Plug in the corresponding values into y = mx + b
8.18 in for y
1.31 in for m
17.2 in for b
8.18 = 1.31x + 17.2
Now bring 17.2 to the left side by subtracting 17.2 to both sides (what you do on one side you must do to the other). Since 17.2 is being added on the right side, subtraction (the opposite of addition) will cancel it out (make it zero) from the right side and bring it over to the left side.
8.18 - 17.2 = 1.31x
-9.02 = 1.31x
Then divide 1.31 to both sides to isolate x. Since 1.31 is being multiplied by x, division (the opposite of multiplication) will cancel 1.31 out (in this case it will make 1.31 one) from the right side and bring it over to the left side.
-9.02/1.31 = 1.31x/1.31
x ≈ -6.8855
x is roughly -6.89
Hope this helped!
~Just a girl in love with Shawn Mendes
Ok i apologise for the messy working but I'll try and explain my attempt at logic
Also note i ignore any air resistance for this.
First i wrote the two equations I'd most likely need for this situation, the kinetic energy equation and the potential energy equation.
Because the energy right at the top of the swing motion is equal to the energy right in the "bottom" of the swing's motion (due to conservation of energy), i made the kinetic energy equal to the potential energy as indicated by Ek = Ep.
I also noted the "initial" and "final" height of the swing with hi and hf respectively.
So initially looking at this i thought, what the heck, there's no mass. Then i figured that using the conservation of energy law i could take the mass value from the Ek equation and use it in the Ep equation. So what i did was take the Ek equation and rearranged it for m as you can hopefully see. Then i substituted the rearranged Ek equation into the Ep equation.
So then the equation reads something like Ep = (rearranged Ek equation for m) × g (which is -9.81) × change in height (hf - hi).
Then i simplify the equation a little. When i multiply both sides by v^2 i can clearly see that there is one E on each side (at that stage i don't need to clarify which type of energy it is because Ek = Ep so they're just the same anyway). So i just canceled them out and square rooted both sides.
The answer i got was that the max velocity would be 4.85m/s 3sf, assuming no losses (eg energy lost to friction).
I do hope I'm right and i suppose it's better than a blank piece of paper good luck my dude xx
A very small source of light that radiates uniformly in all directions produces an electric field with an amplitude of ܧ at a distance R from the source. What is the amplitude of the magnetic field at a point 2R from the source?
If the distance from the source is doubled. The amplitude of the magnetic field is smaller 4 times.
A right turn would be the answer probably.
I think the answer is "<span>The ball that went out of the park shows more work because the distance was greater."</span>