« first day (1415 days earlier)      last day (3521 days later) » 

1:51 AM
@ChrisWhite Well that's pretty impressive
 
 
2 hours later…
3:35 AM
@ACuriousMind true, although it is technically very easy to get rid of if the community decided to do so (i.e. there's a mod tool to remove tags)
At least there used to be. I guess they could have removed it and I wouldn't know, seeing as how I haven't tried to remove a tag in ages
 
good day
 
 
8 hours later…
11:23 AM
0
Q: Why is Physics SE so bad at sorting answers?

shortstheoryFor instance take a look at this question: What technology can result from such expensive experiment as undertaken in CERN? Currently the top most answer has just 2 upvotes while a couple of 30-odd upvoted answers and even a 50 upvote answer is simply hidden away at the bottom. I'm finding this...

 
 
3 hours later…
2:42 PM
Hey, anyone acive?
*Active
I have a question about the force exerted by an electromagnet (solenoid).
Basically, where do I get g from in F=(NI)^2 * mu_0 * A / 2g^2?
I know it is the distance between the electromagnet, but is it the shortest distance possible between the coils and the iron? Is it the farthest possible distance? Or is it the average distance away (middle of the iron)?
And to respond to the last comment on this, I did. But it has gotten no answers
I was thinking the electromagnet would act on the leading edge of the ferromagnetic rod, but the electromagnet produces a field which would act on the projectile as a whole (with different points along the projectile experiencing different amounts of force because of differing distance from the coils.)
 
Sorry i do not know much about electromagnet.:(
 
If that is true, wouldn't I sum the forces to get the overall force acting on the projectile as a whole?
 
May be you should post the question in the main site.
 
Someone said I should pose a question rather than ask in chat. I think I should say that I did. 49 views, no answers or comments.
 
@CoilKid Presumably your coils are all equidistant from the iron bar....
 
2:49 PM
Yes, but that only acts on one "slice" if you will of the bar
The force will be different on the front of the bar then the back because they are different distances away from the coils
If the bar is 5mm long, and the distance between the front of the bar and coils is X, then I get two different distances to put in my equation: X, X+5mm
Can make a big difference considering the fore equation uses the square of the distance
The only thing I can think of is to calculate the force for every point along the bar and average.
I know that electromagnets are used extensively, and I have to assume that someone has already thought of this and the industry has a rule of thumb for this.
 
Ummmm....I'm pretty sure the force calculation is assuming that the bar goes into the solenoid
 
Yup
That
That's the idea
 
So you want to stick a bar into a solenoid sideways?
 
no?
Here.. one sec
 
like, O=====O <- ||
or , O=====O <- =
 
2:54 PM
Like O===O =
 
Then what's the problem?
g is the distance between o and =
Presumably the o is equidistant from the =
 
Yes. But I have to consider the length of =
 
Surface-to-surface distance, if I'm not mistaken
 
Right?
 
@CoilKid There's no L in the force equation....
 
2:55 PM
I have a picture, but I cant remember how to link them in chat
 
Just drop the image URL into it
 
Hmm
Okay
A in my equation will be acting on plane b
But the bar has a length
 
@KyleKanos Sorry to disturb but i wanted to ask-is kirchoff's law only applicable in conservative force fields?
 
@soumyadeep Only Kirchoff law's I know of are the circuital laws & there aren't any forces there, so I'm not sure what you mean
 
I mean the battery establishes electric fields,right?
 
3:00 PM
@soumyadeep Battery establishes current flow...
 
What I mean, is that for every point along the bar, the force will be different. 5bbbafd3-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/…
For line 1, the force is 10N but a little farther down the length of the rod, the force is 6N and so on.
 
@Kyle Kanos Yes but the current i.e the electrons flow due to a field established by the battery.
 
@soumyadeep And that plays no role in the Kirchoff current/voltage laws....
 
Since an electromagnet produces a field, every point on the rod inside the magnetic field will have a force acting on it. Right? That must mean that it would work off of volume, not area. The equation uses area not volume so I'm not sure what to think.
Am I supposed to use the distance to the leading edge?
 
