments may occur.
The website I listed below has an interesting article on the effects of staring at a computer all day, resulting in a condition called Computer Vision Syndrome (CVS).
Use the force equation to determine the mass of an object knowing the force.?
What is the mass of the moon Fg = 1.90 x 10 20th N and the distance between them is 3.9 x 10 8th m?Use the force equation to determine the mass of an object knowing the force.?
I'm on a mission: to teach people how to make exponents when you can't make the little superscript. Do it this way: Fg = 1.90 x 10^20 N.
Newton's Universal Law of Gravitation says
Fg = G*M1*M2/r^2
where G = 6.673*10^-11 nt*m^2/kg^2, M1 is the mass of the Moon, M2 is the mass of the Earth = 5.983*10^24 kg, and r is the distance between them.
I'm on a mission: to teach people how to make exponents when you can't make the little superscript. Do it this way: Fg = 1.90 x 10^20 N.
Newton's Universal Law of Gravitation says
Fg = G*M1*M2/r^2
where G = 6.673*10^-11 nt*m^2/kg^2, M1 is the mass of the Moon, M2 is the mass of the Earth = 5.983*10^24 kg, and r is the distance between them.
How old were you when you got your first crush and did you do tell the object of your crush?
I was in 1st grade, so like 6 years old. Nooo I never told him.How old were you when you got your first crush and did you do tell the object of your crush?
about 7How old were you when you got your first crush and did you do tell the object of your crush?
well i think it was in 3d grade lol..
nah i never told himm!acne facial coconut oil
about 7How old were you when you got your first crush and did you do tell the object of your crush?
well i think it was in 3d grade lol..
nah i never told himm!
What happens when an irresistable force meets an immovable object?
Then the object will be static at same point as all the forces balance each other(force an weight of object)What happens when an irresistable force meets an immovable object?
The two states, irresistable force, and immovable object are mutually exclusive if their definitions are those of the common understanding of the words. Irresistable is, by definition, something that cannot be stopped. Immovable means the irresistable force may not move it out of the way. So, either you shade your understanding of what it means to be immovable, what it means to be irresistable, or both.
A force that is moving, and hits an immovable object must move out of the way. It can do so by deflecting, bouncing off if the object and remaining a force, but on a different vector. This would mean its not really irresistable.
What happens when an irresistable force meets an immovable object?
You get a great movie called ';The Dark Knight';
The Joker and Batman are representative of an unstoppable force and an immovable object. That is one of the Joker's last lines in the movie: ';This is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object';
There is no such force, and no such object. Don't waste your time on hypotheticals - there is no shortage of real problems to spend your time wondering about.
The two states, irresistable force, and immovable object are mutually exclusive if their definitions are those of the common understanding of the words. Irresistable is, by definition, something that cannot be stopped. Immovable means the irresistable force may not move it out of the way. So, either you shade your understanding of what it means to be immovable, what it means to be irresistable, or both.
A force that is moving, and hits an immovable object must move out of the way. It can do so by deflecting, bouncing off if the object and remaining a force, but on a different vector. This would mean its not really irresistable.
What happens when an irresistable force meets an immovable object?
You get a great movie called ';The Dark Knight';
The Joker and Batman are representative of an unstoppable force and an immovable object. That is one of the Joker's last lines in the movie: ';This is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object';
There is no such force, and no such object. Don't waste your time on hypotheticals - there is no shortage of real problems to spend your time wondering about.
What kind of object represents the word mature and bossy?
An old hickory stickWhat kind of object represents the word mature and bossy?
I think of like, a tie. As in suit and tie.
Cause people that wear suits to work are generally mature and stuff.
I think of like, a tie. As in suit and tie.
Cause people that wear suits to work are generally mature and stuff.
Why does serbia object to the annexation of Bosnia-Herzegovina to Austria?
Because Bosnia is Serbian land.Why does serbia object to the annexation of Bosnia-Herzegovina to Austria?
Because they will have to build a bridge of hundreds of km long to reach each other
What is this question about anyway ? New history and geography ?
