[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

Search:


View post   

>> No.7681844 [View]
File: 78 KB, 600x600, 1445818697695.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7681844

Kinetic energy
So if here was a one giant mass and a bunch or little masses and the one giant masses momentum = the momentum of all the smaller masses

Kinetic energy would be greater for all the smaller masses combined than for the one one giant masses kinetic energy. Because momentum is from a direct linear relationship between mass and speed so as you add more mass the speed reduces as by the laws of physics, yet and the kinetic energy reduces since it's measurement is more dependent on speed since it is derived from work equation in which it uses acceleration mass and displacement.
This right?

>> No.7638219 [View]
File: 78 KB, 600x600, 1445818697695.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7638219

If you where to go in an elevator step on a scale and go down you would "weight less" Because of the normal force being reduced.

Is this because since force is mass times acceleration and when you go down you accelerate downward therefor cancelling out the normal force? Also what if you stopped accelerating and went at a negative velocity (Downward) would the normal force already be cancelled out from before and not come back?Also what if you where to move faster than gravity (-9.81) would you experience a "negative normal force" or like complete cancellation of normal force and a new force pushing you upward?

Am I at least close?

>> No.7627192 [View]
File: 78 KB, 600x600, 1445818697695.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7627192

>>7627159
1.No
2.No
3.Don't know; probably not.

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]