Ask question

Ask question

All categories

3 years ago

13

A car accelerates at 2.90 m/s2. Assuming the car starts from rest, how much time does it need to accelerate to a speed of 23.6m/

s?

1 answer:

Monica [59]3 years ago

7 0

Answer:

$\huge{ \boxed{ \bold{ \sf{8.13 \: seconds}}}}$

▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁

☯ Question

A car accelerates at 2.90 m/s . Assuming the car starts from rest , how much time does it need to accelerate to a speed of 23.6 m/s ?

☯ $\underbrace{ \sf{Required \: Answer : }}$

✒ Given :

Initial velocity ( u ) = 0
Final velocity ( v ) = 23.6 m/s
Acceleration ( a ) = 2.90 m/s²

✒ To find :

Time ( t )

✎ We know ,

$\boxed{ \underline{ \sf{acceleration \: (a) \: = \frac{final \: velocity \: (v) - initial \: velocity \: (u )}{time \: ( \: t \: )}}}}$

Substitute the values :

➵ $\sf{2.90 = \frac{23.6 - 0}{t}}$

➵ $\sf{2.90 = \frac{23.6}{t}}$

Apply cross product property

➵ $\sf{2.90 \: t \: = 23.6}$

Divide both sides by 2.90

➵ $\sf{ \frac{2.90 \: t}{2.90} = \frac{23.6}{2.90} }$

➵ $\sf{t = 8.13 \: seconds}$

Hope I helped!

Have a wonderful time シ

▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁

You might be interested in

What type of Earth scientist would be interested in understanding volcanic eruptions on

Vinvika [58]

Answer:

Marine geologists learn about the rocks and geologic processes of the ocean basins.

3 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Why do objects keep moving after the force stops acting on it

saul85 [17]

It keeps moving for just a few seconds because of inertia. Say you are going 50 miles down the interstate there is a stop sign when you stop you almost come out of your set that is why we have to wear set belts and that is an example of Inertia. Glad to help

4 0

3 years ago

Which of the following is true of salt lakes?

bonufazy [111]

Answer: b. Salt lakes are formed when river bends are cut off.

Salt lakes are formed when water from water sourced gets accumulated in a shallow region and the supply of water is cut. These salt lakes are terminal which means water does not flow to other locations. Therefore, salt lakes are formed when river bends are cut off.

3 0

4 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Identical twins, each with mass 61.0 kg, are on ice skates and at rest on a frozen lake, which may be taken as frictionless. Twi

Anna007 [38]

Answer:

Immediately after throwing the backpack away, twin A would be moving away from twin B at approximately $0.630\; \rm m \cdot s^{-1}$ .

Initially, twin B would not immediately be moving. However, after the backpack hits her, she would move away from twin A at approximately $0.526\; \rm m \cdot s^{-1}$ if she held onto the backpack.

Explanation:

Consider this scenario in three steps:

Step one: twin A is carrying the backpack.
Step two: twin A throws the backpack away; the backpack is en route to twin B;
Step three: twin B starts to move after the backpack hits her.

Since all external forces are ignored, momentum should be conserved when changing from step one to step two, and from step two to step three.

<h3>From step one to step two</h3>

In step one, neither twin A nor the backpack is moving. Their initial momentum would be zero. That is:

$p(\text{twin A, step one}) = 0$ .
$p(\text{backpack, step one}) = 0$ .

Therefore:

$p(\text{backpack, step one}) +p(\text{twin A, step one}) = 0$ .

In step two, the backpack is moving towards twin B at $3.20\; \rm m \cdot s^{-1}$ . Since the mass of the backpack is $12.0\; \rm kg$ , its momentum at that point would be:

$\begin{aligned}p(\text{backpack, step two}) &= m \cdot v \\ &= 12.0\;\rm kg \times 3.20\; \rm m \cdot s^{-1} = 38.4\; \rm kg\cdot m \cdot s^{-1} \end{aligned}$ .

Momentum is conserved when twin A throws the backpack away. Hence:

$\begin{aligned}&p(\text{backpack, step two}) +p(\text{twin A, step two}) \\ &= p(\text{backpack, step one}) +p(\text{twin A, step one})\end{aligned}$ .

Therefore:

$p(\text{twin A, step two}) \\ &= p(\text{backpack, step one}) +p(\text{twin A, step one}) - p(\text{backpack, step two}) \\ &= -38.4\; \rm kg \cdot m \cdot s^{-1}\end{aligned}$ .

The mass of twin A (without the backpack) is $61.0\; \rm kg$ . Therefore, her velocity in step two would be:

$\begin{aligned} v(\text{twin A, step two}) &= \frac{p}{m} \\ &= \frac{-38.4\; \rm kg \cdot m \cdot s^{-1}}{61.0\; \rm kg} \approx -0.630\; \rm m \cdot s^{-1}\end{aligned}$ .

Note that while the velocity of the backpack is assumed to be greater than zero, the velocity of twin A here is less than zero. Since the backpack is moving towards twin B, it can be concluded that twin A is moving in the opposite direction away from twin B.

<h3>From step two to step three</h3>

In step two:

$p(\text{twin B, step two}) = 0$ since twin B is not yet moving.
$p(\text{backpack, step two}) = 38.4\; \rm kg \cdot m\cdot s^{-1}$ from previous calculations.

Assume that twin B holds onto the incoming backpack. Thus, the velocity of the backpack and twin B in step three will be the same. Let $v(\text{twin B and backpack, step three})$ denote that velocity.

In step three, the sum of the momentum of twin B and the backpack would thus be:

$\begin{aligned}& m(\text{twin B}) \cdot v(\text{twin B and backpack, step three}) \\ &+ m(\text{backpack}) \cdot v(\text{twin B and backpack, step three})\end{aligned}$ .

Simplify to obtain:

$(m(\text{twin B}) + m(\text{backpack})) \cdot v(\text{twin B and backpack, step three})$ .

Momentum is conserved when twin B receives the backpack. Therefore:

$\begin{aligned}& (m(\text{twin B}) + m(\text{backpack})) \cdot v(\text{twin B and backpack, step three})\\ =&p(\text{twin B, step two}) +p(\text{backpack, step two})\\ =& 38.4\; \rm kg \cdot m\cdot s^{-1} \end{aligned}$ .

Therefore:

$\begin{aligned}& v(\text{twin B and backpack, step three})\\ =&\frac{p(\text{twin B, step two}) +p(\text{backpack, step two})}{m(\text{twin B}) + m(\text{backpack})}\\ =& \frac{38.4\; \rm kg \cdot m\cdot s^{-1}}{61.0\; \rm kg + 12.0\; \rm kg} \approx 0.526\;\rm m\cdot s^{-1} \rm \end{aligned}$ .

In other words, if twin B holds onto the backpack, then (after doing so) she would be moving away from twin A at approximately $0.526\; \rm m \cdot s^{-1}$ .

6 0

3 years ago

Why do some scientists not use controlled experiments?

Leviafan [203]

Observational studies are a prime example. Observational data is more reflective of the real environments that scientists make their inferences to than controlled experiments. The disadvantage of observational studies is that the variability is far greater. <span />

7 0

4 years ago