Recent content by Dodsy

Choppy, good advice I completely agree!

Well that's an obvious and silly thing to say! Obviously the chances of winning a Nobel Prize are slim. I'm just being a tad inspirational! I think people with maths/physics backgrounds are more likely to go into academia than engineering backgrounds. But still an engineering physics major or...

You should never think that. I actually did teach myself those things at an early age and then later decided to not care about high school. Life is a journey and you may find that you make an amazing discovery, one which even Feynman would be jealous! Remember he said "I already got the prize...

I wouldn't ever consider a PhD in a subject just for a job! Expect to be filled with passion about the topics if you're willing to spend the next 10 years studying them! You may want to look into an engineering physics undergrad or a mathematics physics undergrad to prepare you for proofs etc...

Yes, there is an introduction to both relativity and quantum mechanics, as well as an assessment of the implications of each, which goes further in depth as to how to use the equations given when dealing with length contraction, mass, or energy equivalence.This is not advanced physics to say the...

Yes this is just high school, and has just been placed in the incorrect area of the forum by another moderator. Gneil, sorry about the squared variables, I made a disclaimer at the beginning of my post, as I've currently changed this in my variables. Thanks for you help guys, I appreciate it...

That is a completely logical thing to assume, and I fully understand why you would think that. But it's beyond the scope of the course which is introductory in nature. For instance, on time dilation the text merely demonstrates that objects moving at a higher velocity will experience the...

Before continuing, I wanted to verify I have fixed the issue with the wording of my variables, and, I have seen answers for this question elsewhere. I also know I'll get full marks regardless of how I use my equations, as this question obviously isn't very focused on that, however, for my own...

You have to look at your equations for torque. Where torque is equal to the torque constant times the motor current. The torque constant is based on armature length, number of wire turns, magnetic strength etc. Kt = 2(Bnlr) Where: Kt is the torque constant, N is the number of loops of wire in...

Once again, I know 90000 is not the answer. The answer was in fact 2.7 when I computed it. A calulator issue is NOT what I'm looking for. I'm looking for arithmatic issues. If you can't follow a simple conversation please don't bother answering my question. FE21 = FE31 = kq1q2 /r2 FE21 = FE31 =...

Please tell me where I'm going wrong with my equation then? If I square my radius I get 1.35. What am I missing here? that is the purpose of this thread. As I've already stated 90000 obviously is NOT the answer. I need constructive criticism and a level of intelligence to be met with my answer...

Yes the answer will obviously be different now. Other than that is everything okay with my formula? I'd rather not fix my work just to have someone else copy it. If squaring my radius is the only problem that's easily fixable.

I must have! And sorry I didn't notice as I copied and pasted from the microsoft word document I am working in! I appreciate the response. Other than that is everything looking okay?

The answer should just be Eg, given the law of conservation of energy.Et = Eg + EkEt = EgEg= mghEg = (80kg)(9.8n/kg)(5.2m) Eg = 4'076.8 J Just a thought, if I'm wrong so be it.To prove this you can see how fast he would be going if he went down the hill. Take whichever number you get and add...

Any help would be appreciated...