The Psychology of Human Sexuality

  • Thread starter Thread starter Greg Bernhardt
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Human Psychology
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the principles of collision mechanics, specifically differentiating between elastic and inelastic collisions. Elastic collisions conserve both momentum and kinetic energy, while inelastic collisions conserve momentum but not kinetic energy. Advanced concepts such as conservation of angular momentum are also addressed. The provided links offer resources for further exploration of these topics. Understanding these principles is essential for studying the dynamics of physical interactions.
Messages
19,791
Reaction score
10,748
Author: Dr. Donald Luttermoser of East Tennessee State University
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
Collisions

Collision concepts
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/colcon.html

Discussion of elastic collision.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/elacol.html
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/elacol2.html

Inelastic collisions
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/inecol.html


A somewhat more advanced discussion of collisional mechanics, which can involve conservation of momentum and/or angular momentum. For elastic collisions, there is conservation of kinetic energy, which is not conserved in inelastic collisions.
http://www.virginia.edu/ep/Interactions/1__introduction_&_collision_kinematics.htm

http://www.virginia.edu/ep/Interactions/class_notes.htm
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...

Similar threads

Back
Top