All categories

3 years ago

1. Which mathematical representation correctly identifies impulse?

Physics

1 answer:

horsena [70]3 years ago

3 0

Answer:

1. B. Impulse = Force × Time

2. A. The momentum of each ball changes, and the total momentum stays the same

3. -55 kg·m/s

4. B. 3.5 kg

5. C. 6.3 m/s

Explanation:

1. The impulse is the momentum change of an object due to a force applied for a given period

2. Given that the objects collide, and the force of the 3 kg mass moving with 24 kg·m/s acts on the 1 kg mass while the total momentum is conserved;

The stationary ball of mass 1 kg begins to moves at certain velocity after collision and therefore changes momentum, while the velocity of the ball of mass 3.0 kg reduces and the total combined momentum of the two balls in the closed system remains the same

3. By the principle of conservation of linear momentum, we have;

The sum of the momentum before the collision = The sum of the momentum after collision

Given that the objects move together after the collision, the total momentum is therefore;

Total momentum = 110 kg·m/s + -65 kg·m/s + -100 kg·m/s = 110 kg·m/s - 65 kg·m/s - 100 kg·m/s = -55kg·m/s

4. Given that the final velocity of the two objects (m₁ + m₂) combined = 50 m/s

Where;

m₁ = The mass of the first object

m₂ = The mass of the second object

The total momentum of the system = 250 kg·m/s

From momentum = Mass × Velocity, we have;

Mass = Momentum/Velocity = 250 kg·m/s/(50 m/s) = 5.0 kg

The mass (m₁ + m₂) = 5.0 kg

Given that m₁ = 1.5 kg, we have;

m₂ = 5.0 kg - m₁ = 5.0 kg - 1.5 kg = 3.5 kg

The mass of the second object = 3.5 kg

5. The mass of the cue stick = 0.5 kg

The velocity of the cue stick = 2.5 m/s

The mass of the ball = 0.2 kg

The initial velocity of the ball = 0 m/s

Given that total initial momentum = Total final momentum, we have;

0.5 kg × 2.5 m/s + 0.2 kg × 0 = 0.2 kg × v + 0.5 kg × 0

0.5 kg × 2.5 m/s = 0.2 kg × v

v = (0.5 kg × 2.5 m/s)/(0.2 kg) = 6.25 m/s ≈ 6.3 m/s

You might be interested in

Heat is transferred from the sun to the earth via electromagnetic waves (see Chapter 24). Because of this transfer, the entropy

Sever21 [200]

Answer:

1. Decreases,

2. Increases,

3. Increases

Explanation:

The heat which is a product of sun's energy, is transferred from the sun to the earth through radiation, conduction or convention. This heat passes through the earth atmosphere, then warms it , before becoming heat energy.

Therefore, Heat is transferred from the sun to the earth via electromagnetic waves . Because of this transfer, the entropy of the sun DECREASES, the entropy of the earth INCREASES and the entropy of the sun-earth system INCREASES.

8 0

3 years ago

Match to the correct answers

yarga [219]

A. You measure power on watts.
B. Non-renewable
C.renewable
D. Joules
E. Fossil fuels

8 0

3 years ago

Would u rather/ be in avengers or x-men

vlabodo [156]

X men those mutants are amazing

6 0

2 years ago

Why is pseudoscience bad?

USPshnik [31]

Answer:

It is quite difficult to picture a pseudoscientist—really picture him or her over the course of a day, a year, or a whole career. What kind or research does he or she actually do, what differentiates him or her from a carpenter, or a historian, or a working scientist? In short, what do such people think they are up to?

… it is a significant point for reflection that all individuals who have been called “pseudoscientists” have considered themselves to be “scientists”, with no prefix.

The answer might surprise you. When they find time after the obligation of supporting themselves, they read papers in specific areas, propose theories, gather data, write articles, and, maybe, publish them. What they imagine they are doing is, in a word, “science”. They might be wrong about that—many of us hold incorrect judgments about the true nature of our activities—but surely it is a significant point for reflection that all individuals who have been called “pseudoscientists” have considered themselves to be “scientists”, with no prefix.

What is pseudoscience?

“Pseudoscience” is a bad category for analysis. It exists entirely as a negative attribution that scientists and non‐scientists hurl at others but never apply to themselves. Not only do they apply the term exclusively as a discrediting slur, they do so inconsistently. Over the past two‐and‐a‐quarter centuries since the term popped into the Western European languages, a great number of disparate doctrines have been categorized as sharing a core quality—pseudoscientificity, if you will—when in fact they do not. It is based on this diversity that I refer to such beliefs and theories as “fringe” rather than as “pseudo”: Their defining characteristic is the distance from the center of the mainstream scientific consensus in whichever direction, not some essential property they share.

Scholars have by and large tended to ignore fringe science as regrettable sideshows to the main narrative of the history of science, but there is a good deal to be learned by applying the same tools of analysis that have been used to understand mainstream science. This is not, I stress, to imply that there is no difference between hollow‐Earth theories and geophysics; on the contrary, the differences are the point of the analysis. Focusing on the historical and conceptual relationship between the fringe and the core of the various sciences as that blurry border has fluctuated over the centuries provides powerful analytical leverage for understanding where contemporary anti‐science movements come from and how mainstream scientists might address them.

As soon as professionalization blossomed, tagging competing theories as pseudoscientific became an important tool for scientists to define what they understood science to be

The central claim of this essay is that the concept of “pseudoscience” was called into being as the shadow of professional science. Before science became a profession—with formalized training, credentialing, publishing venues, careers—the category of pseudoscience did not exist. As soon as professionalization blossomed, tagging competing theories as pseudoscientific became an important tool for scientists to define what they understood science to be. In fact, despite many decades of strenuous effort by philosophers and historians, a precise definition of “science” remains elusive. It should be noted however that the absence of such definitional clarity has not seriously inhibited the ability of scientists to deepen our understanding of nature tremendously.

Explanation:

8 0

2 years ago

A 12-kg dog jumps up in the air to catch a ball. The dog's center of mass is normally 0.20 m above the ground, and he is 0.50 m

ad-work [718]

Explanation:

Given Data:

mass of dog = 12 Kg

dog's center of mass = 0.20m

length of dog = 0.50m

height of dog's jump = ?

Solution:

Work done of gravitational force = Gain in Potential energy

2.1 × mgΔh = mg (h - 0.1)

2.1 × (0.3 - 0.1) = (h - 0.1)

h = 0.52 m

5 0

3 years ago