Friday, January 8, 2010

If an object travels from point A to B at 12 Kmph and from point B to A at 16 Kmph, what is the average speed?




I am looking for an answer other than (12+16)/2 = 14. I am not calculating velocity.


If an object travels from point A to B at 12 Kmph and from point B to A at 16 Kmph, what is the average speed?
Let distance between A and B = d km


Total distance = 2d km


Time taken in moving from A to B = d/12 h


Time taken in moving from B to A = d/16 h


Total time taken = d/12 h + d/16 h = d(1/12 + 1/16) h


Average speed = total distance/total time taken


= 2d/(d(1/12 + 1/16)) km/h


= 2/(1/12 + 1/16) km/h


= 2*16*12/(16 + 12) km/h


= 13.7 km/h


Ans: 13.7 km/hIf an object travels from point A to B at 12 Kmph and from point B to A at 16 Kmph, what is the average speed?
average speed= total distance /total time


now let us suppose distance between a and b is x km


then time taken for the forward journey= x/12


and that for the return journey is=x/16


since the total distance is 2x


so the avg speed= 2x/((x/12)+(x/16))=96/7


at the first go it would seem 14 though
Let the distance from A to B is x


now time taken to travel from A to B is x/16


now time taken to travel from B to A is x/12


total time taken=7x/48


total distance=2x


average speed=(2x)/7x/8=16/7=2.2857 km/hour(since x cancels)
the average speed IS 14 kmph though. velocity has a direction. why don't you do your own homework???
  • highlight colors
  • ointment cream
  • If two object have different weight falling from 100 M , would they reach to the earth at the same time?

    what does it make difference to the answer if we take or not take the air frication into account?If two object have different weight falling from 100 M , would they reach to the earth at the same time?
    If the two objects have different weight and ignoring air resistance, they will reach the earth at the same time. If you take air friction in consideration, an object with higher air resistance due to its shape and surface roughness, will reach the earth later.If two object have different weight falling from 100 M , would they reach to the earth at the same time?
    If you ignore air resistance, or air friction, they will hit the ground at the same time. This was a famous experiment Galileo did off the Tower of Pisa.





    However, if you include air resistance, a feather will obviously fall slower than a boulder.
    they will fall to earth at the same time. this was proved by Galileo. air friction becomes an issue when the shape of the objects is taken in account, not their weight.
    yes ... 2 types of balls where dropped from the leaning tower in italy and they both hit the floor at exactly the same time ... hope i helped

    Would Satan object if I named my child after him?

    Planning for the future brought me to ponder what I should name my first born. I want to name my child Satan, but wonder if Satan would have a problem with it. Which brings me to the second part of my question, what are you going to do about it? Neah!Would Satan object if I named my child after him?
    I am sure he would be delighted! Let me provide some other options for the legions of children you must be planning to have...





    Naberius : Strong demon in charge of 29 legions, a Marquis of hell


    Oriax : Marquis, demon who commands 30 legions; teaches astrology


    Zepar : Grand Duke, appears as a soldier, commanding 26 legions


    Stolas : High prince of hell, commanding 26 legions; teacher of astronomy and plant properties


    Semiazas : Chief demon of fallen angels


    Verin : Demon of impatience


    Vetis : Demon of corruption


    Philatanus : Demon who assists Belial in sodomy and pedophile behaviors (This just makes that much more evil in the eyes of society. I also believe it gives him power.)


    Ose : Great President, governs 30 legions


    Paymon : a king of hell, master of ceremonies; governs 200 legions (I would not want to meet this guy in a dark alley!)


    Belial : Chief of all devils, brings about wickedness and guilt


    Andras : Marquesse, commands 30 legions; bird head with angel-like wings


    Asmoday : Prince of demons; thought to be the serpent that deceived Eve


    Asmodeus : Demon of wrath, banished by Raphael in the Book of Tobit 8:3





    Just to name a few... you know.Would Satan object if I named my child after him?
    They say imitation is flattery. What it boils down to is if you want to give such a name to a child who would have to live with the connotations that go with it. Firstly I can only assume you like Satan for some reason. Thus, I would suggest that you let the child grow up and make his own choice whether he wants to follow your beliefs rather than giving him that name.
    I'm sure he wouldn't mind you naming your child satan or satanail which is his full name. But I'm sure if he sees your picture, this is probably where he would be pissed off at since your picture doesn't look anything like him.
    I'm not going to do anything about it, neither is Satan because he doesn't exist.








    But... you're kid is going to get beat up on the playground unless he/she is massively huge and bad a**. I hope you have good genes. :)
    If u love that name so much, u can name urself satan.


    Don't do that 2 an innocent child, who would be ridiculed in school for no fault of his.
    No object because Satan's real name is Lucifer.
    maybe not, but how stupid are you? Come on, who would name their kid after the worst creature in the universe who will be destroyed someday? Think mcfly think.
    Get a life. There is no God and there is No Satan. Anton Lavey is full of it too.
    Although Satan might not have a problem with it, your first born might.
    Go for it. My childs name will be Damion Lucifer, or Natasha. Which is Ah, Satan spelled backwards.
    Good luck getting that one past the name registration process! Maybe you could try ';Troll';?
    nothing.
    whoa that kid is gonna seriously be screwed up :)
    you might as well call him screwball if you really want to damage the poor kid.
    Why not name him Daemon instead?

