Leaderboard

Any possibility these nuisance ads could be eliminated? Banner ads are okay, but this new format makes for a pretty rude interruption. How can any advertizer, seeing what type of website this is, imagine we would respond to these in a positive way?

Because it is impossible to give a meaningful answer to the OP's question. Because it is potentially helpful to you if we point out that your reply, while well intended, was wrong.

The OP did not say anything about object/image distance. Rather about mirror/reflection size.

Talk sense.

Misunderstanding the whiteboards paper as badly as many'v here does harm to the subject itself (a new freshman in community college could interpret the arguments better than this; you'll learn simple content analysis in introductory courses). That many would post all of these Clowneries rather than read the paper first shows you are likely a dropout who doesn't know how to tell between reality and fantasy, how to verify a belief, how to premise conditions for observations that should support and defy the belief, how to recognize observations that are irrelevant to the belief. Why do so many hate the scientific method? This kind reflects the American tolerated trash who are why America is with the last in first-world STEM aptitude and industry. And who did this to them? Their parents? Their halfwitted teachers (who committed the fraud of letting them pass)? I shudder!

So why don't you answer them instead of replying to me? OP: 10cm x 10cm 15cm x 15cm (1.5 times larger) f = r^2 / 4s f = focal length r = radius of the mirror / 10cm (half the mirror's diameter) s = enlargement ratio / 1.5 (50% enlargement) f = (10cm)^2 / 4(1.5), etc.

America needs fewer, better jobs and fewer, better Americans.

1/f = 1/o + 1/i f = focal length o = object distance (10cm) i = image distance (15cm) Plug in the known values. 1/f = 1/10cm + 1/15cm . . . (You do the rest.)

Civility and polity are a problem, grounded on liges and brainwash. Calling people what they are is not "un"civil. Censorship, obscurantism, and prejudice are the greatest ills ever foisted on this world; they spawn all other ills; they make liars and fools with power punish the undeserving without power. Every thing and one must be known for what they are, so they can be made into what they should. Wherever one may be called an asset, wrongly, and not found to be attacked, yet called an ass, rihtly, and found to be attacked, is run by the deluded and unqualified. Sooth and ethics have no bias between positive and negative treatment. I discuss science like its methods matter, and I expect the same from others, so I lauded the first person I saw who knows how to read and interpret. Punishing users for correcting others who read and write in bad faith is wrong. What many might call a "personal attack" is a personal solution to someone's wrong behavred; they'v already had the meanings plenty explained here repeatedly. Most people prefer customs over the sooth and, when confronted with the sooth that they're wrong, they will hate the sooth and scourge the person who shows them so that they don't have to listen or think about themselves. Their spew is all over this thread. Forbidding "personal attacks," if they are riht and needed to discourage someone wilfully wrong, hurts and hinders any information source, especially if they're given along with the bare correcting.