Engineer Garin's Paraboloid - page 18
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
Just been as Sharikov :) What's going on with the forum... Changed my password, just in case. Sharikov, I recommend you too.
Vladislav, the post about Euclidean logic and theoretical mechanics was mine:) Sharikov, please don't delete it :(
Same place:
Oh, he's telling the truth, the visionary...The law of even numbers alone... and why did I give up the grail?
If you want it, it's always yours.
Vladislav, I appreciate your love of Euclidean logic, but I did not understand your thesis about the forces "arising due to the presence of accelerations". Maybe you can explain, as a mechanic to an electrician?
If I understand correctly, the question is about the nature of inertial forces? These forces arise for systems possessing mass, that is, such a property as inertia, which is expressed in the fact that the body resists attempts to deflect it from a rectilinear trajectory and uniform velocity in an inertial coordinate system at all times. The forces acting on the body in the arbitrary case can be represented as the joint action of forces directed along the tangent to the curvilinear trajectory of motion (instantaneous rectilinear trajectory) and along the normal to the curvilinear trajectory of motion. The tendency of body to uniform motion without taking into account the change of trajectory, i.e. resistance to change of velocity along rectilinear trajectory of motion, is taken into account by the presence of force, which tends to return the body to uniform motion in the absence of external influence and which is called so - force of inertia. And the resistance to a force acting normally to the curvilinear trajectory of motion - that is, the force which tries to bring the body back to a rectilinear trajectory is called the centrifugal force. It represents the property of resisting attempts to dislodge the body from its rectilinear trajectory and to propel it towards rectilinear motion in the absence of any external force. If, however, there are resistance forces in the body's system of motion, such as fixation or friction forces, anything that would make the body continue on a curvilinear trajectory, then centripetal forces arise to compensate for the effects of the centrifugal force. Hereafter, in order not to stipulate separately, the examples are considered relative to an inertial system: relative to the Earth, a system that can be considered inertial for our purposes with a high degree of plausibility. In the car example: the car, when entering a turn, changes its trajectory in the Earth system, i.e. in this system (Earth) it has stopped moving uniformly and in a straight line. Then forces arise in this system which tend to return the car to a straight line uniform motion. Since the car is turning, there will be a force that tries to return the car to rectilinear motion - it is called centrifugal force. But since the car is following a curvilinear path, this force is compensated by the force acting in the opposite direction - that is, also normal to the curvilinear path, but directed in the opposite direction - this force is called centripetal force and its value cannot be greater than the centrifugal force. In the car example, this force occurs at the point of contact between the wheels and the road. Since centrifugal force is a volumetric force (acting on the entire volume of a body), its influence is described by an equidistant vector of forces applied to the centre of mass of the body. The centripetal force (in this case, the frictional force is a surface force) is applied at the point of contact. Since the car's centre of gravity is above the road and is not in the plane of the contact patch, a tipping moment occurs. Put the car on ice and it will go from a curved trajectory to a straight trajectory, just as with milk. In milk, particles of fat go like that - and move exactly to the walls, where there is already enough drag force to balance the centrifugal force.
That's all - I tried to make it as clear as possible .... if, of course, I understood the question correctly.
