Help in rearranging a formulae

  • Thread starter Thread starter Fornicis
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formulae
Fornicis
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I was wondering if anyone could give me a hand in rearranging the following formulae to make v the subject?

PAvail = 1/2 ρAv^{3}C_{p}

This isn't for homework, its simply something I'm interested in and I would be immensely grateful to anyone who could do this for me.

Oh and before anyone says, I have tried to myself but I just want a second opinion as what it came out with for me seemed a bit off
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
v3 = (2PAvail) / (ρACp)
and then take the cube root of both sides.

Is "PAvail" five different variables, or two, or one? Hard to tell... Anyway, same answer in any case.
 
Thats similar to what I got, though less brackets which could have resulted in miscalculations, and in this case its just one but as you said, it can be interchangeable, and that part is key :) thank you very much
 
Fornicis said:
Hi all,

I was wondering if anyone could give me a hand in rearranging the following formulae to make v the subject?

PAvail = 1/2 ρAv^{3}C_{p}
Minor point: this is a formula. Formulae is the plural of formula.
Fornicis said:
This isn't for homework, its simply something I'm interested in and I would be immensely grateful to anyone who could do this for me.

Oh and before anyone says, I have tried to myself but I just want a second opinion as what it came out with for me seemed a bit off
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top