And Serbia is written with big S
Because they will have to build a bridge of hundreds of km long to reach each other
What is this question about anyway ? New history and geography ?
And Serbia is written with big S
What is this object and how much is it worth?
Someone gave me this object and told me it is worth something. It looks like some sort of antiques. I want to know what it is (a name would be much appreciated) and how much it is worth. Here is three pictures of the object:
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb19/drips_photo/DSC00061.jpg
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb19/drips_photo/DSC00062.jpg
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb19/drips_photo/DSC00063.jpgWhat is this object and how much is it worth?
Looks like a big space-taking dust catcher to me. ;-)What is this object and how much is it worth?
don't know what it is but yes it does look African. odds are it is a mass produced piece and will take a hundred years and a lot of devastation before it will become valuable. enjoy it for what it is...what ever it is.
i have no idea. looks african to me but im most likely wrong.
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb19/drips_photo/DSC00061.jpg
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb19/drips_photo/DSC00062.jpg
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb19/drips_photo/DSC00063.jpgWhat is this object and how much is it worth?
Looks like a big space-taking dust catcher to me. ;-)What is this object and how much is it worth?
don't know what it is but yes it does look African. odds are it is a mass produced piece and will take a hundred years and a lot of devastation before it will become valuable. enjoy it for what it is...what ever it is.
i have no idea. looks african to me but im most likely wrong.
What is used to make small details of an object visible to a scientist?
Probably an electron microscope or x-ray crystallographyWhat is used to make small details of an object visible to a scientist?
microscopeWhat is used to make small details of an object visible to a scientist?
microscope
Electron Microscope
Very big glasses
Magnifying glass or microscope??
Microscope, and I have a neat little device I use in my shop. It is a pair of binoculars, but they are made so both lenses converge to one spot. I use them to find hair line cracks in circuit boards.
microscope
microscopeWhat is used to make small details of an object visible to a scientist?
microscope
Electron Microscope
Very big glasses
Magnifying glass or microscope??
Microscope, and I have a neat little device I use in my shop. It is a pair of binoculars, but they are made so both lenses converge to one spot. I use them to find hair line cracks in circuit boards.
microscope
If a long flat object was brought into space, wouldn't it not be flat anymore because the Earth is round?
Or vise versa, if a long flat object was made in space, and then brought down to Earth, wouldn't it not look flat on Earth and come off the ground the way a ruler does when you put it on a basketball? Does that mean that nothing ';flat'; on Earth is flat, and truly flat objects wouldn't look flat on Earth?If a long flat object was brought into space, wouldn't it not be flat anymore because the Earth is round?
Flat is flat.
The shape of the earth has nothing to do with the flatness of an object.
The only change in flatness of a flat object in space brought to earth would be from resisting the gravitational field of the earth, and even that depends on how it's supported. If the support is at each end, it will become concave on the side away from the center of the earth. If supported in the middle, it will become concave on the side toward the earth.acne facial coconut oil
Flat is flat.
The shape of the earth has nothing to do with the flatness of an object.
The only change in flatness of a flat object in space brought to earth would be from resisting the gravitational field of the earth, and even that depends on how it's supported. If the support is at each end, it will become concave on the side away from the center of the earth. If supported in the middle, it will become concave on the side toward the earth.
Speed of a falling object from various heights?
does the ft. lbs change from different heightsSpeed of a falling object from various heights?
Foot-lbfs (lbf is pound-force, it is distinct from lbm or pound-mass) of energy vary directly with height.
(For those you aren't convince that this is unit energy, consider. You have a force acting through a distance which is the definition of work and work and energy are equivalent.)
Because kinetic energy varies with the square of the speed the velocity of a falling object is proportional to the square root of the height from which it fell.
Which is also supported by noting that the equation for distance traveled by a uniformly accelerated object starting from rest is:
d=(1/2)at^2
where d is distance
a is acceleration
t is timeSpeed of a falling object from various heights?
ft-lb is a force or work moving an object of one lb to a distance of one ft. a force is not use in a falling object, its the gravity that doing the work.
