Physics - December 2006

2006-12-28 15:30:36 · 11 answers · asked by rorer715 1

2006-12-28 15:24:45 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-12-28 15:20:19 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-12-28 15:07:58 · 4 answers · asked by Steenskees 2

Whats the best way to survive a fairly short drop (anywhere between 1-4 stories) with no injury?

2006-12-28 15:03:26 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-12-28 14:57:28 · 6 answers · asked by NARENDER J 1

2006-12-28 14:53:18 · 13 answers · asked by Pradeep G 1

DON'T SAY E=mc^2!
As far as I understand the end products in a chain reaction are random and so is energy released in each single reaction, the same is true with neutrons released, absorbed, or lost. Add to that the whole effects of the explosion and energy release and it sounds like a mess. So how accuarate is it when they say something like such and such nuclear bomb has the same power of so many gigakilos of TNT? In other words, how linear is the relationship between power and mass of the fuel in a nuclear bomb?
I know that much physics to know E=mc^2, not all the mass turns into energy when a bomb goes off. Does anyone know how much mass is turned into energy? What's left?

2006-12-28 13:50:00 · 5 answers · asked by heman g 2

2006-12-28 13:47:31 · 2 answers · asked by David Smith 1

2006-12-28 13:30:37 · 8 answers · asked by KS 1

If a neutron weighs 1.6749293E-27kg, a proton 1.6262171E-27kg, an electron 9.1093826E-31kg and an antineutrino is assumed massless (~0 kg), and given:

-Neutron decay --> electron + proton + antineutrio
-Neutron composed of 2 down quarks/1 up quark
-Proton composed of 2 down quarks/1 up quark

What accounts for the mass difference of 4.7801252E-29kg (or 52.47 times the mass of an electron) between the mass of the neutron and the sum of the masses of the proton and electron (given that the antineutrino is massless)?

What is the other "stuff" that I seem to be missing?

2006-12-28 13:14:18 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

A. a system of prefixes
B. the distance between two points
C. the exact quantity people agree to use for comparison
D. the interval between two events

2006-12-28 12:14:52 · 5 answers · asked by crayzgirl92 1

2006-12-28 12:11:35 · 14 answers · asked by Kaliyug Ka Plato 3

Or in other words - what is the science at work behind the cloud vapor and the noise when a supersonic jet does this?

2006-12-28 12:05:43 · 10 answers · asked by mishel24 2

Don't give me a bio on Einstein. If it's energy how come it's stoped by matter(an opaque wall), if it's particals how come light waves don't run into each other and produce a blurrly image?

2006-12-28 12:05:17 · 7 answers · asked by honor roller 2

2006-12-28 12:00:44 · 16 answers · asked by WILLIAM S 1

2006-12-28 11:57:34 · 13 answers · asked by Primus Amare 2

I heard of it but dont know what it is. I posted another question that I think has something to do with it. Could someone explain it to me. Keep in mind I don't speak geek.

2006-12-28 11:49:07 · 12 answers · asked by honor roller 2

If you drop an object, it will accelerate downward at 9.8 per second per second. If you instead throw it downwards, what will be its acceleration (in absense of air resistance)?

Answer: ___ m/s^2

2006-12-28 11:36:47 · 8 answers · asked by blah 3

2006-12-28 11:32:05 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

An object of mass 5 kg is dropped from a height of 10m. What will be its kinetic energy after it has fallen 4m?

2006-12-28 11:14:46 · 8 answers · asked by blah 3

In chemistry an absolute zero temperature is defined to be a complete lack of kinetic motion at a nanoscale; does physics also have similar concept? Even if we could attain absolute zero temperature in a labratory we would still be far from an absolute zero velocity because the eart is moving around the sun, the sun moving around the galactic center, and on and on.

2006-12-28 11:03:07 · 12 answers · asked by carmicheal99 1

I have an object (lets make it a cube of steel). This cube is perfectly frictionless. somehow I manage to place this perfectly frictionless cube on top of a perfectly level and perfectly frictionless table so that one flat side of the cube is lying on top of this flat table. The table is directly on top of the flat ground. The table is held securely in place (it will never move relative to the ground). The cube is held in place with a clamp that is attached to the ground so that both of them are stationary (relative to the ground). After the clamp is perfectly withdrawn from the cube (it does not give it any momentum/energy) Will the cube move because of the centripetal force of the earth?
If yes, with what velocity? (magnitude and direction)

2006-12-28 10:24:38 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-12-28 09:54:22 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-12-28 09:22:40 · 6 answers · asked by feelingtherain 2

i have a scechy under standing of basic macanics,and i am looking for a experiment,progect,etc to put my new knoleg to use.
any ideas that are simpel but fun

2006-12-28 08:47:21 · 2 answers · asked by the professor 2

2006-12-28 08:43:47 · 3 answers · asked by juicylipssunshine 1

if you had a time machine. would i be right in thinking that you could not go forwards in time. because if you when forwards in time then when you got there it would be the present and the passed. then when you come back to present day the future would be your passed because you have already seen it

2006-12-28 08:23:58 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

I need this information for my physics coursework...

2006-12-28 06:46:03 · 1 answers · asked by jim_walks 2

-insulator of heat
-reflector of heat
-absorber of electromagnetic waves

Or

-refractor of electromagnetic energy.




Thank you and please explain why you chose the answer you did.

2006-12-28 06:20:35 · 4 answers · asked by Micky 2