Answer:
small car since they weigh less than a bus
Explanation:
Answer:
ε = 2 V/cm
Explanation:
To calculate the mobility inside this bar, we just need to apply the expression that let us determine the mobility. This expression is the following:
ε = ΔV / L
Where:
ε: Hole mobility inside the bar
ΔV: voltage applied in the bar
L: Length of the bar
We already have the voltage and the length so replacing in the above expression we have:
ε = 2 V / 1 cm
<h2>
ε = 2 V/cm</h2><h2>
</h2>
The data of the speed can be used for further calculations, but in this part its not necessary.
Hope this helps
Answer:
The average acceleration of the ball during the collision with the wall is 
Explanation:
<u>Known Data</u>
We will asume initial speed has a negative direction,
, final speed has a positive direction,
,
and mass
.
<u>Initial momentum</u>

<u>final momentum</u>

<u>Impulse</u>

<u>Average Force</u>

<u>Average acceleration</u>
, so
.
Therefore, 
Answer:
The ball would have landed 3.31m farther if the downward angle were 6.0° instead.
Explanation:
In order to solve this problem we must first start by doing a drawing that will represent the situation. (See picture attached).
We can see in the picture that the least the angle the farther the ball will go. So we need to find the A and B position to determine how farther the second shot would go. Let's start with point A.
So, first we need to determine the components of the velocity of the ball, like this:






we pick the positive one, so it takes 0.317s for the ball to hit on point A.
so now we can find the distance from the net to point A with this time. We can find it like this:



Once we found the distance between the net and point A, we can similarly find the distance between the net and point B:







t= -0.9159s or t=0.468s
we pick the positive one, so it takes 0.468s for the ball to hit on point B.
so now we can find the distance from the net to point B with this time. We can find it like this:



So once we got the two distances we can now find the difference between them:

so the ball would have landed 3.31m farther if the downward angle were 6.0° instead.