@ACuriousMind that was what I thought, thus my confusion about the statement they make, and I quote "for equilibrium, we must have |F_s| <= u_s|F_n|". I'm sure they're right (and they arrive at the same answer in the end), but I just got really get what the relation to the equilibrium is.
@ACuri
@ACuriousMind (personally, I just calculated |F_s| and then the force acting in the opposite direction, took the difference between that and the role acting in the same direction as the friction. (its asking how much force must the role apply, to keep a box on a incline static)
Which is not to say that I expect them to become famous. There is a lot of time and a lot of oportunities to be surprised between undergrad and famous.
I assume that integrated over my career someone I teach will become something special. But I don't pretend to know who.
I've known people much smarter and more able than I to flame out early. And I've seen some I thought we not my equals get much more prestigious jobs than me.
So, while I may have my favored candidates, that as strong a statement as I'm willing to make.
@0celo7 The seniors TA thing is very school dependent. At You Can Study Buzzed, in the early '90s seniors would be hired to grade exams for minimum wag and pizza (did that a few times), but only grad students could be TAs or regular graders. At my current place we have no grad students so juniors and seniors can become TAs for class credit with instructor approval.
@0celo7 I'm teaching the algebra/trig version (pre-med, pre-nursing, pre-dental, pre-pharmacy, biologists, biochemists, etc...). We've gotten as far as angular momentum at this point. About to talk about simple harmonic oscillation. But first they have a test. ::cackles and dry washes hands::
@0celo7 I believe you started later than we did and they have learned only the most cursory versions of some things (like angular momentum, for instance).
@0celo7 Our curriculum for the course calls for kinematics, forces, circular motion, eneergy momentum, rotational motion, angular momentum, oscillation, elasticity, heat transfer and thermal equilibrium, waves and sound.
@0celo7 But again, you are expected to know it in depth and well. These guys only skim the surface. And some can't keep up even so.
We go that fast by not doing any really interesting problems and giving them a break in terms of how hard we let the math actually get. Remember most of these students not only haven't had calculus, but are unwilling to take it.
@0celo7 Recently. There is actually a standard that calls for it, though there is much resistance in some communities. See also tex.stackexchange.com/questions/14821/… .
I'm also toying with the physics package which (a) takes care of that detail for me and (b) make the detail configurable, so I can easily changing it later if I change my mind.
@dmckee When you say you can't tell genres, you might just mean you can't detect the difference between rawstyle and modern hardcore, which is about 10-15bpm and some characteristic sounds.
But if you can't distinguish house and hardcore...that's pretty severe.
Mind you, I have a piece of software I use to classify songs by tempo and add them to my workout mixes for different activity levels, but the songs are drawn across my library.
@0celo7 : it's got everything to do with the definition of a tensor, because that's the history of it. But hey, if you want to lurch into dismissal mode about something you don't know about, and doubtless call me names too, well, that's one way to cling to ignorance.
Today, November 9th, 2015, is the 5 year anniversary of Phys.SE's public beta. Congratulation! (The 5 year anniversary of the private beta was last week, November 2nd, 2015.)
17
November 2nd, 2015 also had a new record: (almost) 133k total page views in a day.
@Slereah The relativistic point particle is a constrained system, you need to remember the constraints together with the e.o.m. to have full information about the system
@Slereah Just determine the canonical momentum - you'll see that it fulfills this relation, and that's how all constraints arise, one calculates the canonical momenta and observes there are relations among them which are not captured by the e.o.m. (i.e. the Legrendre transform is singular)
Since the Poincare reps are classified by $m^2$, you cannot have physical difference between $m$ and $-m$ since they'd determine the exact same particle representation.
Could anyone explain the following expression: Why can mass not be considered concentrated at CM (center of mass) for rotational motion?
