Please explain.Are there any evidence for the existence of an object with no charge?
You mean the ';neutron';? Google it.Are there any evidence for the existence of an object with no charge?
Duality is a constant theme in this existence. Everything has its opposite. This difference is what you call a charge. All matter has anti-matter for example. The universe sometimes achieves relative neutralization. A Neutron or an Neutrino can be considered neutral, but only relatively. When you say no charge, you imply zero charge. True zero, just like infinity, is a concept that has not been observed, but only theorized.
I am under the impression that neutrons have no charge. I am unsure about what actual evidence there is. if that helps
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Can a small amount of blood on an inanimate object transmit Hep B?
Can a small amount of blood on an inanimate object transmit Hep B?Can a small amount of blood on an inanimate object transmit Hep B?
Hep B is transmitted through blood and body fluids. The ways in which it can be transmitted are direct blood-to-blood contact, unprotected sex, unsterile needles, from an infected mother to her baby during childbirth, from tattooing, body piercing or acupuncture with infected needles, razors, toothbrushes, earrings or other personal items that may come in contact with blood. It's hep A that's transmitted through the fecal-oral route.
The hep B virus can live up to 4 days in the blood on an inanimate object.Can a small amount of blood on an inanimate object transmit Hep B?
hep B is not blood borne, hep C is. hep B is contracted thru the fecal oral route (when people don't wash their hands, then handle your food)
if it gets wet, and is already contaminated, there's every possibilty.
yes absolutely. that's why sterilization is so important
Hep B is transmitted through blood and body fluids. The ways in which it can be transmitted are direct blood-to-blood contact, unprotected sex, unsterile needles, from an infected mother to her baby during childbirth, from tattooing, body piercing or acupuncture with infected needles, razors, toothbrushes, earrings or other personal items that may come in contact with blood. It's hep A that's transmitted through the fecal-oral route.
The hep B virus can live up to 4 days in the blood on an inanimate object.Can a small amount of blood on an inanimate object transmit Hep B?
hep B is not blood borne, hep C is. hep B is contracted thru the fecal oral route (when people don't wash their hands, then handle your food)
if it gets wet, and is already contaminated, there's every possibilty.
yes absolutely. that's why sterilization is so important
An object moves uniformly around a circular path of radius .20 meters, making one complete revolution every 2.
An object moves uniformly around a circular path of radius .20 meters, making one complete revolution every 2.00 sec. What are (a) the translational speed of the object, (b) the frequency of the object, and (C) the angular speed of the object?An object moves uniformly around a circular path of radius .20 meters, making one complete revolution every 2.
r = .2m and T = 2s
v = 2pi(r) / T
a) so just plug in.
b) f = 1/T so just plug in again
c) omega = v/r so just plug in.liquid color try itch cream
r = .2m and T = 2s
v = 2pi(r) / T
a) so just plug in.
b) f = 1/T so just plug in again
c) omega = v/r so just plug in.
How does an electrically polarized object differ from an electrically charged object?
polar just means the electrons are most likely to be found in one area causing a partial charge at that end. The overall net charge may be zero. A charged object has got an abundance of electrons so that the whole object has a net charge.
When does kinetic energy = energy of the object at position x?
1/2 mv^2 = 1/2 kx^2 ?
When does that ever happen for an object attached to a spring. Here ';x'; is denoted as the distance the object travelled from ';x_0'; - the distance that the spring releases itself but does no work (potential energy)?When does kinetic energy = energy of the object at position x?
There are two equations that you need
1) 1/2 mv^2 = 1/2 kx^2
which is the one you provide and
2) 1/2 mv^2 + 1/2 kx^2 = 1/2 mvo^2
which is the total energy of the object (constant) where vo is the initial velocity of the object right before it touches the spring. 1) and 2) are then two equations with two unknowns so go ahead and solve for v and x. I would suggest you solve for v^2 and x^2 first, that would make it easier to simplify.
When does that ever happen for an object attached to a spring. Here ';x'; is denoted as the distance the object travelled from ';x_0'; - the distance that the spring releases itself but does no work (potential energy)?When does kinetic energy = energy of the object at position x?
There are two equations that you need
1) 1/2 mv^2 = 1/2 kx^2
which is the one you provide and
2) 1/2 mv^2 + 1/2 kx^2 = 1/2 mvo^2
which is the total energy of the object (constant) where vo is the initial velocity of the object right before it touches the spring. 1) and 2) are then two equations with two unknowns so go ahead and solve for v and x. I would suggest you solve for v^2 and x^2 first, that would make it easier to simplify.
An object falls 9m in the first second, 27m in the second second and 108 in the third second. 5 seconds?
= 3240
0 - 1 sec =9m
9m * 3 = 27m
1 - 2 sec = 27m
27m * 4 = 108m
2 - 3 sec = 108m
108m * 5 = 540m
3 - 4 sec = 540m
540 * 6 = 3240m
4 - 5 sec = 3240An object falls 9m in the first second, 27m in the second second and 108 in the third second. 5 seconds?
It must be on another planet.
On earth, the formula is d=gt虏/2 , so after 3 sec, the fall will be 44m.
But on Jupiter, maybe...
The sequence between the first figures is 9, 27, 108
That is to say 9, 9x3, 9x3x4
The next term (4 sec) should be 9x3x4x5 = 540m
And the 5th term ( 5 sec) 9x3x4x5x6 = 3240m !!!
This does not respect the rule of the fall of objects anywhere, even on a planet with a very high gravity, except if there is an initial speed...An object falls 9m in the first second, 27m in the second second and 108 in the third second. 5 seconds?
3240
0 - 1 sec =9m
9m * 3 = 27m
1 - 2 sec = 27m
27m * 4 = 108m
2 - 3 sec = 108m
108m * 5 = 540m
3 - 4 sec = 540m
540 * 6 = 3240m
4 - 5 sec = 3240An object falls 9m in the first second, 27m in the second second and 108 in the third second. 5 seconds?
It must be on another planet.
On earth, the formula is d=gt虏/2 , so after 3 sec, the fall will be 44m.
But on Jupiter, maybe...
The sequence between the first figures is 9, 27, 108
That is to say 9, 9x3, 9x3x4
The next term (4 sec) should be 9x3x4x5 = 540m
And the 5th term ( 5 sec) 9x3x4x5x6 = 3240m !!!
This does not respect the rule of the fall of objects anywhere, even on a planet with a very high gravity, except if there is an initial speed...An object falls 9m in the first second, 27m in the second second and 108 in the third second. 5 seconds?
3240
How do size and distance affect an object's mass?
Okay... I am really confused looking for a clear answer.... HELP!!! Thank you....How do size and distance affect an object's mass?
easy: they don't.
are you sure you typed your homework in correctly?How do size and distance affect an object's mass?
Size and distance will affect an objects attraction, not its mass.
They have absolutely no effect on the mass at all.
Think like this.
If I am right next to you do I weigh more then when I am 1 mile away?
Of course not. I always weigh the same or am made out of the same quantity of stuff. Distance has no bearing.
Distance wouldn't.
Size maybe.
Obviously if you had an object of 10kg that were of the same density of an object of 20kg, then the 20kg object would have more mass.
your question is a little vague. but size governs an objects mass and how much gravity it excerts on other external bodies. distance is relevent to mass in that an object say for demonstration purposes 1000 miles away from an object the size of a skyscraper will be pulled towards it , if the same object at 1000 miles is this next time next to an object which is the size of a car is has less mass so will have less gravitational pull. but then saying this you have to consider density of the objects.
easy: they don't.
are you sure you typed your homework in correctly?How do size and distance affect an object's mass?
Size and distance will affect an objects attraction, not its mass.
They have absolutely no effect on the mass at all.
Think like this.
If I am right next to you do I weigh more then when I am 1 mile away?
Of course not. I always weigh the same or am made out of the same quantity of stuff. Distance has no bearing.
Distance wouldn't.
Size maybe.
Obviously if you had an object of 10kg that were of the same density of an object of 20kg, then the 20kg object would have more mass.
your question is a little vague. but size governs an objects mass and how much gravity it excerts on other external bodies. distance is relevent to mass in that an object say for demonstration purposes 1000 miles away from an object the size of a skyscraper will be pulled towards it , if the same object at 1000 miles is this next time next to an object which is the size of a car is has less mass so will have less gravitational pull. but then saying this you have to consider density of the objects.
Police Officers:Would you approve of or object to having 100% of your police field work video & audio recorded?
Why or why not?Police Officers:Would you approve of or object to having 100% of your police field work video %26amp; audio recorded?
Well, I am a police officer and I approve of them. Yes, they can be used in court for alcohol-related arrests, but I find them very beneficial when an officer gets injured or killed in the line of duty. There have been hundreds of training tapes that have been produced which unfortunately documented how an officer was injured or killed. Their sacrifice is our training tool which has undoubtedly saved the lives of police officers around the world.
Yes, some will complain that they're being ';watched'; but in my opinion, when you're on duty, you're being paid for it so deal with it. The advantages far outweigh the disadvantages.
And to the person who said there are a lot of crooked cops in their city...I suggest you go to the nearest precinct, sign a waiver form and do a ride-along once a month. You will change your mind...I absolutely guarantee it.
signed,
big-city copPolice Officers:Would you approve of or object to having 100% of your police field work video %26amp; audio recorded?
I would approve provided that I could exclude private conversations such as talking to friends and acquaintances. I have no problem with the current system that automatically records all MV stops and anything that happens when the emergency lights are on. I can also activate it manually whenever I want to.
I have seen many cases where it has saved the officer but I have also seen a few where it was improperly used to criticize the officer. In one case, the officer did nothing wrong but a corrupt chief (who was on a witch hunt because of his personal dislike for the officer) twisted reality around to find a way to unjustly criticize the officer.
Fortunately, it works for us more often than it works against us.
I'm not a police officer, but I think most would approve. Originally, the dashboard cameras were added to prove that someone was drunk during a stop, because in court the person will obviously be sober and contest the officer's account. It turns out these cameras tend to catch a lot more than just that, good and bad, and are very useful in recalling events, moreso than human's memory.
It is the Responsibility of the State to Prove Beyond a Reasonable Doubt the person has violated the law accused.
The in car camera and on body microphones are a necessary protection to both parties.
I believe the the vast majority of law enforcement officers are simply doing there job according to procedures trained.
However where the is power there is always abuse of that power.
Surveillance equipment has proven to be effective at catching this kind of corruption through out history on many different levels.
I think working cameras and body microphones should be mandatory standard issue to all law enforcement officials on duty , just as a gun , tazer , vehicle, and bulletproof vest should also be.
For those who really want to protect us from violating another I will support to protect them with every possible means technology has to offer .
But if these personnel abuse there power they should be dealt with by the peoples judgment , just as harshly as any other spy or terrorist activity .
I love my life and I want everyone to love theirs .
I m not a cop,but if nothing to hide should be no worry. I live by a city that the cops are always up to no good,and have dirty cops all the way to the judge. I think it is a great idea, I have already been harassed two times for no reason at all, pulled over no reason!
They have been known to pull people over to search them and their cars for no reason! My ,mom lives in that city and her neighbor a convicted drug dealer, also was dealing drugs with the cops and cops from another city. To make a long story short the neighbor moved, my dad had tapes on the neighbor, the police and court did not care then guy moved, my dad had to go to court on bogus reasons. I told him to not fight them , it is a lost cause. My parents are up right law abiding citizens, this is not exaggerated at all
start with the bush, white house
Well, I am a police officer and I approve of them. Yes, they can be used in court for alcohol-related arrests, but I find them very beneficial when an officer gets injured or killed in the line of duty. There have been hundreds of training tapes that have been produced which unfortunately documented how an officer was injured or killed. Their sacrifice is our training tool which has undoubtedly saved the lives of police officers around the world.
Yes, some will complain that they're being ';watched'; but in my opinion, when you're on duty, you're being paid for it so deal with it. The advantages far outweigh the disadvantages.
And to the person who said there are a lot of crooked cops in their city...I suggest you go to the nearest precinct, sign a waiver form and do a ride-along once a month. You will change your mind...I absolutely guarantee it.
signed,
big-city copPolice Officers:Would you approve of or object to having 100% of your police field work video %26amp; audio recorded?
I would approve provided that I could exclude private conversations such as talking to friends and acquaintances. I have no problem with the current system that automatically records all MV stops and anything that happens when the emergency lights are on. I can also activate it manually whenever I want to.
I have seen many cases where it has saved the officer but I have also seen a few where it was improperly used to criticize the officer. In one case, the officer did nothing wrong but a corrupt chief (who was on a witch hunt because of his personal dislike for the officer) twisted reality around to find a way to unjustly criticize the officer.
Fortunately, it works for us more often than it works against us.
I'm not a police officer, but I think most would approve. Originally, the dashboard cameras were added to prove that someone was drunk during a stop, because in court the person will obviously be sober and contest the officer's account. It turns out these cameras tend to catch a lot more than just that, good and bad, and are very useful in recalling events, moreso than human's memory.
It is the Responsibility of the State to Prove Beyond a Reasonable Doubt the person has violated the law accused.
The in car camera and on body microphones are a necessary protection to both parties.
I believe the the vast majority of law enforcement officers are simply doing there job according to procedures trained.
However where the is power there is always abuse of that power.
Surveillance equipment has proven to be effective at catching this kind of corruption through out history on many different levels.
I think working cameras and body microphones should be mandatory standard issue to all law enforcement officials on duty , just as a gun , tazer , vehicle, and bulletproof vest should also be.
For those who really want to protect us from violating another I will support to protect them with every possible means technology has to offer .
But if these personnel abuse there power they should be dealt with by the peoples judgment , just as harshly as any other spy or terrorist activity .
I love my life and I want everyone to love theirs .
I m not a cop,but if nothing to hide should be no worry. I live by a city that the cops are always up to no good,and have dirty cops all the way to the judge. I think it is a great idea, I have already been harassed two times for no reason at all, pulled over no reason!
They have been known to pull people over to search them and their cars for no reason! My ,mom lives in that city and her neighbor a convicted drug dealer, also was dealing drugs with the cops and cops from another city. To make a long story short the neighbor moved, my dad had tapes on the neighbor, the police and court did not care then guy moved, my dad had to go to court on bogus reasons. I told him to not fight them , it is a lost cause. My parents are up right law abiding citizens, this is not exaggerated at all
start with the bush, white house
An object has neutral buoyancy when its density equals that of the liquid in which it is submerged, which mean?
An object has neutral buoyancy when its density equals that of the liquid in which it is submerged, which means that it neither floats nor sinks. If the average density of an 83 kg diver in a freshwater lake is 0.92 kg/L, what mass of lead should be added to give him neutral buoyancy?
_______kgAn object has neutral buoyancy when its density equals that of the liquid in which it is submerged, which mean?
Archimedes principle states that the buoyant force exerted by water is equal to the weight of water he displaces. Neutral buoyancy, when he neither sinks nor floats, occurs when the force of buoyancy equals the weight of the object in question. So how much water does the diver displace? You know his mass and density, and
D = M/V
which rearranged is
V = M/D
So you can calculate his volume. How much buoyant force is that? First look up the density of water in metric units. How much mass would a volume of water equal to that of the diver have? Use the above formula and solve for that mass, then multiply by gravity to get weight, this is the buoyant force. So how much weight do you have to add to the weight of the diver to equal this force?liquid color try itch cream
_______kgAn object has neutral buoyancy when its density equals that of the liquid in which it is submerged, which mean?
Archimedes principle states that the buoyant force exerted by water is equal to the weight of water he displaces. Neutral buoyancy, when he neither sinks nor floats, occurs when the force of buoyancy equals the weight of the object in question. So how much water does the diver displace? You know his mass and density, and
D = M/V
which rearranged is
V = M/D
So you can calculate his volume. How much buoyant force is that? First look up the density of water in metric units. How much mass would a volume of water equal to that of the diver have? Use the above formula and solve for that mass, then multiply by gravity to get weight, this is the buoyant force. So how much weight do you have to add to the weight of the diver to equal this force?
How do you mask an object or cut the background out of an object using Gimp 2.6?
This tutorial is based on the GIMP and uses the scissors select tool to cut an object from an image.
http://photography.suite101.com/article.鈥?/a>How do you mask an object or cut the background out of an object using Gimp 2.6?
Here are the Official GIMP Tutorials http://www.gimp.org/tutorials/ they will also be useful for future reference.
LUg.How do you mask an object or cut the background out of an object using Gimp 2.6?
this is a good tutorial for removing the background from an image:
http://www.gimptalk.com/forum/topic/Cutt鈥?/a>
http://photography.suite101.com/article.鈥?/a>How do you mask an object or cut the background out of an object using Gimp 2.6?
Here are the Official GIMP Tutorials http://www.gimp.org/tutorials/ they will also be useful for future reference.
LUg.How do you mask an object or cut the background out of an object using Gimp 2.6?
this is a good tutorial for removing the background from an image:
http://www.gimptalk.com/forum/topic/Cutt鈥?/a>
If a bullet penetrates an object, would that bullet have traces/microfibres left behind from that object?
Two pillows and a comforter were allegedly missing from a crime scene. Had the bullet passed through either of those objects prior to entering the victim, would the bullet normally reveal traces of those objects under forensic inspection?If a bullet penetrates an object, would that bullet have traces/microfibres left behind from that object?
It depends. If the bullet is lead, lead is very soft and it is relatively easy for something to scratch or deform the bullet. If the bullet has a Cu jacket or a steel jacket or a teflon jacket, it is less likely have picked up any trace. It also depends on what type of materials are in the pillows and comforter.
