- #1
AI Thread Summary
To calculate the balance point on a seesaw-type beam, the distances from the pivot to the center of mass of each weight must be known. The relationship A * E = B * F holds true for a balanced beam, where A and B are the weights and E and F are their respective distances from the pivot. The user is specifically trying to determine the position of 'C' for proper handle placement to ensure balance when lifted. Accurate measurements of the weights' positions relative to the pivot are crucial for this calculation. Understanding these principles will help achieve the desired balance in the product design.
- #2
vk6kro
Science Advisor
- 4,079
- 41
You need to know the distances from below the centre of mass of each of the weights on the beam to the pivot point.
Call these E (on the left) and F (on the right).
Then A * E = B * F if the beam is balanced and weightless.
Call these E (on the left) and F (on the right).
Then A * E = B * F if the beam is balanced and weightless.
- #3
r4v3n
- 2
- 0
- #4
vk6kro
Science Advisor
- 4,079
- 41
No, you have to know where the weights act on the beam.
This is below the center of mass of each weight and not at the end of the beam.
This is below the center of mass of each weight and not at the end of the beam.
So I know that electrons are fundamental, there's no 'material' that makes them up, it's like talking about a colour itself rather than a car or a flower. Now protons and neutrons and quarks and whatever other stuff is there fundamentally, I want someone to kind of teach me these, I have a lot of questions that books might not give the answer in the way I understand. Thanks
i want to just test a linear generator with galvanometer , the magnet is N28 and the wire (Cu) is of 0.6mm thikness and 10m long , but galvanometer dont show anthing ,
The core is PLA material (3d printed)
The magnet size if 28mm * 10mm * 5mm
If the universe is fundamentally probabilistic, and all possible outcomes are realized in some branch of the multiverse, does that invalidate the concept of scientific inquiry? If knowledge is merely a description of one particular branch of reality, does it have any inherent value?
Similar threads
Hot Threads
-
I 'Set of pearls' mathematics / physics help
- Started by lostsoul13
- Replies: 8
- Other Physics Topics
-
B Is space stretching or is new space being created?
- Started by revnice
- Replies: 39
- Other Physics Topics
-
B How do walk-in freezers not give people hypothermia? [they do]
- Started by SpeedOfLightYagami
- Replies: 6
- Other Physics Topics
-
B Easier to pedal with physics
- Started by Dark85
- Replies: 18
- Other Physics Topics
Recent Insights
-
Insights Why Entangled Photon-Polarization Qubits Violate Bell’s Inequality
- Started by Greg Bernhardt
- Replies: 26
- Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
-
Insights Quantum Entanglement is a Kinematic Fact, not a Dynamical Effect
- Started by Greg Bernhardt
- Replies: 11
- Quantum Physics
-
Insights What Exactly is Dirac’s Delta Function? - Insight
- Started by Greg Bernhardt
- Replies: 7
- General Math
-
Insights Relativator (Circular Slide-Rule): Simulated with Desmos - Insight
- Started by Greg Bernhardt
- Replies: 1
- Special and General Relativity
-
Insights Fixing Things Which Can Go Wrong With Complex Numbers
- Started by PAllen
- Replies: 7
- General Math
-
Insights Fermat's Last Theorem
- Started by fresh_42
- Replies: 105
- General Math