Visibility of sun in different altitudes

  • Thread starter Thread starter trina1990
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sun
AI Thread Summary
At the spring equinox, the visibility of the sun from the top of a tower at latitude ø is calculated to be approximately "13.94√H * sec ø." However, the user has derived a different result of "4.24√H * sec ø" using a specific formula. The formula applied is "√(2RH)/(2πR * cos ø) = time obtained/86400," but the user is unsure where the discrepancy lies. The discussion seeks clarification on the calculations and the reasoning behind why the sun would not be visible from the tower's base. Understanding the correct application of the formula and the factors influencing sun visibility at different altitudes is essential for resolving the issue.
trina1990
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
I've to show , " at the spring equinox for a place of latitude ø, the sun will become visible at the top of a tower of height " H " feet, about
" 13.94(root over )H * sec ø "

But as far i made calculations, i got the amount of
"4.24 root over H * sec ø "

I used all the measurements in feet but i could not derive this amount of 13.94 instead of 4.25. .
Plz someone held me to obtain it. .

I used this formula
" root over (2RH)/(2piR *cosø) =time to be obtained/86400 "
Now please identify my err
 
Physics news on Phys.org
trina1990 said:
I've to show , " at the spring equinox for a place of latitude ø, the sun will become visible at the top of a tower of height " H " feet, about
" 13.94(root over )H * sec ø "

But as far i made calculations, i got the amount of
"4.24 root over H * sec ø "
Please explain the problem and the calculations you have made. I don't understand why the sun would not be visible at the base of the tower.

AM
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging 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...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
Back
Top