F = (Lb) * (ft)
for a free falling object neglecting air resistance, the relationship of velocity and height is
v = ( 2gh ) ^ (0.5)
v=velocity
g= acceleration of gravity
h= height
I'm not sure what you're asking. The pounds don't have any effect on how fast the object falls. The speed just depends on how many seconds have elapsed since the object started falling (or how far it has fallen). The combination of final speed and weight will determine how much damage it will do when it hits.
see this video it will help you understand the falling bodies
http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=3鈥?/a>
Are you talking about the force of impact?
No, foot pounds is a unit of torque.
See the video above it will help!
Foot-lbfs (lbf is pound-force, it is distinct from lbm or pound-mass) of energy vary directly with height.
(For those you aren't convince that this is unit energy, consider. You have a force acting through a distance which is the definition of work and work and energy are equivalent.)
Because kinetic energy varies with the square of the speed the velocity of a falling object is proportional to the square root of the height from which it fell.
Which is also supported by noting that the equation for distance traveled by a uniformly accelerated object starting from rest is:
d=(1/2)at^2
where d is distance
a is acceleration
t is timeSpeed of a falling object from various heights?
ft-lb is a force or work moving an object of one lb to a distance of one ft. a force is not use in a falling object, its the gravity that doing the work.
F = (Lb) * (ft)
for a free falling object neglecting air resistance, the relationship of velocity and height is
v = ( 2gh ) ^ (0.5)
v=velocity
g= acceleration of gravity
h= height
I'm not sure what you're asking. The pounds don't have any effect on how fast the object falls. The speed just depends on how many seconds have elapsed since the object started falling (or how far it has fallen). The combination of final speed and weight will determine how much damage it will do when it hits.
see this video it will help you understand the falling bodies
http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=3鈥?/a>
Are you talking about the force of impact?
No, foot pounds is a unit of torque.
See the video above it will help!
For a free falling object dropped from rest, what is its instantaneous speed at end of 5s of fall, 6s of fall?
the same as the number just add a zero.For a free falling object dropped from rest, what is its instantaneous speed at end of 5s of fall, 6s of fall?
All answers are to 1 sig fig.
V = gt
V(5) = 10*5 = 50 m/sec
V(6) = 10*6 = 60 m/sec
All answers are to 1 sig fig.
V = gt
V(5) = 10*5 = 50 m/sec
V(6) = 10*6 = 60 m/sec
A 1.00-kg object is observed to have an acceleration of 10.0 m s2 in a direction 30.0掳 north of east as in fig?
A 1.00-kg object is observed to have an
acceleration of 10.0 m s2 in a direction
30.0掳 north of east as in figure. The force
F2 acting on the object has a magnitude of
5.00 N and is directed north. Determine
the magnitude and direction of the force
F1 acting on the object.A 1.00-kg object is observed to have an acceleration of 10.0 m s2 in a direction 30.0掳 north of east as in fig?
its simple break the force on the body into x and y components. F2 affects only the y component of the force. subtract it from the force acting totally on the body(mass*accelaration) and you will get F1. toatal force is;
mass*10cos30 in x direction and
mass*10sin30 in y direction
acceleration of 10.0 m s2 in a direction
30.0掳 north of east as in figure. The force
F2 acting on the object has a magnitude of
5.00 N and is directed north. Determine
the magnitude and direction of the force
F1 acting on the object.A 1.00-kg object is observed to have an acceleration of 10.0 m s2 in a direction 30.0掳 north of east as in fig?
its simple break the force on the body into x and y components. F2 affects only the y component of the force. subtract it from the force acting totally on the body(mass*accelaration) and you will get F1. toatal force is;
mass*10cos30 in x direction and
mass*10sin30 in y direction
If an object thant on the surface displaces 10cm鲁 of water, how much does that object weight?
thant??
I presume that object is floating on the surface.
Mass and weight are different things, but let's ignore that.
