| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
|
@ shineeee See, in d givn situ , 1 force acts as a support........... Cheers.......................
|
SAARE JAHAAN SE ACHCHA;
GOIIT HAMARA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
this reply: 25 points
(with 5 
in 5 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
![[Post New]](/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif) 20 Dec 2007 00:57:15 IST
|
|
|
Another shortcut. Maybe you all know this.
For finding co-ordinates of COM the formula used is ;
(m1x1+m2x2)/m1+m2
For finding acceleration and velocity of the COM, just replace x with v or a (as reqd)
Hope you find this interesting
|
<TABLE CELLSPACING="1" CELLPADDING="1" BORDER="0">
<TR><TD>
   
<DIV ALIGN="right">Glitter Graphics</DIV></TD></TR></TABLE>
|
this reply: 5 points
(with 1
in 1 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
20 Dec 2007 02:20:32 IST
|
|
|
This also came in my exams..... If a body is projected with a vel. "v" greater than the escape vel from the surface of earth , then its vel. in intersteller space will be ans) let v' be the vel. of projected body , where g is zero (intersteller , g = 0 iska meaning yeh hai) , so potential energy bhi zero rahegi from law of cons. of energy , 1/2 m(v)2 + - [GMm/R) = 1/2 m (v')2 + 0 v'2 = v2 - 2GM/R as we knw escape vel. = (2GM/R)1/2 so v'2 = v2 - ve2 so this will be its vel. This 1 too...(look at the qs) Q) Is it possible to put an artificial satellite on an orbit in such a way that it always remain visible over CHANDIGARH ANS) The answer to this is no ,coz to put an artif. satellite in an orbit such dat it always remain directly over a particular place , its time period mst be same as dat of earth in equitorial plane . As chd doesnt lie on equitorial plane...so its nt possible HOPE THIS HELPS  
|
I always like to walk in rain as no one can see me crying there :(
frnds are like diamonds , if u hit them , they don't break but they slip frm ur hands
-----It is better to be hated for what you are than to be loved for what you are not.----
*****wen love and skill work together--expect a masterpiece*****
|
this reply: 27 points
(with 5
in 6 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
20 Dec 2007 08:21:54 IST
|
|
|
hey friends i see that some of my friends are posting a number of new topic in this post but what we want is the common mistakes one is bound to make ,,,,,,,,] plz dont go away from the topic hope to get more contributions cheers
|
this reply: 10 points
(with 2
in 2 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
20 Dec 2007 09:09:00 IST
|
|
|
electric energy is nothing but the kinetic energy of electrons...........after they pass through resist. or gadgets,there is a loss of energy...hence electrons can b recycled but not the elec. energy itself.........
|
kaushik krishna .R
bits pilani
mech engg |
this reply: 10 points
(with 2
in 2 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
20 Dec 2007 10:15:46 IST
|
|
|
yaar himanshu i didnt really understand why a satellite cant stay directly above chandigarh, please explain again
|
Ratings do not necessarily signify that someone is good, or bad. I'm here to learn and help others learn, and a person unlocking the mysteries with the help of my solution, to a nagging problem, means more pleasure to me than ratings can ever make me feel. |
this reply: 5 points
(with 1
in 1 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
20 Dec 2007 10:55:04 IST
|
|
|
here's another from ma side....... A question based on dis concept came in ma coaching test.... hardly 3-4 were able to do it CORRECTLY.........  As i said in my earlier post, in an elastic collisision, kinetic energy converts into potential energy and back . Now the question is WAT IS THE MAXIMUM VALUE OF THIS POTENTIAL ENERGY??????????? Most of students thought K.E -> P.E , and thus wrote the value of K.E. as their answers.. But the truth is dat, P.E is max at dat instant when V RELATIVE= 0 ,(AND NOT V=0) that is when both move with equal velocity............... and KINETIC ENERGY AT THAT INSTANT IS NOT 0 BUT IS MINIMUM .. HOPE IT BENEFITS U ..................... (DO NUDGE FOR ANY EXPLAINATION )
|
SAARE JAHAAN SE ACHCHA;
GOIIT HAMARA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
this reply: 65 points
(with 13
in 13 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
20 Dec 2007 11:26:32 IST
|
|
|
THATS VERY VERY TRUE !
|
Ken
From: UNITED STATES, Green Bay, Wisconsin
 |
this reply: 0 points
(with 0
in 0 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
20 Dec 2007 11:43:22 IST
|
|
|
here's one from my side... its a very simple n basic concept but sometimes we do misunderstand n apply it incorrectly. >>>force of friction decides the relative motion between two bodies only at their surface of contact i.e. the surface at which force of friction acts. It decides whether the body will move "with respect to" that surface or not . It does not governs the overall motion of body. A body may be at rest with respect to a surface but may be in motion otherwise. its a very basic concept n probably u knew it before...but even if it helped to one of u then i'm pleased!.
|
this reply: 12 points
(with 2
in 3 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
20 Dec 2007 16:58:25 IST
|
|
|
@anandghegde pls explain dat ques on tension
|
what is this life so full of care ?
we have no time 2 stand & stare !!!!
--DAVIES--
laziness pays now.....
hard work L8ter....
but both pays ! !
If u can fill the unforgiving minute with sixty seconds worth of distance run;urs is da world n all dats in it----------->>>>a Russian who spend 7 yrs in siberia said dat the above lines helped sustain him
p.s. u wont loose ur rates if u will RATE me-------------->>>>>>
|
this reply: 0 points
(with 0
in 0 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
20 Dec 2007 17:02:41 IST
|
|
|
the three kinematical equations v = u + at s = ut + 1/2 at2 2as = v2 - u2 have been derived ONLY for systems with constant acceleration. if in a question you are told that acceleration varies as a function of time/displacement, you cannot use this directly!
|
Ratings do not necessarily signify that someone is good, or bad. I'm here to learn and help others learn, and a person unlocking the mysteries with the help of my solution, to a nagging problem, means more pleasure to me than ratings can ever make me feel. |
this reply: 10 points
(with 2
in 2 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
20 Dec 2007 17:14:51 IST
|
|
|
okay, here is a concept: COEFFICIENT OF RESTITUTION It can make some sums real simple. It basically states that in a collision between two bodies, the relative velocity of separation bears a constant ratio to the relative velocity of approach. v2 - v1 = -e (u2 - u1) where 'e' is called the coefficient of restitution. It's values ranges from 0 to 1. If the coefficient of restitution is 0, then v2-v1 = 0 which means v2 = v1, ie the bodies move together. This means that the bodies stick to one another, a characteristic of a perfectly inelastic collision. However, if the coefficient of restitution is 1, it can be proved (using conservation of linear momentum and conservation of kinetic energy) that the collision is perfectly elastic. If it is given that the velocity of a freely falling body reduces by x times upon collision with the ground, it is easily understood that the coefficient of restitution is 1/x. Then, solving the problem on the lines of the definition of coefficient of restitution easily lands you the answer.
|
Ratings do not necessarily signify that someone is good, or bad. I'm here to learn and help others learn, and a person unlocking the mysteries with the help of my solution, to a nagging problem, means more pleasure to me than ratings can ever make me feel. |
this reply: 10 points
(with 2
in 2 votes ) [?]
|
|
You have to be logged on to rate
|
|
|
20 Dec 2007 19:13:09 IST
|
|
|
Moderation Team
![[Up]](/templates/default/images/icon_up.gif "[Up]"){kind=icon}
