[Archive!] Pure mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc.: brain-training problems not related to trade in any way - page 46
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
ОК, страсти поутихли, можно вбрасывать новую задачку.
Есть светящаяся лампа. В комнате много зеркал, в которых она отражается. Как светлее - с зеркалами или без них?
Of course, it's brighter with mirrors. It's like asking which room is brighter, the white one or the black one?
Sorry, I'll be gone for a while and won't be posting here as much.
OK, passions have subsided, a new challenge can be thrown in.
There's a luminous lamp. There are many mirrors in the room in which it is reflected. Is it brighter with or without mirrors?
They can't solve my problems yet.
-
The answer is brighter with mirrors. The brightness depends on the degree of reflection of the walls. The degree of light reflection from mirrors is over 97% and that's a lot.
By the way, if anyone doesn't believe you, it's easy to check. There is a software program called Dialux: http://www.dialux.com
It calculates illuminance. Absolutely free of charge and in Russian.
Why is it lighter? It's not obvious - if you remember that light is of a wave nature, and light sources in mirrors are coherent with the real source.
Why is it lighter? It's not obvious - if you remember that light is of a wave nature, and light sources in mirrors are coherent with the real source.
My understanding is that lighter means higher illuminance. Illuminance on what? On the shirt of the person, figuratively speaking, who is standing in the room. The illuminance is directly proportional to the luminous flux of the lamp which is constant and inversely proportional to the surface area of the room which is also constant. It also depends on the reflection/absorption coefficient of the surfaces. What does coherence and wave nature have to do with it?
By the way, you can design this very room with mirrors and hang a lamp in it in the program to which I gave a link. Give it a try.
Как-то надо поднимать интеллектуальный уровень форума.
I guess that's what they do :) It's like they're solving university entrance level problems, which means they're at school level. :) Imagine how much clearer it became, what all their cleverest ideas about markets and trading are worth. :) Where do the others live to learn from? :)
They can't solve my problems yet.
-
The answer is that it's lighter with mirrors. Luminance depends on the degree of reflection of the walls. The degree of light reflection from mirrors is over 97% and that's a lot.
By the way, if anyone doesn't believe you, it's easy to check. There is a software program called Dialux: http://www.dialux.com
It calculates illuminance. Completely free and in Russian.
Here's the dick you can just walk away and not listen to the nonsense. Not lighter!!! It's obvious!!! How is it that you kindly use DSLRs to increase illumination? This is the second time you've invented the "perpetual motion machine"
Ндя. Ну я могу понять людей в возрасте. Но мне казалось что на этом форуме в основном до 30-и. Задачки-то простые. С мухами-то ну вообще позорище. Базовые законы физики даже нарушаете. Как-то надо поднимать интеллектуальный уровень форума.
and what are your answers about taking off and flies?
I borrowed 100 roubles from Mathemat.
I went to the shop and lost it.
I met a friend. I borrowed 50 rubles from her.
I bought two chocolates for 10. I had 30 rubles left.
I gave 30 rubles to Mathemat, and I still owed 70.
And my friend 50. Total 120. Plus I have 2 chocolates.
That makes 140! Where's the 10 rubles?
а какие у вас ответы про взлет и мух?
The plane will take off, it's not going anywhere.
With a glider, the problem is different, for the simple reason that the mechanics of the system change (the thrust is external to the aircraft and is transmitted by a cable). And the condition of the problem is not met. The landing gear will just slip. (you just have to be an engineer, not a theorist :o).
Sergey, sorry, but it is too much. It is difficult even to imagine, that you graduated from MAI. All the same, it's a respectable firm.
The words "mechanics of the system changes" make you want to cry. You'd think the aircraft would know the source of the force that pushes it forward: the tether, the propeller, the jet engine or your own hands. Not only does it know, it has the freedom to choose its behaviour according to it. It's like "the cable will do it, but the propeller won't". Where's the physics in that, Sergei? And where do you put the laws of physics?
Forget your MAI for 5 minutes, remember 8th grade. An elementary Newtonian dynamics problem. Draw a plane and all the forces that are applied to it on takeoff. You do the rest.
I'm not discussing this topic with you anymore. I am afraid for my psyche.
PS
Just one line about the plane:
http://forum.ixbt.com/topic.cgi?id=64:417
There are more of us :o)))) at least by a few percent :o(((
It just goes to show how few people know how to use the little bits of knowledge that their teachers are trying so hard and threatening their lives to drum into their heads. :-(
Though it is an axiom that there are more dark ones.