It depends. If the bullet is lead, lead is very soft and it is relatively easy for something to scratch or deform the bullet. If the bullet has a Cu jacket or a steel jacket or a teflon jacket, it is less likely have picked up any trace. It also depends on what type of materials are in the pillows and comforter.
Calculate the work done by an object and the force (3 parts)?
A 290 kg piano slides 4.3 m down a 30掳 incline and is kept from accelerating by a man who is pushing back on it parallel to the incline. The effective coefficient of kinetic friction is 0.40.
(a) Calculate the force exerted by the man.
(b) Calculate the work done by the man on the piano.
(c) Calculate the work done by the friction force.Calculate the work done by an object and the force (3 parts)?
The friction force is (0.40)290(9.8)cos(30) = 984 N in the same direction the man pushes.
The gravity force along the incline is 290(9.8)sin(30) = 1421 N down along the incline.
In order to prevent acceleration, the man must push with force 1421 - 984 = 437 N.
The work done by the man is -437(4.3) = -1879 J since the distance moved is opposite the direction of his force.
The work done by the friction force is -984(4.3) = -4231 J.
(a) Calculate the force exerted by the man.
(b) Calculate the work done by the man on the piano.
(c) Calculate the work done by the friction force.Calculate the work done by an object and the force (3 parts)?
The friction force is (0.40)290(9.8)cos(30) = 984 N in the same direction the man pushes.
The gravity force along the incline is 290(9.8)sin(30) = 1421 N down along the incline.
In order to prevent acceleration, the man must push with force 1421 - 984 = 437 N.
The work done by the man is -437(4.3) = -1879 J since the distance moved is opposite the direction of his force.
The work done by the friction force is -984(4.3) = -4231 J.
Early bonding with an object or animal is commonly referred to as?
A. priming.
B. sensitizing.
C. imprinting.
D. socializing.Early bonding with an object or animal is commonly referred to as?
Imprinting, as studied extensively and popularized by Konrad Lorenz and his greylag goslings. He got them to imprint on him instead of a female goose, and he ended up having to teach them to fly, because they wouldn't learn from a female goose.
Check him out on wikipedia.Early bonding with an object or animal is commonly referred to as?
Imprinting
c
C. Imprinting. Good luck!!
C. imprinting as with little yellow fuzzy ducklings
imprinting...my answer before i saw the choices
Imprinting :)
Definately imprinting
a? maybe
B. sensitizing.
C. imprinting.
D. socializing.Early bonding with an object or animal is commonly referred to as?
Imprinting, as studied extensively and popularized by Konrad Lorenz and his greylag goslings. He got them to imprint on him instead of a female goose, and he ended up having to teach them to fly, because they wouldn't learn from a female goose.
Check him out on wikipedia.Early bonding with an object or animal is commonly referred to as?
Imprinting
c
C. Imprinting. Good luck!!
C. imprinting as with little yellow fuzzy ducklings
imprinting...my answer before i saw the choices
Imprinting :)
Definately imprinting
a? maybe
Once something has entered a black hole, where does that object go?
What theories are there?
I have one that once an object comes in a black hole, it comes out another(what comes in, must come out... right?).
Your thoughts?Once something has entered a black hole, where does that object go?
Nobody knows.
';The'; foremost expert on the matter would be S. Hawking, who says something one day, discovers something else on his own and denies the previous statement.
I think the only thing we know for certain is that any object getting close to a black whole will evaporate.Once something has entered a black hole, where does that object go?
Once an object reaches the event horizon, it will never come out as that object, though the black hole will slowly radiate energy that was converted from the mass of the object. This process is known as Hawking radiation.
I have one that once an object comes in a black hole, it comes out another(what comes in, must come out... right?).
Your thoughts?Once something has entered a black hole, where does that object go?
Nobody knows.
';The'; foremost expert on the matter would be S. Hawking, who says something one day, discovers something else on his own and denies the previous statement.
I think the only thing we know for certain is that any object getting close to a black whole will evaporate.Once something has entered a black hole, where does that object go?
Once an object reaches the event horizon, it will never come out as that object, though the black hole will slowly radiate energy that was converted from the mass of the object. This process is known as Hawking radiation.
What might cause an object to sink or swim in water. (List a minimum of 7 factors)?
please get bak 2 me A.S.A.P. THANKSWhat might cause an object to sink or swim in water. (List a minimum of 7 factors)?
Byounacy can float an object.liquid color try itch cream
Byounacy can float an object.
Acceleration of an object in a circular path?
Why does an object travelling in a circular path at a constant speed is always accelerating towards the centre
I just need a simple non complicated explanation please.Acceleration of an object in a circular path?
To understand this, it is essential to understand the difference between speed and velocity. Speed has size, but no direction. It is a scalar quantity. Acceleration has both size (magnitude) and direction. It is a vector quantity.
A vector quantity changes when either its size or its direction changes. When an object is travelling round a circle, the direction of its velocity is changing constantly, as the velocity is always directed along a tangent of the circle.
Look at the first diagram on this web page:
http://www.geocities.com/mileswmathis/av鈥?/a>
As the velocity changes from vector CB to vector BA, the change in its velocity is represented by the diagonal of the parallelogram with three of its vertices at A, B and C. That is directed towards the centre of the circle, and hence that is the direction of the acceleration for uniform circular motion.Acceleration of an object in a circular path?
I would add that the word ';acceleration'; is actually a very poor word for it. When we use the word ';acceleration'; we generally think of something speeding up. But in this case the object is no more speed up then slowing down. ';acceleration'; actually means 'the rate of change of velocity'; and velocity is a vector quantity.
===========
Don't forget to give the guy above best answer or at least say thanks.
We like to know we are not waisting our time.
I just need a simple non complicated explanation please.Acceleration of an object in a circular path?
To understand this, it is essential to understand the difference between speed and velocity. Speed has size, but no direction. It is a scalar quantity. Acceleration has both size (magnitude) and direction. It is a vector quantity.
A vector quantity changes when either its size or its direction changes. When an object is travelling round a circle, the direction of its velocity is changing constantly, as the velocity is always directed along a tangent of the circle.
Look at the first diagram on this web page:
http://www.geocities.com/mileswmathis/av鈥?/a>
As the velocity changes from vector CB to vector BA, the change in its velocity is represented by the diagonal of the parallelogram with three of its vertices at A, B and C. That is directed towards the centre of the circle, and hence that is the direction of the acceleration for uniform circular motion.Acceleration of an object in a circular path?
I would add that the word ';acceleration'; is actually a very poor word for it. When we use the word ';acceleration'; we generally think of something speeding up. But in this case the object is no more speed up then slowing down. ';acceleration'; actually means 'the rate of change of velocity'; and velocity is a vector quantity.
===========
Don't forget to give the guy above best answer or at least say thanks.
We like to know we are not waisting our time.
For the last 2 nights I have seen an object in the sky that has red and green light flashing around it.?
Don't ask why I was looking at the sky but I noticed it. It stays in one general area. It will shift to the right and then the left, but it just stays there. The red flashes in a circular motion and green will appear every now and then. I think it looks flat looking, and so does my daughter. ANy ideas?For the last 2 nights I have seen an object in the sky that has red and green light flashing around it.?
*GASP* I THINK I SAW IT TOO!!! ITS A UFO!!!
notFor the last 2 nights I have seen an object in the sky that has red and green light flashing around it.?
Bright stars (like Sirius) that are low on the horizon will flash red and blue and sometimes other colors. This happens because of the 'twinkling'. Twinkling occurs because the light from the star is being randomly bent by turbulence in the atmosphere, just like how the horizon shimmers on a hot day. Twinkling becomes more pronounced as the star is closer to the horizon, and when the atmosphere is cold and clear. If the star is bright, then the light from the star is broken up just like sunlight through a prism, and the colors are bright enough to trigger the color receptors in your eyes.
Well..I've seen something like that around my area before. It looks pretty neat..and even more so in binoculars.
According to individuals in my local astronomy club...the red and green flashing is a result of the turbulent atmosphere. I believe the object you see is fairly low in the sky..but not too low.
The flashing is a result of atmospheric fluctuations.
Congratulations! You have seen an aircraft!
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/ele鈥?/a>
Well, no worries. We have that exact same thing here. It's a simple ';pole'; type object. It's for the drivers of helicopters %26amp; airplanes. It's fine. Just that sorta thing.
It's a star
http://www.earthsky.org/skywatching/what鈥?/a>
hmmm i don't real believe in aliens but it could be a helicopter if you live any wear near a army bace ? Kinda Scary lol
not sure, record it into your mobile phone next time so we can see
Would be nice if we had a photo of it
*GASP* I THINK I SAW IT TOO!!! ITS A UFO!!!
notFor the last 2 nights I have seen an object in the sky that has red and green light flashing around it.?
Bright stars (like Sirius) that are low on the horizon will flash red and blue and sometimes other colors. This happens because of the 'twinkling'. Twinkling occurs because the light from the star is being randomly bent by turbulence in the atmosphere, just like how the horizon shimmers on a hot day. Twinkling becomes more pronounced as the star is closer to the horizon, and when the atmosphere is cold and clear. If the star is bright, then the light from the star is broken up just like sunlight through a prism, and the colors are bright enough to trigger the color receptors in your eyes.
Well..I've seen something like that around my area before. It looks pretty neat..and even more so in binoculars.
According to individuals in my local astronomy club...the red and green flashing is a result of the turbulent atmosphere. I believe the object you see is fairly low in the sky..but not too low.
The flashing is a result of atmospheric fluctuations.
Congratulations! You have seen an aircraft!
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/ele鈥?/a>
Well, no worries. We have that exact same thing here. It's a simple ';pole'; type object. It's for the drivers of helicopters %26amp; airplanes. It's fine. Just that sorta thing.
It's a star
http://www.earthsky.org/skywatching/what鈥?/a>
hmmm i don't real believe in aliens but it could be a helicopter if you live any wear near a army bace ? Kinda Scary lol
not sure, record it into your mobile phone next time so we can see
Would be nice if we had a photo of it
Christmas craft for girls, all ages, which has an object lesson?
I am looking for a lesson/craft that I can demonstrate and have a large group of girls (ages 5 to 13!) participate in. The lesson/craft/object lesson needs to teach something about Christmas, can be specific to Christians or just something fun with good moral of a story. Any thoughts?Christmas craft for girls, all ages, which has an object lesson?
How about the story of the Poinsettia? It is a moving story about a small boy wanting to give the gift to the baby Jesus and his travail along the way.Get it off the internet and print out way too much to type. Then roll it up into a scroll,it can be an ornament or put in a frame,or just a nice story to enhance your Christmas.Since you are wanting a craft you could frame it with poster board and a ribbon and decorate that anyway you wish.Just a thought.
How about the story of the Poinsettia? It is a moving story about a small boy wanting to give the gift to the baby Jesus and his travail along the way.Get it off the internet and print out way too much to type. Then roll it up into a scroll,it can be an ornament or put in a frame,or just a nice story to enhance your Christmas.Since you are wanting a craft you could frame it with poster board and a ribbon and decorate that anyway you wish.Just a thought.
An object m=2kg, is 10 meters above the ground at the top of a long ramp and starts to roll down?
An object m=2kg is 10 meters above the ground at the top of a long ramp and starts to roll down. If you are ignoring friction, what is the object鈥檚 velocity at the bottom of the ramp? Is this velocity greater than, less than, or equal to the velocity that the ball would have if it were simply dropped straight down to the ground without rolling down the ramp?An object m=2kg, is 10 meters above the ground at the top of a long ramp and starts to roll down?
P.E at the top is converted into K.E. at the bottom
mgh = 0.5mv^2
v =sqrt (2gh) = 14 m/s
In case of the free fall of the object
u = 0
Using , v^2 = u^2 - 2gh
h = sqrt(2gh) = 14 m/s , same as aboveAn object m=2kg, is 10 meters above the ground at the top of a long ramp and starts to roll down?
With no friction to worry about, the object's speed is exactly what it would be if dropped straight down; it just takes longer to get to the bottom than if it fell.
The potential energy here is mgh = (2 kg)(9.81 m/s虏)(10 m) = 196 J.
The resulting kinetic energy Ek is (1/2)mv虏, so v = 鈭?2Ek/m)
= 鈭?(2)(196 J)/(2 kg)) = 14 m/s.
Just an addition to the other answers, which pretty much have it covered, the velocity will actually be in a different direction but the same magnitude.
Velocity is a Vector quantity, therefore direction is Very important.
It seems your teacher set you a sneaky trick question there
the best answer you can give is
The velocity is equal in magnitude but acts in a different direction.
P.E at the top is converted into K.E. at the bottom
mgh = 0.5mv^2
v =sqrt (2gh) = 14 m/s
In case of the free fall of the object
u = 0
Using , v^2 = u^2 - 2gh
h = sqrt(2gh) = 14 m/s , same as aboveAn object m=2kg, is 10 meters above the ground at the top of a long ramp and starts to roll down?
With no friction to worry about, the object's speed is exactly what it would be if dropped straight down; it just takes longer to get to the bottom than if it fell.
The potential energy here is mgh = (2 kg)(9.81 m/s虏)(10 m) = 196 J.
The resulting kinetic energy Ek is (1/2)mv虏, so v = 鈭?2Ek/m)
= 鈭?(2)(196 J)/(2 kg)) = 14 m/s.
Just an addition to the other answers, which pretty much have it covered, the velocity will actually be in a different direction but the same magnitude.
Velocity is a Vector quantity, therefore direction is Very important.
It seems your teacher set you a sneaky trick question there
the best answer you can give is
The velocity is equal in magnitude but acts in a different direction.
What happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?
The unstoppable force will STOP while the immovable object WILL move.
because both forces are unlimited it is the same as saying what happens when an object is resting at will take 10 pounds of force to move it and an object flies by with 10 pounds of force. the force will stop and the object will have moved.What happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?
This is one of those meaningless questions. It is like asking, ';What is infinity minus infinity';. Since infinity is a concept rather than a number, to try to read meanings into such questions is to misconstrue something strange as something profound.
In Calculus, contrary to what you may have convinced yourself (not learned), we do not do not divide zero by zero or infinity by infinity, or subtract infinity from infinity. We do deal with such notions where the numbers approach zero or infinity using the notion of limits.What happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?
Paradox
Big noise
It'll go around?? Or Itl's breakk [=
because both forces are unlimited it is the same as saying what happens when an object is resting at will take 10 pounds of force to move it and an object flies by with 10 pounds of force. the force will stop and the object will have moved.What happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?
This is one of those meaningless questions. It is like asking, ';What is infinity minus infinity';. Since infinity is a concept rather than a number, to try to read meanings into such questions is to misconstrue something strange as something profound.
In Calculus, contrary to what you may have convinced yourself (not learned), we do not do not divide zero by zero or infinity by infinity, or subtract infinity from infinity. We do deal with such notions where the numbers approach zero or infinity using the notion of limits.What happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?
Paradox
Big noise
It'll go around?? Or Itl's breakk [=
What is the theoretical and realistic maximum speed of object falling onto or projected into a black hole?
From the event horizon to the singularity (although probably not an actual singularity with infinite mass and zero dimensions, but that's a different subject), spacetime has undergone an intense amount of stretching that approaches infinite curvature at the singularity. The curvature of space is what determines the gravitational field strength, which is represented by the acceleration due to gravity. On Earth, our acceleration due to gravity is about 9.8 m/s^2.
In a blackhole, that field strength grows without bound because of the unbounded curvature so to speak. Therefore, the maximum speed should be unbounded, since the acceleration is unbounded, but we also have to consider how long the object is under the influence of that acceleration. (not to mention the speed of light being the speed limit as well)
The time it takes an object to reach the singularity once it has breached the event horizon is fractions of a second, so there isn't enough time for the object to reach a great speed. Of course you could argue that the blackhole is the size of a galaxy, which would give the object more time; however, in a blackhole that size, it would take a little longer, but not much. Besides, the the farther away one is from the singularity, the less intense the curvature is, so it would take some of that extra time just to get to the extremely intense curvature.
Here is another interesting feature: when you solve the equations inside a blackhole for velocity, it is always negative, meaning the velocity is directed towards the singularity. It can't be positive, which means once you enter the event horizon, there is only one way to go, and there is nothing you can do to stop it.
Also, you have to consider the intense tidal gravitational forces. Because the gravity is so intense, there is an appreciable difference of gravity's pull between your head and feet (assuming you go in feet first). Because this difference is so great, your body would be subject to tidal forces (like the tidal forces the Earth experiences from the moon), which means you will be stretched and crushed from the sides.What is the theoretical and realistic maximum speed of object falling onto or projected into a black hole?
Anyone who asks what the realistic maximum speed of an object projected into a black hole should be shot with a bullet traveling 186,000 m/secWhat is the theoretical and realistic maximum speed of object falling onto or projected into a black hole?
Theoretically it can go up to, but not at the speed of light. realistically it would be pulverized and turned into energy giving off gamma rays in a matter of milliseconds, therefore not really traveling at all.
Maximum theoretical speed is ';just under'; the speed of light. The realistic speed is lower--incoming matter orbits in an accretion disk where a lot of its motion is converted to heat. A measurement was actually made of about 10% of light speed.
