Physics

I'm trying to solve the following problem with little success: "A plumb bob does not hang exactly along a line directed to the center of the Earth, becaose of the earth's rotation. How much does the plumb bob deviate from a radial line at 35 degrees north latitude. Assume that the Earth is spherical" Help would be greatly appreciated. I would tips on how to start the problem off.. or a run through of the problem rather than just solving the problem itself. I'd like to work it out(well.. most of it anyways) myself. Thanks alot!

Okay, say I have a coiled conductor below where the direction of the magnetic field is indicated in the North direction. +()()()()()- ---> N If I were to place a compass in the following position, what would happen? (a) COMPASS +()()()()()- (b) +()()()()()- COMPASS Okay, so given that the north end of a compass is repelled by the north pole of any magnet creating the field, are my answers correct: (a) COMPASS needle will point ---> as it is attracted by the southern magnetic flow created by the coiled conductor. (b) COMPASS needle will point ---> as it is repelled by the northern magnetic flow created by the coiled conductor.

hey, i am a gr.11 studuent who has just been given an EEI regaurding (really a number of topics, but my chosen one would be of: ) either the refractive index of certain liquids or investigating stress-strain of polymeres via Polarization (polarizer patterns). Would anyone have any suggestions regaurding the procedure for either? The first my partner should know a bit about ( i missed a large unit of work), but advice is still more than welcome. However the second of the two we have not touched on in our studies, and i personally find polarization interesting... so thanks for your time if you care to donate it

Is it possible to make Infra Red googles for night vision with ordinary house hold materials? If so, please tell me how! Thanks!

I recently saw a show on physics that said something about some universal constant(s) might actually have been different billions of years ago, implying that these constants change. Does anybody know where I can get some more info on this?

I posted this in the pseudoscience area and then noticed the last post in there was 2 or 3 weeks ago. I'm guessing it doesn't get looked at much. So, I thought I'd try it in here. I apologize if it's out of place, although I don't think it is. I'm having a hard time understanding the multiverse theory. I thought I read some time ago, that the universe as we know it is like two plates moving away from each other, or expanding, set in motion by the big bang...and that they eventually come back together, singularity, and then big bang again..and so on. Now when I look up information on it, I see no mention of that part. Just dimensions. I'm wondering if this…

I have read that using Newtonian physics, the gravitation interaction between two bodies traces the path of a conic, if one is orbiting the other it is an ellipse, if it is a fly by it forms part of a hyperbola, somewhere in-between is a porabola. It seems that a simple condition for two bodies to be orbiting is that one body needs to make a 180 degree turn, if that is so then it could only possibly be an ellipse and therefore be in orbit. Taking relativity into account, is it possible for two bodies to come near each other and one make a 180 degree turn but still end up being ejected from the field?

By "empty space," I mean space empty of all matter. I realize this a huge question. Maybe I should ask, if you were take a one meter cube of space from way out between the galaxies, clean out any stray ions or whatnot, what could you say about it? Presumably it has EM waves passing through it in all directions, constantly. It also has a gravitational "shape," right? And it can expand and contract, theoretically? But does that expansion/contraction mean anything without reference to objects? That was a tangled mess of a question. I'll leave it open if anyone wants to touch it.

Hi everyone! I've been away for a while, with exams and being quite ill the last month but getting better now and I'm thining of starting anew book called The Road To Reality by Roger Penrose. Has anyone actually read this book and have any comments on weather its worth getting ro not, the way I see it for £15 its well worth the money but I'm interested in peoples comments too -- Ryan Jones

I have been continuing my reading around the subject area of relativity and have come across the following: http://www.physorg.com/news10789.html The article describes how Dr. Franklin Felber has come up with a solution to the Gravitational Field Equation that accounts for the gravitational effects of masses moving at speeds close to that of light, which has been presented to the Space Technology and Applications International Forum in Albuquerque. This solution is touted as a likely basis for a spacecraft capable of extremely high speeds. I have been unable to locate a biography online. There is just this from the bottom of an article at http://www.newswise.co…

Before I continue, I should make it clear that I am a complete layman and have no formal physics education. Now that's out of the way... I have come across mention in the media of the theories of a certain Reg Cahill, Associate Professor of Physics, who says that Einstein is wrong, that there are many experiments performed over the past years which prove this and that the only reason it's not widely accepted is partly institutional inertia and partly because experimental data that does not conform to Einstein's theories are discarded as artefacts. What really got my attention was Cahill's comment to the effect that physics could have been going off on a ta…

