« first day (630 days earlier)      last day (2289 days later) » 

02:35
@Mr.Xcoder it's correct
@sammygerbil you there?
 
3 hours later…
05:13
@Mr.Xcoder you are correct . If density had been same as l . Then similarly you could get $x_{cm }= 2L/3$
@Johnrennie hi.
 
1 hour later…
06:37
One 120 kg metal of specific heat 389 Jkg^-1k^-1 is heated that its temperature increased by 100°C . What is its final mass?
@DavidZ can you help me with that. Im intending to share my solving method. And you to judge that.
@LoopBack do you know when jr will come ?
@Nobodyrecognizeable I m also waiting for him
@LoopBack btw whats your question. If its from mechanics. Ill surely try that then .
Electrostatics
I can handle mechanics myself
@LoopBack ok. Post it. But i think sammy gerbil is here also.
@sammygerbil are you here ?
I don't think he is
06:51
@LoopBack probably he forgot to turn off the internet.
@Nobodyrecognizeable Maybe
Can you solve it without using star Delta method
@LoopBack have you tried jr's superposition method?
@Nobodyrecognizeable I understood what jr means, but what is it?
@LoopBack its superposition principle largely recommended by john rennie:p
@LoopBack ^^
@Nobodyrecognizeable Is this related with capacitors?
@Nobodyrecognizeable link isn't working
It says connection refused
@LoopBack finally the right link . But the theorem works for capacitors also.
@Nobodyrecognizeable I know how to solve this question but I think I'm writing the incorrect equations
@LoopBack im not practicing electrostatics for one year or so . But i could help you with the solving method . Read and try it . And if you run into problems i hope jr would be there .
Okay. @Nobodyrecognizeable thanks for the link, I'll go through it
07:09
Np. Goodbye @LoopBack
@Nobodyrecognizeable you there?
I think "superposition principle" is used when circuit contains serval batteries, I don't find it useful for calculating effective resistance/capacitance of a complex circuit connected to a single battery
07:47
@Nobodyrecognizeable Sorry I missed that, but I don't have time now.
@DavidZ np.
@LoopBack ok . Sorry then .
 
1 hour later…
08:59
@LoopBack @Nobodyrecognizeable Thank you for checking!
@Mr.Xcoder are you preparing for some exam?
Lengthening Pendulum Problem #19 : I think I have solved it. Angular momentum is conserved according to eq 3 on p 268 of the following article : audiophile.tam.cornell.edu/…. So at the lowest point we can write Lv0=(L+δ)v1Lv0=(L+δ)v1 or $v_0^2=(1+x)^2v_1^2$ wherewhere $v_0, v_1$ are the velocities to left and right of the lowest point and are the velocities to left and right of the lowest point and $x=\frac{\delta}{L}$.

On the LHS of the swing the mass falls a distance h0=L(1−cosθ0)h0=L(1−cos⁡θ0) so that $v_0^2=2gh_0v0^2=2gh_0$. On the RHS of the swing the mass rises through a height of h1…
@Nobodyrecognizeable You could say that. I am preparing for the national physics olympiad. I am too young now but one day I wish I could go to IPhO so that's my goal.
09:14
@Mr.Xcoder then i advice you to use gradeup the free app . And jee questions of it. And most probably physics questions.
Lengthening Pendulum Problem #19 : I think I have solved it. Angular momentum is conserved according to eq 3 on p 268 of the following article : audiophile.tam.cornell.edu/randpdf/swing.pdf. So at the lowest point we can write $Lv_0=(L+\delta)v_1$ or v_0^2=(1+x)^2v_1^2$ where $v_0, v_1$ are the velocities to left and right of the lowest point and $x=\frac{\delta}{L}$.
Lengthening Pendulum Problem #19 : I think I have solved it. Angular momentum is conserved according to eq 3 on p 268 of the following article : audiophile.tam.cornell.edu/…. So at the lowest point we can write Lv0=(L+δ)v1Lv0=(L+δ)v1 or $v_0^2=(1+x)^2v_1^2$ wherewhere $v_0, v_1$ are the velocities to left and right of the lowest point and are the velocities to left and right of the lowest point and $x=\frac{\delta}{L}$.

