[Archive!] Pure mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc.: brain-training problems not related to trade in any way - page 40
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
если бы вместо шасси у самолета была бы использована воздушная подушка - то да, взлетел бы.
"земля"-"транспортер"-"самолет"-"воздух" - это одна система.
So it's the same thing! In this case.
Why does it need wheels at all? On take-off.
They provide NOTHING to do with the ground.
This is a game with negative MO.
It is known to invariably lead to ruin if a large number of bets are placed. In other words, it is not recommended to play it, but it is possible to win. A simple analysis shows that if you have a desire to play and no shortage of cash, a single entry of the entire deposit is an optimal strategy for games with negative expected payout. This minimizes your opponent's stat advantage and thus maximizes our chances of winning by chance.
We enter the game once and up to our tomatoes!
there are 3 equal solutions in this problem (at $36 depo). One is really the first move to bet everything. There are 2 other equivalent first betting options
Если перевернуть меня - останется тоже самое. Если перевернуть всю систему - с силой моей тяжести.
Exactly the whole system!
This is the scenario played out in the ball-box system - when you float up, the pressure will increase by the hydrostatic pressure, which is dP=pgh, where p is the density of the medium, g is the acceleration of gravity, h is the height of the barrel.
And notice, now you're pushing on the floor (the one that used to be the ceiling, with twice the force)!
So it's the same thing! In this case.
Why does it need wheels at all? On take-off.
They provide NOTHING to do with the ground.
they provide minimum friction, thus reducing the drag on acceleration.
Есть 2 других равнозначных варианта первой ставки
Hmmm...
Коллеги я выбываю из спора по причине более важных дел на текущий момент. Сорри.
Моделировать динамику задачи в VISSIM ради этого - не буду. Все при своем и лирики и физики :о)
There is and can be no more important business in the current situation
Interesting movie - a hundred and fifty passengers haven't been able to leave since last night, waiting for our unanimous decision
I'll complain.
Two blondes are flying on a plane.
- Oh, look, the plane's wings are shaking! It's probably going to fall off!
- Stupid, it's flapping!
And you say it won't take off :-))
они обеспечивают минимальное трение, уменьшая тем самым сопротивление при разгоне
The problem is theoretical and friction is simply neglectedДве блондинки летят в самолете.
- Ой, смотри, у самолета крылья трясутся! Наверное, сейчас отвалятся!
- Дура, он же ими машет!
I thought the last sentence would be, "What's a blonde's name? "The problem is theoretical and friction is simply neglected
the solution to the problem depends on it. If it is infinitely large, it will not take off, if it is small, it will take off. If it is medium, it will depend on the thrust of the plane - whether it is enough to overcome it and accelerate. When the plane accelerates on a stationary runway, the work of friction force is less than when it is moving. The wheel has friction too, but it is redistributed into the friction of the axle bearings, etc. So for simplicity we can consider an aeroplane taking off on skis for example. Which is realistic when there's little friction (in the snow).