The ultimate speed limit is of course the speed of light... nothing that has any mass can go as fast as light. As a massive object approaches the speed of light it's mass INCREASES towards infinity, so you see for an object with mass to get to the speed of light it would require more and more energy to accelerate it the more massive it became until ultimately it would require an infinite amount of energy just to increase its velocity by one cm/sec.... not very likely now is it?
maximum speed would be the speed of light, although as matter approaches that speed it loses mass!
the theoretical speed is just under light speed , or light speed if we are talking about fotons.in reality....a wormhole has special properties...the event horizon,it's huge gravitational force, time distortion so the speed will be affected by all of them, makink it to bound to the specific conditions to determinliquid color try itch cream
In a blackhole, that field strength grows without bound because of the unbounded curvature so to speak. Therefore, the maximum speed should be unbounded, since the acceleration is unbounded, but we also have to consider how long the object is under the influence of that acceleration. (not to mention the speed of light being the speed limit as well)
The time it takes an object to reach the singularity once it has breached the event horizon is fractions of a second, so there isn't enough time for the object to reach a great speed. Of course you could argue that the blackhole is the size of a galaxy, which would give the object more time; however, in a blackhole that size, it would take a little longer, but not much. Besides, the the farther away one is from the singularity, the less intense the curvature is, so it would take some of that extra time just to get to the extremely intense curvature.
Here is another interesting feature: when you solve the equations inside a blackhole for velocity, it is always negative, meaning the velocity is directed towards the singularity. It can't be positive, which means once you enter the event horizon, there is only one way to go, and there is nothing you can do to stop it.
Also, you have to consider the intense tidal gravitational forces. Because the gravity is so intense, there is an appreciable difference of gravity's pull between your head and feet (assuming you go in feet first). Because this difference is so great, your body would be subject to tidal forces (like the tidal forces the Earth experiences from the moon), which means you will be stretched and crushed from the sides.What is the theoretical and realistic maximum speed of object falling onto or projected into a black hole?
Anyone who asks what the realistic maximum speed of an object projected into a black hole should be shot with a bullet traveling 186,000 m/secWhat is the theoretical and realistic maximum speed of object falling onto or projected into a black hole?
Theoretically it can go up to, but not at the speed of light. realistically it would be pulverized and turned into energy giving off gamma rays in a matter of milliseconds, therefore not really traveling at all.
Maximum theoretical speed is ';just under'; the speed of light. The realistic speed is lower--incoming matter orbits in an accretion disk where a lot of its motion is converted to heat. A measurement was actually made of about 10% of light speed.
The ultimate speed limit is of course the speed of light... nothing that has any mass can go as fast as light. As a massive object approaches the speed of light it's mass INCREASES towards infinity, so you see for an object with mass to get to the speed of light it would require more and more energy to accelerate it the more massive it became until ultimately it would require an infinite amount of energy just to increase its velocity by one cm/sec.... not very likely now is it?
maximum speed would be the speed of light, although as matter approaches that speed it loses mass!
the theoretical speed is just under light speed , or light speed if we are talking about fotons.in reality....a wormhole has special properties...the event horizon,it's huge gravitational force, time distortion so the speed will be affected by all of them, makink it to bound to the specific conditions to determin
I dont know what is happening to my left hand right now.i think i carried an object improperly?
evrytime i hold an object..im losing my grip and even a light load makes my hand in pain. what will i do?I dont know what is happening to my left hand right now.i think i carried an object improperly?
stiff muscles ,I dont know what is happening to my left hand right now.i think i carried an object improperly?
Take Advil or Aleve according to directions and call Dr. Obviously you've damaged something.
stiff muscles ,I dont know what is happening to my left hand right now.i think i carried an object improperly?
Take Advil or Aleve according to directions and call Dr. Obviously you've damaged something.
An object weighing 14n is swung at the end of a cord .80m long. The object makes 2.0 revolutions per second. ?
What is the centripetal force on the moving object?An object weighing 14n is swung at the end of a cord .80m long. The object makes 2.0 revolutions per second. ?
Fc = centripetal force = mv^2/r = m r w^2
w = angular speed = angled turned /time taken = 4pi/1 [rad/sec]
w = 4 * (22/7) = 88/7
weight = mg = 14 Newton
m = 14/9.8 kg
Fc = [14/9.8] [0.80] [88/7]^2
= 180.62 N
Fc = centripetal force = mv^2/r = m r w^2
w = angular speed = angled turned /time taken = 4pi/1 [rad/sec]
w = 4 * (22/7) = 88/7
weight = mg = 14 Newton
m = 14/9.8 kg
Fc = [14/9.8] [0.80] [88/7]^2
= 180.62 N
What is the object being view under a microscope called?
homework help!What is the object being view under a microscope called?
specimen?What is the object being view under a microscope called?
i dont get it =S
specimen?What is the object being view under a microscope called?
i dont get it =S
Suppose that an object is attached to a spring and is started in motion so that the speed at time t is given ?
Suppose that an object is attached to a spring and is started in motion so that the speed at time t is given by |5cos(t)| . How far did the object travel from t=0 to t=2蟺? (Use the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus)Suppose that an object is attached to a spring and is started in motion so that the speed at time t is given ?
The above answer is correct, only a mistake occurs in the calculation of the last integral. It should read:
. 2蟺
. .鈭? 5x.dx = 5, (instead of = 10)
3蟺/2
The total distance traveled will be: 5 + 10 + 5 = 20Suppose that an object is attached to a spring and is started in motion so that the speed at time t is given ?
Integral of [|5cos(t)|]dt from 0 to 2蟺 it is equal to
Integral of [5cos(t)]dt from 0 to 蟺/2 + Integral of [-5cos(t)]dt from 蟺/2 to 3蟺/2 + Integral of [5cos(t)]dt from 3蟺/2 to 2蟺
=[5sint](0 to 蟺/2) +[-5sint]( 蟺/2 to 3蟺/2)+ [5sint](3蟺/2to 2蟺)
= 5+10+10 = 25 units
The above answer is correct, only a mistake occurs in the calculation of the last integral. It should read:
. 2蟺
. .鈭? 5x.dx = 5, (instead of = 10)
3蟺/2
The total distance traveled will be: 5 + 10 + 5 = 20Suppose that an object is attached to a spring and is started in motion so that the speed at time t is given ?
Integral of [|5cos(t)|]dt from 0 to 2蟺 it is equal to
Integral of [5cos(t)]dt from 0 to 蟺/2 + Integral of [-5cos(t)]dt from 蟺/2 to 3蟺/2 + Integral of [5cos(t)]dt from 3蟺/2 to 2蟺
=[5sint](0 to 蟺/2) +[-5sint]( 蟺/2 to 3蟺/2)+ [5sint](3蟺/2to 2蟺)
= 5+10+10 = 25 units
What is the most efficient angle when projecting an object?
To get best distance.What is the most efficient angle when projecting an object?
I belive you get best results at 45 degrees.What is the most efficient angle when projecting an object?
45 degrees
45 degrees if you neglect drag caused by the projectile's flight through air.
it is 45...
I belive you get best results at 45 degrees.What is the most efficient angle when projecting an object?
45 degrees
45 degrees if you neglect drag caused by the projectile's flight through air.
it is 45...
Does anyone know for what types of families is object relation therapy appropriate?
People who are afraid of airing their dysfunctional dynamics with strangers. Even at the expense of the other family member's sanity.Does anyone know for what types of families is object relation therapy appropriate?
emotionally inept families.liquid color try itch cream
emotionally inept families.
Whats a good object to symbolize the book A Wrinkle in Time?
something that symbolizes the main point of the book.Whats a good object to symbolize the book A Wrinkle in Time?
A pocket-watch
A pocket-watch
What the different between a cylinder and a sphere object?
which is more faster and has more greater rotational kinetic energy?What the different between a cylinder and a sphere object?
The cylinder has limited speed thus limited kinetic energy
The cylinder is imitated by the factor that it can only spin on one axis, the sphere is free of all limitations therefore can be faster.
under some extreme circumstances, they are almost the same (when the cylinder is faced perfectly down a inclination)What the different between a cylinder and a sphere object?
i like your answer... Report Abuse
a cylinder is vertical where sphere is more like a ball. I think that the sphere would have more rotational kinetic engery.
The cylinder has limited speed thus limited kinetic energy
The cylinder is imitated by the factor that it can only spin on one axis, the sphere is free of all limitations therefore can be faster.
under some extreme circumstances, they are almost the same (when the cylinder is faced perfectly down a inclination)
A roll of paper towels is a cylinder.
A grain silo is a cylinder.
A can of soda is a cylinder.
A globe is a sphere.
A baseball is a sphere.
A bubble is a sphere.
Hi. I'll tell you the difference. Think of water towers. The ones that are round and tall, that's a cylinder. The other type that sorta resembles a giant golf ball on a tee, that's a sphere. Hope that helps.
The cylinder has limited speed thus limited kinetic energy
The cylinder is imitated by the factor that it can only spin on one axis, the sphere is free of all limitations therefore can be faster.
under some extreme circumstances, they are almost the same (when the cylinder is faced perfectly down a inclination)What the different between a cylinder and a sphere object?
i like your answer... Report Abuse
a cylinder is vertical where sphere is more like a ball. I think that the sphere would have more rotational kinetic engery.
The cylinder has limited speed thus limited kinetic energy
The cylinder is imitated by the factor that it can only spin on one axis, the sphere is free of all limitations therefore can be faster.
under some extreme circumstances, they are almost the same (when the cylinder is faced perfectly down a inclination)
A roll of paper towels is a cylinder.
A grain silo is a cylinder.
A can of soda is a cylinder.
A globe is a sphere.
A baseball is a sphere.
A bubble is a sphere.
Hi. I'll tell you the difference. Think of water towers. The ones that are round and tall, that's a cylinder. The other type that sorta resembles a giant golf ball on a tee, that's a sphere. Hope that helps.
What was the object of The Uninvited?
I don't get it. How could Anna be the one killing all these people and not knowing it and thinking Rachel did? And how could her friend across the room from her have been Mildred Kemp? How could Alex have been dead when she was there the whole time with Anna? And how could Anna have killed Rachel when it was Alex?What was the object of The Uninvited?
Anna was crazy, she was imagining all these things. If you think through the movie, noone ever talked to Alex except Anna. Anna killed all those people, but she was psyco so she just imagined everythng else. It is kind of confusing, just think through the whole movie knowing that Anna was imagining it. It makes sense if you think about it.
Anna didnt know she was killing them because she was crazy.
The friend, Mildred Kemp,was not really who Anna thought she was, once again, Anna just imagined that because she was insane.
Alex never killed Rachel, Anna did, but Anna turned insane after killing her mother and Alex on accident.
Pretty much all of your quistions are answered with the statedment ';Anna is insane';
Hope you understand now!What was the object of The Uninvited?
I know really.... but what i think it was was that she is Crazy and super smart. All the times you were seeing Alex is from her mind. If you watch closely nobody ever talks to Alex but Rachel. What i got from the ending was that she had planned the whole thing an knew she could get away with it because she is crazy. She told the doctor that she did what he told her to do....go back and finish what she started ( killing her stepmom and her Dad). She wanted to finish the murder of her new Stepmom, Mildred Kemp was just fuel for her lies. She used Mildred Kemp as (someone whose story she knew well having been in the institution together) so that when she told the lie it would sound like she was still really and truly crazy... which is exactly what she wanted. She wanted to murder people and get away with it and then go back to her happy environment @ the institution.
Did you watch the movie? seriously.
I'm gonna address them individually (your questions)
Anna was crazy. She had Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. She thought what she wanted; when she saw the nurse messing with her dad, she immediately saw her as the evil one. Then, when her mother and sister blew up, the thought was reassured in her head, like Rachel planned it.
Her friend could easily be Mildred Kemp because they're both crazy. Plain and simple.
Alex was, indeed, dead. When her mother blew up(sounds so insensitive, but whatevs) Anna needed someone to talk to, and her sister was the only one to think of. She needed her.
Alex didn't kill her. Did you notice in the movie that Alex was never in the same room with anyone other Anna (except her dad, and he wasn't paying attention)
It was Alex the whole time and she played both roles.
there ya go. Maybe you should watch the end again
i no this wont help, but i like after i watched that movie i was thinkin the exact same thing. how can anna have gone the whole entire movie thinking that her sister was still alive without anybody finding out.
its extremely confusing...
but it was a good movie all in all....just weird lol
im sorry this doesnt help with the answering.
Anna was crazy, she was imagining all these things. If you think through the movie, noone ever talked to Alex except Anna. Anna killed all those people, but she was psyco so she just imagined everythng else. It is kind of confusing, just think through the whole movie knowing that Anna was imagining it. It makes sense if you think about it.
Anna didnt know she was killing them because she was crazy.
The friend, Mildred Kemp,was not really who Anna thought she was, once again, Anna just imagined that because she was insane.
Alex never killed Rachel, Anna did, but Anna turned insane after killing her mother and Alex on accident.
Pretty much all of your quistions are answered with the statedment ';Anna is insane';
Hope you understand now!What was the object of The Uninvited?
I know really.... but what i think it was was that she is Crazy and super smart. All the times you were seeing Alex is from her mind. If you watch closely nobody ever talks to Alex but Rachel. What i got from the ending was that she had planned the whole thing an knew she could get away with it because she is crazy. She told the doctor that she did what he told her to do....go back and finish what she started ( killing her stepmom and her Dad). She wanted to finish the murder of her new Stepmom, Mildred Kemp was just fuel for her lies. She used Mildred Kemp as (someone whose story she knew well having been in the institution together) so that when she told the lie it would sound like she was still really and truly crazy... which is exactly what she wanted. She wanted to murder people and get away with it and then go back to her happy environment @ the institution.
Did you watch the movie? seriously.
I'm gonna address them individually (your questions)
Anna was crazy. She had Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. She thought what she wanted; when she saw the nurse messing with her dad, she immediately saw her as the evil one. Then, when her mother and sister blew up, the thought was reassured in her head, like Rachel planned it.
Her friend could easily be Mildred Kemp because they're both crazy. Plain and simple.
Alex was, indeed, dead. When her mother blew up(sounds so insensitive, but whatevs) Anna needed someone to talk to, and her sister was the only one to think of. She needed her.
Alex didn't kill her. Did you notice in the movie that Alex was never in the same room with anyone other Anna (except her dad, and he wasn't paying attention)
It was Alex the whole time and she played both roles.
there ya go. Maybe you should watch the end again
i no this wont help, but i like after i watched that movie i was thinkin the exact same thing. how can anna have gone the whole entire movie thinking that her sister was still alive without anybody finding out.
its extremely confusing...
but it was a good movie all in all....just weird lol
im sorry this doesnt help with the answering.
Why does an object look different when seen in tubelight and sunlight?
Tube light - neon or fluorescent?
Neon and similar gas discharge tubes as well as sodium area lights put out light in a very narrow spectrum so colors outside that range have no light to reflect so look black.
Fluorescent tube some with various phosphors inside to produce different mixes of light output. For example, Daylight (6500K) is intended to match the light coming from the northern sky in day time, which is liked by artists. Direct sunlight is much more yellow. Cool White was the original and most efficient phosphor, seen in work shops and many offices. Warm White is less efficient, but is intended to match the color of incandescent lights.
If an analysis of the energy at the frequencies across the spectrum (red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet) the amounts at each frequency will vary with the type.
Sunlight is a broad spectrum of light with energy distributed by the rules of heated object output. A light bulb with a filament heated to the same temp will produce the same spectrum.Why does an object look different when seen in tubelight and sunlight?
You mean fluorescent light?
Sunlight has a fairly continuous spectrum, but the spectrum of fluorescent light is concentrated in relatively few sharp peaks.聽 The reflectivity of many objects also has peaks, and it will look more colorful under fluorescent light if one of those coincides with a peak from the lamp and will look duller if none of them do.
Neon and similar gas discharge tubes as well as sodium area lights put out light in a very narrow spectrum so colors outside that range have no light to reflect so look black.
Fluorescent tube some with various phosphors inside to produce different mixes of light output. For example, Daylight (6500K) is intended to match the light coming from the northern sky in day time, which is liked by artists. Direct sunlight is much more yellow. Cool White was the original and most efficient phosphor, seen in work shops and many offices. Warm White is less efficient, but is intended to match the color of incandescent lights.
If an analysis of the energy at the frequencies across the spectrum (red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet) the amounts at each frequency will vary with the type.
Sunlight is a broad spectrum of light with energy distributed by the rules of heated object output. A light bulb with a filament heated to the same temp will produce the same spectrum.Why does an object look different when seen in tubelight and sunlight?
You mean fluorescent light?
Sunlight has a fairly continuous spectrum, but the spectrum of fluorescent light is concentrated in relatively few sharp peaks.聽 The reflectivity of many objects also has peaks, and it will look more colorful under fluorescent light if one of those coincides with a peak from the lamp and will look duller if none of them do.
There is a theoretical limit to how cold an object can be, that being absolute zero. Is there a theoretical?
limit to how hot an object can be? Like for instance, hotter than Scarlett Johansson?There is a theoretical limit to how cold an object can be, that being absolute zero. Is there a theoretical?
In the Standard Model, the highest temperature that makes any sense is the Planck Temperature, which is about 10^23 K and way, WAY hotter than anything in existence. See the reference...
In the Standard Model, the highest temperature that makes any sense is the Planck Temperature, which is about 10^23 K and way, WAY hotter than anything in existence. See the reference...
How are an object's mass and weight different?
third grade sicence hw.How are an object's mass and weight different?
Mass is a measure of how much matter is in an object.
Weight is a measure of the affect of gravity on the matter in the object.How are an object's mass and weight different?
weight depends on gravity. measured in Newtons
Mass is a simple number that depends on the amount of matter, measured in lbs, kg, k etc. Your mass will never change for example, if you have a mass of cheese it will be the same mass no matter where u put it.
Weight depends on gravity. So if you went to the moon, you'd weigh less since the moon's pull isn't as strong as Earth's.
Mass only depends on how much matter you have. So no matter where you go, you'll have the same mass.liquid color try itch cream
Mass is a measure of how much matter is in an object.