The weight of the object is equal to the weight of the water it displaces. 10 cm^3 weighs 10 grams, so that's the weight of the object.
I presume that object is floating on the surface.
Mass and weight are different things, but let's ignore that.
The weight of the object is equal to the weight of the water it displaces. 10 cm^3 weighs 10 grams, so that's the weight of the object.
The speed of an object is directly proportional to the time it has fallen.?
After an object has fallen for 3.5seconds its speed is 22.5m/s. What is its speed after 5s?The speed of an object is directly proportional to the time it has fallen.?
v = v0 + a*t
assuming it started from rest means:
22.5 m/s = a * 3.5s
-%26gt; a = 6.43 m/s^2
-%26gt; vf = (6.43 m/s^2)*(5s) = 32.1 m/s
cheersThe speed of an object is directly proportional to the time it has fallen.?
if the speed is directly proportional, then the speed is 32.143m/s given that there is no terminal velocity fir the object
and you wonder why you don't go to the prom
v = v0 + a*t
assuming it started from rest means:
22.5 m/s = a * 3.5s
-%26gt; a = 6.43 m/s^2
-%26gt; vf = (6.43 m/s^2)*(5s) = 32.1 m/s
cheersThe speed of an object is directly proportional to the time it has fallen.?
if the speed is directly proportional, then the speed is 32.143m/s given that there is no terminal velocity fir the object
and you wonder why you don't go to the prom
How does a bat ditinguish between a prey and an object when its sends high frequency waves?
The prey is small and moving. The object is large and fixed. However really stupid bats still go for rocks, trees, and airplanes. They get weeded out in the process.How does a bat ditinguish between a prey and an object when its sends high frequency waves?
Generally speaking animals are softer then trees and rocks the sound waves bounce of them at a different frequency, in the natural environment there aren't as many variables as in the modern world. Bats also use there sense of smell which helps alot.How does a bat ditinguish between a prey and an object when its sends high frequency waves?
the same way any animal would.
through the process of growing up, and becoming able to hunt their own food, they learn how to notice the subtle differences between animate and inanimate objects.
remember that bats' sonic waves are just another form of sight. sight is electromagnetic waves, afterall. there's no real difference besides the wavelength and speed.
and similarly, there are bound to be a lot of ways to camoflauge against sound, just like there are a lot of ways to camoflauge against light.acne facial coconut oil
Generally speaking animals are softer then trees and rocks the sound waves bounce of them at a different frequency, in the natural environment there aren't as many variables as in the modern world. Bats also use there sense of smell which helps alot.How does a bat ditinguish between a prey and an object when its sends high frequency waves?
the same way any animal would.
through the process of growing up, and becoming able to hunt their own food, they learn how to notice the subtle differences between animate and inanimate objects.
remember that bats' sonic waves are just another form of sight. sight is electromagnetic waves, afterall. there's no real difference besides the wavelength and speed.
and similarly, there are bound to be a lot of ways to camoflauge against sound, just like there are a lot of ways to camoflauge against light.
What is the amount of stress or force that an object can take?
I am not sure of the exact term, but it is called (something like) the failure point. In Structural Geology applied stress results in strain, which is movement or distortion of the object.What is the amount of stress or force that an object can take?
Depends on the object and its shape.
We had a challenge once when I was in school....we got one piece of paper and a 12in strip of masking tape and we were told to build a structure that would hold weight without collapsing.
The final weight bearing structure consisted of three circles taped together in a triangular form. It held 14 encyclopedias.What is the amount of stress or force that an object can take?
It would depend upon the modulus of elasticity as well as nature of force and duration.
thnks
your are reffering to the breaking point of an object?
Depends on the object and its shape.
We had a challenge once when I was in school....we got one piece of paper and a 12in strip of masking tape and we were told to build a structure that would hold weight without collapsing.
The final weight bearing structure consisted of three circles taped together in a triangular form. It held 14 encyclopedias.What is the amount of stress or force that an object can take?
