Me tooit shud be related to newtons 2nd law accelaration is inversly propotional to mass thts wat i did
We are currently struggling to cover the operational costs of Xtremepapers, as a result we might have to shut this website down. Please donate if we have helped you and help make a difference in other students' lives!
Click here to Donate Now (View Announcement)
Me tooit shud be related to newtons 2nd law accelaration is inversly propotional to mass thts wat i did
i got 183.31
i got 185
What was that question about i've forgot itWhat did you guys put for the very last question?
The description of the motion of the steel ballWhat was that question about i've forgot it
What was that question about i've forgot it
i just did 1cos(7)........which gave me an anwser of 0.99.......hope its rightAlso, how do you show the acceleration was 1ms-2 when the ball was at a angle of 7 degrees, it didnt make any sense
Ohh it was uniform acceleration and constant velocity. And after that it hit the ground ( 1st impact)Describe the motion of the solid ball :L
Where'd you get the one from? xDi just did 1cos(7)........which gave me an anwser of 0.99.......hope its right
Trust me.............no clue......i was panicked coz of the time and just wrote anything to get the answer!!!Where'd you get the one from? xD
i forgot all my calculation answers but i guess u got most correct!Answers I got:
12.4 seconds
183.7m
CO2 emissions 0.75kg
Power: 3,057,065.2
Time to burn 25%: 36,000 something seconds
Anyone else get similar answers
bounce it was dropped in air. The sharp decrease in velocity indicates that the ball was in contact with the floor and the difference in time between the two points was the contact timei dont think the ball bounced in the last question....i think it was flowing through air with varying velocity...correct me if im wrong
I said that it didn't obey hookes law since the region of direct proportionality occurs long after the non linear regioni forgot all my calculation answers but i guess u got most correct!
what u wrote for whether it obeys or not hookes law?
i said it didnt obey cauz if we ll extend tht straight region it wont pass thro origin and hookes law sates tht force is proportional to extension - can i get 2 ?I said i
I said that it didn't obey hookes law since the region of direct proportionality occurs long after the non linear region
For almost 10 years, the site XtremePapers has been trying very hard to serve its users.
However, we are now struggling to cover its operational costs due to unforeseen circumstances. If we helped you in any way, kindly contribute and be the part of this effort. No act of kindness, no matter how small, is ever wasted.
Click here to Donate Now