Weight is a measure of the affect of gravity on the matter in the object.How are an object's mass and weight different?
weight depends on gravity. measured in Newtons
Mass is a simple number that depends on the amount of matter, measured in lbs, kg, k etc. Your mass will never change for example, if you have a mass of cheese it will be the same mass no matter where u put it.
Weight depends on gravity. So if you went to the moon, you'd weigh less since the moon's pull isn't as strong as Earth's.
Mass only depends on how much matter you have. So no matter where you go, you'll have the same mass.
GOP didn't object to deficit spending when Bush did it-Does that justify Dems continuing to do so?
Do two wrongs make it right?GOP didn't object to deficit spending when Bush did it-Does that justify Dems continuing to do so?
The only reason the Dems are in such control right now is because republican voters voted the republicans out of office in 2006 for their ludicrous spending policies, and Bush didn't help either.
Love how this is an overlooked fact...over, and over and over and over...GOP didn't object to deficit spending when Bush did it-Does that justify Dems continuing to do so?
The GOP may not have, but Republican voters did. That's why they didn't turn up to re-elect their politicians in Washington, giving control of Congress back to the Dems. In reality, it was the Dems who howled the loudest about Bush's spending. and they are the ones who are scrambling to make excuses for their Representatives gross spending.
That may be the main difference between the parties.
Republicans are willing to throw their bums out.
Democrats worship them and continue to reward their failures by reelecting them.
When they have a good thing going why quit? They already have their pockets full of money but they will find room for more. Swindlers never quit swindling and Washington is full of them. They got us in to this mess and the sheeple help them by doing nothing. They was no difference between the Bush administration and the Democratic agenda. Bush proposed the budget and the democrats approved it everytime.
I hardly see the comparison between Obama's $787 billion dollar spending spree to Bush's stimulus package for one. I was opposed to Bush's liberal approach to spending, yet what the liberals are doing right now is using the recession to push their personal agenda's through. Deceptive to say the least!
It doesn't. I am really angry at the Republicans. They now sound like the voice of reason and fiscal responsibility. Where were they all of these years? They had their chance. Now let the Democrats have theirs. Let the Dems sink or swim on their own merits. The Republicans lost for a reason. That is why I am sick of our government. They don't have us in mind. They care about themselves and their petty interest groups. The Dems are the same as the republicans. Only they have different petty interest groups.
i have always objected to wasteful spending,and this takes the cake,what really bothers me are the people that say well bush did it,al capone robbed and killed so i guess i can,i swear the reasoning of the average democrat is frightening
No, it does not. We americans are being robbed of the future and most are cheering while it happens. It is sickening and frightening at the same time.
Dems are not only engaging in deficit spending... they are taking it to a whole new level.
Massive massive deficit spending.
Problem is OBAMA is the one that ran on REDUCING the deficit.
Tomorrow he will INCREASE it by 3.2 TRILLION over the next 10 years!
It was wrong under Bush, and it is wrong now.
it's about that time to ditch both parties...it was that time 70 years ago
No, it is not right.
do two rights make it wrong?
With the plan to create jobs to stimulate the economy, that will get people off of unemployment and paying taxes. Sometimes you have to spend money to make money.
Seems with Bush's plans all he did was give money and and incentives for businesses. Bush needed to provide people a means to buy from businesses....a job!
APPLES and Dump trucks--analogy...
AND plus--dems voted against a lot of it? WHY--if they're in favor of this crap?..That's what I want to know?
If something wasn't wasn't done millions more would have lost their homes, jobs, insurance...is that what you wanted?
Obama also wisely as added protections for American jobs, and has put a stop to the unfair trade balance we have with China.
The only reason the Dems are in such control right now is because republican voters voted the republicans out of office in 2006 for their ludicrous spending policies, and Bush didn't help either.
Love how this is an overlooked fact...over, and over and over and over...GOP didn't object to deficit spending when Bush did it-Does that justify Dems continuing to do so?
The GOP may not have, but Republican voters did. That's why they didn't turn up to re-elect their politicians in Washington, giving control of Congress back to the Dems. In reality, it was the Dems who howled the loudest about Bush's spending. and they are the ones who are scrambling to make excuses for their Representatives gross spending.
That may be the main difference between the parties.
Republicans are willing to throw their bums out.
Democrats worship them and continue to reward their failures by reelecting them.
When they have a good thing going why quit? They already have their pockets full of money but they will find room for more. Swindlers never quit swindling and Washington is full of them. They got us in to this mess and the sheeple help them by doing nothing. They was no difference between the Bush administration and the Democratic agenda. Bush proposed the budget and the democrats approved it everytime.
I hardly see the comparison between Obama's $787 billion dollar spending spree to Bush's stimulus package for one. I was opposed to Bush's liberal approach to spending, yet what the liberals are doing right now is using the recession to push their personal agenda's through. Deceptive to say the least!
It doesn't. I am really angry at the Republicans. They now sound like the voice of reason and fiscal responsibility. Where were they all of these years? They had their chance. Now let the Democrats have theirs. Let the Dems sink or swim on their own merits. The Republicans lost for a reason. That is why I am sick of our government. They don't have us in mind. They care about themselves and their petty interest groups. The Dems are the same as the republicans. Only they have different petty interest groups.
i have always objected to wasteful spending,and this takes the cake,what really bothers me are the people that say well bush did it,al capone robbed and killed so i guess i can,i swear the reasoning of the average democrat is frightening
No, it does not. We americans are being robbed of the future and most are cheering while it happens. It is sickening and frightening at the same time.
Dems are not only engaging in deficit spending... they are taking it to a whole new level.
Massive massive deficit spending.
Problem is OBAMA is the one that ran on REDUCING the deficit.
Tomorrow he will INCREASE it by 3.2 TRILLION over the next 10 years!
It was wrong under Bush, and it is wrong now.
it's about that time to ditch both parties...it was that time 70 years ago
No, it is not right.
do two rights make it wrong?
With the plan to create jobs to stimulate the economy, that will get people off of unemployment and paying taxes. Sometimes you have to spend money to make money.
Seems with Bush's plans all he did was give money and and incentives for businesses. Bush needed to provide people a means to buy from businesses....a job!
APPLES and Dump trucks--analogy...
AND plus--dems voted against a lot of it? WHY--if they're in favor of this crap?..That's what I want to know?
If something wasn't wasn't done millions more would have lost their homes, jobs, insurance...is that what you wanted?
Obama also wisely as added protections for American jobs, and has put a stop to the unfair trade balance we have with China.
Why would an object with a higher velocity have a higher critical Reynold number?
It will have a higher Reynolds # ; Rncr is a function of lots of other factors you haven't revealed.
Why is an object lighter when it is hot?
the reason that it is not advisable to measure a sample in a hot test tube.Why is an object lighter when it is hot?
It's not lighter when it's hot. It may have a higher molecular speed (gas) or lower density (liquid), but it won't get lighter unless you lose some of it (evaporation, boiling). But those molecules just go somewhere else, they don't disappear.Why is an object lighter when it is hot?
it has lower density when it's hot.
If that was supposed to be funny please put it in Jokes and Riddle.
(plese don't mind me, bad mood)
Gas expands making low pressure causing lift. Liquid turns to vapor. Vapor expands making low pressure causing lift. Solids expands with no weight lost. The only lost would come for the moisture on the surface of the solid not from the solid. If the solid is porous the moisture inside the solid will evaporate make the solid to lose weight. Burning solids, gases, and liquids Will consume the material causing weight lose also. The three rules Expansion, evaporation, and consumption.
because the water evaporated.... and the condensation process takes place...
An object can't be lighter when it is hot. Mass of an object can't change.
It's not lighter when it's hot. It may have a higher molecular speed (gas) or lower density (liquid), but it won't get lighter unless you lose some of it (evaporation, boiling). But those molecules just go somewhere else, they don't disappear.Why is an object lighter when it is hot?
it has lower density when it's hot.
If that was supposed to be funny please put it in Jokes and Riddle.
(plese don't mind me, bad mood)
Gas expands making low pressure causing lift. Liquid turns to vapor. Vapor expands making low pressure causing lift. Solids expands with no weight lost. The only lost would come for the moisture on the surface of the solid not from the solid. If the solid is porous the moisture inside the solid will evaporate make the solid to lose weight. Burning solids, gases, and liquids Will consume the material causing weight lose also. The three rules Expansion, evaporation, and consumption.
because the water evaporated.... and the condensation process takes place...
An object can't be lighter when it is hot. Mass of an object can't change.
My new dSLR's shutter button doesn't work when the camera's too close to an object. Is this normal?
I just got a new Nikon D60 and am playing with it, but I've found a weird 'glitch' when I'm trying to focus on an object that's too near for the lens (18-55mm VR AF-S) - the shutter button doesn't work. I press it and sometimes the focus readjusts but no picture is taken.
Is this normal? Is it because I have it on autofocus?My new dSLR's shutter button doesn't work when the camera's too close to an object. Is this normal?
It is because of one of the automatic settings, auto-focus is most likely. It could also be too dark. You can override any but you may not be able to get a sharp or bright picture.
Try switching to manual focus and see what you can get by yourself. If it is blurry, you are too close.My new dSLR's shutter button doesn't work when the camera's too close to an object. Is this normal?
A poor workman always blames his poor work on his tools.
There is nothing wrong with your camera. The shutter won't work because you are trying to focus too close and Nikon built that fail-safe into the camera so you won't take a bad picture and blame the camera.
For decades camera manufacturers have built their cameras to be as fool-proof as possible. Their goal is, was - and always will be - to insure that the casual user gets as many good pictures as possible to make the user happy and build brand loyalty.
The 18-55mm lens is designed to close focus to 11 inches. Get any closer and you will have nothing but a blurry mess.
You have to know the limitations of your equipment. This is best learned by taking time to READ %26amp; STUDY the Owner's Manual for your camera and lens.
If macro photography is one of your interests then invest in a macro lens like the AF-S VR Micro Nikkor 105mm f2.8G IF-ED.
you may want to also try a macro lense.
the camera can't focus on the subject when the subject is too close and if it can't focus it doesn't let you take the picture. you could either use the manual focus or use a macro lens. even if you use the manual focus, the picture comes out may be blurry coz it just can't focus but it lets you take the picture
This is normal. The camera's default setting is to not make a picture until the subject is in focus.
All lenses have a minimum focus distance - the closest to the subject that the lens can get and still get focus. If you're too close, the lens can't get focus and the camera won't make a picture.
Look at the focusing ring of your 18-55mm. You'll see distance measurements on it. Point your camera at a subject 1 or 2 meters away and let the lens autofocus on it. Then look at the focusing ring. You'll see that it has focused to the distance that the subject is from the camera.
Note that your 18-55mm lens can focus as far away as infinity but has a minimum focus distance on the other end of the scale. That's as close to a subject as you can get with that lens.
On my old Nikon D100, the no-picture-without-focus feature can be turned off so the camera will make a picture whether the subject is in focus or not. I don't know about the D60, but if you really, really need a close-up blurry photo of something, look in the manual to learn how to turn the feature off.
Or just back up until you're within the minimum focus distance of your lens!
Disclosure: I am the owner of http://www.lenslenders.com/ in Canada.
If you switch it to MF mode it will take the picture. Also, if its like Canon, switching it to continuous AF mode (AI SERVO on canon) will allow you to take the picture.
However, why would you want to do this? Taking a picture closer than the MFD will just result in a blurry mess.
When taking close up pictures, make sure you are zoomed in all the way, to maximize the magnification of the lens. That way you can step back a little to get to the minimum focus distance.
Adding close focus lenses, extension tubes, or teleconverters to your lens will also increase the magnification, allowing you to focus closer than normal. However, there is no substitute for a true macro lens for close up work, if you can afford one.
Is this normal? Is it because I have it on autofocus?My new dSLR's shutter button doesn't work when the camera's too close to an object. Is this normal?
It is because of one of the automatic settings, auto-focus is most likely. It could also be too dark. You can override any but you may not be able to get a sharp or bright picture.
Try switching to manual focus and see what you can get by yourself. If it is blurry, you are too close.My new dSLR's shutter button doesn't work when the camera's too close to an object. Is this normal?
A poor workman always blames his poor work on his tools.
There is nothing wrong with your camera. The shutter won't work because you are trying to focus too close and Nikon built that fail-safe into the camera so you won't take a bad picture and blame the camera.
For decades camera manufacturers have built their cameras to be as fool-proof as possible. Their goal is, was - and always will be - to insure that the casual user gets as many good pictures as possible to make the user happy and build brand loyalty.
The 18-55mm lens is designed to close focus to 11 inches. Get any closer and you will have nothing but a blurry mess.
You have to know the limitations of your equipment. This is best learned by taking time to READ %26amp; STUDY the Owner's Manual for your camera and lens.
If macro photography is one of your interests then invest in a macro lens like the AF-S VR Micro Nikkor 105mm f2.8G IF-ED.
you may want to also try a macro lense.
the camera can't focus on the subject when the subject is too close and if it can't focus it doesn't let you take the picture. you could either use the manual focus or use a macro lens. even if you use the manual focus, the picture comes out may be blurry coz it just can't focus but it lets you take the picture
This is normal. The camera's default setting is to not make a picture until the subject is in focus.
All lenses have a minimum focus distance - the closest to the subject that the lens can get and still get focus. If you're too close, the lens can't get focus and the camera won't make a picture.
Look at the focusing ring of your 18-55mm. You'll see distance measurements on it. Point your camera at a subject 1 or 2 meters away and let the lens autofocus on it. Then look at the focusing ring. You'll see that it has focused to the distance that the subject is from the camera.
Note that your 18-55mm lens can focus as far away as infinity but has a minimum focus distance on the other end of the scale. That's as close to a subject as you can get with that lens.
On my old Nikon D100, the no-picture-without-focus feature can be turned off so the camera will make a picture whether the subject is in focus or not. I don't know about the D60, but if you really, really need a close-up blurry photo of something, look in the manual to learn how to turn the feature off.
Or just back up until you're within the minimum focus distance of your lens!
Disclosure: I am the owner of http://www.lenslenders.com/ in Canada.
If you switch it to MF mode it will take the picture. Also, if its like Canon, switching it to continuous AF mode (AI SERVO on canon) will allow you to take the picture.
However, why would you want to do this? Taking a picture closer than the MFD will just result in a blurry mess.
When taking close up pictures, make sure you are zoomed in all the way, to maximize the magnification of the lens. That way you can step back a little to get to the minimum focus distance.
Adding close focus lenses, extension tubes, or teleconverters to your lens will also increase the magnification, allowing you to focus closer than normal. However, there is no substitute for a true macro lens for close up work, if you can afford one.
How do I write a narrative story as an object...'A Day in the life of a ...';?
I did this as a poem for my english class last year and did it as a day in the life of an elevator button and then another one on the space bar on a keyboard. just think like it, give it a personality.How do I write a narrative story as an object...'A Day in the life of a ...';?
Choose an object and then imagine yourself as that object. Imagine things that can happen to you. Make sure each thing that happens to you gets worse and worse. Imagine the type of people who you will encounter. Decide what you like and dislike and what you as an object would like to have happen. Decide where you are located, too, since it makes a difference. For instance, if you're a ball kicked by a three year old girl versus a ball kicked in a courtyard by a 300lb man and there's shattered glass all around. Be sure to have fun since these can be amusing.
Good luck,
:) Sheri How do I write a narrative story as an object...'A Day in the life of a ...';?
Write what you think it would be like to be a object, such as a Barbie doll, a baby blanket, or a even a spoon.
What would happen in those 24 hours? Maybe you would be used to stir birthday cake batter and then get to ride in the dishwasher? What would it be like?
Choose an object and then imagine yourself as that object. Imagine things that can happen to you. Make sure each thing that happens to you gets worse and worse. Imagine the type of people who you will encounter. Decide what you like and dislike and what you as an object would like to have happen. Decide where you are located, too, since it makes a difference. For instance, if you're a ball kicked by a three year old girl versus a ball kicked in a courtyard by a 300lb man and there's shattered glass all around. Be sure to have fun since these can be amusing.
Good luck,
:) Sheri How do I write a narrative story as an object...'A Day in the life of a ...';?
Write what you think it would be like to be a object, such as a Barbie doll, a baby blanket, or a even a spoon.
What would happen in those 24 hours? Maybe you would be used to stir birthday cake batter and then get to ride in the dishwasher? What would it be like?
How do you calculate the water displaced by an object if you know the weight, length, width and height?
assuming that the object is solid, the water displaced is equal to the volume of the object submerged in water, of course depending on the material of the object or more specifically its unit weight
this means that some material are not completelt immersed in water therefore the volume displaced is equal only to the volume of the object immersed
its simple physics, two objects cannot occupy the same space at the same time (I'm quoting lex luthor of course)
according to achimedes: any body immersed in a fluid is acted upon by an unbalanced upward force called the 'bouyant force', which is equal to the weight of the fluid displaced
calculated as:
Bf = yf * Vo
Bf - bouyant force
yf - unit wieght of the fluid
Vo - volume of object immersed in water or volume of water displaced
to calculate the volume displaced just divide the unit weight of the object by the unit weight of water then multiply that to the volume of the object
in the case of water where the unit weight is equal to 1
displacement is much easier to compute right?
for example, if an object's unit weight is 0.5 then we can immediately say that the immersion of the object is only half of its volume
however, if the unit of an object is larger than the unit weight of water which is 1, for example 2
then immediately we know that the object is completely submerged and therefore the displaced water is equal to the volume of the object
whew ! that explanation took some of my strength !
my physics teacher could have been proud
enjoy your studies heh !How do you calculate the water displaced by an object if you know the weight, length, width and height?
