Pure maths, physics, logic (braingames.ru): non-trade-related brain games - page 62

New comment
 
TheXpert:
Considering all of the above.

You want to drag me by the ears and say that friction has decreased by exactly the amount of energy lost in the snow?

you'll tear your ears off )

With very little friction...

synonym - can be ignored

 
Mischek:

synonymous - can be ignored

if neglected, the answer is that they won't stop at all))
 
Mischek:

synonymous -- can be ignored.

no. synonym -- everything happens over quite a long period of time. This is so that a meaningful amount of snow has time to attack.
 
Avals:
if you ignore it, the answer is that they won't stop at all))
Oh man, that's right (!)
 

How can you prove in figures that friction reduction, which we do not know, is exactly equal to the loss of energy from the lost mass?

The relationship between friction and mass may not be linear in purely constructive terms.

 
Mischek:

The relationship between friction and mass may not be linear in purely constructive terms.

Just don't. It depends on velocity (purely structurally) and on weight (not mass) and contact area.

But there's no mention of that in the problem. So it's linear with friction coefficient so-and-so.

And it doesn't depend on energy in any way.

 
TheXpert:
Because agreater force is applied to a greater mass. So the acceleration remains the same.

I forget the physics, but it seems that the kinetic energy of the snow cart will be greater, so the friction force needs to do more work to make the cart stop. But this can happen not only by making the cart roll longer, but also by increasing the friction force due to the increased mass of the cart.

 
TheXpert:

Don't do that. Depends on the speed (purely constructive) and the weight (not mass) and the area of contact.

But there is no mention of this in the problem. So it's linear with a coefficient of friction.

And it doesn't depend on energy at all.

It doesn't depend on energy, of course.

But now you have to prove in figures that the skateboard I came off perpendicularly will go the same distance as the skateboard you're riding, assuming that we started with the same speed of inertia.

and prove through the change in friction

 
Mischek:

and prove through the change in friction

Oh, shit :)

starting from the moment of jumping off.

The speed of my skate V mass M + m friction a*(M + m)*g acceleration a*g

Speed of your skate V mass m friction a*(m)*g acceleration a*g

The acceleration is the same. there is no point in going any further.

 
Well, skateboards can't go the same way. I see them under my window every day, for fuck's sake. There you go again with the spherical horses in a vacuum.
1...555657585960616263646566676869...229
New comment
Reason: