There all diffrent speeds
Answer:
I would say the answer is A... but I'm not so sure ....
if rebecca stands in front of david at a distance of do and david perceives the position of rebecca at di, di will be +84 cm
<h3>What is focal length ?</h3>
How strongly light converges or diverges depends on an optical system's focal length, which is the inverse of optical power. A system with a positive focus length is said to converge light, whereas one with a negative focal length is said to diverge light.
focal length = +60 cm
magnification m = -0.40
focal length being positive an magnification negative.
given lens is a convex lens.
for a lens
m = di/do and 1/f = (1/di) - (1/do)di
= -0.4do1/f = (1/-0.4do) - 1/do do
= -210 cmdi = -0.4 * -210
di = +84 cm
To learn more about focal length go to - brainly.com/question/25779311
#SPJ4
The ball should put 200 N of force towards the golfer.
Newton's Third Law is every action has an equal and opposite reaction.
It's the ball exerting 200 N of force towards the club as well, but the opposite reaction is that it flies away.
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.