It would depend upon the modulus of elasticity as well as nature of force and duration.
thnks
your are reffering to the breaking point of an object?
HOw do u know if a force acting on an object does no work?
Is it because the force is not in the direction of the objects motion, the force is greater than the force of friction, or the object accelerates?
* please explain how u know this %26amp; the first person with the right answers gets 5 stars *HOw do u know if a force acting on an object does no work?
If the force acting on the object doesnt result in displacement of the particles in relation to the surroundings of the system under consideration, then the work done is zero.
Mathematically the work done is zero when the displacement is at right angle (90 degrees) to the direction of the force.
Since work is calculated as force x displacement x cos(theta)
i.e. W = F x d x cos (theta)
where theta is the angle between the force and the displacement.
Eg : The earth does no work on the moon since the motion of the moon is at right angle (tangential) to the direction of the force applied by the earth.HOw do u know if a force acting on an object does no work?
work is force times distance. so if there is either no force or no distance, then the object does no work.
Whenever there is a Force acting on any object, even though there is no displacement it does some work, to find out that u have to calculate the co-efficient of surface and frictional force.
But it always does some work.
If a force acting on an object does not move or deform the object, then it does no work. The previous answer is incorrect.
hick_ninja is right
* please explain how u know this %26amp; the first person with the right answers gets 5 stars *HOw do u know if a force acting on an object does no work?
If the force acting on the object doesnt result in displacement of the particles in relation to the surroundings of the system under consideration, then the work done is zero.
Mathematically the work done is zero when the displacement is at right angle (90 degrees) to the direction of the force.
Since work is calculated as force x displacement x cos(theta)
i.e. W = F x d x cos (theta)
where theta is the angle between the force and the displacement.
Eg : The earth does no work on the moon since the motion of the moon is at right angle (tangential) to the direction of the force applied by the earth.HOw do u know if a force acting on an object does no work?
work is force times distance. so if there is either no force or no distance, then the object does no work.
Whenever there is a Force acting on any object, even though there is no displacement it does some work, to find out that u have to calculate the co-efficient of surface and frictional force.
But it always does some work.
If a force acting on an object does not move or deform the object, then it does no work. The previous answer is incorrect.
hick_ninja is right
If a solid object was traveling through the mass of earth.?
Would the surviving object be expelled by earth or travelling with its own motion as at the moment of impact?If a solid object was traveling through the mass of earth.?
i suggest you take an english correspondence course before you try physics.If a solid object was traveling through the mass of earth.?
Depends upon the nature of the object colliding with the Earth and its speed; for example, if the object hitting the Earth was a planet the size of Jupiter, there would be nothing left of the planet; if the object was an asteroid 1/2 mile in diameter going 20 thousand mph, although a tremendous amount of damage would be done, the object would be completely stopped by the impact and would there after move along with the Earth.
you need to reformulate your question to have the answer you need
Yes and no.
It depends on what you mean by a solid object.
A very small and almost massless object like a neutrino could pass through without any interaction at all.
A big object like a meteorite is going to sting a little.
Most likely it will totally vapourize. If its small enough and metallic it might leave a small lump buried in the crater. e.g. Meteor Crater Arizona.
The Australian desert is littered with remains. Bear in mind 7/10 will hit the sea and disappear.
Many objects vapourize on hitting the atmosphere. (e.g. ';Shooting stars';)
The moon may well have formed due to a collision/near collision of the earth with a planetoid, spilling matter, which later coalesced into our two worlds.
i suggest you take an english correspondence course before you try physics.If a solid object was traveling through the mass of earth.?
Depends upon the nature of the object colliding with the Earth and its speed; for example, if the object hitting the Earth was a planet the size of Jupiter, there would be nothing left of the planet; if the object was an asteroid 1/2 mile in diameter going 20 thousand mph, although a tremendous amount of damage would be done, the object would be completely stopped by the impact and would there after move along with the Earth.
you need to reformulate your question to have the answer you need
Yes and no.
It depends on what you mean by a solid object.