@CoilKid I presume then that you'd have to do an integral over the position of the magnetic field
 
3:05 PM
It doesn't use volume though:/
Area along the bar at every point is volume isn't it?
So that can't be right
 
What can't be right?
And what doesn't use volume?
 
The force equation uses area, not volume
so I don't think I should do area at every point and average, or something like that
 
g is measured in length, so A/g^2 is unitless
 
Yup
Units are arbitrary
 
So if you use a volume, it'd be V/g^3
 
3:07 PM
Can't change the g though... That would mess something up, I think
 
@Kyle Kanos Well the text book says that as the Field is conservative and the electrons coming out of the battery goes into it ,the work done is 0.So the sum of potential drop and rise is zero-which is the second law.
 
@soumyadeep If that's the case, then it seems you have your answer. I've not had a circuits course in about a decade
 
Volume would be more accurate though I think. I'm just not sure if I can without messing up my equation
*if I can use it
 
@KyleKanos What i am asking is whether the text book is correct.I am reading preliminary physics...
 
I've got a question that maybe can be answered here (if not, I'll head over to Academia.SE) -- is it okay to re-use entire chapters from a thesis proposal when writing the actual thesis? Is a proposal a stand-alone document that should not be self-plagarized, or is it just like a first draft of the thesis?
 
3:13 PM
@tpg2114 I've copied a good portion of mine, but I'm not entirely sure
Is your committee going to remember it?
But I've gotta head out to class now
 
Yes, probably
 
@KyleKanos I believe what I'm getting at is a more fundamental question: The force equation I have now, using A and g^2 would only act on an object without depth. If I wanted to get the force for a three-dimensional object, I would use Volume and g^3?
 
@KyleKanos Before leaving can you pls tell if the txtbk is right?
@CoilKid May be you can help too.
@Kyle Hello.
 
4:06 PM
@CoilKid I think your interpretation is wrong. If you assume azimuthal symmetry (the case for cylinders), you can neglect a dimension
 
0
Q: No marked answer when user found it usefull

rmhleoI have seen several questions, already inactive, for which an answer was given which was useful to the user asking, but not marked as the answer. It was easy to see they were useful from the comments and flags from the user asking. But since they seem long time inactive, I wonder what happens wit...

 
user54412
the existence of the second question makes me suspect the first was a cleverly disguised homework problem
 
user54412
too clever, really, because the answers are more realistic than the problem meant to be solved
3
 
user54412
5:55 PM
3
Q: Nuclear Blast in Space

KillerIt is possible to detonate a nuclear bomb in space, if possible then what will happen? In Armageddon movie we watched that, after discovering that an asteroid the size of Texas is going to impact Earth in less than a month, NASA recruits a team of deep core drillers to drill and blast a nuclear w...

 
user54412
okay this is getting ridiculous
 
user54412
was there some big asteroid-hitting-earth movie screening somewhere?
 
user54412
was this shown to a class of HS students who were then instructed to ask the internet about it?
 
Yeah...that is pretty ridiculous!
 
@ChrisWhite The 11 km/s really seals the deal on this one
 
 
2 hours later…
7:46 PM
I actually enjoyed Armageddon. Bruce Willis saves the world. And who watches Hollywood films expecting them to be good? Or (even less likely) scientifically accurate?
Actually, it's ironical how bad the science usually is, since the average HW movie could get advice from the scientist for the HW equivalent of petty cash.
 
 
4 hours later…
user54412
11:24 PM
@FaheemMitha My quantum mechanics prof was consulted for I think Iron Man 2 - the one where he builds his own accelerator and synthesizes a new element. The science is just as ridiculous as ever. I think the consulting is just to get ideas they can run with, rather than to be realistic (which would never sell tickets).
 
user54412
And if you've heard of Interstellar its plot promises to be equally absurd, and there Kip Thorne is not only a consultant but executive producer.
 
got a silly beginner's question
say you have a 2d board with a bunch of pins placed randomly, and each pin has a rubber band attached on one end. the other end of the rubber bands are attached to a single small ball.
eh wait never mind
 
