Answer:
(a) 328 Nm
(b) 79.35 Nm
Explanation:
N = =150, side = 17.5 cm = 0.175 m, i = 42 A, B = 1.7 T
A = side^2 = 0.175^2 = 0.030625 m^2
(a) Torque = N x i x A x B x Sinθ
For maximum torque, θ = 90 degree
Torque = 150 x 42 x 0.030625 x 1.7 x Sin 90
Torque = 328 Nm
(b) θ = 14 degree
Torque = 150 x 42 x 0.030625 x 1.7 x Sin 14
Torque = 79.35 Nm
Answer:
The change in potential energy is 
Explanation:
From the question we are told that
The magnitude of the uniform electric field is 
The distance traveled by the electron is 
Generally the force on this electron is mathematically represented as
Where F is the force and q is the charge on the electron which is a constant value of 
Thus
Generally the work energy theorem can be mathematically represented as
Where W is the workdone on the electron by the Electric field and 
is the change in kinetic energy
Also workdone on the electron can also be represented as
Where 
considering that the movement of the electron is along the x-axis
So
substituting values
Now From the law of energy conservation
Where 
is the change in potential energy
Thus
You asked a question. I'm about to answer it.
Sadly, I can almost guarantee that you won't understand the solution.
This realization grieves me, but there is little I can do to change it.
My explanation will be the best of which I'm capable.
Here are the Physics facts I'll use in the solution:
-- "Apparent magnitude" means how bright the star appears to us.
-- "Absolute magnitude" means the how bright the star WOULD appear
if it were located 32.6 light years from us (10 parsecs).
-- A change of 5 magnitudes means a 100 times change in brightness,
so each magnitude means brightness is multiplied or divided by ⁵√100 .
That's about 2.512... .
-- Increasing magnitude means dimmer.
Decreasing magnitude means brighter.
+5 is 10 magnitudes dimmer than -5 .
-- Apparent brightness is inversely proportional to the square
of the distance from the source (just like gravity, sound, and
the force between charges).
That's all the Physics. The rest of the solution is just arithmetic.
____________________________________________________
-- The star in the question would appear M(-5) at a distance of
32.6 light years.
-- It actually appears as a M(+5). That's 10 magnitudes dimmer than M(-5),
because of being farther away than 32.6 light years.
-- 10 magnitudes dimmer is ( ⁵√100)⁻¹⁰ = (100)^(-2) .
-- But brightness varies as the inverse square of distance,
so that exponent is (negative double) the ratio of the distances,
and the actual distance to the star is
(32.6) · (100)^(1) light years
= (32.6) · (100) light years
= approx. 3,260 light years . (roughly 1,000 parsecs)
I'll have to confess that I haven't done one of these calculations
in over 50 years, and I'm not really that confident in my result.
If somebody's health or safety depended on it, or the success of
a space mission, then I'd be strongly recommending that you get
a second opinion.
But, quite frankly, I do feel that mine is worth the 5 points.
c would be the correct answer because when its a negative power your moving the decimal to the left whic makes the number smaller
