Recent content by amitSingh95

Thanks to everyone I got it :)

I thought B and the wall both were exerting upward force on A to balance its weight, but now I know that the wall alone is balancing its weight.

The tendency of A is to slide down, with respect to both B and the wall, and frictional force acts in direction opposite to the motion or its tendency, at least in this case I think it is, so shouldn't the direction of force due to both be upwards?

Thank you everyone for your reply, I understand that the direction must be upwards to balance the weight of B. The only confusion I have is due to Newton's third law of motion according to which the direction must be in opposite to the force that B is applying on A.

1. Homework Statement The system is in equilibrium. All the surfaces in the image are rough. The direction of friction on B due to A is : (a) is upward (b) is downward (c) is zero (d) depends on the masses of A and B. ANS : (a) Homework Equations MAg = 2μN (Friction due to wall and due to B)...

"Case 1" - that's what I wanted to say though my reasoning was wrong.

Well I prefer to think like someone curious enough to switch to any point of view necessary because no outlook is useless, I just wanted to know if this was practically possible by some method I was unaware of, but turns out that this too is one of those ideal conditions which are practically...

Understood. Thanks everyone for helping.

So things will not work here as they do in case of a fixed rotating disk?

I am not aware of much physics terminology, but let me explain you what I mean with an example. Suppose you are standing on a huge merry go round rotating rapidly. Now if you are right at the center, nothing will happen, but if move towards corner, you will be ultimately thrown away, because...

Sorry, I actually intended to write ω=v/r, the same as you said. v is not fixed here, my last message was wrong, ω is fixed, just as it is for different points on a rotating disk, but v increases with r, so as the ball goes higher, its velocity increases, and as it lands back, it decreases, but...

You are absolutely right and considering what you said, I think the ball SHOULD land ahead of the thrower as at the time of throwing, both have the same horizontal velocity, which doesn't change, but the distance of the ball from the axis of rotation is, on an average, greater than that of the...

I am not sure if this question even makes any sense, it just popped in my mind while reading a book on special relativity. Suppose an observer throws a ball upwards, now at the time of throwing, both the observer and the ball have a horizontal velocity same as the instantaneous velocity of...

Even if electron's electric field is negligible, electric field IS present there, that's what I don't want, I might be misinterpreting the line but I think according to the book, magnetic field can exist even if there is no electric field at all.

Recently I bought - Introducing Relativity A Graphic Guide, in the book, after introducing Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism a line is written, "Simple magnetic fields can occur when there is no electric field (and vice versa)". I understand that electric field can exist without any magnetic...