All you need is it's weight x volume. This will be equal to the weight of the water displacedHow do you calculate the water displaced by an object if you know the weight, length, width and height?
subrtract the initial height from the final height.or you can put weight x (lenght x width x height).good luck on that =]
If the object is solid, it should displace an amount of water equal to its volume = L*w*hliquid color try itch cream
this means that some material are not completelt immersed in water therefore the volume displaced is equal only to the volume of the object immersed
its simple physics, two objects cannot occupy the same space at the same time (I'm quoting lex luthor of course)
according to achimedes: any body immersed in a fluid is acted upon by an unbalanced upward force called the 'bouyant force', which is equal to the weight of the fluid displaced
calculated as:
Bf = yf * Vo
Bf - bouyant force
yf - unit wieght of the fluid
Vo - volume of object immersed in water or volume of water displaced
to calculate the volume displaced just divide the unit weight of the object by the unit weight of water then multiply that to the volume of the object
in the case of water where the unit weight is equal to 1
displacement is much easier to compute right?
for example, if an object's unit weight is 0.5 then we can immediately say that the immersion of the object is only half of its volume
however, if the unit of an object is larger than the unit weight of water which is 1, for example 2
then immediately we know that the object is completely submerged and therefore the displaced water is equal to the volume of the object
whew ! that explanation took some of my strength !
my physics teacher could have been proud
enjoy your studies heh !How do you calculate the water displaced by an object if you know the weight, length, width and height?
All you need is it's weight x volume. This will be equal to the weight of the water displacedHow do you calculate the water displaced by an object if you know the weight, length, width and height?
subrtract the initial height from the final height.or you can put weight x (lenght x width x height).good luck on that =]
If the object is solid, it should displace an amount of water equal to its volume = L*w*h
What is Adobe Photoshop equivalent to corel photopaint's Object Transparency Tool?
Photoshop doesn't have 'objects', and I'm not even sure what they are. But if you can isolate something on a picture in its own layer (easy to do) you can adjust the transparency of that layer (and do a million other things!)
If you select an area with the 'marquee' tool or lasso, and do a 'copy' and 'paste', the area is pasted into a new layer. You can then use the eraser tool to 'trim' that layer to just the area you want. You can then move, resize, etc. the layer or even drag it to another picture (to put a person in a photograph, put someone's head on someone else, etc). And that thing, whatever it is, can be edited and adjusted separately from the rest of the picture.What is Adobe Photoshop equivalent to corel photopaint's Object Transparency Tool?
photoshop does not have this tool, sad. and is not the layer opacity. Report Abuse
What is Adobe Photoshop equivalent to corel photopaint's Object Transparency Tool?
I've never used Corel Photopaint, but that tool sounds similar to Layer Opacity in Photoshop. Select the layer you want to adjust and change the Opacity value at the top of the layers palette.
If this isn't what you are looking for, you might give us a description of what the Object Transparency Tool does. I don't know many people that use both programs.
If you select an area with the 'marquee' tool or lasso, and do a 'copy' and 'paste', the area is pasted into a new layer. You can then use the eraser tool to 'trim' that layer to just the area you want. You can then move, resize, etc. the layer or even drag it to another picture (to put a person in a photograph, put someone's head on someone else, etc). And that thing, whatever it is, can be edited and adjusted separately from the rest of the picture.What is Adobe Photoshop equivalent to corel photopaint's Object Transparency Tool?
photoshop does not have this tool, sad. and is not the layer opacity. Report Abuse
What is Adobe Photoshop equivalent to corel photopaint's Object Transparency Tool?
I've never used Corel Photopaint, but that tool sounds similar to Layer Opacity in Photoshop. Select the layer you want to adjust and change the Opacity value at the top of the layers palette.
If this isn't what you are looking for, you might give us a description of what the Object Transparency Tool does. I don't know many people that use both programs.
Calculate the instantaneous speed and distance fallen for an object that falls freely from rest for 8 seconds?
Physics!Calculate the instantaneous speed and distance fallen for an object that falls freely from rest for 8 seconds?
H=+1/2gt^2=1/2(9.8)(64)=313.6 meters
V=gt=9.8(8)=78.4m/sec.
God bless you.Calculate the instantaneous speed and distance fallen for an object that falls freely from rest for 8 seconds?
s = ut + (a * t^2)/2
u = 0
t = 8
t^2 = 64
a = 9.81
therefore s = 313.92 meters
v = u + at
therefore v = 78.48 meters per second
assuming it doesn't reach terminal velocity
u = 0
t = 8s
Speed after 8s
v = u + gt
v = 0 + 9.8x8 = 78.4m/s
distance fallen in 8s:
v^2 = u^2 + 2gs
s = v^2/2g = 313.6 m
H=+1/2gt^2=1/2(9.8)(64)=313.6 meters
V=gt=9.8(8)=78.4m/sec.
God bless you.Calculate the instantaneous speed and distance fallen for an object that falls freely from rest for 8 seconds?
s = ut + (a * t^2)/2
u = 0
t = 8
t^2 = 64
a = 9.81
therefore s = 313.92 meters
v = u + at
therefore v = 78.48 meters per second
assuming it doesn't reach terminal velocity
u = 0
t = 8s
Speed after 8s
v = u + gt
v = 0 + 9.8x8 = 78.4m/s
distance fallen in 8s:
v^2 = u^2 + 2gs
s = v^2/2g = 313.6 m
How can an object at rest have energy?
It can have potential energy due to its location.How can an object at rest have energy?
Kinetic energy.How can an object at rest have energy?
If you're constantly in motion, how can you possibly have any energy? Boy, just *thinking* about it makes me tired. Excuse me while I sit down for a while.
An object at rest has *potential* energy. A stick of dynamite at rest has a lot of energy. So does a gallon of gasoline.
But if you have a big rock on top of the roof, it has energy, too. Just tap it, and it comes flying down, picking up speed, until it hits your foot and you hop around on the other foot going ';Ouch, ouch, ouch!';
Yes, an object at rest has potential energy.
It breathes. and not like we do.
Objects at rest have Potential energy. Look up E=Mc2
You sitting at rest have the potential to move - ';grubs up'; !
A poolball has the potential to move - when I whack it with a cue.
etc etc
Everyone speaking of potential energy has completely neglected the concept of ';internal energy';. Unless a substance is at ABSOLUTE ZERO, the atoms and molecules within it are moving. Heat energy, the enthalpy of the substance, is always a factor in determining the total energy of an object. Electrons move around the nucleus, sub-atomic particles vibrate, quarks spin. And, of course, the substance itself has an equivalent in energy if all its matter were to be converted to energy.
So, yes, an object at rest has plenty of energy. Chemical energy, thermal energy, atomic energy, potential energy... the list goes on. Kinetic energy in the sense of classic physics is only one measurement.
Kinetic energy.How can an object at rest have energy?
If you're constantly in motion, how can you possibly have any energy? Boy, just *thinking* about it makes me tired. Excuse me while I sit down for a while.
An object at rest has *potential* energy. A stick of dynamite at rest has a lot of energy. So does a gallon of gasoline.
But if you have a big rock on top of the roof, it has energy, too. Just tap it, and it comes flying down, picking up speed, until it hits your foot and you hop around on the other foot going ';Ouch, ouch, ouch!';
Yes, an object at rest has potential energy.
It breathes. and not like we do.
Objects at rest have Potential energy. Look up E=Mc2
You sitting at rest have the potential to move - ';grubs up'; !
A poolball has the potential to move - when I whack it with a cue.
etc etc
Everyone speaking of potential energy has completely neglected the concept of ';internal energy';. Unless a substance is at ABSOLUTE ZERO, the atoms and molecules within it are moving. Heat energy, the enthalpy of the substance, is always a factor in determining the total energy of an object. Electrons move around the nucleus, sub-atomic particles vibrate, quarks spin. And, of course, the substance itself has an equivalent in energy if all its matter were to be converted to energy.
So, yes, an object at rest has plenty of energy. Chemical energy, thermal energy, atomic energy, potential energy... the list goes on. Kinetic energy in the sense of classic physics is only one measurement.
Would a steel object that sunk in the ocean corrode more at 100m in the ocean or 1000m? (assume that the salt?
assume that the salt content of the water is the same at both depths, just the temperature and amount of dissolved oxygen has changedWould a steel object that sunk in the ocean corrode more at 100m in the ocean or 1000m? (assume that the salt?
A nice brain teaser. The deeper the water, the colder it is. The kinetics of the reaction will slow by half with every 10 掳C drop in temperature. However, the colder the water, the greater the solubility of oxygen, more oxygen, more oxidation. The problem here is that the oxygen is limited by diffusion and would be slower at 1000m. My gut says that overall, corrosion would be slower.
A nice brain teaser. The deeper the water, the colder it is. The kinetics of the reaction will slow by half with every 10 掳C drop in temperature. However, the colder the water, the greater the solubility of oxygen, more oxygen, more oxidation. The problem here is that the oxygen is limited by diffusion and would be slower at 1000m. My gut says that overall, corrosion would be slower.
How would I go about retrieving a 10 inch object from a small space?
By using your little finger, duh!!! Or if your a pro your thumb.How would I go about retrieving a 10 inch object from a small space?
by opening a 11 inch hole to extract it.How would I go about retrieving a 10 inch object from a small space?
you wouldnt have someting stuck up your rectum would you?thats a tough one and you will need to go get some help.
Gum or tape and a stick.
How do you get a 10'; object in a small place, that's the question!!!
OK if its a 10 inch object it cant be that SMALL of a space.... you need to specify what kind of object and what type of space.. cause if the object is metal use a telescopic magnet to get the object out ........ since this is posted in skin conditions ....... we REALLY would need to know what space and object, THEN you could get some good advice..
Depends on what type of 10 inch product you're talkin about
take a thin stick and cover the end with duct tape, sticky-side-out. Reach in with your sticky stick and stick it onto the object. Pull it out.
cut off the other end of the object and it should come right out on its own
by opening a 11 inch hole to extract it.How would I go about retrieving a 10 inch object from a small space?
you wouldnt have someting stuck up your rectum would you?thats a tough one and you will need to go get some help.
Gum or tape and a stick.
How do you get a 10'; object in a small place, that's the question!!!
OK if its a 10 inch object it cant be that SMALL of a space.... you need to specify what kind of object and what type of space.. cause if the object is metal use a telescopic magnet to get the object out ........ since this is posted in skin conditions ....... we REALLY would need to know what space and object, THEN you could get some good advice..
Depends on what type of 10 inch product you're talkin about
take a thin stick and cover the end with duct tape, sticky-side-out. Reach in with your sticky stick and stick it onto the object. Pull it out.
cut off the other end of the object and it should come right out on its own
Feminists, do you object to the President's wife being called the First Lady?
I understand that ';lady'; is an offensive term to you, so what do you prefer? First Woman? First Female?Feminists, do you object to the President's wife being called the First Lady?
I do not object to the President's wife being called the First Lady. I look upon it as a term of respect.Feminists, do you object to the President's wife being called the First Lady?
I'm a ';lady'; and have no problem with it....why would anyone be upset about the term ';First Lady';?
Hillary Clinton is a feminist and was a ';First Lady';
P.S. I agree with Rio Madeira :)
Boy, are you whacked out.
When Hillary wins, will Bill will be the First Laddie?
Since when is ';lady'; an offensive term? Chick, babe, girl, these, in the right instance, can all be a bit offensive, but lady? I would rather be called a lady (given the linguistic origins of the word) than some other titles.
Feminists prefer only that a woman be president. They don't care about convention.
call me
As long as Bill becomes the First Gentleman, it's fine.
Why is such a title even needed in the first place? In other countries, the spouse of the prime minister or president doesn't even have a title. This is true, regardless of that person's sex. If we get a female president, what will her husband's title be? ';First Man';? I think it's time to drop this designation entirely.
I love being a lady.liquid color try itch cream
I do not object to the President's wife being called the First Lady. I look upon it as a term of respect.Feminists, do you object to the President's wife being called the First Lady?
I'm a ';lady'; and have no problem with it....why would anyone be upset about the term ';First Lady';?
Hillary Clinton is a feminist and was a ';First Lady';
P.S. I agree with Rio Madeira :)
Boy, are you whacked out.
When Hillary wins, will Bill will be the First Laddie?
Since when is ';lady'; an offensive term? Chick, babe, girl, these, in the right instance, can all be a bit offensive, but lady? I would rather be called a lady (given the linguistic origins of the word) than some other titles.
Feminists prefer only that a woman be president. They don't care about convention.
call me
As long as Bill becomes the First Gentleman, it's fine.
Why is such a title even needed in the first place? In other countries, the spouse of the prime minister or president doesn't even have a title. This is true, regardless of that person's sex. If we get a female president, what will her husband's title be? ';First Man';? I think it's time to drop this designation entirely.
I love being a lady.
How can you measure the average speed of an object between two points.formulate hypothesis,proceduces,?
use a stop watch to measure the time it takes. Use a tape measure to measure the distance between the two points.
The average speed is the time divided by the distance.
If doing an experiment you would repeat the time trial several times and then average the times before determining the average speed
The average speed is the time divided by the distance.
If doing an experiment you would repeat the time trial several times and then average the times before determining the average speed
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Where can i find a javascript code for mouseover effect for separate parameters on one large object?
i have found a code that will do mouseover for separate objects, but wondered if I could make a large image, and create mouseover effects within that large object using javascript.Where can i find a javascript code for mouseover effect for separate parameters on one large object?
Use a client-side, HTML image map (ancient, often overlooked, but wonderful tool).
http://www.javascriptkit.com/howto/image鈥?/a>
Use a client-side, HTML image map (ancient, often overlooked, but wonderful tool).
http://www.javascriptkit.com/howto/image鈥?/a>
How do you create a transparent background to an object?
For example I am trying to create a flower graphic on its own without the backgroundHow do you create a transparent background to an object?
You'll want to create a GIF file, which supports transparent backgrounds. You can use a picture editor like GIMP (see link below) to create a GIF file. From the GIMP menu, pick File %26gt; New and click Transparent as the Fill type. After you create the image, save it with a .GIF extension. If it asks you a question about indexing the file, go ahead and have it indexed (a GIF file uses an array for each color, and one of the elements in the array is set to the ';transparent'; color).How do you create a transparent background to an object?
if your using photoshop then when you choose file/new the panel that pops up with the options in it has a setting for the background. choose transparent
If you are using M S publisher, you can create the object, then choose to have no background in the Background colour selection box
Yea, And also save it as a png to keep it transparent
You'll want to create a GIF file, which supports transparent backgrounds. You can use a picture editor like GIMP (see link below) to create a GIF file. From the GIMP menu, pick File %26gt; New and click Transparent as the Fill type. After you create the image, save it with a .GIF extension. If it asks you a question about indexing the file, go ahead and have it indexed (a GIF file uses an array for each color, and one of the elements in the array is set to the ';transparent'; color).How do you create a transparent background to an object?
if your using photoshop then when you choose file/new the panel that pops up with the options in it has a setting for the background. choose transparent
If you are using M S publisher, you can create the object, then choose to have no background in the Background colour selection box
Yea, And also save it as a png to keep it transparent
A freely falling object requires 1.50 s to travel 30.0 m before it hits the ground. What height did it fall?
Trick question?
30.0 meters, silly.
30.0 meters, silly.
Physics: how to find acceloration due to gravity, given mass, height and time taken for an object to fall?
Can someone help me with the following physics question?
';On mars, a 20kg hammer is dropped from a height of 2.0m. It takes 1.04 seconds to reach the ground. What is the acceleration due to gravity on Mars?';
Thankyou!Physics: how to find acceloration due to gravity, given mass, height and time taken for an object to fall?
d = vi * t + 1/2 * a * t^2
d = distance
vi = initial velocity
a = acceleration
t = time of fall
Just plug in the known variables and solve this equation for a.Physics: how to find acceloration due to gravity, given mass, height and time taken for an object to fall?
The acceleration is your problem is 3.698 m/s/s.
2*d/t^2=a
2*2/1.04^2=3.698
As on Earth, the mass of the object is inconsequential.
';On mars, a 20kg hammer is dropped from a height of 2.0m. It takes 1.04 seconds to reach the ground. What is the acceleration due to gravity on Mars?';
Thankyou!Physics: how to find acceloration due to gravity, given mass, height and time taken for an object to fall?
d = vi * t + 1/2 * a * t^2
d = distance
vi = initial velocity
a = acceleration
t = time of fall
Just plug in the known variables and solve this equation for a.Physics: how to find acceloration due to gravity, given mass, height and time taken for an object to fall?
The acceleration is your problem is 3.698 m/s/s.
2*d/t^2=a
2*2/1.04^2=3.698
As on Earth, the mass of the object is inconsequential.
The objective lens of a microscope has a focal length of 0.5 cm. An object on the microscope slide is placed a
The objective lens of a microscope has a focal length of 0.5 cm. An object on the microscope slide is placed at a distance of 1.0 cm from the lens.
(a) At what distance from the lens is the image formed by the objective lens?
_____cm
(b) What is the magnification of this image?
_____xThe objective lens of a microscope has a focal length of 0.5 cm. An object on the microscope slide is placed a
a. 1/do + 1/di = 1/f
f=0.5
do = 1
Put all into the equation and work out that di = 1
b. m= di/do
= 1liquid color try itch cream
(a) At what distance from the lens is the image formed by the objective lens?
_____cm
(b) What is the magnification of this image?
