Answer:
1470kgm²
Explanation:
The formula for expressing the moment of inertial is expressed as;
I = 1/3mr²
m is the mass of the body
r is the radius
Since there are three rotor blades, the moment of inertia will be;
I = 3(1/3mr²)
I = mr²
Given
m = 120kg
r = 3.50m
Required
Moment of inertia
Substitute the given values and get I
I = 120(3.50)²
I = 120(12.25)
I = 1470kgm²
Hence the moment of inertial of the three rotor blades about the axis of rotation is 1470kgm²
Explanation:
The strength of the gravitational force between two objects depends on two factors, mass and distance. the force of gravity the masses exert on each other. ... increases, the force of gravity decreases. If the distance is doubled, the force of gravity is one-fourth as strong as before.
Answer:
i think it might be D or C
Answer:
Explanation:
Given that
V= 12 V
K=3
d= 2 mm
Area=5.00 $ 10#3 m2
Assume that
$ = Multiple sign
# = Negative sign
We Capacitance given as
For air
Net capacitance
C=C₁+C₂
We know that charge Q given as
Q= C V
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.
