Recent content by AussieDave

I am looking at the orbits of exoplanets. I understand Ipetrich the invariable plane, as that is what the orbital elements are currently defined with respect to in my program, but I want to be able to input the orbital elements as seen in discovery papers. For example, by taking the X-Y...

Hello, I have a little three-body (well n-body but let's just worry about 3 now) simulator. I input six Keplerian orbital elements (period P, eccentricity E, inclination I, longitude of the ascending node W, argument of periapse w and initial true anomaly f). They then get converted to...

Interesting, thank you for the replies. I am most interested in close binaries, in which case a captured case would I think be extremely rare.

It is not necessarily a coincidence if you consider the base core accretion model, which is the favoured (but not perfect) way of explaining how planets form. The first step is to build up a rocky body. This is the same for the inner terrestrial planets and the outer gas and ice giants...

The title speaks for itself. I'm just curious and I couldn't find anything on it. Particularly, what if they are a close binary (period less than 50 days)?

Hey fellas, thanks for your help. I tried using conservation of momentum because I use that all the time in rocket equations. This is, however, just an estimate based on a gas tank that we'd buy online (we don't actually buy it...we just do the design) and there isn't any info on the mass...

Hey. Quick question. If we have a compressed air tank of 550 kPa with a opening area of 0.25 cm^2, would the force provided just be P*A so it'd just be 550 * 0.25 (with appropriate conversions to metres and pascals etc). We are looking for the force that'd be provided to a model car that the...

I have a materials question that's asking me to calculate the "magnitude of Luder's Strain" from a bit of low carbon steel that we ran through the machine to break it apart and produce a load-elongation graph. I know what the region is, the elongated yield point which can be seen on the graph...

Work = Force x Displacement The work for each skater will be equal to their kinetic energy because Work = Change in energy and they both lose all of their kinetic energy as they come to a complete stop (and gain no gravitational potential energy). That still leaves me with 2 unknowns though...

Okay. I'm calling V1 the velocity of the 30kg kid and V2 the velocity of the 20kg kid. V1 x m1 = V2 x m2 Add in numbers 30V1 = 20V2 V1 = (2/3)V2 Now for energy. E1 = (1/2) x 30 x (V1)^2 Sub in V1 = (2/3)V2 to get E1 = (1/2) x 30 x ((2/3)V2)^2 E2 = (1/2) x 20 x (V2)^2 Rearrange to get (V2)^2...

Well I have m but what's F? I don't have any frictional values to work with, nor do I have any values of time to work with dP/dt I really need a basic plan of attack for solving this problem because at the moment I'm just throwing equations at it and trying to somehow get my way to an answer...

Well they should both have the same momentum which would give them different velocities. This would give the lighter of the two skaters more kinetic energy. I just can't quite incorperate distance into it. I know that Work = Force x Displacement but I don't have a frictional force here. That...

To add my query. Should I be looking at this from a force perspective and try to relate it to momentum? It's the absense of time that's really bothering me and the suggestion of using energy has also left me a bit stunned. Some starting points and explanations would be greatly appreciated.

Homework Statement A verbatim copy from the problem set: Two children wearing skates on ice push apart from each other in opposite directions. The child of mass 30kg slides 15m before stopping. How far will the smaller child of mass 20kg travel before stopping? Assume they experience the...

Okay then. So to clarify, that'd mean: (a) Yes because the function is defined for -3 -> + infinity and has a clearly defined inverse function over the domain 1 -> + infinity (b) No because the function does not have a clearly defined inverse over the domain 1 to + infinity due to the absolute...