A very small and almost massless object like a neutrino could pass through without any interaction at all.
A big object like a meteorite is going to sting a little.
Most likely it will totally vapourize. If its small enough and metallic it might leave a small lump buried in the crater. e.g. Meteor Crater Arizona.
The Australian desert is littered with remains. Bear in mind 7/10 will hit the sea and disappear.
Many objects vapourize on hitting the atmosphere. (e.g. ';Shooting stars';)
The moon may well have formed due to a collision/near collision of the earth with a planetoid, spilling matter, which later coalesced into our two worlds.
Whats the HTML Code i neede to place an object on top of a flash layout?
hi i recently got a flash layout from lovemyflash.com and i have this music player type thing that i would like to place on top of the layout, sort of to the right on the grey area, just not on the bottom white part, this is the page myspace.com/radiobored
can somone tell me the code for javascript or css or whatever it is i need to do this?Whats the HTML Code i neede to place an object on top of a flash layout?
easiest to use CSS and have a z-coordinateWhats the HTML Code i neede to place an object on top of a flash layout?
Get two DIVs and place one over the other with CSS, using Z-Index property. Google it.
can somone tell me the code for javascript or css or whatever it is i need to do this?Whats the HTML Code i neede to place an object on top of a flash layout?
easiest to use CSS and have a z-coordinateWhats the HTML Code i neede to place an object on top of a flash layout?
Get two DIVs and place one over the other with CSS, using Z-Index property. Google it.
What happens when an irrsistable force meets am inmovable object?
they collide!What happens when an irrsistable force meets am inmovable object?
REPRODUCTION!! lolWhat happens when an irrsistable force meets am inmovable object?
BOOOOM
like a car crashing into a solid wall
A horrendous kablooie
the fabric of the universe would split and the space-time continuum would be disrupted.
SEX!!!
REPRODUCTION!! lolWhat happens when an irrsistable force meets am inmovable object?
BOOOOM
like a car crashing into a solid wall
A horrendous kablooie
the fabric of the universe would split and the space-time continuum would be disrupted.
SEX!!!
What is the de Broglie wavelength of a 300g object moving @ velocity of 50m/second (about 100mph)?
The de Broglie wavelength W of an object with momentum p is
W = h / p,
where h is Planck's constant ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_鈥?/a> ). So, we need the momentum, which for a particle with mass m and velocity v is
p = m * v
non-relativistically, and
p = gamma * m * v = m * v / sqrt[ 1 - (v / c)^2 ]
relativistically, where
gamma = 1 / sqrt[ 1 - (v / c)^2 ]
is the Lorentz factor ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_fac鈥?/a> ) and c is the speed of light ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_li鈥?/a> ).
Since the speed you're given is very small compared to c, it won't matter much if you use the non-relativistic formula for p. The larger v is, though, the larger the error in this approximation becomes.acne facial coconut oil
W = h / p,
where h is Planck's constant ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_鈥?/a> ). So, we need the momentum, which for a particle with mass m and velocity v is
p = m * v
non-relativistically, and
p = gamma * m * v = m * v / sqrt[ 1 - (v / c)^2 ]
relativistically, where
gamma = 1 / sqrt[ 1 - (v / c)^2 ]
is the Lorentz factor ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_fac鈥?/a> ) and c is the speed of light ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_li鈥?/a> ).
Since the speed you're given is very small compared to c, it won't matter much if you use the non-relativistic formula for p. The larger v is, though, the larger the error in this approximation becomes.
