<h2>Camels have 12 humps and lives at the North Pole </h2>
Six lost camels has 12 humps and lives at the north pole. The reason is that animal which possess hump are camels and they live at the north pole. Camel is used for travel purpose and for transfer goods from one place to another place.
Basically, a camel's hump is a large heap of fat. In a normal camel hump can be of 80 pounds that is equal to 35 kilograms on the scale. Human and many animals stocks their fat blended within the muscle tissue or beneath the skin layers. Camels are the sole living organism with a hump on its back.
Answer:
f = 1.96 revolutions per minute
Explanation:
The formula for the the frequency of revolution of a satellite, to develop an artificial gravity, with the help of centripetal acceleration is given as follows:
f = (1/2π)√(ac/r)
where,
f = frequency of rotation = ?
ac = centripetal acceleration= apparent gravity or artificial gravity = 2.2 m/s²
r = radius of station or satellite = diameter/2 = 104 m/2 = 52 m
Therefore,
f = (1/2π)√[(2.2 m/s²)/(52 m)]
f = (0.032 rev/s)(60 s/min)
<u>f = 1.96 revolutions per minute</u>
<h2>Answer: 4.928 days
</h2><h2 />
Explanation:
This problem can be solved using the <u>Radioactive Half Life Formula:
</u>
<u></u>
(1)
Where:
is the final amount of the material
is the initial amount of the material
is the time elapsed
is the half life of the material (the quantity we are asked to find)
Knowing this, let's substitute the values and find from (1):
(2)
(3)
Applying natural logarithm in both sides:
(4)
(5)
Clearing :
(6)
Finally:
The answer is not 'A'.
Using the numbers given in the question, it's 'B'.
It WOULD be 'A' if the number in B were 71 or less.
________________________________
<span>This is not as simple as it looks.
What quantity are we going to compare between the two cases ?
Yes, I know ... the "amount of work". But how to find that from the
numbers given in the question ?
Is it the same as the change in speed ?
Well ? Is it ?
NO. IT's NOT.
In order to reduce the car's speed, the brakes have to absorb
the KINETIC ENERGY, and THAT changes in proportion to
the SQUARE of the speed. ( KE = 1/2 m V² )
Case 'A' :
The car initially has (1/2 m) (100²)
= (1/2m) x 10,000 units of KE.
It slows down to (1/2 m) x (70²)
= (1/2m) x 4,900 units of KE.
The brakes have absorbed (10,000 - 4,900) = 5,100 units of KE.
Case 'B' :
The car initially has (1/2 m) (79²)
= (1/2m) x 6,241 units of KE.
It slows down to a stop . . . NO kinetic energy.
The brakes have absorbed all 6,241 units of KE.
Just as we suspected when we first read the problem,
the brakes do more work in Case-B, bringing the car
to a stop from 79, than they do when slowing the car
from 100 to 70 .
But when we first read the problem and formed that
snap impression, we did it for the wrong reason.
Here, I'll demonstrate:
Change Case-B. Make it "from 71 km/h to a stop".
Here's the new change in kinetic energy for Case-B:
The car initially has (1/2 m) (71²)
= (1/2m) x 5,041 units of KE.
It slows down to a stop . . . NO kinetic energy.
The brakes have absorbed all 5,041 units of KE.
-- To slow from 100 to 70, the brakes absorbed 5,100 units of KE.
-- Then, to slow the whole rest of the way from 71 to a stop,
the brakes absorbed only 5,041 units of KE.
-- The brakes did more work to slow the car the first 30 km/hr
than to slow it to a complete stop from 71 km/hr or less.
That's why you can't just say that the bigger change in speed
requires the greater amount of work.
______________________________________
It works exactly the same in the opposite direction, too.
It takes less energy from the engine to accelerate the car
from rest to 70 km/hr than it takes to accelerate it the
next 30, to 100 km/hr !</span>
(The exact break-even speed for this problem is 50√2 km/h,
or 70.711... km/hr rounded. )
