Ask question

Ask question

All categories

3 years ago

11

A 10cm long wire is pulled along a U-shaped conducting rail in a perpendicular magnetic field. The total resistance of the wire

and rail is 0.35 Ω. Pulling the wire with a force of 1.0 N causes 4.0 W of power to be dissipated in the circuit.
a. What is the speed of the wire when pulled with a force of 1.0 N?
b. What is the strength of the magnetic field?

1 answer:

soldi70 [24.7K]3 years ago

5 0

Answer:

a) $v=4.0m/s$

b) $B=2.958T$

Explanation:

From the question we are told that:

Wire Length $l=10cm=>0.10m$

Resistance $R=0.35$

Force $F=1.0N$

Power $P=4.0W$

a)

Generally the equation for Power is mathematically given by

$P=Fv$

Therefore

$v=\frac{P}{F}$

$v=\frac{4.0}{1.0}$

$v=4.0m/s$

b)

Generally the equation for Magnetic Field is mathematically given by

$B=\frac{\sqrt{PR}}{vl}$

$B=\frac{\sqrt{4*0.35}}{4*0.10}$

$B=2.958T$

You might be interested in

Help me please with this

Gre4nikov [31]

1. radiation
2. convection
3. condunction

8 0

4 years ago

Which scientist was the first to conclude through experimentation that atoms have positive charges in their nuclei?

Pavel [41]

<h2>Answer: Ernest Rutherford </h2>

Ernest Rutherford was a British physicist and chemist of New Zealand origin, who conducted a series of experiments together with Hans Geiger and Ernest Marsden; where the result led him to propose a new atomic model.

It should be noted that at that time, the "accepted" atomic model was Thomson's raisin pudding atomic model<u> </u><em><u>(electrons with negative charge immersed an the atom of positive charge that counteracted the negative charge of the electrons, like raisings embedded in a pudding)</u></em>, who discovered the electron and formerly was a professor of Rutherford.

Now, the experiment conducted under the direction of Ruherford at the laboratories of the University of Manchester during the year 1911; was for the purpose of <u>corroborating Thomson's atomic model</u>. To achieve this, a thin metal sheet was bombarded with alpha particles (nuclei of helium gas).

The idea was that these alpha particles, having positive electric charge, were attracted by the atom's negative charges and repelled by the positive charges, and it was expected that they would pass through the thin sheet without hardly deviating. Then, to observe the crash site of the particle, a phosphorescent screen was placed behind and on the sides of the metal sheet.

For according to Thomson's atomic model the positive and negative charges were evenly distributed, the sphere (the atom) had to be electrically neutral, and <u>the alpha particles would pass through the sheet without deviating. </u>

However, the results were surprising:

As expected, most of the particles went through the sheet without deviating.

<h2>But some suffered large deviations and, most importantly, <u>a small number of particles bounced backwards</u>. </h2>

That is:

<h2>The alpha particle beam was scattered (repelled) when it hit the thin metal sheet. </h2>

These facts could not be explained by Thomson's atomic model, so Rutherford developed another, suggesting that:

<h2><em>There is a concentration of charge in the center of the atom (which was later called nucleus) surrounded by electrons. </em></h2>

This new model could explain the proven fact in his experiments that some particles bounced in the direction opposite to the incident particles, because the electrical charge of this nucleus was positive, equal to the electrical charge of the alpha particles.

This is how Rutherford proposed a new atomic model and discovered the existence of the nucleus. However, this was not the definitive model, because on 1913 it was replaced by Bohr's.

8 0

3 years ago

The aluminum alloy (2024-t6) absorber plate is 6 mm thick and well insulated on its bottom. the top surface of the plate is sepa

Xelga [282]

The aluminum alloy(2024-T6; k=180 W/m<span>!K,) </span>absorber plate<span> is </span>6 mm thick<span> and </span>well insulated<span> on </span>its bottom<span>. The </span>top surface<span> of the </span>plate<span> is </span>separated<span> from a </span>transparent cover plate<span> by an </span>evacuated space<span>. The </span>tubes<span> are</span>spaced<span> a </span>distance<span> L of ...</span>

5 0

3 years ago

You swing a bat and hit a heavy box with a force of 1500 N. The force the box exerts on the bat is

vlabodo [156]

Answer:

E)

Explanation:

Because of Newton's Second Law, which says any action will be opposed by a reaction of the same magnitude, then no matter what, no matter if the box does or does not move, the bat bouces back, or what happens after the hit, when hitting the box the force ithbox exerts on the bat is exactly 1500 N.

4 0

3 years ago

If you now catch a second ball, with a mass 2m and speed v/2, is the sting you feel greater than, less than, or equal to the sti

Lesechka [4]

Answer:

b) Best explanation is -- both balls have same momentum and hence has equal stings to be felt

Explanation:

The question is ;

A friend tosses a ball to you with a speed V. When you catch the ball , you feel a noticeable sting in your hand, due to the force required to stop the ball.

a0 If you catch the second ball with a mass 2m and speed V/2. is the sting you feel , is greater than. less than or equale to the sting you felt when you caught the first ball ? The time required to stop the two balls is same.

b) Choose the best explanation from among the following;

i) The second ball has less KE, since KE depends on V2, and hence less sting.

ii) The two balls have the same momentum , and hence produce the same sting.

iii) The second ball has more mass and hence produces the greater sting.

<em>Solution:</em>

The momentum can be found from KE = 1/2 m $V^{2}$ = 1/2 $(mV)^{2}$ ÷ m

= $P^{2}$ /2m

or KE= $P^{2}$ /2m

==> P= $\sqrt{KE (2m)}$ --- (1)

Now momentum for first ball;

mass = m1=m

Speed V1 = V

and KE = 1/2 m $V^{2}$

Putting in eq (1)

==> P1= $\sqrt{\frac{1}{2} m V^{2} (2m)}$

==> P1 = mV

Momentum for second ball;

Mass m2= 2m

Speed V2 = V/2

KE = 1/2 m $V2^{2}$ = 1/2 (2m) $(V/2)^{2}$ = $\frac{mV^{2} }{4}$

For momentum putting value of KE and mass m =3m in eq 1;

==> P2 = $\sqrt{\frac{mV^{2} }{4} } (2(2m))$

==> P2 = mV

So we see that both the balls have same momentum i-e change in momentum is zero - or we can say both ball hit the hand with same force -- hence with same sting to be felt.

b) Best explanation is -- both balls have same momentum and hence has equal stings to be felt

7 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers