« first day (2537 days earlier)      last day (384 days later) » 

09:13
@JohnRennie hello sir. Are you free now?
Hi, yes I'm free :-)
Yesterday I asked about what is tube length
If we use distance between fo and fe we get different result
If we use distance between fo and image distance we get different result
I don't know I'm afraid. I don't know how tube length is defined.
It's ok sir :-)
Can I show you one more thing?
09:18
While calculating magnification I found this amazing number which is powers of 5
Oh yes :-)
Is this just coincidence or some complex math that I don't know
I'll have to think about it. You could ask on the Maths Stack Exchange.
Ok sir. Thank you for your time :-)
09:49
@HarjotDhillon I think I see why this works.
Ping me if you want to discuss it.
 
4 hours later…
13:35
@JohnRennie Can you look into this question when you are free ?
13:50
It is 12 13 5 triangle
You can find its angle with x axis
Then 34cosθ would give velocity across rod
The point on parabola where rod is touching could be simplified by imagining it as straight wall like I did in my drawing
That imaginary line is equal to slope of parabola at that point
Now this question is reduced to simple constrained motion
Now imagine point o where rod could be imagined to be pivoted at that instant
Point o is x distance away from base of rod and 13-x distance away from top
At point o 34sinθ = vsin(α-θ)
After you find x distance you find angular velocity by 34sinθ/x
@KavinIshwaran that's what I thought feel free to tell if I am wrong
@HarjotDhillon Hi ! :-)
I did exactly as you did here. but it isn't giving the answer given in the answer key
What's the answer
2 rad/s
and my method is slightly different as I went to find the component of velocity perpendicular to rod at the top end
14:07
You need to find dy/dt for the right end of the rod, then the angular velocity is that speed divided by 12. Yes?
@JohnRennie Isn't it 17 ?
The normal distance of the speed dy/dt from the left end of the rod is 12 cm. Yes?
So the speed is given by v_y = 12 ω
Hence ω = v_y/12
Ah yes. But I got v_y to be 17cm/s
14:12
Ah, sorry I misunderstood what you meant.
Actually I misunderstood :-)
@Johnrennie The point of contact with the rod makes an angle 45 degrees right ?
we don't need to resolve ?
To calculate v_y let (x,y) be the coordinates of the right end of the rod and let x' be the x coordinate of the left end of the rod - the y coordinate of the left end is always 0.
Now write the function giving y as a function of x'.
I'd have to sit down and work out what that function is, but I doubt it's very hard to derive.
OK so far?
So we have y = f(x') for some function f(), then:
dy/dt = df/dt = df/dx' dx'/dt
And we are told dx'/dt = -34
14:17
@KavinIshwaran I calculated on calculator and got answer 1.99 rad
So find df/dx' and then substitute x' = -2 and you should get the answer.
My way as mentioned above was right
Here our distance x is 6.54
And 34sinθ is 13.07
@JohnRennie OK :-)
@HarjotDhillon Oh ! I will have to check if I get the same without calculator :-)
@JohnRennie sir now we can discuss if you are free
14:58
@HarjotDhillon Hi :-)
Are you available now?
@JohnRennie sorry I went away now I am here
Your expression simplifies to 1.5/(3000 - 1.5)
Now divide through by 3 to get:
0.5/(1000 - 0.5)
15:07
And then rewrite this as:
0.5/1000 × (1 - 0.5/1000)⁻¹
OK so far?
Now we can use the binomial theorem to expand (1 - 0.5/1000)⁻¹
We get 1 + (0.5/1000) + (0.5/1000)² + (0.5/1000)³ + ...
Yes?
Yes now I see why we get powers of 5
Yes :-)
Thank you for your help sir :-)
15:11
It was a fun problem to think about :-)
It works with other numbers too
e.g. 1/(10000 - 3) gives us powers of 3.
15:39
Please help me
@AayushSethia Hi :-)
What's the question?
16:41
Hi sir @JohnRennie
Hi :-)
We need to find a relation between x and y
The parabolic arc is the free surface
You want the equation for the shape of the liquid surface in a rotating container?
Yes
The pressure in a liquid is related to the work done to move a unit mass of the liquid. For example we know the pressure at a depth h is ρgh, and gh is the work done to move a unit mass a distance h.
The work done is ∫F dx and when moving vertically F = mg which is just g for a unit mass. So when moving vertically the integral gives us W = gh.
OK so far?
16:47
Yes
@JohnRennie Instead of doing this, we can use the fact that the resultant centrifugal force and gravity should be perpendicular to free surface ?
I think it is simple
Now when we have a fluid rotating at some angular velocity ω there is a centripetal force F = rω².
@KavinIshwaran Yes you can do it that way, though I think my way is pretty simple too.
@sanya OK
@JohnRennie Ok :-)
Yes
