Recent content by luis20

Yes, but my teacher suggested this measure: value added / (labour + capital + intermediate inputs) which is: (output - a) / inputThis is my actually question, is he wrong? ^^

Yes, I would include losses of intermediate inputs in the denominator. But the amount I took from numerator shouldn't I take from denominator too? (since I know that amount is represented in both numerator and denominator) I mean, if the original ratio is: output / input, then if I take the...

I found on the internet that there are 2 main multifactor productivity measures: 1) total output / (labour + capital + intermediate inputs) 2) value added / (labour + capital) , where value added = total output - intermediate inputsThis two measures make sense but my teacher said that...

Is "force required" still favoring hinged door? That's the answer I ultimately seek. I don't know if all energy from the force is used in rotational motion or if some is lost since the hinges don't let the door move forward (so some wasted energy here)?

So if you had assumed that the hinged door needs to rotate 90 degrees, it would take a little less time with same initial KE.

Thanks a lot! I get it. But didn't you forgot the translational energy lost in the hinges? If so, in the end, hinged door may lose. Or is all energy input used in rotational motion?

Thanks! How did you get (pi^2)/8? The problem is not with simple doors xD (some are quite hard to push actually :P), I'm trying to work on possible misconceptions I have about energy

No, no. I meant in a specific interval of time "t". I want it opened after "t" seconds. In both ends there would be springs to make an idealized perpetual system. Which kind of door would need the smaller energy input to start this repeated system with "2t" periods?

Of course. I know it doesn't require much effort xD. But, knowing this simple situation I can extrapolate to more complex situations, that's why I made up this simple example. Anyway, without friction, I believe hinged doors would spend more energy since the translational component of energy is...

I just would like to understand if linear motion is more energy efficient than angular motion in this situation or not. Friction would just complicate the answer, I think. And you can develop doors with very small friction. And, by the way, if hinged doors are worse, why are them so spread around?

To understand, in a specific case, which motion spends less energy - angular or linear - I want to ask an unusual question. Which kind of door - hinged or sliding door - needs less energy to change its state from closed to fully opened, in a specific interval of time "t"? If I want to close...

If entropy is increasing, life will eventually come to an end, right?

Right! One last question The equation of conservation of energy is: Ma*sqrt(Viax^2 + Viay^2) + Mb*sqrt(Vibx^2 + Viby^2) = Ma*sqrt(Vfax^2 + Vfay^2) + Mb*sqrt(Vfbx^2 + Vfby^2) and not separated like this:Ma*Viax^2 + Mb*Vibx^2 = Ma*Vfax^2 + Mb*Vfbx^2 , for direction x Ma*Viay^2 +...

Thanks. The problem is: I'm talking about collisions in at least 2 dimensions. Calculations become harder. :\

I didn't quite understand how did you make the calculations but I could see that the faster atom most speed up! If the slower atom comes perpendicularly or from behind, the faster object will speed up. I think this could be likely in a system with few atoms. In the real situation, atoms are...