Recent content by Juraj

The article mainly discusses the direction and magnitude of current which I can determine easily. But I don't understand how can we predict the measured voltage if we only know the direction and value of current. (voltage is positive when there is more potential near the positive pole so what I...

This is the concrete problem: Inward directed magnetic field passes through surface area of 0.01 m^2 as shown in the image below and changes from 4 T to -4 T in 4 seconds. What is the voltage measured on a voltmeter? (note: voltmeter measures positive voltage when the potential is higher on...

It seems more clear now, thanks!

If current flows from + to - for example, which pole has greater potential? I assume the + pole has greater potential, but my teacher says otherwise.

I'm having real trouble understanding some concepts in RLC circuits. If I have a circuit like this. The effective voltage is 120 V. What is the required frequency for resistor to release power of 250 W? I want to really understand this on a deeper level so please make the explanation...

Thanks for the explanation, it's much clearer now. Thank you everyone

Oh, I get it now, but this is valid only if the momentum of the more massive body is taken as unchanged, right? We obviously can't apply this in every instance.

I am aware that momentum and position both have their separate superposition states and by knowing one, we don't know the other. In my assumption I was specifically referring to position wave-function for which I stated that it collapses when it interacts with the barrier. And also, I'm familiar...

How actually did you get this?

But the small object doesn't bounce back with the twice of it's initial velocity, according to the analogy. It bounces with velocity of 2V + v0

The assumption you are making that I'm someone who will hold on my beliefs not matter what is entirely wrong. It seems you interpreted my words as provocative, but that was merely a way of saying that I'm relieved for not being alone with this understanding, right or wrong. And for the record, I...

Finally...

Why are you defining e = vsep/vapp if the collision is perfectly elastic? I'm not familiar with the meaning of the indexes...

I think that the analogy assumes the collision is perfectly elastic. I don't quite follow your math here. Are you sure? The explanation of this analogy says that the ball has gained twice the speed of train, this doesn't seem to me like idealization...

I understand that it transfers it's energy and momentum, but how can we say that the velocity of the ball will be 130 m/s without knowing the momentum of the train nor the tennis ball? We can't know how much energy and momentum will be transfered.