phillip1882

i also wanted to add, if you spin the ship fast enough, you stick to the walls

no, but that's because gravity counter acts the effect. yeah i understand, i was wrong, force doesn't necessarily require energy, but we should clearly indicate when force is being applied

no its velocity, you can experience this with your car, when you turn your thrown to the side some. clearly force is being applied.

so, i used to have a beef with newton. i thought that an orbiting body should require the expenditure of anergy. with the strong nonclear force i can understand not requiring energy, there's no motion and therefore no change in velocity and therefore no acceleration and therefore no force. but with an orbiting body there's change in velocity, a change in direction, therefore force, and force should require the expenditure of energy. but then i envisioned a pole with one end of rope tied to a pole and the other end tied to a rock, if you put the rock "into orbit" around the pole, yes the rope is applying force, but i see no reason discounting friction it can't obit indefinitely. clearly not all force requires energy expenditure.

hmmm. lets say n is 7, 72 × 1 + 36, = 108 72 × 2 + 36 = 180 72 × 3 +36 =252 72 x 4 +36 = 324 72 x 5 +36 = 396 72 x 6 +36 =468 72 x 7 +36 =540 adding all of them together, i get 2268. I'm not sure where the +35 is coming from, but lets add that as well, 2303 from here, how would you determine p and q?