_____xThe objective lens of a microscope has a focal length of 0.5 cm. An object on the microscope slide is placed a
a. 1/do + 1/di = 1/f
f=0.5
do = 1
Put all into the equation and work out that di = 1
b. m= di/do
= 1
How can I sove the problem ';Object reference not set to an instance of an object'; ?
When I execute the code
Dim dr As DataRow
dr = ds.Tables(';tbl_item';).NewRow()
in VB.NET with sql Server 2000 back end there happened an error like
';Object reference not set to an instance of an object'; . So I want an solution for this. Can Any one provide a solutionHow can I sove the problem ';Object reference not set to an instance of an object'; ?
You are trying to reference an object that has not been instantiated. In your case; your DataRow object ';dr';.
Try Dim dr As New DataRow()
Then you should be able to assign values to ';dr'; like you've done in your second line.
Make sure your DataSet object is also instantiated.
I hope this helps. :-)
Dim dr As DataRow
dr = ds.Tables(';tbl_item';).NewRow()
in VB.NET with sql Server 2000 back end there happened an error like
';Object reference not set to an instance of an object'; . So I want an solution for this. Can Any one provide a solutionHow can I sove the problem ';Object reference not set to an instance of an object'; ?
You are trying to reference an object that has not been instantiated. In your case; your DataRow object ';dr';.
Try Dim dr As New DataRow()
Then you should be able to assign values to ';dr'; like you've done in your second line.
Make sure your DataSet object is also instantiated.
I hope this helps. :-)
On what grounds do you object to global capitalism?
ethical/environmental/efficiency?
Capitalism is not a sustainable economic system because the pursuit of profit ALWAYS leads to a misallocation of resources. it is not environmentally friendly because environmental regulations ';get in the way'; of securing a profit. It is not ethical because it causes the majority of social injustices of the world (war, poverty, genocide, imperialism, crime, terrorism etc) as almost everything is essentially economically motivated, and other reasons for inefficient governments etc are due to reactionary ideals the result of a profit-based system that ONLY cares about profit and thus people have to justify their worth in other ways (ie nationalism, patriotism, religion, etc)
So what is your major objection to capitalism?On what grounds do you object to global capitalism?
You are completely right with your assessment.
But the economy is usually just a superficial indicator of our relationships to each other, indicating our selfish attitude for more profits, exploiting others.
This is our inherent human nature, but as we are entering the new global era of human evolution, within this closed, integral system this attitude, which has driven human progress up to this point, cannot function anymore.
So while before humanity enjoyed benefits of progress through competition, and expansion, we have to find a new way of relationships in our new global system.
From now on we have to work together for the benefit and well being of the whole, rather than for individual interests.
The time of capitalism is over, we have to live and work together as a single loving family.
Although it will be a difficult pill to swallow for a large portion of humanity, we simply do not have any other chances for our future.
I hope it helps, all the best.On what grounds do you object to global capitalism?
In the absence of laws prohibiting monopolies, ALL competition leads to monopoly control of industries. In the presence of laws prohibiting monopolies, oligopolies arise instead, and the effect is the same: higher prices and few choices for all.
One of the present problems with the American economy is 'bigness';. If it's too big to fail, we have to bail it out or our country will suffer irreparable losses. Another problem with bigness is the lack of consumer choices amongst products and services. Then, as you mentioned, there is the problem of ';externalities';: The cost of corporate waste is socialized and paid for by the government/taxpayers, and the profits remain privatized, going only to the stockholders and executives.
Personally, I am in favor of limiting the size of businesses beyond economies of scale, and in favor of a balanced economy, with a mixture of socialistic functions and free-markets as well.
yet it works and has created a more prosperous economy overall leaving people happier and less prone to radicalism that often leads to to aforemenbtioned things you balme on the great ecnonomic system
So none. :)
Capitalism is not a sustainable economic system because the pursuit of profit ALWAYS leads to a misallocation of resources. it is not environmentally friendly because environmental regulations ';get in the way'; of securing a profit. It is not ethical because it causes the majority of social injustices of the world (war, poverty, genocide, imperialism, crime, terrorism etc) as almost everything is essentially economically motivated, and other reasons for inefficient governments etc are due to reactionary ideals the result of a profit-based system that ONLY cares about profit and thus people have to justify their worth in other ways (ie nationalism, patriotism, religion, etc)
So what is your major objection to capitalism?On what grounds do you object to global capitalism?
You are completely right with your assessment.
But the economy is usually just a superficial indicator of our relationships to each other, indicating our selfish attitude for more profits, exploiting others.
This is our inherent human nature, but as we are entering the new global era of human evolution, within this closed, integral system this attitude, which has driven human progress up to this point, cannot function anymore.
So while before humanity enjoyed benefits of progress through competition, and expansion, we have to find a new way of relationships in our new global system.
From now on we have to work together for the benefit and well being of the whole, rather than for individual interests.
The time of capitalism is over, we have to live and work together as a single loving family.
Although it will be a difficult pill to swallow for a large portion of humanity, we simply do not have any other chances for our future.
I hope it helps, all the best.On what grounds do you object to global capitalism?
In the absence of laws prohibiting monopolies, ALL competition leads to monopoly control of industries. In the presence of laws prohibiting monopolies, oligopolies arise instead, and the effect is the same: higher prices and few choices for all.
One of the present problems with the American economy is 'bigness';. If it's too big to fail, we have to bail it out or our country will suffer irreparable losses. Another problem with bigness is the lack of consumer choices amongst products and services. Then, as you mentioned, there is the problem of ';externalities';: The cost of corporate waste is socialized and paid for by the government/taxpayers, and the profits remain privatized, going only to the stockholders and executives.
Personally, I am in favor of limiting the size of businesses beyond economies of scale, and in favor of a balanced economy, with a mixture of socialistic functions and free-markets as well.
yet it works and has created a more prosperous economy overall leaving people happier and less prone to radicalism that often leads to to aforemenbtioned things you balme on the great ecnonomic system
So none. :)
Buoyancy question: What does an object in water displace...?
The weight of water that the object itself weighs, or
The volume of water that is the same volume of the object?
Please, please help. I keep on getting confused with this.Buoyancy question: What does an object in water displace...?
An object immersed in water will displace the volume of water equal to the volume of the object itself.
When you combine this with weighing the object on scales, you can determine its density:
density = weight/volume
This does assume that the object is more dense than water, otherwise it will float. Metal ships float because, although the metal is more dense than water, it is filled with air - and the combined air+metal is less dense than water.Buoyancy question: What does an object in water displace...?
volume, the amount of space...
A ship displaces the volume of water that is taken up by the portion of the hull that is below water level. The weight of the ship detrmines exactly what that volume is.
If it is floating then it displaces its weight.
If it is submeged then it displaces its volume.
A floating object displaces its own weight of water.The reason it floats is that the displaceed water trieas to return to where it was and pushes back against the floating body with a force equal to its own weight A submerged object displaces its own volume. Think if this as a balance scale with the object on one side and the displaced water on the other side. The object will float when the weight of the displaced water just balances the object or is greater than the object
A body immersed in water is displaced by an amount of its own mass.
the volume of the object that is why dispacers with a known volume can be used to determine level in instrument and control devices such as in a water leg
The volume of water that is the same volume of the object?
Please, please help. I keep on getting confused with this.Buoyancy question: What does an object in water displace...?
An object immersed in water will displace the volume of water equal to the volume of the object itself.
When you combine this with weighing the object on scales, you can determine its density:
density = weight/volume
This does assume that the object is more dense than water, otherwise it will float. Metal ships float because, although the metal is more dense than water, it is filled with air - and the combined air+metal is less dense than water.Buoyancy question: What does an object in water displace...?
volume, the amount of space...
A ship displaces the volume of water that is taken up by the portion of the hull that is below water level. The weight of the ship detrmines exactly what that volume is.
If it is floating then it displaces its weight.
If it is submeged then it displaces its volume.
A floating object displaces its own weight of water.The reason it floats is that the displaceed water trieas to return to where it was and pushes back against the floating body with a force equal to its own weight A submerged object displaces its own volume. Think if this as a balance scale with the object on one side and the displaced water on the other side. The object will float when the weight of the displaced water just balances the object or is greater than the object
A body immersed in water is displaced by an amount of its own mass.
the volume of the object that is why dispacers with a known volume can be used to determine level in instrument and control devices such as in a water leg
What is the multi colored object in the night sky?
it seems to have red blue green blinking lights resembling a police cars lights not high in the sky i assumed it is a satellite it is not alwaws visibleWhat is the multi colored object in the night sky?
Aurora Borealis maybe?
http://science-education.pppl.gov/middle鈥?/a>What is the multi colored object in the night sky?
The aliens are attacking!!!!!!!!!! jk
Due west in the sky, that would be Arcturus in the constellation Bootes. cutting an oblique scattered path
through possible turbulence in the atmosphere
plane
Aurora Borealis maybe?
http://science-education.pppl.gov/middle鈥?/a>What is the multi colored object in the night sky?
The aliens are attacking!!!!!!!!!! jk
Due west in the sky, that would be Arcturus in the constellation Bootes. cutting an oblique scattered path
through possible turbulence in the atmosphere
plane
How is datacentric different to object oriented?
As title thanks.How is datacentric different to object oriented?
Data centric focus the design on the data, how the data is represented, etc. Quite often it implies using a database or something similar. The entire program is very much tied into how the data is implemented. The goal is to optimize based on the data being processed.
In an OO approach you are actually trying to hide the data model within objects. Only the object knows what the data is like, how created, access, etc. The goal here is to protect the overall program from being affected by changes in the internal implementation.liquid color try itch cream
Data centric focus the design on the data, how the data is represented, etc. Quite often it implies using a database or something similar. The entire program is very much tied into how the data is implemented. The goal is to optimize based on the data being processed.
In an OO approach you are actually trying to hide the data model within objects. Only the object knows what the data is like, how created, access, etc. The goal here is to protect the overall program from being affected by changes in the internal implementation.
How do you paste a PDF into a Word document as an object?
I'm trying to load a large PDF file into a Word document as an object. I don't want to be able to edit the text or anything; I just want it to look just like the PDF does, but inside of a word document. ThanksHow do you paste a PDF into a Word document as an object?
Follow the instructions on this page:
http://digital-vector-maps.com/tutorial-鈥?/a>
If you're using Adobe Reader 8.x the snapshot tool can be found in Tools | Select %26amp; Zoom.
Hope this helps!
Follow the instructions on this page:
http://digital-vector-maps.com/tutorial-鈥?/a>
If you're using Adobe Reader 8.x the snapshot tool can be found in Tools | Select %26amp; Zoom.
Hope this helps!
In adobe illustrator how can you make a photo have a colour object with a black and white background ?
IIn adobe illustrator how can you make a photo have a colour object with a black and white background ?
i don't have illustrator but if you have photoshop you can do the same thing -either
1) desaturate the photo (put it into black and white), then use the history brush to 'paint' the object - wherever you use the brush, it will put it back into colour
or
2) use the 'magnetic lasso' tool to select the outline of the object, then create this into a separate 'layer'. select the background and desaturate it, the object in its separate layer will remain in colour
sorry if that hasn't helped much, let me know if you need any more help on the details of using photoshop
xxIn adobe illustrator how can you make a photo have a colour object with a black and white background ?
there is one option with effects to convert selection vector or rastered image to grayscale,
http://safari.adobepress.com/0789730413/…
though to have one object colored may require a duplicate image with masked areas, or clipping of object in new layer,
http://tutorialoutpost.com/view/1834/ble…
____________________
this type of image edit could be better done in photoshop, if you dont have at this time, try others,
Gimp ~image editor,
http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/stable.h…
..
hmmmm. Illustrator isn't made to work with and edit photos (rasterized images). Sorry to say but the best program for this is photoshop. I hope you have it! ...if not don't forget about the free thirty day trial on their website.
i don't have illustrator but if you have photoshop you can do the same thing -either
1) desaturate the photo (put it into black and white), then use the history brush to 'paint' the object - wherever you use the brush, it will put it back into colour
or
2) use the 'magnetic lasso' tool to select the outline of the object, then create this into a separate 'layer'. select the background and desaturate it, the object in its separate layer will remain in colour
sorry if that hasn't helped much, let me know if you need any more help on the details of using photoshop
xxIn adobe illustrator how can you make a photo have a colour object with a black and white background ?
there is one option with effects to convert selection vector or rastered image to grayscale,
http://safari.adobepress.com/0789730413/…
though to have one object colored may require a duplicate image with masked areas, or clipping of object in new layer,
http://tutorialoutpost.com/view/1834/ble…
____________________
this type of image edit could be better done in photoshop, if you dont have at this time, try others,
Gimp ~image editor,
http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/stable.h…
..
hmmmm. Illustrator isn't made to work with and edit photos (rasterized images). Sorry to say but the best program for this is photoshop. I hope you have it! ...if not don't forget about the free thirty day trial on their website.
Minimum work needed to push object up an incline?
What is the minimum work in kj needed to push a 1015.4-kg car 871 m up along a 9.0潞 incline? Ignore friction.
Please help!!Minimum work needed to push object up an incline?
the difference between the initial energy state, and the final energy state, is simply the height. in other words, the car would have gained gravitational potential energy.
if you draw a 9 degree right triangle, the opposite would be the height, and the hypotenuse would be 871 m (the length of the ramp). so,
sin 9 deg = h/871
=%26gt; h = 871 sin 9
we know m (mass of car) and (acceleration due to gravity)
simply use the above values in mgh
mgh = (871 sin 9) x 1015.4 x 9.81
= 1.36 x 10^3 KJMinimum work needed to push object up an incline?
Let work energy WE = mgh; where m = 1015.4 kg, g = 9.81, h = L sin(theta), and L = 871 m and theta = 9 deg incline. You can do the work
Given you are asking for help on this very rudimentary problem, I think you need a physics lesson more than answer this problem.
The physics is this, WE = Fs is the so-called work function. F is a net force acting along the direction an object m is moved a distance s. In your problem, the only force is the force of gravity, F = W = mg which we call weight. This is true because you discounted friction.
As gravity is always acting inward towards the center of mass M, in this case Earth's mass, it is always acting vertically wrt the ground. So as you push the object up the incline, the only force you are working against is the vertical force of gravity W. And because it is vertical, we need not consider any horizontal components in the work function. That is, we are just concerned with how high h = L sin(theta) the object is raised against the force of gravity.
In other words, in the work function WE = Fs, F = W = mg, the weight of the object, and s = h = L sin(theta) the height to which the object is raised above the starting point for pushing the object up hill. Therefore WE = Fs = mgh. And that's the physics you should learn. With that firmly entrenched, you can work any number of these kinds of problem.
First you will need to find the force required to push the car. You can do this using trig. (let the force of gravity parallel to the incline equal Fgx)
Fg = mg
Fg = (1015.4) (-9.8)
Fg = -9950.92 N
Fgx = sin(9) (-9950.92)
Fgx = -1556.67 N
Fa = -Fgx
Fa = 1556.67 N
To find work applied you multiply the force applied by the distance the car is pushed.
Wa = Fa x d
Wa = (1556.67) (871)
Wa = 1355856.82 J
Wa = 1355.86 KJ is your answer
Note: The is an alternative method to solving this problem. Since you are told to neglect friction you could simply find the hight of the ramp and multiply that by the weight of the object. If there is no friction, the work done to raise the object straight up would be the same as if you pushed the object up the incline.
Please help!!Minimum work needed to push object up an incline?
the difference between the initial energy state, and the final energy state, is simply the height. in other words, the car would have gained gravitational potential energy.
if you draw a 9 degree right triangle, the opposite would be the height, and the hypotenuse would be 871 m (the length of the ramp). so,
sin 9 deg = h/871
=%26gt; h = 871 sin 9
we know m (mass of car) and (acceleration due to gravity)
simply use the above values in mgh
mgh = (871 sin 9) x 1015.4 x 9.81
= 1.36 x 10^3 KJMinimum work needed to push object up an incline?
Let work energy WE = mgh; where m = 1015.4 kg, g = 9.81, h = L sin(theta), and L = 871 m and theta = 9 deg incline. You can do the work
Given you are asking for help on this very rudimentary problem, I think you need a physics lesson more than answer this problem.
The physics is this, WE = Fs is the so-called work function. F is a net force acting along the direction an object m is moved a distance s. In your problem, the only force is the force of gravity, F = W = mg which we call weight. This is true because you discounted friction.
As gravity is always acting inward towards the center of mass M, in this case Earth's mass, it is always acting vertically wrt the ground. So as you push the object up the incline, the only force you are working against is the vertical force of gravity W. And because it is vertical, we need not consider any horizontal components in the work function. That is, we are just concerned with how high h = L sin(theta) the object is raised against the force of gravity.
In other words, in the work function WE = Fs, F = W = mg, the weight of the object, and s = h = L sin(theta) the height to which the object is raised above the starting point for pushing the object up hill. Therefore WE = Fs = mgh. And that's the physics you should learn. With that firmly entrenched, you can work any number of these kinds of problem.
First you will need to find the force required to push the car. You can do this using trig. (let the force of gravity parallel to the incline equal Fgx)
Fg = mg
Fg = (1015.4) (-9.8)
Fg = -9950.92 N
Fgx = sin(9) (-9950.92)
Fgx = -1556.67 N
Fa = -Fgx
Fa = 1556.67 N
To find work applied you multiply the force applied by the distance the car is pushed.
Wa = Fa x d
Wa = (1556.67) (871)
Wa = 1355856.82 J
Wa = 1355.86 KJ is your answer
Note: The is an alternative method to solving this problem. Since you are told to neglect friction you could simply find the hight of the ramp and multiply that by the weight of the object. If there is no friction, the work done to raise the object straight up would be the same as if you pushed the object up the incline.
