To determine the energy equivalent of an object, we use the famous equation of Einstein which is E=mc^2 where m is the mass of the object and c is the speed of light (3x10^8 m/s). We calculate as follows:
E = mc^2
E = 1.83 kg (3x10^8 m/s)^2
E = 1.647x10^17 J
Answer:
a). 53.78 m/s
b) 52.38 m/s
c) -75.58 m
Explanation:
See attachment for calculation
In the c part, The negative distance is telling us that the project went below the lunch point.
Answer:
70.6 mph
Explanation:
Car A mass= 1515 lb
Car B mass=1125 lb
Speed of car B is 46 miles/h
Distance before locking, d=19.5 ft
Coefficient of kinetic friction is 0.75
Initial momentum of car B=mv where m is mass and v is velocity in ft/s
46 mph*1.46667=67.4666668 ft/s
Initial momentum of car A is given by
where 
is velocity of A
Taking East as positive and west as negative then the sum of initial momentum is
The common velocity is represented as 
hence after collision, the final momentum is
From the law of conservation of linear momentum, sum of initial and final momentum equals each other hence
The acceleration of two cars 
From kinematic equation
hence
Substituting the value of in equation
I was about to say: because people generally get comfortable with
what they think they know, and don't like the discomfort of being told
that they have to change something they're comfortable with.
But then I thought about it a little bit more, and I have a different answer.
"Society" might initially reject a new scientific theory, because 'society'
is totally unequipped to render judgement of any kind regarding any
development in Science.
First of all, 'Society' is a thing that's made of a bunch of people, so it's
inherently unequipped to deal with scientific news. Anything that 'Society'
decides has a lot of the mob psychology in it, and a public opinion poll or
a popularity contest are terrible ways to evaluate a scientific discovery.
Second, let's face it. The main ingredient that comprises 'Society' ... people ...
are generally uneducated, unknowledgeable, unqualified, and clueless in the
substance, the history, and the methods of scientific inquiry and reporting.
There may be very good reasons that some particular a new scientific theory
should be rejected, or at least seriously questioned. But believe me, 'Society'
doesn't have them.
That's pretty much why.
Answer: Glass may break at low temperatures, but this is because the contents freeze and their expansion cause the glass to crack (if the cap does not come off). ... Hot temperatures can cause the glass to break when the bottle is subject to excessive thermal variations. hope this helps can u give me brainliest
Explanation:
