Entropy is a measure of randomness within a system. Another useful way to look at it is "energy no longer available to do work". I'll admit I still have kind of a loose handle on it myself. Entropy is positive or zero for any process. So it's not conserved as other forms of energy are, but...
Unless those assumptions are made, there is no way to do basic analysis for ideal systems. And doing in-depth analysis of thermodynamic systems would require higher levels of proficiency in both mathematics and physics than someone taking an introductory thermo class would be expected to have...
The force from the curved object being moved into will be distributed evenly over all surfaces inside the piston as pressure. Also, the curved object itself is likely to develop an area of higher pressure in front of it as it is moved into the cylinder. That's what happens in real pistons...
Sorry to jump in here and muddy things up again, but there will be a magnetic field with flux lines that wrap around the wire axially as soon as the electrons start to move in a certain direction. (Think about right-hand-rule in regards to moving charges and magnetic fields.) So perhaps that...
Yes. The mass moving in an arc really doesn't affect the net KE being generated as a result of it changing elevation. And I'm assuming that the head of the striking implement will be more-or-less perpendicular to the surface of the object it's striking. This means all the velocity will be...
The final kinetic energy, mass times mv^2 will be equal to the vertical distance fallen times gravity times mass, mgh.
Set the two equal to each other, and mass cancels out. So you can solve for final velocity. But your device is complicated by the fact that the rod has mass as well, and will...
dPE=-dKE
The potential energy stored as the rig is raised will be converted to kinetic energy on the way down. KE=mV^2. Your issue is going to be a little complicated though. Because the rod also has mass of a known linear density and each differential slice dx will be raised a distance of...
Okay. So he's saying that as a result of exposure to the voltage, the wire is developing a field of its' own. I don't disagree with this, per se as an explanation for the bulk movement of electrons. It can be demonstrated mathematically using Gauss' equations that there is an axial EM field...
The model I proposed is pretty much the classical way electric currents in conductors are modeled. It's incomplete, but it does explain some things. If conduction were completely due to the charges interacting with a field, then why don't batteries short-circuit more easily? If a field in and...
From what I understand, it's electrostatic repulsion. The battery will emit electrons at one terminal, and those electrons will "push" on other electrons in the wire and so on down the length of the wire. The other terminal of the battery will also take in electrons at the other end.As a...
You know, I somehow completely missed the fact that Q was given in the problem statement. I thought the poster was only given T1 and dS. If Q is known, it should be easy enough to substitute something like Q=C(T2-T1) into the first equation, and then C will cancel.
Generally, S = Q/T. Kind of simplistic, but that is probably what you're going to use to find the net heat transfer into the cherry pie. Then, you'll need to know the heat capacity of the cherry pie to determine the change in temperature. Does the problem statement give the temperature of the...
Where there is a flat surface, the charge distribution is even because the exposed surface area of the object per unit volume of space surrounding it is constant. Where you have a sharp edge, or a pointed protrusion on an object, there is more surface area exposed per unit volume of space...
Bookmarking for consideration as an alternative calc 3 text. Would this text be accessible to someone with a decent mastery of typical Calc I/II topics without having to resort to talk with professors to wade through the jargon?
This book is good in that the exercises clearly teach the section concepts in a progressive fashion. It is not so good in that the explanations of the material seem to aim to use as few words as possible, and rely on some VERY dense jargon to save paper.
A few extra words per sentence would...
Try this too: http://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/genchem/topicreview/bp/ch4/deviation5.html
In layman's terms:
Basically, the larger and more "sticky" the molecules are, the more the collisions between them deviate from being perfectly elastic. The "stickyness" can be there for a variety of...
True. I didn't really think about it, but g will vary inversely with the distance squared between the center mass of the 2 bodies. But like you say, negligible for this problem. Those were both great links!
A larger surface area in relation to the mass of an object is likely to slow it. Think "wind resistance" slowing the acceleration of an object. In a vacuum, a feather and a bowling ball dropped from any height will hit the ground at the same time. Whereas in actual atmospheric conditions, the...
F=ma isn't really the equation you're looking for to determine how much energy the object is developing as it falls. Gravity is accelerating the object over the period of time it falls, to give it kinetic energy.
ke=(mv^2)/2 vf^2-vi^2=2az where vi = initial velocity, vf = final velocity...
No. Acceleration due to gravity is a constant g=9.807 m/s^2 for all objects regardless of mass. Only aerodynamic considerations will affect the velocities.