Why is the general public not given the right to read and object to a bill that is going to be voted on?
Every bill that is passed before congress has about two hundred other pages to it that the general public never gets to see and is not given the right to object to it before it is voted on. Is there any website where you can see full bills that are going to congress and how can you bject to them esspecially if it has some hidden tax hike the public is not notified of it? Do you agree that something has to be done about this?Why is the general public not given the right to read and object to a bill that is going to be voted on?
Because we are a REPRESENTATIVE democracy. Our representatives can %26amp; I hope do read the bills.Why is the general public not given the right to read and object to a bill that is going to be voted on?
Check the links below.
The first two are the federal Senate sites; the next one is the California bills site.
Good luck!
Politics is very complex process and you have to understand many things.
1. Learn which committe is which.
a. Senate
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/committ鈥?/a>
b. House
http://www.house.gov/house/CommitteeWWW.鈥?/a>
This will tell you where your bill is being drafted upon.
2. Know your Senators and Congressman/ woman and understand what is their position.
You can find them at Senate.gov and House.gov.
3. Many lobbyist firms watch these bills and post analysis on their websites. Realize that you some time cannot read long bills and understand what they mean. So become member of these firms/ web sites which interest your issue cause.
Last, even if you have issue with bill that doenot mean Senator/ Congressman/ woman will do what you want. It is very simple to understand ..more people are behind certain issue, more chances are that you will get your wishes.
this country is not a full blown democracy, it's a republic, meaning we elect representatives who we trust to make the decisions that will help our state/county succeed.
I think there is too much trust going into this system, when really, we can't trust these politicians to be thinking of us, since they are so biased in their own way.
Of course we should have the right to vote on all bills the House and Senate pass but then we would live in true democracy .
It is the general public's obligation to research new bills thru the library, internet, etc. That is why we have congressmen and public officials. So, you can write to them!
Because our general public is so large, at over something like 30 billion to-date our government is set up to be run by the elected representatives of the people. The theory is that these elected officials are all about doing what the majority of the people want. Sadly, since WWII it has become more and more common for our elected governing bodies to represent themselves more than the people. I don't know if there is such a website, but if there is I would be amazed. This nonsensical crap of adding on just any old law or provison which has absolutely no relativity to the supposed main article of legislation is a total abuse of the governmental policy this country is supposed to be run by and does need to done away with. How? I don't know, because the people doing it are the ones who would have to vote to make it illegal !!! Maybe if we did away (by voting against them) with all the current senators and representatives and filled congress with all new people we would have a chance......
Here's another good resource. http://www.gpoaccess.gov/bills/index.htm鈥?/a> Any bill that reaches a full vote in the House or Senate will be there before that vote occurs. Versions that do not survive committe may not actual be available for the public to read, but if they didn't survive committee, then they aren't being voted on.
Because we are a REPRESENTATIVE democracy. Our representatives can %26amp; I hope do read the bills.Why is the general public not given the right to read and object to a bill that is going to be voted on?
Check the links below.
The first two are the federal Senate sites; the next one is the California bills site.
Good luck!
Politics is very complex process and you have to understand many things.
1. Learn which committe is which.
a. Senate
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/committ鈥?/a>
b. House
http://www.house.gov/house/CommitteeWWW.鈥?/a>
This will tell you where your bill is being drafted upon.
2. Know your Senators and Congressman/ woman and understand what is their position.
You can find them at Senate.gov and House.gov.
3. Many lobbyist firms watch these bills and post analysis on their websites. Realize that you some time cannot read long bills and understand what they mean. So become member of these firms/ web sites which interest your issue cause.
Last, even if you have issue with bill that doenot mean Senator/ Congressman/ woman will do what you want. It is very simple to understand ..more people are behind certain issue, more chances are that you will get your wishes.
this country is not a full blown democracy, it's a republic, meaning we elect representatives who we trust to make the decisions that will help our state/county succeed.
I think there is too much trust going into this system, when really, we can't trust these politicians to be thinking of us, since they are so biased in their own way.
Of course we should have the right to vote on all bills the House and Senate pass but then we would live in true democracy .
It is the general public's obligation to research new bills thru the library, internet, etc. That is why we have congressmen and public officials. So, you can write to them!
Because our general public is so large, at over something like 30 billion to-date our government is set up to be run by the elected representatives of the people. The theory is that these elected officials are all about doing what the majority of the people want. Sadly, since WWII it has become more and more common for our elected governing bodies to represent themselves more than the people. I don't know if there is such a website, but if there is I would be amazed. This nonsensical crap of adding on just any old law or provison which has absolutely no relativity to the supposed main article of legislation is a total abuse of the governmental policy this country is supposed to be run by and does need to done away with. How? I don't know, because the people doing it are the ones who would have to vote to make it illegal !!! Maybe if we did away (by voting against them) with all the current senators and representatives and filled congress with all new people we would have a chance......
Here's another good resource. http://www.gpoaccess.gov/bills/index.htm鈥?/a> Any bill that reaches a full vote in the House or Senate will be there before that vote occurs. Versions that do not survive committe may not actual be available for the public to read, but if they didn't survive committee, then they aren't being voted on.
What is the most circular object in the world?
Good question.
Rosie O'Donnell.
*cries*What is the most circular object in the world?
Uh....political speeches?What is the most circular object in the world?
glazed doughnut
The circle of life
the earth
wooden sphere
a bubble
your pupils
the world itself?
a circley Circle
um... the earth?
um, the world itself?
a lie
a circle
a square!
Rosie O'Donnell.
*cries*What is the most circular object in the world?
Uh....political speeches?What is the most circular object in the world?
glazed doughnut
The circle of life
the earth
wooden sphere
a bubble
your pupils
the world itself?
a circley Circle
um... the earth?
um, the world itself?
a lie
a circle
a square!
Can an object have a constant speed and at the same time varying a velocity?
Absolutely!
Speed and velocity are not the same.
Speed of merely a scalar with a magnitude whereas velocity is a vector which has both a magnitude AND a direction.
In uniform circular motion, an object can travel around a circular path with a constant speed, but since it is always changing direction (going around the circle), the object is always acceleration, and thus has a constantly changing velocity.
The velocity at any instant of an object traveling around a circular path is pointed tangentially to the circle. As the object moves, the velocity stays tangent to the circle at the location of the object so the velocity is constantly changing. This constant change in velocity is caused by an acceleration....';Centripetal'; acceleration which is always pointed radially inward towards the center of the circle.Can an object have a constant speed and at the same time varying a velocity?
Yes... angular momentum my friend. Velocity is a vector and depends on both speed and direction.
Convince yourself, put a ball on a string and whirl round your head.Can an object have a constant speed and at the same time varying a velocity?
yes .
speed is magnitude of velocity.
velocity has both magnitude and direction.
so if u keep magnitude constant and direction changing u ll have constant speed but varying velocity.
YES, THIS CAN BE HAPPENED ONLY WHEN THE VELOCITY OF THE OBJECT IS CHANGING IN DIRECTION , THE MAGNITUDE OF THE VELOCITY REMAINED CONSTANT.
FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE OBJECT IS MOVING IN A CIRCULER PATH AT A UNIFORM SPEED, IT'S VELOCITY CHANGES AT EVERY MOMENT,BUT SPEED ( WHICH HAS NO DIRECTIONAL PROPERTY ) REMAINS SAME.
Besides the vector-scalar different, my speed can be a constant 60MPH relative to the ground, 10MPH and increasing relative to the exiting car behind me, and -450MPH and decreasing relative to the airplane landing in front of me.
Yes.
Velocity is a vector, in that the *direction* matters as well. Whereas speed is a scalar, in that only the *value* matters.
For example.
Travelling due North at 30mph is a different velocity to travelling due west at 30mph, but the speed is the same.
In circular motion, one is always changing velocity (accelerating) as the direction of motion is always changing. However the speed does not change.
Definitely yes. A particle in a circular motion, with constant speed has varying velocity. (direction changes continuously)
Yes.
Velocity is a vector quantity, speed id not. So velocity includes direction as well as speed.
As an example, put a lump of poster putty on one blade of the ceiling fan above your bed. Lay back, relax, keep your eyes open and switch the fan on. The fan will rotate a a constant number of revolutions per minute. The lump of poster putty will move at a constant speed, that is it will cover a constant number of inches per second. The velocity of the lump will be continually changing because it's direction of travel is continuously changing although it's speed remains constant.
Reward yourself with a few minutes of shuteye.
speed and velocity is the same
speed is the same thing as velocity but the diff is direction.. the answer to ur question yes. because an object can be going the same speed but diff direction
Velocity is speed AND direction. A car driving at 30 miles per hour in a circle is constantly changing it's velocity but not its speed.
Yes, velocity is a vector (it has magnitude and direction) while speed is a scalar ( it has only magnitude). Acceleration is a change in velocity, so if you turn at 10 kph, without slowing down, you still have acceleration.
yeah,,,,,,,,, consider a particle moving in cirlcle with constant speed. but velocity changes at every instant due to continous change in direction....liquid color try itch cream
Speed and velocity are not the same.
Speed of merely a scalar with a magnitude whereas velocity is a vector which has both a magnitude AND a direction.
In uniform circular motion, an object can travel around a circular path with a constant speed, but since it is always changing direction (going around the circle), the object is always acceleration, and thus has a constantly changing velocity.
The velocity at any instant of an object traveling around a circular path is pointed tangentially to the circle. As the object moves, the velocity stays tangent to the circle at the location of the object so the velocity is constantly changing. This constant change in velocity is caused by an acceleration....';Centripetal'; acceleration which is always pointed radially inward towards the center of the circle.Can an object have a constant speed and at the same time varying a velocity?
Yes... angular momentum my friend. Velocity is a vector and depends on both speed and direction.
Convince yourself, put a ball on a string and whirl round your head.Can an object have a constant speed and at the same time varying a velocity?
yes .
speed is magnitude of velocity.
velocity has both magnitude and direction.
so if u keep magnitude constant and direction changing u ll have constant speed but varying velocity.
YES, THIS CAN BE HAPPENED ONLY WHEN THE VELOCITY OF THE OBJECT IS CHANGING IN DIRECTION , THE MAGNITUDE OF THE VELOCITY REMAINED CONSTANT.
FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE OBJECT IS MOVING IN A CIRCULER PATH AT A UNIFORM SPEED, IT'S VELOCITY CHANGES AT EVERY MOMENT,BUT SPEED ( WHICH HAS NO DIRECTIONAL PROPERTY ) REMAINS SAME.
Besides the vector-scalar different, my speed can be a constant 60MPH relative to the ground, 10MPH and increasing relative to the exiting car behind me, and -450MPH and decreasing relative to the airplane landing in front of me.
Yes.
Velocity is a vector, in that the *direction* matters as well. Whereas speed is a scalar, in that only the *value* matters.
For example.
Travelling due North at 30mph is a different velocity to travelling due west at 30mph, but the speed is the same.
In circular motion, one is always changing velocity (accelerating) as the direction of motion is always changing. However the speed does not change.
Definitely yes. A particle in a circular motion, with constant speed has varying velocity. (direction changes continuously)
Yes.
Velocity is a vector quantity, speed id not. So velocity includes direction as well as speed.
As an example, put a lump of poster putty on one blade of the ceiling fan above your bed. Lay back, relax, keep your eyes open and switch the fan on. The fan will rotate a a constant number of revolutions per minute. The lump of poster putty will move at a constant speed, that is it will cover a constant number of inches per second. The velocity of the lump will be continually changing because it's direction of travel is continuously changing although it's speed remains constant.
Reward yourself with a few minutes of shuteye.
speed and velocity is the same
speed is the same thing as velocity but the diff is direction.. the answer to ur question yes. because an object can be going the same speed but diff direction
Velocity is speed AND direction. A car driving at 30 miles per hour in a circle is constantly changing it's velocity but not its speed.
Yes, velocity is a vector (it has magnitude and direction) while speed is a scalar ( it has only magnitude). Acceleration is a change in velocity, so if you turn at 10 kph, without slowing down, you still have acceleration.
yeah,,,,,,,,, consider a particle moving in cirlcle with constant speed. but velocity changes at every instant due to continous change in direction....
If you quintuple the frequency of a vibrating object, by what factor will its period change?
Thanks!If you quintuple the frequency of a vibrating object, by what factor will its period change?
Quintuple is increase 5 fold?
Then the period is decreased 5 fold - it becomes 1/5 th of what it was.If you quintuple the frequency of a vibrating object, by what factor will its period change?
Period = 1 / Frequency
So if frequence is five times as much, Period will change by 1/5
Freq is inversely proportional to wavelength.
c = wave * freq
Quintuple is increase 5 fold?
Then the period is decreased 5 fold - it becomes 1/5 th of what it was.If you quintuple the frequency of a vibrating object, by what factor will its period change?
Period = 1 / Frequency
So if frequence is five times as much, Period will change by 1/5
Freq is inversely proportional to wavelength.
c = wave * freq
If an object's gravitational potential energy changes, does it's velocity and momentum change as well? How?
Maybe, maybe not. Depends on how it is done.
No. A ball is rolling across a horizontal table. The table is lifted (or lowered) without vibration and keeping it perfectly horizontal. Velocity and momentum do not change, though the ball is higher (or lower) and has more (less) gravational PE)
Yes. A ball is rolling across a horizontal table. The table is lifted on one end so the ball rolls up hill (or lowered so the ball rolls down hill) both velocity and momentum change. The ball higher and has more (or less) Gravational PE
No. A ball is rolling across a horizontal table. The table is lifted (or lowered) without vibration and keeping it perfectly horizontal. Velocity and momentum do not change, though the ball is higher (or lower) and has more (less) gravational PE)
Yes. A ball is rolling across a horizontal table. The table is lifted on one end so the ball rolls up hill (or lowered so the ball rolls down hill) both velocity and momentum change. The ball higher and has more (or less) Gravational PE
Do Christians object to the Avatar cartoon because he uses all the elements, instead of worshiping a God?
Oh my gawd you blasphemer!!!!!!! How dare you!!!!!
Oh wait..
Do Christians object to the Avatar cartoon because he uses all the elements, instead of worshiping a God?
Lol. You make it sound as if Christians object to every little thing.
I personally do not object to it. I actually love the cartoon. They do not worship god because it is not a christian cartoon, it is a cartoon for all to enjoy, so it is neutral. I wouldn't expect for it to talk about god anyway.Do Christians object to the Avatar cartoon because he uses all the elements, instead of worshiping a God?
i dont,
but many i know do!
some of the older crowd here may remeber
the whole bewitched ordeal
and slightly younger the whole
Sabrina teenage witch
fiasco
yeah non Christians don't deserve entertainment.
i literally heard once,';we should go back to burning them';, this is from a pastor!
follow christ not a church
I'm Christian and I don't know of any reason why they would be. They're not worshiping the elements in the show, they're mainly manipulating them.
Though, I'm not hard core Christian.
some of the really extremist people object it because the avatar is the ';chosen one';
they don't like my favorite tv show
or my favorite book series(harry potter)
I think the Avatar cartoon fits you perfectly. It's very odd and has nothing to do with reality.
Wait, people are objecting to Avatar? Seriously?
They reject it because it's entertainment that doesn't force christian opinion. Look at what they said about Harry Potter
Hmm, never really thought about that when watching it. All I knew that it was the best new cartoon that Nick made.
no its just a funny cartoon
Oh wait..
Do Christians object to the Avatar cartoon because he uses all the elements, instead of worshiping a God?
Lol. You make it sound as if Christians object to every little thing.
I personally do not object to it. I actually love the cartoon. They do not worship god because it is not a christian cartoon, it is a cartoon for all to enjoy, so it is neutral. I wouldn't expect for it to talk about god anyway.Do Christians object to the Avatar cartoon because he uses all the elements, instead of worshiping a God?
i dont,
but many i know do!
some of the older crowd here may remeber
the whole bewitched ordeal
and slightly younger the whole
Sabrina teenage witch
fiasco
yeah non Christians don't deserve entertainment.
i literally heard once,';we should go back to burning them';, this is from a pastor!
follow christ not a church
I'm Christian and I don't know of any reason why they would be. They're not worshiping the elements in the show, they're mainly manipulating them.
Though, I'm not hard core Christian.
some of the really extremist people object it because the avatar is the ';chosen one';
they don't like my favorite tv show
or my favorite book series(harry potter)
I think the Avatar cartoon fits you perfectly. It's very odd and has nothing to do with reality.
Wait, people are objecting to Avatar? Seriously?
They reject it because it's entertainment that doesn't force christian opinion. Look at what they said about Harry Potter
Hmm, never really thought about that when watching it. All I knew that it was the best new cartoon that Nick made.
no its just a funny cartoon
A 30000000kg object travels 500m in 30secs.Radius from the center of the path is 30m.What's the angular speed?
I'm sorry I don't remember the exact wording of the question but this is all the information given. I would really appreciate any help :)A 30000000kg object travels 500m in 30secs.Radius from the center of the path is 30m.What's the angular speed?
Angular speed, w = 胃/t, where 胃 = angular displacement, and
t = time
r = radius = 30m
s = 500m
t = 30 sec
Therefore, s = 胃r
胃 = s/r = 500m/30m = 16.67 rad
Hence, w = 16.67rad/30sec = 0.56 rad/sec
ANSWER: w = 0.56 rad/sec, angular speed
Hope this helps.
teddy boy
Angular speed, w = 胃/t, where 胃 = angular displacement, and
t = time
r = radius = 30m
s = 500m
t = 30 sec
Therefore, s = 胃r
胃 = s/r = 500m/30m = 16.67 rad
Hence, w = 16.67rad/30sec = 0.56 rad/sec
ANSWER: w = 0.56 rad/sec, angular speed
Hope this helps.
teddy boy
Why are there different measurements for the same object?
well i want to know!!! and its a question on my homework and i just cant put it into wordsWhy are there different measurements for the same object?