Suppose we start at the centre and move out to a distance x, then the work done is:
W = ∫xω² dx
where we integrate from 0 to x.
So this is just going to be W = ¹⁄₂ω²x²
Yes?
16:51
Yes
And suppose at this point the depth of the liquid is y, then the work done to move up to the surface is just gy as we discussed above.
Yes
And the two works have to be the same so we get:
¹⁄₂ω²x² = gy
And that immediately gives us the equation for the surface:
y = ω²/2g x²
@JohnRennie I understand that the pressure should be the same at a point, why will the work done be the same?
If we start at the centre and move along the surface the pressure doesn't change. It's just 1 atm everywhere on the surface.
So that means if we move horizontally outwards then vertically upwards, the pressure increase as we move outwards must be the same as the pressure decrease when we move upwards.
Remember we are only calculating the work because the pressure change is proportional to the work done.
So what we are really saying is the horizontal and vertical pressure changes must be the same.
16:57
Okay
@sanya I've done the calculation this way because you will see this concept used in other similar questions. e.g. suppose we have a tube of length 𝓁 filled with liquid of density ρ and we rotate the tube horizontally with angular velocity ω then what is the pressure at the end of the tube?
From above it's going to be P = ¹⁄₂ρ𝓁²ω²
@JohnRennie Got it
OK :-)
Thanks:)
This is an important concept to know as like I say you'll encounter it in various questions.
17:03
I see..
How far have you got with this?
COM accelerates with 5m/s^2
You can do it that way, though there is a shortcut.
at maximum extension relative motion exists
@JohnRennie are we going to do the SHM way ?
17:12
At time zero the spring is at its shortest length i.e. extension = 0. Then as we pull the spring stretches to a maximum extension x = 𝓁, then contracts again to its original length x = 0, and this cycle repeats.
This is just like if we have a mass on a vertical spring that is unstretched and we let go. The mass falls down then bounces back up and oscillates vertically in the same way our system above oscillated vertically.
And the key fact here is the maximum extension is half the equilibrium extension.
That is, if we let the mass down slowly so it came to rest with the spring stretched by some distance 𝓁 then that distance would be half the maximum extension.
Does this make sense so far?
Now suppose in the system above we ramped up the force slowly so the masses didn't oscillate but just accelerated together. The acceleration would be a = F/m = 90/(3 + 15) = 5 m/s².
Yes?
17:18
And if the acceleration of the 3kg mass is 5 m/s² the force on it must be 15N
So the extension of the spring is given by 15 = kx = 90x
So x = ¹⁄₆ metres
Yes?
And that is the equilibrium extension, so the maximum extension is double this i.e. ¹⁄₃m
Does that match the answer key?
17:22
I've taken a while to explain this, but once you know this method it is very quick to get the answer.
@JohnRennie \We have solved question with COM frame and conserving the momentum, but that is when no external force acts on it
how to do this in this case in that method ?
The problem is that here the COM frame is accelerating so it is not an inertial frame.
And while you can work in non-inertial frames I avoid it as it's so easy to make mistakes.
You can write down equations for the motion. We can go through that if you want, but I suspect it takes too long to do in the exam.
I can suggest another quick way to analyse questions like these if you want ...
I will take the easy way :-)
@JohnRennie Yes
17:27
Acceleration can be treated like gravity.
In this question a 90N force is acting on the 15kg mass.
Suppose you were holding the 15kg block stationary on a planet where g = 6 m/s² then the force you would need to hold the block would be the same 90N. Yes?
So physically the motion is the same as if you were on a planet with g = 6 m/s² and you had the 3kg mass on a spring below the 15kg mass you are holding, and then you let the 3kg mass go so it starts bouncing.
The extension of the spring with time is exactly the same as when pulling the system horizontally. It's like you have a horizontal gravity of 0.6g acting.
So in this case the "gravity" force on the 3kg mass is F = m × "g" = 3 × 6 = 18N
How do you think these ideas ! :-)
Then as before equate this to kx to get the equilibrium spring extension, then double it.
@KavinIshwaran Many, many years of experience :-)
Anyhow you'll see this gives the same result as we got above.
17:33
And both methods are very quick.
I get it :-)
@JohnRennie Thank you for the clarification :-)
OK :-)
Will see you tomorrow :-)
Bye :-)

« first day (2537 days earlier)      last day (384 days later) »