The launch velocity is at 41.1° relative to the horizontal.
Let V = the launch velocity, ft/s
The horizontal component of the velocity is
Vx =Vcos(41.1°) = 0.7536V ft/s
The vertical component of the launch velocity is
Vy = Vsin(41.1) = 0.6574V ft/s
Assume that g = 32 ft/s² and neglect air resistance.
At the maximum height of 11.7 ft, the vertical velocity is zero. Therefore
Vy² - 2*32*11.7 = 0
Vy² = 748.8
Vy = 27.3642 ft/s
Therefore
0.6574V = 27.3642
V = 41.8285 ft/s
Note that
1 ft/s = 0.3048 m/s
Therefore
V = 41.8285*0.3048 = 12.749 m/s
Answer: 12.75 m/s
Answer:
the frequency is the fundamental and distance is L = ¼ λ
Explanation:
This problem is a phenomenon of resonance between the frequency of the tuning fork and the tube with one end open and the other end closed, in this case at the closed end you have a node and the open end a belly, so the wavelength is the basis is
λ = 4 L
In this case L = 19.4 cm = 0.194 m
let's use the relationship between wave speed and wavelength frequency and
v = λ f
where the frequency is f = 440 Hz
v = 4 L f
let's calculate
v = 4 0.194 440
v = 341.44 m / s
so the frequency is the fundamental and distance is
L = ¼ λ
Last month, we featured IRB best practices (“IRBs: Navigating the Maze” November 2007 Observer), and got the ball rolling with strategies and tips that psychological scientists have found to work. Here, we continue the dissemination effort with the second of three articles by researchers who share their experiences with getting their research through IRB hoops. Jerry Burger from Santa Clara University managed to do the seemingly impossible — he conducted a partial replication of the infamous Milgram experiment. Read on for valuable advice, and look for similar coverage in upcoming Observers. These are the first words I said to Muriel Pearson, producer for ABC News’ Primetime, when she approached me with the idea of replicating Stanley Milgram’s famous obedience studies. Milgram’s work was conducted in the early 1960s before the current system of professional guidelines and IRBs was in place. It is often held up as the prototypic example of why we need policies to protect the welfare of research participants. Milgram’s participants were placed in an emotionally excruciating situation in which an experimenter instructed them to continue administering electric shocks to another individual despite hearing that person’s agonizing screams of protest. The studies ignited a debate about the ethical treatment of participants. And the research became, as I often told my students, the study that can never be replicated. Hope this helps!
Answer:
Explanation:
From the question we are told that:
Angular speed 
Radius 
No. Turns 
Area 
Magnetic field. 
Acceleration 
Time 
Generally the equation for momentum is mathematically given by
Therefore
Generally the equation for Peak emf is mathematically given by
Answer:
B- He is correct. Evaporation is a physical change, but dissolving salt in water is a chemical change. The change in mass is evidence that a chemical change occurred.
Explanation: Dissolving Salt in water is a Chemical Change, Because the Salt arrangement is different in solid state than dissolved in water. As we can see in the image below, once the Salt is dissolved, it is separated into its ions, Na+ and Cl- Now, The evaporation process is a physical change, because the water doesn´t change its configuration H20 and it only changes its form, as we can see in the image below.