I'm reading an introductory Physics textbook for the fun of it, and I'm having proper bad trouble remembering formula derivations from page to page after not reading it for a while; is this a normal thing? If so, anyone have any tips? If not, would it be a bad idea to pursue Physics further?
Like when I'm reading it I'm like "Oh, that makes sense. I can do that, it's easy." and then 10 minutes later it's just gone :c
 
user54412
@AshleyDavies If you enjoy physics, you should definitely pursue it! Don't let one bad experience with a book get in the way.
 
user54412
Actually, there are two points: (1) not every book is good for everyone, and (2) not every way of reading a textbook is a good idea
 
11:40 PM
It doesn't really show many steps in derivations (I think this might be a standard undergrad thing, I'm used to high school textbooks), which is helpful since I can remember them better having focussed on finding out how they derived it, but I'm a bit worried if I can't keep to memory a couple of basic mechanics equation derivations (I can remember the equations fine from long months of applying them) then it's going to be a huge pain when there's a whole lot more is all.
 
user54412
For the first point, I really recommend trying a bunch of different books. No need to read one cover to cover if it's not working for you. If you want suggestions for good intro books on particular topics you can ask here in chat and we might have suggestions.
 
user54412
This gets to my second point - I think you might be too focused on the details of the derivation.
 
user54412
A lot of students starting out in physics get caught up in the formulas, probably because intro textbooks are written in the "here's a formula, now plug in some numbers" style
 
user54412
But physics is really about concepts
 
Yeah, it's really hard to adjust to switching from remembering hundreds of formulas for something to figuring them out on the spot
 
user54412
11:43 PM
As you're reading the derivation, ask if the steps make physical sense, not just if the symbol manipulation looks good. And at the end ask yourself if the result agrees with your intuition.
 
user54412
At first not everything will make sense, but as you've been exposed to more and more, certain patterns and useful techniques will emerge and stick with you.
 
So you think it's worth sticking with it then?
 
user54412
definitely
 
user54412
also, remember there are multiple levels to knowing a formula
 
user54412
the most basic is knowing what variables are involved, i.e. what quantities does the physics depend on and what don't matter
 
user54412
11:46 PM
then you can ask how the thing scales with those quantities: does temperature increase or decrease with pressure at constant density? does potential energy fall off like a power of radius or like a logarithm?
 
user54412
the last level is knowing the exact numbers, and I'd argue this is the least important
 
That's quite good advice; thanks! :)
 
user54412
Also, since your profile says you're in high school, I'll point out that pretty much every subject in high school is very different from what's taught in college.
 
is lagrangian mechanics something that was just observed to be true empirically or is it something that can be proved from newtonian mechanics with force laws?
 
user54412
Mathematics is nothing like doing trig problems, physics is not just blindly applying formulas, computer science is not really about coding
5
 
11:48 PM
Yeah, I'm reading ahead to try to see what I want to study for definite
It's kinda frustrating that our A-Levels (AFAIK, AP classes equivalents) are pretty much just using like 50 given formulas and subbing them into eachother and memorising exam board's definitions
 
user54412
good idea, but I also recommend not limiting yourself until you've sampled the subject in person once at university - attend some lectures, talk with older students, get a feel for what things are really like
 
Yeah, I really like the way the US college system does that; over here we pick our major in senior year of HS and pretty much have to stick with it (Although some places let you switch between similar fields if you do it early enough)
 
user54412
@zounds It is perfectly equivalent to Newtonian mechanics (given that you're dealing with a certain class of appropriate problems - one keyword is "holonomic constraints"), as well as to a third formulation, Hamiltonian Mechanics
 
user54412
any basic analytic mechanics textbook should have a proof
 
user54412
@AshleyDavies Ah yes, I forgot how the UK does that. Well, at the very least try reading through more than just one textbook. And since you're trying to get a feel for the subject, don't read it to memorize.
 
11:54 PM
Yeah; it's a bit of a shame :( I'm applying to some of the US colleges that offer international financial aid but it's too competitive to get my hopes up much I guess
Are there any intro textbooks you'd recommend that aren't highly expensive?
 
user54412
Alas, I never actually had any intro physics book that I liked... which isn't to say there isn't one.
 
user54412
As for expense, I feel like in this day and age that ideally shouldn't be a problem
 
user54412
Perhaps a nearby university library?
 

« first day (1415 days earlier)      last day (3521 days later) »