- #1
SciencePF
- 56
- 0
Suppose that an object is moving up an inclined plane, then stops and after moves down. Is correct to say that the objects stops, or we can only say that it inverts its motion without stopping?
haiha said:Theoretically it doesn't stop. Because something stops only when its velocity is 0. The velocity is dS/dt. For the object, you can always find a small dt (not zero) so that dS is not zero.
cesiumfrog said:haiha, you just failed the math exam
cristo said:Huh?? How can the velocity of an object get from v to -v without passing through zero?
If your theory predicts the bird will never stop, your theory needs to be revised.haiha said:You make me remember the problem of a bird flying between two trains approaching each other. Theoretically, it wil never stop.
This case i also marked as theoretical.
Danger said:I know that the answer seems obvious; of course it stops. In reality, though, isn't it more likely that the ball or whatever would describe a very small circular path at the apex rather than simply reverse and come straight down? I realize that it could be restricted with rails or a groove or something, but that wasn't specified in the OP.
cesiumfrog said:haiha, you just failed the math exam
cepheid said:Ouch. The truth hurts sometimes...yes a review of basic calculus is definitely in order.
nealh149 said:haiha, dS/dt is not a fraction.
KingNothing said:Yes, it is.
prasannapakkiam said:What does a fraction have anything to do with the question?
haiha said:Theoretically it doesn't stop. Because something stops only when its velocity is 0. The velocity is dS/dt. For the object, you can always find a small dt (not zero) so that dS is not zero.
haiha said:Theoretically it doesn't stop. Because something stops only when its velocity is 0. The velocity is dS/dt. For the object, you can always find a small dt (not zero) so that dS is not zero.
moose said:By your reasoning, it will also never have a velocity of 1, or 2, or 1.1, or 54, or whatever you choose!
That might explain the problems here. In the context of the initial post, "stop" means have a velocity = 0. Just for an instant, of course--not for some finite interval.haiha said:I think we may mix the words stops and zero velocity.
It is difficult to determine the accuracy of a statement without further context or information. Scientific accuracy depends on the validity of the evidence and the rigor of the research that supports the statement.
No, the body does not completely stop functioning until death. Even in death, certain processes such as decomposition continue to occur. However, the body's vital functions and systems do stop working at death.
When the body stops functioning, there is a lack of oxygen and nutrients being delivered to the cells, causing them to die. This leads to the cessation of bodily functions and eventually, death. Additionally, the body's natural processes, such as metabolism and waste removal, also stop.
In some cases, the body can be revived if it has stopped functioning due to a medical emergency such as cardiac arrest. However, once the body has reached the point of total brain death, it is no longer able to restart its functions.
The length of time the body can survive without functioning varies depending on the individual and the circumstances. In general, the body can only survive a few minutes without oxygen and a few days without water and nutrients. However, factors such as age, overall health, and environmental conditions can influence this timeframe.