At one afternoon, which will be cooler, a white object or a black one?
if both are left under a shade from 4:30 pm to 5:30pm...At one afternoon, which will be cooler, a white object or a black one?
generally and roughly speaking, the lighter-colored the object is, the more it reflects light instead of absorbing it.
so, if all other things are equal (details of surface, heat capacity, thermal mass etc), the white object should be cooler than the black one...
edit: the 'in the shade' part is pretty much irrelevant. if both objects are seeing the same intensity and spectrum of light, the lighter one will reflect more of that light compared to the darker one...
both objects will temperature-equilibrate with the outside air (in the light or dark) via conduction/convection/radiation.
if the only difference between these two objects is the color, this thermal equilibration will occur at the same rate. the only difference then is how effectively the two object absorb IR/visible/UV light, and what is the result of that absorbed light....
of course this difference will be very very small ';in the shade';. i think the result will be that the warmer black object will simply just lose this extra heat via the other three processes to compensate for the heat absorbed radiatively...
in direct sunlight, the other three processes would not be able to keep up, and the black object would be noticably warmer...
cheersAt one afternoon, which will be cooler, a white object or a black one?
White because light objects absorb less heat than dark objects.
My dad for example has a white car which is cooler once you get in.
My mom has darker green car and it is hotter inside.
The less energy is absorbed the less you have to emit
It will take longer to get rid of more energy than less energy
it is right that black is the better emiter but only if the temperature of the black surface is more than that of its surroundings. White would be the cooler of the two. I have already answered a question like this one, and here is it's link: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;鈥?/a>
Under a shade, they will be the same temperature. In the sun, the white one would be cooler. Haley's mom maybe good at math, but this isn't math. She probably didn't even notice the ';under a shade'; part.
It is a proven fact that dark colors trap and hold more heat. So the white will be slightly cooler.
my mom is good at math and she said WHITE
generally and roughly speaking, the lighter-colored the object is, the more it reflects light instead of absorbing it.
so, if all other things are equal (details of surface, heat capacity, thermal mass etc), the white object should be cooler than the black one...
edit: the 'in the shade' part is pretty much irrelevant. if both objects are seeing the same intensity and spectrum of light, the lighter one will reflect more of that light compared to the darker one...
both objects will temperature-equilibrate with the outside air (in the light or dark) via conduction/convection/radiation.
if the only difference between these two objects is the color, this thermal equilibration will occur at the same rate. the only difference then is how effectively the two object absorb IR/visible/UV light, and what is the result of that absorbed light....
of course this difference will be very very small ';in the shade';. i think the result will be that the warmer black object will simply just lose this extra heat via the other three processes to compensate for the heat absorbed radiatively...
in direct sunlight, the other three processes would not be able to keep up, and the black object would be noticably warmer...
cheersAt one afternoon, which will be cooler, a white object or a black one?
White because light objects absorb less heat than dark objects.
My dad for example has a white car which is cooler once you get in.
My mom has darker green car and it is hotter inside.
The less energy is absorbed the less you have to emit
It will take longer to get rid of more energy than less energy
it is right that black is the better emiter but only if the temperature of the black surface is more than that of its surroundings. White would be the cooler of the two. I have already answered a question like this one, and here is it's link: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;鈥?/a>
Under a shade, they will be the same temperature. In the sun, the white one would be cooler. Haley's mom maybe good at math, but this isn't math. She probably didn't even notice the ';under a shade'; part.
It is a proven fact that dark colors trap and hold more heat. So the white will be slightly cooler.
my mom is good at math and she said WHITE
An object has a mass of 615 grams and a volume of 105 cm3. What is the density of the object?
density=mass/volume
so you just divide 615g/105cm^3 = 5.86g/cm^3An object has a mass of 615 grams and a volume of 105 cm3. What is the density of the object?
Density is grams per cubic centimeters.
So density (615 grams/105 cubic centimeters) = 5.87An object has a mass of 615 grams and a volume of 105 cm3. What is the density of the object?
Density is defined as mass / volume.
Now -you- go do the arithemetic 鈽?br>
Doug
so you just divide 615g/105cm^3 = 5.86g/cm^3An object has a mass of 615 grams and a volume of 105 cm3. What is the density of the object?
Density is grams per cubic centimeters.
So density (615 grams/105 cubic centimeters) = 5.87An object has a mass of 615 grams and a volume of 105 cm3. What is the density of the object?
Density is defined as mass / volume.
Now -you- go do the arithemetic 鈽?br>
Doug
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)