curious_mind

@MarkusMaximus Yes, sure.

@MarkusMaximus Please discuss, I would be happy to participate in answering if any questions

@MartinSleziak Yes, I wanted to keep this room around, and wanted to contribute and form study group, but I am myself not getting much time much this is why not able to discuss and get ideas. Now feeling that instead discussing via posting questions on main Physics SE would be more helpful.

Noted, thank you. @MartinSleziak

Sure, I will write here with questions

No questions from that

@Later, I am done with chapter 18

I am also not very much knowledgable about experimental stuffs, but it is fun searching about the reason and got to know some theories and way of thinking that's why was telling that :)

Sure, I will be reviewing chapter 18 onwards.

but I recommed not just reviewing chapters but connect the concepts with each other or think in more general manner. For example, I really liked efforts for searching why certain cross sections are more suitable, due to question posed by @insipidintegrator.

@Later I am now available to resume our review of Halliday Resnick from where we last left. We were done I think till chapter 20

@MartinSleziak Noted.

Well, okay !! I was feeling a bit awkward in chatroom having such messages repeatedly and no ongoing activity, thats why suggested like that. Anyway, to prevent from freezing I think we should post something once a week. Probably I can do that at this period of time.

@Later have any opinions on this ?

Well I think this new chatroom is serving a little bit purpose this is why not posting in that chat for a whike. Few person shared their sone thoghts and projects in that chat. But since then there is no activity there. But this chatroom has. So I think for some time it would not be a problem if "find your physics partner" freeze.

*square sections are better against bending

Still better to ask at other places to confirm whether it could be better reason or not.

quora.com/…

quora.com/…

Sources:

@insipidintegrator I am not sure, but as I searched, I think it seems to me that square sections are better at bending- which might affect the wave velocity formula we use which assumes uniform tension everywhere. Square cross section could be preserving uniform stress(tension) as much as possible than other section shapes of rope probably.

And good to see other people participating in the chat. :)

@Later I am extremely sorry for so much delay.. but I am quite stuck at this period of time with my personal schedule these days. Please bear with me.. currently my plan is to complete halliday resnick review till month of April.

@Later done with these chapters.

@Later I am done with chapter 13&14.. I will point out some topics which I would like to explore in detail i n future. You can do same as well if you are curious about some topic coming in way to explore in details.

@Later Ok sure

@Later am I going too slow for you ? Till chap 12 I am done..We can do chap 13 today

Chapter 11 done

I am done with chapter 10.. will do 11,12 today

Sure, I will begin on Monday. So, will update you regarding it on Tuesday.

Well, okay... I am not sure.. but please continue and update the status. I will proceed further from next monday for sure.

I guess kinetic friction acts only when there is relative velocity between objects .. but in the book .. I don't think they microscopically justify that the kinetic friction force magnitude is lesser than maximum static friction force magnitude... or do they ? I am not seeing thing on it

Just pointing out, as I like microscopic description of things that we do normally.

Ok thanks !!!👍 it gives my answer here I read it.. but I feel I will revise it again while learning bernouli equation. Please carry on reviewing book and point out interesting points/doubts, sorry for bit late reply, as I was a bit busy these days. I will post if something I find reviewing I am starting chapter 7.

This section 6.2 THE DRAG FORCE AND TERMINAL SPEED ... how the book written $D = \frac{1}{2} C \rho A v^2 $ ? It says 'experimentally determined, but even if it is experimentally determined , then how the factor of $\frac{1}{2} $ come into the picture ? It could be absorbed in drag coefficient C ? Isn't it so ?

I got reminded when first time exposed to the concept of vectors, units and measurements and all. Although this is quite philosophical point rather than physical..... what you think, in Physical world why is it that vectors can be added componentwise ? Or vectors can be decomposed in two vector !?

have a nice day. :)

sure.

If I need to extend time, I will put msg here. For now, I think it will be okay - 1 day.

ok ;)

Btw, if you don't mind, can you tell me are you a high school student, or undergrad/grad student or industry person working in some other field want to self-study physics ? So that I can estimate how to go ahead, only that's why asking. I have no problem whatever your background is, but I appreciate the idea that you want to start from very basic and fundamentals.

@MartinSleziak Merry Christmas !! :)

Correct answer is given 1st option (bolden the answer) but using relaticistic expressions I am not able to get any answer ? $\gamma m_0 c^2 = Pt $ So, $ \gamma = \frac{Pt}{m_0 c^2} $ .. this way I get $ (\gamma - 1) m_0 c^2 = \left (\frac{Pt}{m_0 c^2} - 1 \right) m_0 c^2 $... is it fine or wrong approach ?

Can anyone help how to solve this problem ? I tried relativistic kinetic energy formula $KE = ( \gamma - 1) m_0 c^2$ . Can I relativistically write $E=Pt$ ? I think it should not be $E= \gamma t \cdot P$ , because we are observing particle with particular velocity.. whereas the power of light given is also in my own frame.. is my reasoning correct ?