Recent content by thepatient

I mentioned earlier that for scenario B, the reaction force on the falling object can be related by equation U = P2L/(2AE). Where U is the maximum compression energy of the stationary object on the ground (which equates to kinetic energy of the falling object before the collision), P is the...

I guess I should have been more precise when I said "impact energy." What I meant was, if we consider scenario A being the collision and B the fall scenario, the kinetic energy gained by the object after the collision in A equaling the kinetic energy lost by the falling object in scenario B...

Drakkith, thanks, but I think I answered my own question, but feel free to refute. This problem is more of an engineering problem. I'm only looking for an approximation (and it isn't really applied to anything. Just something I became curious about, which is why I am only looking into average...

Conservation of energy is the reason why I highly suspect it can be.

Why not? Assuming that the acceleration distance from the collision is equivalent to the compression distance of the landing medium.

That's true, concrete won't deform enough, which means the force will be higher due to that shorter stopping distance. Stating a material makes this a bit difficult. I guess the real question is, given a collision with an object that accelerates you to a certain amount of kinetic energy KE, is...

Let's say that there is a sort of large concrete wall, that applies an average force of 12,900 N for .04 seconds while you're initially at rest. After the impact, your momentum is now 516 N*s. Your mass being of 50 kg, means your speed is 10.32 m/s. So, in terms of kinetic energy, you've gained...

The units on the solution aren't consistent. They show that (units of electric charge)^2 = force.

That is what I thought as well. But apparently, this result is used to prove that 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 +5... = -1/12, and apparently that result is used in physics like String Theory.

Homework Statement I was browsing online and stumbled upon someone's explanation as to why 1 -2 +3 -4 + 5... towards infinity= 1/4. His explanation didn't make sense to me. He starts with a geometric series, takes a derivative, and plugs in for x = -1, and gets a finite value of 1 -2 + 3 - 4...

Thanks for taking a look. :smile:

Oops sorry. I clicked the space after the 3rd question, and everything after that came out bold. I just realized now that there is a formatting tool above. I'll edit that.

Homework Statement A manufacturing machine produces defects with a probability of 0.1%. How many parts must the machine produce to have a 99.9% chance of producing at least 1 defective part? Homework Equations P(A) + P(B) = 1 The Attempt at a Solution [/B] A in this case is the machine...

So it isn't a big deal. I guess I am just splitting hairs. Thanks.

He wasn't clear whether it was going to be sent through snail mail or e-mail, but he said today or tomorrow. Today is tomorrow, so I am guessing it will be snail mail.