Recent content by MrDickinson

m1 is the large cruise ship m2 is the tug boat The question doesn't state it explicitly, but I assume that both masses are undergoing acceleration because the tug boat is experiencing a change in velocity. I assume the system accelerates uniformly, and I assume that m1 and m2 accelerate...

Thank you for your response. To some extent, I agree with you, but to some extent I disagree. But perhaps I am wrong, I cannot say for now because I do not entirely understand the topic. Precisely speaking, the momentum of a system is conserved so long as there are no external forces acting...

Thank you for your response Is it possible to have recoil without conservation of momentum? It appears possible to me upon my first consideration, but I could not necessary precisely prove it. Perhaps, what I mean to say, is this: Is a ΔF or a ΔP or the Law of Conservation of Momentum an...

Thank you for your response. I am considering "recoil" more generally. I used the cannon example because it is one that I happened upon and it was fresh in my memory. But if "recoil" appears to have properties of force, momentum, displacement, and the the like, then can recoil be defined and...

I have a basic understanding of Newton's Third Law. This definition from KhanAcademy seems sufficient. "If an object A exerts a force on object B, then object B must exert a force of equal magnitude and opposite direction back on object A." An object of some mass that exerts force an some...

I am having some difficulty understanding what "recoil" really is with respect to momentum, force, and and time. On the one hand, momentum is considered to be the product of mass and velocity or perhaps the product of the sum of masses and some velocity, or some variant of P=mv, where P is a...

Thank you. That is very helpful information. Is it fair to say that the angle of projection is, with respect to the position of the object, is constantly changing? Thanks

Thank you.

Dear Sir or Madam: I did all of my work, then I checked the answer in the back of the book (this does not give a solution, just a plain answer). With the wrong answer in mind, I really wanted to understandand why my reasoning was incorrect so that I understand the problem with greater depth...

My reasoning and answer is wrong, but I cannot figure out why. Perhaps it is strange, perhaps not, but I want to figure out why my initial method of solving this problem did yield an incorrect answer. I began by creating an equation and drawing a right triangle. x is the horizontal part of...

I understand this. But why not do one of two things... 1. Establish a new frame of reference that is accelerating? or 2. Simply acknowledge that, similar to time dilation, the speeds of these massive objects only appears to be traveling at the speed of light, however, the speeds that these...

But are there not such things as non-inertial reference frames? Can't we consider a reference frame in which the object is not at rest... ? Or even a reference frame of one photon to the other? I mean... is it possible to establish a reference frame in which a particle is accelerating or in...

I see. But why is it impossible for a photon to have a reference frame?

I had to look up the definition of "spurious." The question and constraints do not imply any falsehood. Let us examine the situation. I apologize, but auto-correct made a fool of me. In any case, I am constructing a diagram based on the information given and in the steps that said information...

So, time only appears different relative to observer. Everything that is moving at normal speeds here on Earth might appear to move very fast relative to particle A, but in its absolute sense, time is experienced uniformly from particle to particle? But, I have read on this forum that photons do...