If I understand correctly, the question is about the nature of inertial forces? These forces arise for systems possessing mass, i.e. such a property as inertia, which is expressed by the fact that the body is always resisting attempts to deflect it from a rectilinear trajectory and uniform speed in a non-inertial coordinate system. The forces acting on the body in the arbitrary case can be represented as the joint action of forces directed along the tangent to the curvilinear trajectory of motion (instantaneous rectilinear trajectory) and along the normal to the curvilinear trajectory of motion. The tendency of body to uniform motion without taking into account the change of trajectory, i.e. resistance to change of velocity along rectilinear trajectory of motion, is taken into account by the presence of force, which tends to return the body to uniform motion in the absence of external influence and which is called so - force of inertia. And the resistance to a force acting normally to the curvilinear trajectory of motion - that is, the force which tries to bring the body back to a rectilinear trajectory - is called centrifugal force. It represents the property of resisting attempts to dislodge the body from its rectilinear trajectory and to propel it towards rectilinear motion in the absence of any external force. If, however, there are resistance forces in the body's system of motion, such as fixation or friction forces, anything that would make the body continue on a curvilinear trajectory, then centripetal forces arise to compensate for the effects of the centrifugal force. Hereafter, in order not to stipulate separately, we consider examples relative to a non-inertial system: relative to the Earth, a system that can be considered non-inertial for our purposes with a high degree of plausibility. In the car example: the car, when entering a turn, changes its trajectory in the Earth system, i.e. in this system (Earth) it has stopped moving uniformly and in a straight line. Then forces arise in this system which tend to return the car to a straight line uniform motion. Since the car is turning, there will be a force that tries to return the car to rectilinear motion - it is called centrifugal force. But since the car is following a curvilinear path, this force is compensated by the force acting in the opposite direction - that is, also normal to the curvilinear path, but directed in the opposite direction - this force is called centripetal force and its value cannot be greater than the centrifugal force. In the car example, this force occurs at the point of contact between the wheels and the road. Since centrifugal force is a volumetric force (acting on the entire volume of a body), its influence is described by an equidistant vector of forces applied to the centre of mass of the body. The centripetal force (in this case, the frictional force is a surface force) is applied at the point of contact. Since the car's centre of gravity is above the road and is not in the plane of the contact patch, a tipping moment occurs. Put the car on ice and it will go from a curved trajectory to a straight trajectory, just as with milk. In milk, particles of fat go like that - and move exactly to the walls, where there is already enough drag force to balance the centrifugal force.
That's all - I tried to make it as clear as possible .... if I understood the question correctly, of course.
Well done! And now move on to applying these ideas to forex
Vladislav, I appreciate your love of Euclidean logic, but I do not understand your thesis about forces "arising due to the presence of accelerations". Maybe you can explain, as a mechanic to an electrician?
EEEh, what's up, how come, what's up. i didn't write this....... demand an explanation.
Well done! And now move smoothly to the application of these ideas to forex
Was the question asked in terms of FOREX or the application of this to the market ? The question was about the nature of the forces of inertia, as far as I understood ..... I'm not your expert and I don't remember when we started talking on a first name basis ?
And there's nothing to discuss on the subject, and if you haven't understood it yet, you should ponder whether or not you have chosen this hobby. .....
So, it's quite normal to be flooded in an originally flooded thread, IMHO.
SZZ, about FOREX - we are talking about a proof of losing locks, so if you do not understand - do not bother to set the record straight.
Was the question asked in terms of FOREX or the application of this to the market ? The question was about the nature of the forces of inertia, as far as I understood ..... And I wasn't answering to you, and I don't remember when we switched to the first name?
And there is nothing to discuss, and if you haven't understood it, you should think over whether your hobby is what you've chosen for it ;) .....
So, that flooding in the initially flooded thread, IMHO - quite normal.
Count, I didn't recognise you in your make-up. No challenge to a duel, I hope?
Stop fussing about it - it's a thread. And if there's nothing to discuss then there's nothing to write about.
I'm at a loss as to what good branches there are here.
Z and what is the truth? The movement of fat drops in milk?
Count, I didn't recognize you in your make-up! I hope there will be no challenge to a duel?
Stop fussing about it - it's a thread. And if there's nothing to discuss then there's nothing to write about.
I'm at a loss as to what useful threads there are here.
Boy, get out of here. Just because something is beyond your comprehension does not mean that no one is interested: We are here to prove the existence of loss-making locks.
And whether to write here or not, or anywhere else I'll sort it out without the snot-nosed.
Boy, get past it. Just because something is beyond your comprehension doesn't mean that no one is interested: We are here to prove the existence of loss-making locks.
And whether or not to write here or elsewhere is up to me without snivelling.
I'll stay, though.
so "we're here to talk" or "flooding in the originally flooded thread"? And what about "drops of fat in the milk" - how does that relate to forex and lock?
I'll stay, though.
so are we "lokalizing here" or are we "flubbing in the originally flubbed thread"? And what about "drops of fat in the milk" - how does that relate to forex and lock?