Recent content by DaNiEl!

hi i'm still learning these basic concepts of airplane stability, specifically the aerodynamic center, the point about which the pitching moment does not vary with AOA. i just wanted to know if there is a theoretical basis for this, or if it is just experimental. is there some sort of...

Alright, i have found the book through google and i'll see if i find it in my university's library. Thank you.

hello, i'm wondering where this law comes from. I'm currently reading Feynman's lectures. I skipped some parts but i don't think it says where it comes from. does anyone here know of a link, a book or the part in Feyman's lectures which mentions the origin of it? i know Maxwell's equations have...

any help in showing the way to solve this problem would be apreciated: the problem is: given to charges q1=2 micro colomb, q1=4 micro colomb, 10 inches apart, find the collision point.an obvious approach would be calculating the position equation but in this problem the aceleration is not...

Hello. Maybe this sort of question has been answered before so excuse my laziness. At the moment I'm doing my 2nd year in aerospace engineering and my grades won't go much higher than 14. Still, I'd like to get your opinion about my odds if I follow a theoretical physics career or if that's...

i was just reading about reducing a force to a binary-force system and this made sense. i always thought it was only the component parallel to the line from the center of mass to the force that counted but i guess i was wrong. makes me wonder if it has energy implications. thanks for the help!

then, my missunderstanding seems to be at the basic level of forces and torque. what you are telling me is that when, as in my example, a force (1,0) acts on the point (0,1), it not only produces a rotation (torque=(-1) x 1 N.m) but a translation according to a force of 1N in the x direction?

I don't understand what you are saying. you mean, the force component changes but the effect doesn't? this is too puzzling for me. i don't understand how the translational component change yet this having no importance. doesn't that change the movement of the body?

the reason i referred the internal product is that, "apart" from a multiplication of a constant (the inverse of the distance (||r||)), it should give the component of the force parallel to r. if i understood the principle of transmissibility, a force should have the same effect if placed on any...

let's say you have a body at the origin and a force (1,0) applied at the point (0,1) (r=(0,1)). the external product is not null, but the internal product is. now if the same force is applied at the point (1,1)(r=(1,1)), the external product of the force with r (fxr) is still 1, but the internal...

oh, i see. the explanation should lie in the fact that the arm length and the projection of the force on a perpendicular to r vary in the same proportion so the torque is always the same. it's good to see it intuitively, though a proof would be better (to confirm this hypothesys). another thing...

Hello. Sorry if it is a bother, but I'm starting Applied Mechanics (statics) and my books states this "principle of transmissibility" with no proof (except for the one given in the dynamics volume which i don't have). could anyone provide me an explanation or point me in the direction of a...

im at a youtube discussion and if it would be possible i would like anyone with understanding of Einsteins special theory of relativity to give me some information on a certain issue: it is about the famous train experiment, the one about simultaneity. if you use a rod to mesure a distance from...

interesting stuff. i just figured out the same principle applies to a negative work, i.e. when the particle moves outside (by the same principle a perpendicular component is gained eliminated by centripetal force). now I'm thinking about the 'top'. the top goes in circules in precessional...

very clever. that sure is giving me a lot to think. it will give a little trouble when i read the book again and try to figure out how this fits but it sure explains it. it explains why a normal force would only increase or decrease the radius according to the law of conservation of angular...