You would need to put more info for an answer. You must have more info?
You would need to put more info for an answer. You must have more info?
What's wrong with being seen as an ''object''?
In movies, games, and literature, a lot of the stories are focused on a certain highly-powerful artifact.
Objects are not subject to old age, disabilities, or illnesses. They can only break, but so can humans.
Some of the most treasured and valuable things in the world are objects. (the Mona Lisa, computers, money, etc.)What's wrong with being seen as an ''object''?
Because people are not objects.
I don't care how treasured the Mona Lisa is. The Mona Lisa is a painting, not a person. Someone owns The Mona Lisa. No one owns me but me.
I don't care about the advantages of being an object. ';No price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.';
Friedrich NietzscheWhat's wrong with being seen as an ''object''?
What did the tool say?
I never listen to them, they aren't good for much besides sex. ;)
A living being should never be seen as an object! but statues paintings etc.. should be seen as what they are, nothing but an artists impression of what he or she See's at a snapshot in time.
Actually, the notion of ';objectification'; is problematic in many ways. The human body IS an object. It is also a PERSON.
The issue with which those who speak of ';objectification'; are concerned is that the personhood is denied or minimized, that human worth is reduced to the human BODY'S worth and as a body, it exists only in relation to the feelings, desires, beliefs, and intentions of other persons. The human body, qua object, is not recognized as having feelings, desires, beliefs, and intentions of its own.
Objectification is often conflated with aesthetic appreciation, but not all aesthetic appreciation of the body denies that the body is also a person. And objectification is in fact a matter of degree... the subtext of recognizing that it IS a person being TREATED as an object is part of the desire to see degradation, humiliation, and domination that, e.g. some pornography appeals to.
An ';object'; is not a human being. You don't have to ask permission from an object to use it or do something to it. I imagine you would care a lot if you were treated like this.
You shouldn't look at ';objectification'; as literally turning a person in to an object. People who are objectified are still subject to old age, illness, etc. ';Objectification'; instead refers to ceasing to respect a person's autonomy, and instead seeing them as a means to your ends, much like computers and money are. Slaves used to be treated as objects. Animals still are.
the mona lisa, computers, and money ARE objects. Humans are not.
Objects don't have feelings. People do. And negative emotions can be self-destructive or destructive toward others, depending on how they are expressed.
Idiot
Would you want to be looked upon as an OBJECT. Soemthing that could be THROWN AWAY, Soemthing that could be BEATEN AND HURT. An OBJECT ISN'T HUMAN.
Everyone human deserves HUMAN RIGHTS regardless of their gender, race, ethnicity, religion ETC ETC
You shud know that..
It denies humanity.
Mona lisa may smile, but she smiles because a man painted her to do so, not because she is expressing her human emotion.
Its too shallow... it makes you feel like a tool. A nameless, faceless, ';thing';. Who you are and what you are about becomes unimportant. Its like being a car. I'm a person.. not a thing.
Objects are something people own NO-ONE owns me!
Um... because we are human beings with feelings, wants, and needs?
I'm waiting to be seen as a sex object !!
So, objectify away !
';Some of the most treasured and valuable things in the world are objects';
Thats just it, friend. I'M NOT A THING. I like to look at pretty things. Not be a pretty thing.
Objectification denies a person's humanity.
Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals, etc. were denied their humanity during the Holocaust.
Slaves were denied their humanity.
You can't really see this as a ';good thing';, or even a ';neutral'; thing if you REALLY understand the concept, and all of it's implications.
Objects have no rights. They are merely possessions, to be acted upon. No human should be thought of as an ';object.';
There is something awesomely distinct and different between
alive humans and inanimate objects. Humans have skills, memory, can solve problems, etc, etc.
I would consider it both the ultimate insult and the product of a rather dead brain to consider a person an object.
The ';dead brain'; is has probably been overpowered by young hormones. Hopefully this is a temporary death, the young man saved by more maturity.
People would see me as a piece of poor contemporary art rather than a seascape by Turner. I wouldn't want that.
As you know...objects are not human...most of us want to be treated as human beings...that's what's wrong.
Having said that....there are ';times'; when some of us don't mind being treated as a ';sex object';...but that desire lasts until we fall asleep, exhausted from the throes of passion...when we wake up in the morning...we want to be treated with respect and adoration...like a human being, not an object.
now....tell me you'd like to be treated like a painting or a watch.
People tend to see objects in a selfish way: in terms of use value and as property. Not really good qualities for relationships between humans. This is a philosophy question though. If you mean 'objectification', I can't answer.
EDIT: This is a lost battle now. Just let it go. You're making a fool of yourself.
That's all well and good, but we're PEOPLE, with brains and hearts and mouths.
In tech college I was looked upon as a sex object, so much so that most guys tripped over their own two feet to ask me out on a date. My only danger was allowing it to go to my head, which I never did; managed to keep my head on straight; came quite useful I'll give you that. The only part I hated was allowing myself to be talked into entering a beauty contest, truthfully I felt like a slap of meat or sex for sale; incidentally my convincers goal was to lay me after it was over; no he didn't get to far either..liquid color try itch cream
Objects are not subject to old age, disabilities, or illnesses. They can only break, but so can humans.
Some of the most treasured and valuable things in the world are objects. (the Mona Lisa, computers, money, etc.)What's wrong with being seen as an ''object''?
Because people are not objects.
I don't care how treasured the Mona Lisa is. The Mona Lisa is a painting, not a person. Someone owns The Mona Lisa. No one owns me but me.
I don't care about the advantages of being an object. ';No price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.';
Friedrich NietzscheWhat's wrong with being seen as an ''object''?
What did the tool say?
I never listen to them, they aren't good for much besides sex. ;)
A living being should never be seen as an object! but statues paintings etc.. should be seen as what they are, nothing but an artists impression of what he or she See's at a snapshot in time.
Actually, the notion of ';objectification'; is problematic in many ways. The human body IS an object. It is also a PERSON.
The issue with which those who speak of ';objectification'; are concerned is that the personhood is denied or minimized, that human worth is reduced to the human BODY'S worth and as a body, it exists only in relation to the feelings, desires, beliefs, and intentions of other persons. The human body, qua object, is not recognized as having feelings, desires, beliefs, and intentions of its own.
Objectification is often conflated with aesthetic appreciation, but not all aesthetic appreciation of the body denies that the body is also a person. And objectification is in fact a matter of degree... the subtext of recognizing that it IS a person being TREATED as an object is part of the desire to see degradation, humiliation, and domination that, e.g. some pornography appeals to.
An ';object'; is not a human being. You don't have to ask permission from an object to use it or do something to it. I imagine you would care a lot if you were treated like this.
You shouldn't look at ';objectification'; as literally turning a person in to an object. People who are objectified are still subject to old age, illness, etc. ';Objectification'; instead refers to ceasing to respect a person's autonomy, and instead seeing them as a means to your ends, much like computers and money are. Slaves used to be treated as objects. Animals still are.
the mona lisa, computers, and money ARE objects. Humans are not.
Objects don't have feelings. People do. And negative emotions can be self-destructive or destructive toward others, depending on how they are expressed.
Idiot
Would you want to be looked upon as an OBJECT. Soemthing that could be THROWN AWAY, Soemthing that could be BEATEN AND HURT. An OBJECT ISN'T HUMAN.
Everyone human deserves HUMAN RIGHTS regardless of their gender, race, ethnicity, religion ETC ETC
You shud know that..
It denies humanity.
Mona lisa may smile, but she smiles because a man painted her to do so, not because she is expressing her human emotion.
Its too shallow... it makes you feel like a tool. A nameless, faceless, ';thing';. Who you are and what you are about becomes unimportant. Its like being a car. I'm a person.. not a thing.
Objects are something people own NO-ONE owns me!
Um... because we are human beings with feelings, wants, and needs?
I'm waiting to be seen as a sex object !!
So, objectify away !
';Some of the most treasured and valuable things in the world are objects';
Thats just it, friend. I'M NOT A THING. I like to look at pretty things. Not be a pretty thing.
Objectification denies a person's humanity.
Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals, etc. were denied their humanity during the Holocaust.
Slaves were denied their humanity.
You can't really see this as a ';good thing';, or even a ';neutral'; thing if you REALLY understand the concept, and all of it's implications.
Objects have no rights. They are merely possessions, to be acted upon. No human should be thought of as an ';object.';
There is something awesomely distinct and different between
alive humans and inanimate objects. Humans have skills, memory, can solve problems, etc, etc.
I would consider it both the ultimate insult and the product of a rather dead brain to consider a person an object.
The ';dead brain'; is has probably been overpowered by young hormones. Hopefully this is a temporary death, the young man saved by more maturity.
People would see me as a piece of poor contemporary art rather than a seascape by Turner. I wouldn't want that.
As you know...objects are not human...most of us want to be treated as human beings...that's what's wrong.
Having said that....there are ';times'; when some of us don't mind being treated as a ';sex object';...but that desire lasts until we fall asleep, exhausted from the throes of passion...when we wake up in the morning...we want to be treated with respect and adoration...like a human being, not an object.
now....tell me you'd like to be treated like a painting or a watch.
People tend to see objects in a selfish way: in terms of use value and as property. Not really good qualities for relationships between humans. This is a philosophy question though. If you mean 'objectification', I can't answer.
EDIT: This is a lost battle now. Just let it go. You're making a fool of yourself.
That's all well and good, but we're PEOPLE, with brains and hearts and mouths.
In tech college I was looked upon as a sex object, so much so that most guys tripped over their own two feet to ask me out on a date. My only danger was allowing it to go to my head, which I never did; managed to keep my head on straight; came quite useful I'll give you that. The only part I hated was allowing myself to be talked into entering a beauty contest, truthfully I felt like a slap of meat or sex for sale; incidentally my convincers goal was to lay me after it was over; no he didn't get to far either..
If an object of 1.2 g/cm cubed is placed in pure liquid water will it sink, float, or remain suspended?
I should think it will sink. Water has a density of 1.0 g/cm cubed, so it is heavier than water. But, there are more things that can effect sinking or floating. Needles are denser than water but can float due to surface tension. For things that aren'e small and flat, sink.If an object of 1.2 g/cm cubed is placed in pure liquid water will it sink, float, or remain suspended?
well, water is 1g per cubic cm. So, object is more dense than water. What happens when you place an object that is more dense than water...in water?
well, water is 1g per cubic cm. So, object is more dense than water. What happens when you place an object that is more dense than water...in water?
Can an object have a zero instantaneous velocity and a non-zero acceleration?
thanks.Can an object have a zero instantaneous velocity and a non-zero acceleration?
Yes. Consider a ball thrown straight up. As it peaks, its velocity is zero, but it's still accelerating at -9.8m/s^2Can an object have a zero instantaneous velocity and a non-zero acceleration?
yes, and the way to find this is through calculus. a simple way to explaining this is that there is this thing called a derivative, its tangent to a function.
so if your function is for displacement, you can take the derivative for velocity
at any time t, the V is instantaneous, so it can be 0
by another derivative you get acc. from there, you plug in the same number but get a different answer
yes.
example, an object starts out with a forward velocity, and a negative acceleration. At some point, the object slows down and the velocity = 0 and then becomes negative, ie, it moves the other way.
.
Yes. Consider a ball thrown straight up. As it peaks, its velocity is zero, but it's still accelerating at -9.8m/s^2Can an object have a zero instantaneous velocity and a non-zero acceleration?
yes, and the way to find this is through calculus. a simple way to explaining this is that there is this thing called a derivative, its tangent to a function.
so if your function is for displacement, you can take the derivative for velocity
at any time t, the V is instantaneous, so it can be 0
by another derivative you get acc. from there, you plug in the same number but get a different answer
yes.
example, an object starts out with a forward velocity, and a negative acceleration. At some point, the object slows down and the velocity = 0 and then becomes negative, ie, it moves the other way.
.
Name a object that relates to business that I can give a mini speech on?
Some examples that other people are doing is like credit cards...because it teaches you to be responsible. I'm a funny guy so anything that you can think of that is funny is cool too. I just got to give a speech about how an object or item relates to business.Name a object that relates to business that I can give a mini speech on?
A simple deck of cards or a pair of dice (pair o' dice) which can represent the big time business of gaming or gambling now present in an increasing number of states thanks to the inluence of IGT or International Gaming Technology of Reno, Nevada. Indian Gaming is the ultimate Native American bloodless revenge against whitey for stealing land. A matchbook from a legal Nevada brothel can lead you to ultimate riches as the potential owner/founder of a famous Nevada landmark also known as a ';cat house'; and I do not mean ';pet sanctuary.'; Start your speech off by striking a match and you will get their attention. eMail me if you want stats and additional data to support my ';wild'; claims also supported by the IRS. LOL.Name a object that relates to business that I can give a mini speech on?
Can you juggle?
communication
Bike riding: it teaches you how important it is to conserve energy.
Make a video of you riding a bike as fast as you can on a flat surface; then, attempt to ride the bike up a steep incline, causing you to run out of energy and fall down...Be creative, maybe incorporating food as fuel, as well.
Good luck.
Condoms, it helps people avoid child support.
The cup of coffee. **
Where would a business be without that morning cup of coffee?
There are strangely convincing theories about how coffee triggered revolution, colonialism, slavery, and economic inequality.
The Industrial Revolution depended on it.
Read this:
Coffee and the Industrial Revolution
Coffee's growing popularity complemented and sustained the Industrial Revolution, which began in Great Britain during the 1700s and spread to other parts of Europe and North America in the early 1800s. The development of the factory system transformed lives, attitudes, and eating habits. Most people previously had worked at home or in rural craft workshops. They had not divided their time so strictly between work and leisure, and they were largely their own masters. People typically ate five times a day, beginning with soup for breakfast.
With the advent of textile and iron mills, workers migrated to the cities, where the working classes lived in appalling conditions. As women and children entered the organized workforce, there was less time to run a household and cook meals. Those still trying to make a living at home were paid less and less for their work. Thus, European lacemakers in the early nineteenth century lived almost exclusively on coffee and bread. Because coffee was stimulating and warm, it provided an illusion of nutrition.
';Seated uninterruptedly at their looms, in order to earn the few pennies necessary for their bare survival,'; writes one historian, ';[workers had] no time for the lengthy preparation of a midday or evening meal. And weak coffee was drank as a last stimulant for the weakened stomach which鈥攆or a brief time at least鈥攕tilled the gnawing pangs of hunger.'; The drink of the aristocracy had become the necessary drug of the masses, and morning coffee replaced beer soup for breakfast.
Big Mac Meal - the adverage minimum wage is usually about equal to the price of a McDonalds meal.
Checkbooks....and hating to wait in line behind the old lady that refuses to get a debit card. Plus, it slows a store's sales.
The telephone, it lets people communicate.
A simple deck of cards or a pair of dice (pair o' dice) which can represent the big time business of gaming or gambling now present in an increasing number of states thanks to the inluence of IGT or International Gaming Technology of Reno, Nevada. Indian Gaming is the ultimate Native American bloodless revenge against whitey for stealing land. A matchbook from a legal Nevada brothel can lead you to ultimate riches as the potential owner/founder of a famous Nevada landmark also known as a ';cat house'; and I do not mean ';pet sanctuary.'; Start your speech off by striking a match and you will get their attention. eMail me if you want stats and additional data to support my ';wild'; claims also supported by the IRS. LOL.Name a object that relates to business that I can give a mini speech on?
Can you juggle?
communication
Bike riding: it teaches you how important it is to conserve energy.
Make a video of you riding a bike as fast as you can on a flat surface; then, attempt to ride the bike up a steep incline, causing you to run out of energy and fall down...Be creative, maybe incorporating food as fuel, as well.
Good luck.
Condoms, it helps people avoid child support.
The cup of coffee. **
Where would a business be without that morning cup of coffee?
There are strangely convincing theories about how coffee triggered revolution, colonialism, slavery, and economic inequality.
The Industrial Revolution depended on it.
Read this:
Coffee and the Industrial Revolution
Coffee's growing popularity complemented and sustained the Industrial Revolution, which began in Great Britain during the 1700s and spread to other parts of Europe and North America in the early 1800s. The development of the factory system transformed lives, attitudes, and eating habits. Most people previously had worked at home or in rural craft workshops. They had not divided their time so strictly between work and leisure, and they were largely their own masters. People typically ate five times a day, beginning with soup for breakfast.
With the advent of textile and iron mills, workers migrated to the cities, where the working classes lived in appalling conditions. As women and children entered the organized workforce, there was less time to run a household and cook meals. Those still trying to make a living at home were paid less and less for their work. Thus, European lacemakers in the early nineteenth century lived almost exclusively on coffee and bread. Because coffee was stimulating and warm, it provided an illusion of nutrition.
';Seated uninterruptedly at their looms, in order to earn the few pennies necessary for their bare survival,'; writes one historian, ';[workers had] no time for the lengthy preparation of a midday or evening meal. And weak coffee was drank as a last stimulant for the weakened stomach which鈥攆or a brief time at least鈥攕tilled the gnawing pangs of hunger.'; The drink of the aristocracy had become the necessary drug of the masses, and morning coffee replaced beer soup for breakfast.
Big Mac Meal - the adverage minimum wage is usually about equal to the price of a McDonalds meal.
Checkbooks....and hating to wait in line behind the old lady that refuses to get a debit card. Plus, it slows a store's sales.
The telephone, it lets people communicate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)