On the LHS of the swing the mass falls a distance h0=L(1−cosθ0)h0=L(1−cos⁡θ0) so that $v_0^2=2gh_0v0^2=2gh_0$. On the RHS of the swing the mass rises through a height of h1…
Sorry to room owners. Was bookmarking a solution which i forgot.
@Nobodyrecognizeable Lengthening Pendulum Problem #19 : I think I have solved it. Angular momentum is conserved according to eq 3 on p 268 of the following article : audiophile.tam.cornell.edu/randpdf/swing.pdf. So at the lowest point we can write $Lv_0=(L+\delta)v_1$ or v_0^2=(1+x)^2v_1^2$ where $v_0, v_1$ are the velocities to left and right of the lowest point and $x=\frac{\delta}{L}$.
On the LHS of the swing the mass falls a distance $h_0=L(1-\cos\theta_0)$ so that $v_0^2=2gh_0$. On the RHS of the swing the mass rises through a height of $h_1=(L+\delta)(1-\cos\theta_1)$ when it reaches
So option D is correct.
@Nobodyrecognizeable what are you doing
@LoopBack i think no jr today. Though he came in h bar for a moment. I think hes too busy today.
@LoopBack was bookmarking a solution.
@Nobodyrecognizeable ohh
@LoopBack in these circuits you have to pull the two ends and see how the capacitors align.
@Nobodyrecognizeable no need I have solved it
09:30
@LoopBack thats great . Then . I think superposition will help you in harder circuits.
@LoopBack are you preparing for jee?
@LoopBack you may use gradeup app for jee. Its free.
I don't think I will have to study superposition, its time consuming. I prefer Kirchoff
As you wish.
Ok @Nobodyrecognizeable I'll search for it
09:33
Ok. Anyway are you giving jee this January?
Best of luck . Chap. Have to go. Goodbye.
@Nobodyrecognizeable goodbye
10:12
@LoopBack the circuit is symmetrical from forward and backward that is if you rotate it 180° it looks than same you can utilize that to make kirchoff's laws easier to apply use the symmetry
 
2 hours later…
11:50
@sammygerbil you really should turn off internet when you're not using it. So much loss of electric energy.
@Nobodyrecognizeable :)
@sammygerbil are you free now?
@Nobodyrecognizeable yes
@sammygerbil do you know how to calculate moment of inertia of a square about a tilted axis ?
@Nobodyrecognizeable Do you mean a square plate (2D) or a cube (3D)?
12:00
@sammygerbil lets start with 2d first.
@Nobodyrecognizeable Don't you have any ideas?
@sammygerbil my teacher was saying something like $I=I_{xx}cos^2\alpha + I_{yy}cos^2\beta +I_{zz}cos^2\gamma$ do you know something about that.
@Nobodyrecognizeable Yes I have seen that before. Can you apply that formula?
@sammygerbil ok. No please show.
@Nobodyrecognizeable Do you know what $I_{xx}$ etc and $\alpha, \beta, \gamma$ are?
12:09
@sammygerbil no. Basically he just wrote the formula . Thus could be used. Can you teach me this thing?
@Nobodyrecognizeable $I_{xx}, I_{yy}, I_{zz}$ are the principal moments of intertia, parallel and perpendicular to the sides of the rectangle.
@sammygerbil lemme guess for a 2d
$\alpha, \beta, \gamma$ are the angles between the chosen axis and the corresponding principal axis.
@sammygerbil so if you have a square of side a and in xy plane so that the sides (two are parallel to x axis) and other two parallel to y axis. Then $\alpha$ is the new axis about the diagonal which make 45° angle with x and $\alpha =\beta=45°$
@Nobodyrecognizeable So you want the axis to be the diagonal of the square?
12:15
@sammygerbil yeah
@Nobodyrecognizeable ok. You are doing well so far. Can you get a result now using the formula?
@sammygerbil $ \gamma = 90°$
@Nobodyrecognizeable yes
And $I_{xx}=I_{yy}=$?
@sammygerbil wait ..... double integration going on....
@Nobodyrecognizeable The MI of the square is the same as for a rod of length $a$ about its midpoint.
12:20
@sammygerbil $Ma^2/3$ provided that a is the side and M total mass
@Nobodyrecognizeable That is the MI about one end, not the middle.
Replace $a$ by $a/2$.
@sammygerbil $\sigma y^2 dxdy$ limits 0 to a for both.
@Nobodyrecognizeable No need for integration.
@sammygerbil are you talking about moment of inertia of a square about a square going through its midpont and is in xy plane (*xy plane as i defined) then we don't have controversy here.
@Nobodyrecognizeable Yes MI for square about diagonal axis.
That is what you are trying to find?
$I_{xx}, I_{yy}$ are MIs about axis through centre parallel the the sides.
12:29
@sammygerbil im talking about it when the square isn't tilted and the axis goes right through the middle.
@sammygerbil yeah then i agree $cos\beta=cos\alpha = 1/\sqrt 2$
@Nobodyrecognizeable When axis isn't tilted the MI is the same formula as a rod of length $a$ about its midpoint.
@Nobodyrecognizeable Good so far.
@sammygerbil yeah . I acknowledged that.
@Nobodyrecognizeable So what final answer do you get?
@sammygerbil $Ma^2/12$
@Nobodyrecognizeable Correct.
For a square, the MI is the same about any axis in the xy plane.
12:34
@sammygerbil which to align as principal axis i could think one side as principal axis and do a major mistake.
$I_{xx}=I_{yy}$ and $\alpha=90-\beta$ so $I=I_{xx}\sin^2\beta+I_{xx}\cos^2\beta=I_{xx}$!
@sammygerbil about an edge youd get $Ma^2/3$
@Nobodyrecognizeable yes
I meant any axis through COM.
@sammygerbil you wanna mean when i cose an x axis y should be perpendicular.
@Nobodyrecognizeable ? x and y axes are perpendicular and both in the plane of the square plate.
12:38
@sammygerbil if i had said the x axis is the edge of a square and youll get another edge as y axis. So moment of inertia would be different.
@sammygerbil agreed but the dilemma is which should be regarded as principal axis as said^^^
@Nobodyrecognizeable The principal axes pass through the COM.
If you choose any other axis you can use the formula to find MI about a parallel axis through COM then use Parallel Axis Theorem to find MI about other axis.
I think the formula only works for axes through COM.
@sammygerbil thanks . All clear. Now trying to calculate moment of inertia of cube around its body diagonal and post that. To test that i learnt properly or not so please stay a while.
@Nobodyrecognizeable No need to do any calculation at all! Extend the result you got for the square.
@sammygerbil Ma^3/3 ?
Sorry a call from mother which caused late responce
@Nobodyrecognizeable That is not the MI about COM.
12:53
@sammygerbil $ I_xx = I_yy = I_zz= Ma^2/4$
@Nobodyrecognizeable How?
@sammygerbil $\int \int \int \rho x^2 dx dy dz$ all limits -a/2 to +a/2
@sammygerbil I'm damn sure you didn't forget triple integration but i did ; so $I_{xx} = I_{yy}= I_{zz}= Ma^2/12$
@Nobodyrecognizeable Result should be $\frac16 Ma^2$.
Same as $I_{zz}$ for a square plate.
$I_{xx}=I_{yy}=\frac{1}{12} Ma^2$ and $I_{zz}=I_{xx}+I_{yy}$.
MI of cube about any axis through COM is $\frac16Ma^2$.
MI of square about any axis through COM in plane of square is $\frac{1}{12}Ma^2$.
8 mins ago, by Nobody recognizeable
@sammygerbil $\int \int \int \rho x^2 dx dy dz$ all limits -a/2 to +a/2
Your integrand should be $\rho (x^2+y^2)$. ^^^
@sammygerbil to get mi about z you are right.
@Nobodyrecognizeable For the cube all principal axes are the same.
13:09
@sammygerbil so yeah $ I_xx = I_yy = I_zz = Ma^2/6$
@Nobodyrecognizeable Correct. Also use the identity $\cos^2\alpha+\cos^2\beta+\cos^2\gamma=1$.
Result is that MI about any axis through COM is $\frac16 Ma^2$ for cube.
@sammygerbil the body diagonal makes 45°angle with all tgree axises doesn't it ?
@Nobodyrecognizeable No.
@sammygerbil is the z axis perpendicular?
@Nobodyrecognizeable To what?
13:15
@sammygerbil to the body diagonal.
@Nobodyrecognizeable No it isn't.
The body diagonal makes the same angle with all 3 principal axes.
@sammygerbil thats 45° for all principal axises right ?
@Nobodyrecognizeable No! If the side of the cube is $a$ then the length of the body diagonal is $\sqrt3 a$.
So $\cos\alpha=1/\sqrt3$ etc.
Not $1/\sqrt2$.
@sammygerbil sure .
@sammygerbil thanks professor.
@Nobodyrecognizeable you're welcome
13:20
@sammygerbil have a nice day professor, goodbye.
@Nobodyrecognizeable you also
2
 
2 hours later…
14:59
@sammygerbil Do you have any knowledge about electrolytic conductance?
@Dante Not much. What is the question?
Is there any difference between molar conductance and molar conductivity?
There's a difference between between conductance and conductivity (geometrical factors) but according all that I've tried to find molar conductance and molar conductivity are same, and they have the same formula
It's really pissing me off, I've spent too much time trying to clear my concept still don't feel satisfied :/
@Dante Yes they are the same.
And why so?
Molar conductance is conductance per mole.
If they are defined by same formula they are the same.
15:07
But what's their definition exactly?
And why are they same unlike the same of just conductivity and conductance
@Dante I cannot find a definition for molar conductance using google. All I get is molar conductivity. Molar conductance is a misleading name which usually means the same as molar conductivity.
What is the context in which you have seen molar conductance used?
It's there in my reference book, Physical chemistry by OP tandon
@Dante Does the author use both terms or only molar conductance? And in what context? Can you post an image of text in which it is used?
eg Molar conductance could refer to the conductance of a particular geometrical arrangement of solution with concentration of 1 Mol.
Unlike molar conductivity there doesn't seem to be a standard definition of molar conductance. It could mean the same as molar conductivity, it could mean something different, depending on the context.
This is from OP t
This from NCERT
15:25
@Dante They seem to be the same definition, same units.
Yes, but Definition looks different to me,
@Dante In what way?
If NCERT sets the exams which you are taking, or is authorised by the examination board to provide study guides, then I would stick with their definitions.
Tandon defines conductance with reference to a cubic cell with plates of area 1cm^2 separated by a distance of 1cm. That is the same definition as for conductivity.
15:47
So, if we have a mole of electrolyte in a in a liter bottle or in a 1000 litre tank, molar conductance is same right?
@Dante Yes, according to the definition Tandon uses. It is the same as molar conductivity.
It is a property of the electrolyte, not the geometry of the conduction cell.
Hmm

« first day (630 days earlier)      last day (2289 days later) »