English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

could you please define sliding friction, rolling friction, Newton;s first law of motion, newtons second law of motion, and newtons third law of motion?

please and thank you

2006-10-02 13:17:36 · 10 answers · asked by wootsublime_gurlwoot 1 in Education & Reference Homework Help

10 answers

It sounds as though you are politely seeking someone to do your entire homework assignmnet. Just turn off the computer and do your homework.

You're welcome

2006-10-02 13:22:24 · answer #1 · answered by ©2009 7 · 0 0

Sliding friction: The resistance offered by an object when it is rubbed against another.
Rolling friction: A force which opposes the motion of any body which is rolling over the surface of another.
Newton's 1st law: Every object continues in its state of rest or uniform motion unless acted by an external force.
Newton's 2nd law: The force of an object is equal to the product of its mass and its acceleration.
F = ma
Newton's 3rd law: Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

2006-10-02 13:40:16 · answer #2 · answered by cosmoboyin 2 · 0 0

The definitions you have for Newton's Second Law are not technically correct. It states that the acceleration of an object is directly proportional to the net force acting on it and inversely proportional to its mass. In the MKS system of units, this translates to F=ma, but that's only because the system was designed so that the proportionality constant is numerically 1. There are other systems of units - the English Engineering System, for instance, where this is not true, and F = ma turns out to be wrong.

You're probably using MKS, so stick with F=ma, but it's worth remembering that there's a constant in there that can't always be ignored.

For what it's worth, none of these is how Newton actually stated the second law. What he said was that the net force on an object equals the time rate of change of the momentum - a derivative, mathematically speaking. The thing I find interesting about this is that, while F=ma is not true relativistically, Newton's original statement is. Pure chance, and probably not interesting to anyone but physics geeks, but still...

2006-10-02 13:31:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Sliding friction is the friction between two bodys in contact.
Rolling friction is friction in between two objects as one rolls upon another. If they were perfectly smooth without friction, they would slide
1st law Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.
2nd law The relationship between an object's mass m, its acceleration a, and the applied force F is F = ma. Acceleration and force are vectors (as indicated by their symbols being displayed in slant bold font); in this law the direction of the force vector is the same as the direction of the acceleration vector.
3rd law For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

2006-10-02 13:25:39 · answer #4 · answered by Dennis K 4 · 0 0

First law:. Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.

second law:The relationship between an object's mass m, its acceleration a, and the applied force F is F = ma. Acceleration and force are vectors (as indicated by their symbols being displayed in slant bold font); in this law the direction of the force vector is the same as the direction of the acceleration vector

Third law:For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

2006-10-02 13:23:00 · answer #5 · answered by tntchic9425 1 · 0 0

sliding friction - flat object
rolling friction - round object
3. equal and oposite
2. F = mA
1. a mass in motion tends to stay in motion

2006-10-02 13:24:45 · answer #6 · answered by Poncho Rio 4 · 0 0

"Scientists" attack Christianity and "Christians" attack technology. How can technology be used to attempt non-repeatable phenomena. Did "guy" exist 7,000 years in the past? It relies upon on the way you define "guy." in case you define "guy" as somebody who can checklist historic previous, the respond would desire to be "no." whilst i became into attending college, many years in the past, C-14 relationship became into referred to as an "absolute" relationship technique and limited to 50,000 years in the past. Now it rather is seen a relative relationship gadget. It has alway been seen as such by potential of physicists and extends previous 60,000 years. C14 is created by potential of bombarding the nitrogen unfastened on the genuine of the ambience with cosmic power. If there is way less unfastened nitrogen, there is way less C14 created. much less C14 in an merchandise shows an older age. technology would not attack something. the 2nd it does, it ceases to be technology. Scientists who take facets like which will become clergymen of "technology" extremely than observers of experiments and technology is all approximately repeatable technology. right it rather is the weak point of all relationship platforms. no person has ever examined them for 2 hundred,000 years... or maybe 60,000 years. the thought the forces that govern those platforms are static is without evidence. Even the theory of time has its limits. without mass/gravity, time would not exist, in accordance ot Steven Hawkings. yet, then, the Biblical relationship is likewise in line with assumptions by potential of a few nineteenth century bishop. How long is an afternoon if the earth would not rotate in terms of the sunlight... or if there is not any sunlight. Then there is the situation of randomness. If a pail of ice unexpectedly began to boil, might or not it rather is a miracle or an twist of fate of possibility? technology might say it became into an twist of fate of possibility probable basically to ensue as quickly as in one thousand billion trillion buckets of ice. in some unspecified time interior the destiny, that that's possibility and that that's supernatural attain a nexus.

2016-10-15 11:07:50 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

You just set my mind in motion and I am now dizzy.

2006-10-02 13:25:47 · answer #8 · answered by gdmantle7 2 · 0 0

friction is a force that apposes moving objects

2006-10-02 13:19:40 · answer #9 · answered by Jay 3 · 0 0

resistance

2006-10-02 13:20:51 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers