[Archive!] Pure mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc.: brain-training problems not related to trade in any way - page 64
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
Absolutely
Suppose the radiator is electric. It is not regulated by a thermostat - there is no relay. I argue that it will heat better and consume correspondingly more electricity if a fan is installed next to it. I argue that.
1. Then there will be a dependence of aircraft speed on transporter speed. Which in the normal case is eliminated by an instantaneous increase in landing gear speed.
2. Ok, then what is the speed ratio of the car on the transporter? After all, in order to stay in place - the speeds of the web and the wheels must coincide. Don't they?
1. They won't. Realise - the wheels are spinning freely, according to how the transporter requires it (this is where your instantaneous increase in wheel speed comes into play, although it's not really instantaneous, but simply requires no energy expenditure and no adventuring forces due to the lack of friction and inertia). And the plane doesn't care how they spin, it only needs them to break its connection to the ground.
2. The car has everything as you say. The reason is simple - the wheels are rigidly connected to both the ground (via the touch point) and the engine (via the gearbox).
Допустим радиатор электрический. Не регулируется при помощи термореле - реле там нет. Утверждаю, что он станет греть лучше и потреблять соответственно больше электроэнергии, если рядом с ним установить вентилятор. Я это утверждаю.
Pity
Are you just asserting or are we supposed to exchange arguments ?
Or shall we go out ?
С коэффициентом этим разбираться не хочется, но за кпд вступлюсь.
Сколько бы ни перекачивала тепла тепловая машина в ед. времени, общая работа = это к-во тепла + затраты энергии в тепловой машине. Поэтому отношение полезной работы (перекачаного тепла) к общей всегда будет меньше 1.
The refrigerator efficiency ηx is determined by the ratio of the amount of heat extracted from the freezer compartment to the work required to do so. For an ideal freezer, it is equal to
The refrigeration efficiency of a heat pump ηn is determined by the ratio of the amount of heat received by the space to the external work required for this. In the ideal case, it is equal to
Самолет (реактивный или винтовой) стоит на взлётной полосе с подвижным покрытием (типа транспортёра). Покрытие может двигаться против направления взлёта самолёта, то есть ему навстречу. Оно имеет систему управления, которая отслеживает и подстраивает скорость движения полотна таким образом, чтобы скорость вращения колёс самолёта была равна скорости движения полотна.
Вопрос: сможет ли самолёт разбежаться по этому полотну и взлететь?
As it should be for this kind of problem, the wording is not quite correct. In particular, the rotation speed of the wheels of the plane and the speed of the web cannot be equal because they are measured in different units.
But we do want to solve this problem, so we have to give it some meaning ourselves. Suppose that the wording is simply sloppy and that it is not the speed of rotation that is meant. Then what?
If it is wheel speed, then in an ideal problem it will always be equal to the speed of the plane relative to the web (as well as the speed of the web relative to the plane). So there would be nothing to adjust. And nothing will prevent the plane from taking off. Except for a bad wind :)
The tweak would make sense if both speeds (of the plane and the web) were measured relative to the ground or relative to the air. In that case, the relative speed of the plane and the web (in the absence of wind) would be twice as much. Again, it cannot be seen what, apart from a sudden tailwind, could prevent the plane from taking off. We have a perfect aeroplane, it can't break down. However, the wheels can be real up to the speed of sound or even higher:)
That's how most have reconstructed the problem conditions.
Honestly, I can't think of any meaningful reconstruction that prevents the plane from taking off. That might be a more interesting problem.
So my answer is that unless there is a sudden breakdown or a sudden gust of tailwind of irresistible force the plane will definitely take off :)
Pity
Are you just asserting or are we supposed to exchange arguments ?
Or shall we go out ?
I'd like to know your arguments. Busy at the moment, I'll give you mine tonight.
Хотелось бы знать ваши аргументы. Сейчас занят, вечером приведу свои.
"Spent=received." (c) muallch
I see there's reason to have fun. I'll give you a harder one than Richie .
What do you think,
1. Does the force of inertia exist in nature?
2. Does centrifugal force exist in nature?
If you answer in the affirmative, provide a definition or at least an explanation of what it is.
ЗАДАЧА на засыпку №3:
-
Есть закрытая комната. Отапливается радиатором отопления. Температура в комнате 20 гр.С. Рядом с радиатором поставили вентилятор.
Вопрос: Как будет изменяться температура воздуха в комнате после установки вентилятора?
The fan will create additional air disturbance, resulting in better heat transfer to the walls, i.e. increased heat loss. Thus, if the room temperature was equilibrium, it will go down :).
P.S. Actually, it would be a good idea to specify the radiator temperature and the outdoor temperature, which would allow to indirectly assess the degree of thermal insulation of the room :)
Still, I don't understand why you think the conditions are correct.
In order to take off, it still has to go faster than the transporter. Anyway, by design - that's the point I wanted to catch you on, and you have a very flexible stance. :о)
Sergey, what's all this nonsense (emphasis added)? Don't you understand what is provided?
In fact, it turns out that your task is to catch me? And I thought that I should understand what the whole forum has already understood.