How Accurate Are My Physics Problem Solutions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter woodworker101
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Airplane
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the accuracy of solutions to physics problems involving Newton's laws. The user is uncertain about their answers to three specific problems: the acceleration of a glider towed by an airplane, the coefficient of friction for a skier on wet snow, and the resultant acceleration of an object under two perpendicular forces. Other participants suggest that the user should show their work to identify mistakes, emphasizing the importance of understanding the problem-solving process rather than just comparing answers. Overall, the conversation highlights the need for clarity in problem-solving and peer review in physics.
woodworker101
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
I am still having troubles with Newtons laws and i work with the problems but get an answer but don't know if it is the right one and just want to check my work with yours to see if I am correct.

An airplance with a mass of 1.2 x 10^4 kg tows a glider with a mass of .60 x 10^4 kg. If the airplace propellers provide a net forward thrust of 3.6 x 10^4 N, what is the acceleration of the glider? I believe the answer is 6.0 m/s^2, but not for sure if it right or not.

An Olympic skier moving at 20.0 m/s down a 30.0 degree slope encounters a region of wet snow and slides 145 m before coming to a halt. What is the coefficient of friction between the skies and the snow? I believe it is .740.

Two perpendicular forces, one of 45.0 N directed upward and the second of 60.0 N directed to the right, act simultaneously on an object with a mass of 35.0 kg. What is the magnitude of the resultant acceleration of the object? This I believe is 1.41 m/s^2.

All I am wanting is to see someone else's work on how they got their answer so I can see where I messed up or if I did them correctly or not. Thanks for the help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your first and third are wrong. Why don't you show your work and we see what you did wrong?

--J
 
The reason is that when I tell someone else my work it doesn't make sense to them and I just started to ask to see someone elses to see where my mistake(s) where. that is the reason behind it.
 
Have you not convinced yourself that your answer is totally correct? If not, why not? You shouldn't be able to spot problems in your own work by looking at others', you should be able to spot problems in others' work by looking at others'. Barring silly algebra mistakes, of course.

Show your work.

--J
 
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanged mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top