/sci/ - Science & Math

>>1881143
i don't think you know what perpendicular and parallel mean

>>1881153

I know what they mean, originally I tilted my coordinate system so my y-axis was perpendicular to the SCW, but this fucked with my angle right?

Basicially I don't know what the fuck to do. yeah.

>>1881143
you are doin it wrong. you are treating 2.50 like it is the hyp in the pic, it is not.

>>1881160
Sort of right OP, I believe your _I_ was right, I'm not sure about using Cos for the parallel component though.

>implying a magnetic field can have a perpendicular component to a piece of superconductor

4/10

>>1881167
SHIT. Right yea, that's my bad big time. Do I just break the 2.50 down into X,Y components orrrr........

>>1881187
no

>>1881187
Are you really this fucking stupid? YOu dont know basic fukcing geometry? You cant draw fukcing triangles? What grade you in? What school do you go to? I gotta fucking complain to your princible!


It you post some cools pics (tits), i will guide you

>>1881199
¯\(°_o)/¯

>>1881199

>>1881199
Put your cock perpendicular to her tits.

>>1881199
OP actually kind of came through haha, not great tits, better than more impossible physics questions though.

>>1881143
ok since you delivered with the tits...

does this help? you simply make the 2.5 the hyp of another triangle. You should be able to calculate the angles of your new traingle easily

Any questions?

>>1881262
WIN!

bitches don't know bout my meissner effect

>>1881262
Oh fuck my face.
Ok I have that done, but I'm in my book now, and under 'Tilted Aces and Arbitrary Directions', it says it's usefule if you need to determine component vectors 'Parallel to' and ' Perp. To', which is exactly what I'm doing.

AII = Ax = ACos(Angle)
Aperp = Ay = ASin(Angle)

Shouldn't I tild my axes for this..?

>>1881319

>>1881319
YES OP, don't listen to the guy that posted the picture for you, all that's doing is turning a force into a length..?

Tilt and use direction cosines

>>1881371
wat

>>1881319
WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? I ALREADY GAVE YOU THE GODDAMM ANSWER! (in the pic >>1881262). STOP BEING A FUCKING FAGGOT!

Tilt axes? ARE YOU fucking simple or somthing? You mean can you "rotate the paper"...LMAO. YOU CAN ALWAYS ROTATE THE FUCKING PAPER! GTFO!

>>1881400
No, not rotate the paper.. How the fuck does your picture help me.

Think about it and try and find the parallel component..

>>1881400
do you get it now OP?
WTF is so confusing?
Do you not know geometry?

What is it with all these complicated answers? OP, you were nearly right in the first place. You simply mixed up parallel and perpendicular, if you look at the picture the field crosses at 55, not 35 degrees. Perpendicular is 2.50T*cos35, parallel is 2.50T*sin35. Alternatively 2.50T*sin55 and 2.50T*cos55 (complete the triangle). And here's a sanity check: if the angle shown were 0, it would all be perpendicular. Plug in the values and check that it indeed works out.

>>1881410
STOP BEING A FAGGOT! i posted a dumbed down version here >>1881414.

I had assumed you were smart enough to do basic geometry and figure out the bottom angle was 35 as well. I Guess I was wrong. I HOPE YOU FUCKING FAIL THE 10TH GRADE!

>>1881419
Everyone else is wrong. Someone give this man a fucking medal, an average man among retards.

>>1881434

Thanks, I feel honored.

Ex-physics-teacherfag here.

>>1881419
>>1881445

NO! THIS THREAD IS FUCKING BULLSHIT!
READ THE FUCKING QUESTION.

35 WITH THE HORIZONTAL. FUCK.

>>1881434
Nope, everyone is telling you the exact same thing.

The only differnce is that >>1881419 just gave you the answer, while everyone else hoped you could figure it out (if you set up geometery right). I guess they were wrong, you dont know shit about geometery, and will fail this course.

Good job

>>1881456
Wasn't me, I'm just assuming dude who posted the pic is right and did it that way. OP here. I guess they are the same shit.

>>1881419
>>1881414

Not idiotic OP here, but these seem to be contrasting ideas, using the picture posted in >>1881419, we can use Law of Sines which solves the Perpendicular component to be 1.43 etc bullshit, the second post lists that as the parallel component. Try it.

>>1881462
The pic is the correct was to do the problem, the geometery justifies why it works. You always need to set up the geometry.

To just look at the pic and conclude 2.5*sin(35) and 2.5*cos(35) is incorrect, as 2.5 is not the hyp. It may seem like it worked in this case, but it wont work in general, and will fuck up yor calculations.

This has gone on way too fucking long jesus fucking christ alfuckingmighty.

Parallel = 1.43
Perp = 2.047
OP = fucking gigantic dipshit

>>1881495

>>1881262, >>1881414 and >>1881419
are the same

Parallel = 2.5 T Sin (35)
Perp = 2.5 T Cos(35)

what part dont you get?