Answer:
The displacement in t = 0,
y (0) = - 0.18 m
Explanation:
Given f = 40 Hz , A = 0.25m , μ = 0.02 kg / m, T = 20.48 N
v = √ T / μ
v = √20.48 N / 0.02 kg /m = 32 m/s
λ = v / f
λ = 32 m/s / 40 Hz = 0.8
K = 2 π / λ
K = 2π / 0.8 = 7.854
φ = X * 360 / λ
φ = 0.5 * 360 / 0.8 = 225 °
Using the model of y' displacement
y (t) = A* sin ( w * t - φ )
When t = 0
y (0) = 0.25 m *sin ( w*(0) - 225 )
y (0) = 0.25 * -0.707
y (0) = - 0.18 m
Without a bulb energy cant go through and it would be an open circuit blocking the energy from coming out.
Power is the rate at which work is done (2nd option)
Answer:
Precipitation is the formation of a solid from a solution. It is necessary to centrifuge the precipitate to exert sufficient forces of gravity to bring the solid particles in the solution to come together and settle
Explanation:
When you centrifuge precipitate it enables the nucleation to form.
Centrifuging the precipitate helps in determining whether a certain element is present in a solution or not.
Answer: hope it helps you...❤❤❤❤
Explanation: If your values have dimensions like time, length, temperature, etc, then if the dimensions are not the same then the values are not the same. So a “dimensionally wrong equation” is always false and cannot represent a correct physical relation.
No, not necessarily.
For instance, Newton’s 2nd law is F=p˙ , or the sum of the applied forces on a body is equal to its time rate of change of its momentum. This is dimensionally correct, and a correct physical relation. It’s fine.
But take a look at this (incorrect) equation for the force of gravity:
F=−G(m+M)Mm√|r|3r
It has all the nice properties you’d expect: It’s dimensionally correct (assuming the standard traditional value for G ), it’s attractive, it’s symmetric in the masses, it’s inverse-square, etc. But it doesn’t correspond to a real, physical force.
It’s a counter-example to the claim that a dimensionally correct equation is necessarily a correct physical relation.
A simpler counter example is 1=2 . It is stating the equality of two dimensionless numbers. It is trivially dimensionally correct. But it is false.