1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
vova2212 [387]
3 years ago
8

A skateboarder traveling at 7.0 meters per second rolls to a stop at the top of a ramp in 3.0 seconds. What is the skateboarder’

s acceleration?
*Please only answer if you know - and ABSOLUTLEY NOOOOOOOO LINKS*
Thank you! :)
Physics
1 answer:
ki77a [65]3 years ago
8 0

Answer:

-2.33 m/s²

Explanation:

The computation of the skateboarder’s acceleration is shown below;

Acceleration means the change in velocity per unit with respect to time.

In the given case, the initial velocity is 7 m/s.

As in the question it is mentioned that  it comes to a stop, so the final velocity would be zero.

And, The time elapsed is 3 seconds.

Now the following equation should be used  

a = (v,final - v,initial) ÷ t

=  (0 - 7)/3

= -2.33 m/s²

You might be interested in
What forms of energy best describes the energy stored in food
Ludmilka [50]

Answer:

probably potentially energy

Explanation:

hopefully this helps

3 0
3 years ago
Two protons moving with same speed in same direction repel each other but what about two protons moving with different speed in
Thepotemich [5.8K]

Answer:In the case of two proton beams the protons repel one another because they have the same sign of electrical charge. There is also an attractive magnetic force between the protons, but in the proton frame of reference this force must be zero! Clearly then the attractive magnetic force that reduces the net force between protons in the two beams as seen in our frame of reference is relativistic. In particular the apparent magnetic forces or fields are relativistic modifications of the electrical forces or fields. As such modifications, they cannot be stronger than the electrical forces and fields that produce them. This follows from the fact that switching frames of reference can reduce forces, but it can’t turn what is attractive in one frame into a repulsive force in another frame.

In the case of wires the net charges in two wires are zero everywhere along the wires. That makes the net electrical forces between the wires very nearly zero. Yet the relativistic magnetic forces and fields will be of the same sort as in the case of two beams of charges of a single sign. This is true even in the frame of reference of what we think as the moving charges, that is, the electrons. In the frame of reference moving at the drift velocity of these current-carrying electrons, it is the protons or positively charged ions that are moving in the other direction. Consequently in any frame of reference for current-carrying wires in parallel, the net electrical force will be essentially zero, and there will be a net attractive magnetic force

Explanation:                                                                              

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Goo.gle meet??<br><br> https://meet.go ogle.com/qzz-pxqd-gaj
Elenna [48]

Answer:

ok............I'll try ............

5 0
3 years ago
Supply the missing force necessary to achieve equilibrium. Show your work.
Mumz [18]

<u>Analysing the Question:</u>

We know that equilibrium is the state of a body when it has equal and opposite forces being applied on it

In this case, a net downward force of 496N is being applied and a net upward force of (106 + 106 + 142 + x) N

<u>Finding the missing force:</u>

Since we have to achieve equilibrium, the net upward forces have to be equal to the net downward forces

So,  (106 + 106 + 142 + x) = 496

354 + x = 496

x = 496 - 354

x = 142 N

Therefore, the missing force is 142 N

8 0
3 years ago
Is the alien theory a scientific claim? Why or why not?
spin [16.1K]
I'm not sure what the alien Theory says or if there really is such a theory. If the theory says that aliens definitely exist and that they have visited Earth in the past then the theory is totally and completely without any kind of support. It's not scientific in any way because there is no evidence for such a claim. It may be thought to be probable but no solid evidence has ever been presented.
8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Janis volunteered to participate in a psychology experiment. When she arrives at the lab a lab assistant standing on the other s
    10·1 answer
  • Eat the majority of your calories in the evening to fuel your sleep hou<br> True<br> False
    7·2 answers
  • The graph below shows the sunspot number observed between 1750 and 2000. The graph shows sunspot number on the y axis and years
    6·2 answers
  • Over a time interval of 1.99 years, the velocity of a planet orbiting a distant star reverses direction, changing from +20.7 km/
    12·1 answer
  • John performs an experiment on an electric circuit. He increases the voltage from 25 volts to 50 volts while keeping the resista
    10·1 answer
  • Explain why most stars seem to move from east to west across the sky in nys
    14·1 answer
  • An object that does not allow light to pass through it is
    5·2 answers
  • What property of objects is best measured by their capacitance?
    11·1 answer
  • A baseball pitcher throws a 0.14 kg ball toward a batter who is 18 m away.
    10·1 answer
  • If a book has a a mass of 2 kg, how much does the book weigh?
    12·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!