"Les Horribles Cernettes are the one and only High Energy Rock Band. They sing about colliders, quarks, microwaves, antiprotons and Internet. They are known and loved by some 20000 High Energy Physicists worldwide. Check these few songs to have an idea, and if you are music producer, you have found your gold mine!" http://musiclub.web.cern.ch/MusiClub/bands/cernettes/

Hello Everyone, Anyone I have recently built a model Rocket (Q-Modelling Nike-X) and I am interested in finding out how many Newtons of thrust I would need to launch it. The total weight without the motor at present is 330grams, is there a simple equation I can use to work out the above. Also could someone please explain g = 9.81 m s-2 It's the -2 (per second per second) I can't get my head around??? kind regards Th3bozz

What will happen if you drop an atom in space? Will it stay put or start moving?

Sorry if this seems a stupid question, but why is 2pi used to complete a fine structure constant. I'm right near the end of my course, and working out Planck mass, and Planck energy which has 2pi just thrown in, with no explanation ?

http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/10/8/15/1?rss=2.0 this is a titanium studded organic polymer developed at a Korean lab that is claimed able to store 7.6 percent by weight of hydrogen. so 100 kilograms of the polymer could store 7.6 kilograms of hydrogen. it is a polyacetylene polymer "decorated" by atoms of titanium. a picture of the molecular structure is included making a SPONGE that can soak up a lot of hydrogen even at moderate pressure

How did all the forces come to be? What created gravity? To us it is "just there", but what put it there? Same with the other forces. Have there been the same forces since the beginning of the universe or even longer? Or have they always been there, but changed?

Just an idle question: If a mass of uranium (with neutron source) fell in to a black hole, would the forces/pressures on it shortly before reaching the event horizon be sufficient to make it supercritical and detonate in a nuclear fission explosion? Similarly if you had some deuterium/tritium (without the uranium) and did the same, would you get a fusion thermonuclear bomb? I believe that the approach towards a black hole is to cause elongation and narrowing. Perhaps that could be a way to detect the presence of black holes in the future?

Physics is really just a complicated application of mathematics. 99% of everything you learn in physics class are equations and/or inequalities that explain why things work the way they do. The problem with this is that there are literally tens of thousands of different equations to tediously memorize. Sure, we don't know everything about the universe, but that shouldn't stop us from putting what we DO know in a single, mile-long equation that would cover everything physics-related known to man, from kicking a soccer ball to a planet orbiting a star. For things as simple as the former, variables that are not needed can just represent zero if adding and subtracting …

I was watching NOVA's Elegant Universe, and I completely understood everything. I have all you to thank for your conversations, articles, and everything. So thank you! I must look up this M-theory, even though I think it's a bit out there.

Under certain conditions, a wheel driven by a motor can form a gravitational field matter vortex, producing antigravitation, of which the mechanical, thermal, electromagnetic, magnetic, and optical consequences measured in the experiments guided by the theories are 1. the macroscopic quantum mechanical effect, 2. the changed temperature, 3. the changed frequency of the change in the voltage of the electromagnetic wave signals, 4. the enlarged magnetic field, 5. the change in the voltage value of the electromagnetic wave signals, and 6. the antigravitation induced refractive index change effect. For more information, please see…

I have seen several devices that apparently increase leg strength to carry a load, like bleex and the springwalker, or to increase running and jumping distance, like the Kangaroo Boots or Powerskip. But is there anything that increases arm productivity like a hyrdaulic arm that imitates human motion or what would be even cooler is somethig that operates liek the powerskip and doesnt use a powersource or anything. Just wondering becuase i've never seen anything except a picture of this huge advanced arm thingy in someones fake DARPA form about a exoskelaton if i can find it ill post links it was kinda funny actually he used pictures from springwalker and bleex and …

how would i go about determining the energy stored in a volume of gas under pressure?

The pressure at the bottom face of a liquid is not affected by the shape of the container. This is a stunning statement, but how do you prove it? I am confused as the weight is not the same as that of a beaker containin water of the same height.

Can Big Bangology *amend with the imminent reinstatement and return of the Cosmological Constant - Einstein's presently abandoned Unified Field - the Bondi, Gold, Hoyle Steady State theory <Re: 'The material-spatial accelerating universe'>)? *Why must it, or why must it not? How can it, or why can it not? "If I knew where it all started and ended, I'd put everything else in the middle." - R. W. Emerson