Pure maths, physics, logic (braingames.ru): non-trade-related brain games - page 105
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Correct. But this effect is the same for both carts, so consider that there is no effect. This is what I called dynamic pressure.
If snow increases the mass of the cart at a rate alpha = dm/dt, then the megamotor must generate a reactive force alpha*v directed backwards. It has to eject the snow constantly, at a constant speed. Hence the reactive force.
Here v is the speed of the cart.
If snow increases the mass of the cart at a speed alpha = dm/dt, then the megamotor must geren the reactive force alpha*v directed backwards. It has to eject the snow constantly, at a constant speed. Hence the reactive force.
Green is right.
Blue is wrong: it also brakes it, the bastard.
Let the time dt have elapsed. In that time the snow has increased the mass of the cart by dm = alpha * dt = dm/dt * dt. We assume that the snow falls on the cart, increasing its mass at the speed alpha. The mass of the cart grows according to the law m(t) = m_0 + alpha*t (if the snow is not dumped).
The cart's momentum did not change. The friction has changed, but slightly.
The megamotor takes a mass of snow dm and throws it perpendicular to the movement. Due to the fact that the cart is moving forward with speed v, the megamosk is throwing forward momentum dp = v*dm - for the same time dt.
Hence, it throws momentum dp = v*alpha*dt in time dt.
So, by pushing the cart back, it creates a reactive force equal to dp/dt = v*alpha and directed already against the motion. Consider that the megamotor is not a person, but a pump that sweeps the snow from the cart.
Is it clear now?
Blue is wrong: he's slowing her down too, the bastard.
Noooo (((( does not slow down
I also thought so before, but Andrew convinced me. And then by an indirect hint the braingames.ru moderator also convinced me by asking an innocent question about the conservation of momentum.
Andrei ? You're confused.
If I do not see or do not understand something, I'll take your word for it, the moderator of the game, but it's like this.
I used to think so too, but Andrei convinced me. And then, by an indirect hint, the braingames.ru moderator also convinced me by asking an innocent question about momentum conservation.
Brainwashing...
Let's go to a vacuum. A space cart flies. Then by kidnapping it splits in half. The daughter carts (equal in mass) are repulsed perpendicular to the motion...
Speed is halved? ;-)
Megabrain...
Let's go into a vacuum. A space cart flies. Then it splits in half by kidnapping. The daughter carts (equal in mass) are repulsed perpendicular to the motion...
Speed halved? ;-)
You're saying something wrong, Volodya.
You throw a cigarette butt (no, not a butt, but a pebble - so it doesn't fly back and hit your mother-in-law in the eye) from the car strictly perpendicular to the traffic (you are driving at a hundred kilometres an hour). Will it fly forward or not? Or will it hit the ground without moving forward in traffic an inch?
I'm talking strictly about the component of snow velocity that's co-axial to the movement of the cart. And I'm arguing that the snow will also fly along the motion of the cart.
If I don't see or understand something, I'll take your word for it, I'll take the word of the moderator of this game, but it's like that.
If the cart's momentum doesn't change when the snow is thrown, then the snow will have to be thrown a bit backwards. This is when the snow in the system connected to the ground (stationary) will fly strictly perpendicular to the trajectory.
I am talking strictly about the component of snow velocity that is co-directional to the movement of the cart. And I argue that the snow will also fly along the movement of the cart.