danny8522003

Would it not just reflect off the sunny side of the disk?

An example of quantum entanglement results from the creation of two photons from a positron-electron annihilation event. The two photons emitted in each opposite directions are related through certain observables. By measuring an observable of one you, by definition, know the value of the observable of the other.

I know i can't change the title but i solved the problem i was looking for originally and need help with another... The question says to use an integrating factor to solve: x(dy/dx) = y + (y^2)x The problem comes at the very last part to find v' and v because of the y^2 term. The factor i'm using is: y = v*exp(-integral[-1/x]dx) where the -1/x is the term infront of the y when you divide by x and bring it across. Any pointers would be great. Thanks.

Spaghettification of the string and weight, but what properties does the sting have? Can it stretch, take an infinite force before breaking etc...

Sorry i meant negligible. It was late.. I was tired..

If you drop them at the same time, they impact at the same time. If you drop them separately then they take different amounts of time to fall? I'd never thought about that overlap before, of course that would happen because of the overlapping 'gravitational field' of the 3 objects as they all attract each other. Although to be even more picky, i didn't say that they were dropped on the same hemisphere .

Thanks, knew it was there somewhere!

Actually the lost energy is thought to be given off as gravity waves or gravitons. Just as an electron would give off photons as it orbits a nucleus, and hence puts rest to the Bohr model. It's interesting to see how energy is gained and lost but is inevitably conserved. Glad I could be of help.

Just to be picky... Two objects of different masses falling in a frictionless environment wold not hit the ground at the same time. The effect is however so tiny when you do it on the moon or the Earth that it's impossible to measure. My tutor derived an equation that included the 'reduced mass' to calculate the acceleration due to gravity, but i can't remember it off hand. I also can't find the wiki article that contained it.

Some more info on the subject: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_fade My brakes failed once when i was going down a hill, when i got out the car there was smoke coming from the wheels. Thank heavens for engine braking.

The motion of the pollen is due to water molecules colliding with them creating movement through conservation of momentum. These water molecules lose energy and give it to the pollen, and hence no energy is lost from the system. The motion of the planets is not perpetual since energy is conserved. The rotation is due to the fact the matter the solar system is made of was rotating before it collapsed. The planets actually lose energy as they orbit the Sun but this is arbitrary and is not noticable.

immeasurable?

There is no force acting to prevent the movement of the lower block because of the frictionless table though. Any force greater than 0 will give rise to an acceleration in the lower block. In order to prevent the lower block from accelerating at 3.5m/s wouldnt there need to be a force opposing this acceleration in the form of friction? Any force on the upper block will result in a force on the lower block, but how can it exert a force back if there is nothing opposing acceleration but it's own inertia?

If the table is frictionless, then any mu value greater than 0 between the blocks would mean they would both accelerate at 3.5m/s. Surely?

Gain in kinetic means loss in potential... Just because it's a black hole, it doesnt act any differently than say the earth. (Not taking relativity into account)