You can use the concept of a magnetic dipole here and then apply the formula τ=MxB where M is the dipole vector and B the magnetic field vector in which the loop is kept.
Imagine current flowing in loop of figure 1 and curl your right hand fingers in the current's direction, then your thumb(M...
mfb, Thanks for the reply. I think I found what the problem is.
What you're saying is indeed right! We started with 8 and produced a new one.
So there should be 9 electrons on the RHS(fluorine atom would actually be bearing a positive charge). Thus, the reaction originally given is essentially...
Shouldn't we say that there are 10 electrons on the RHS? And you mentioned something about catching electron from environment, can you elaborate on that. Does that mean we have to subtract ONLY NUCLEAR MASSES and not the whole mass defect in the reaction given to find Δm?
Yes, but at the right hand side of the equation we have a total number of 10 electrons(9of fluorine and 1emitted) and on the left 8 electrons(of oxygen). So, Δm should include the change in mass DUE to change in NUMBER of electrons from LHS and RHS. But the solutions doesn't agree with this notion.
Hello,
I've recently started studying Nuclear physics and would appreciate help from someone who could clarify my doubt.
Given Problem:
19O -> 19F + e + v
Calculate the Q-value in the given decay using following data:
Atomic masses:
19O 19.003576u
19F 18.998403u
The problem that I'm having...
Exactly Chet!,
the dot product should zero out the perpendicular component of electric field on the test charge(W=F.s.cosθ).
So, we shouldn't use V=kq/r for a such-arranged multi charged system because this equation was itself derived only for head-on cases.
There should be something like...
Hello!
For Single Charge:
I studied the formula for electric potential for a point charge (V=kq/r). It was derived when the test charge approached the source charge from infinity "head-on". In this case the electric field due to source charge and displacement of test charge were vectors in...
We all have been studying chemical bonds, specifically covalent, told to us that it composes of electron sharing between participating atoms. But do we have a scientific evidence that somehow conforms or substantiates this theory?
For example, We have evidence to 'believe' in electrons. The...
mfb
The corrected virtual image is NOT at correct distance.
The corrected real image is being formed on the retina but the eye should perceive that the object is just a metre in front(because of the virtual image at far point), even though the object actually is at infinity.
That's the point...
Thank you for your replies mfb and mrspeedybob!
So , are you agreeing with my argument that the location of image is significantly different from the actual location of object itself?
And that it is some secondary factors like parallax, experience, etc. which leads us to perceive that the...
Hello Everyone!
I have a question related to the ACTUAL APPEARANCE of the virtual image/object formed when a person wears a lens.
When a lens (spectacle) is used for correction of vision to make the rays meet at retina, my book says a virtual image seems to form before the lens. This takes...
Water is covalent compound. But formation of water is written as:
H+ + OH- = H2O
I cannot understand why hydrogen is electrically positive in the above equation. Hydrogen wants one more electron to complete its first and last shell (total two valence electrons). Hence, hydrogen should...
So, the question I ask is simple : " Is a screen necessary to view a real image?"
For example, when I view my image at the 'concave mirror' side of a spoon, a real image is visible. Now, according to my book the image location should be between Centre and Focus. So, is the image actually...
Hey sophiecentaur, thanks a lot.
That sentence simply clicked. That makes sense. I think that was it.
Man you all really rock!
So having resistant heater limits heating to the heater only. Then the wires wouldn't be the heaters. Right, sophiecentaur?