    If an object weighed 100 pounds on the Earth, what would it weigh on Europa?

    Europa's surface gravity compared to Earths is 0.134g.If an object weighed 100 pounds on the Earth, what would it weigh on Europa?
    A 100 pound object on Earth would weigh


    100 x (0.134) = 13.4 lbs on Europa.

    What household object is made out of oxygen?

    besides air.





    I need it for a school project, due tomorrow.What household object is made out of oxygen?
    water is made out of oxygen and hydrogen lol probs dosnt help

    If an object is traveling towards you at the speed of light will you?

    see it before it hits you?


    short motivation will be appreciated.If an object is traveling towards you at the speed of light will you?
    Some good answers above, but incomplete.


    1. No ';Object'; can reach the speed of light (according to Einstein's relativity): it would have an infinite mass and would have required an infinite amount of energy to reach that speed.


    2. It it were travelling at that speed, then you will ';see'; it at the same time as it hits you. Too late!


    3. If it has an infinite mass, no light reflected or emitted by that Object would LEAVE the object towards you! The light would be trapped on the Object, so its image will never reach you...If an object is traveling towards you at the speed of light will you?
    Nope, if both are traveling at the same speed it will be simultaneous, if not near impossible to tell the difference if you could tell. Assume that your body was the length that light could travel in one year (a light year). Now imagine that you were stung by a bee at your toe. How long would it take the light reflected off of the bee and the pain sensation to reach your brain. Most likely the same time, because both visual and sensory perceptions have an nerve impulse that travel at the speed of light.
    Theoretically no. The speed of light is a constant so the object traveling at the speed of light will emit or reflect light in all directions except in the direction of travel.
    NO
    For you to see an object, light must hit the object first, then reflect and enter your eyes.





    If the object travels as fast as light, then it will hit you at the same time that the light reflected from it enters your eyes.





    Thus, if the object was 300,000,000 meters away before moving towards you, then,





    after one second, you will be hit by the object and at the same time, your eyes will capture the object's image 300,000,000 meters away from you.





    If the object travels that fast, your brain will not have enough time to interpret the image before you die.
    This is a question with many problems to consider. First of all, nothing with any mass can travel at the speed of light. It it were to do so, it would become infinitely massive due to mass dilation, and destroy the universe. So, most of what would protentially be coming towards us at the speed of light will be a photon anyway, and they don't generally reflect a great deal of light for us to see in any case.





    However, if we assume that the universe won't end if something with mass which is zooming around and ignore mass dilation effects, then we're faced with another problem. In a fraction of a second things moving at the speed of light travel further than we can see (more or less). So, the object would need to be very large, in order for us to be able to see it at a distance.





    The question of whether or not you could see it as it approached is a little complicated. The answer, is maybe. The problem is that what we understand of the universe, isn't exactly set up to determine what happens when something travelling at light speed flicks on a light. The thing is, that relativity tells us that if two photons are travelling directly towards each other, then the speed at which they appraoch each other is c, rather than 2c, time slows down, space warps and so forth, and the absolute speed of light is maintained. If we were to flip this experiment around, so two photons are travelling in the same direction, ala your question, then it should be the case that the relative speed should remain at c. The intuitive alternative (that they would be a constant distance from one another, or have ea relative speed of 0) would violate the absolute frame of reference that is the speed of light.





    So, I suppose that if we are to ignore the problematic assumptions that the question requires, that the answer is yes, we would see the object as it approached.
    Depends on the size of the object
    If Ever Anything happens like that time space will have phenomenol effect around you and you should be able to judge that there is something very chaotic which is about to happen. you need to be very observant and deductive when something like that happens.
    ya when distance is greater than 3*10^8 metres.............


    you can see because the light from the moving object travells at the speed of light w r t the object(moving at light speed). so it reaches u r eyes and hit u proved by PROF.ALBERT EINSTEIN(THE GREAT)
    depends how far away it is
    nope it will hit you before you see it
    no, you will not see it, for the light reflecting off of it would not be traveling faster than the objest to reach your eyes first.
    you wouldn't know it because if it has mass it couldn't move at the speed of light. There would be no impact. With that said we have ';obects'; of no mass hitting us all the time... like light.
    Yes if you look at your watch as long as its not a battery watch you can even time it coming.
    hard to imagine anything with mass travelling at the spped of light. light emitted in your direction would only propogate at the same speed it's travelling, from your perspective. cant imagine you ever even experiencing a single moment of its collision with you.
    No, your eyes can't pick up something moving that fast...
    Be dead before you realize it hit you.
    Does it matter? If an object is traveling towards you at the speed of light, you aren't going to have time to get the f u c k out of the way in time anyway before it knocks you on your a s s.
    Your question is not yet possible. Nothing can travel at the speed of light except light itself. If something travels at the speet of light, you wont be able to see it come and go . . . but its not yet possible.

    How do you find the mass of an object?!?

    How do you find the mass of an object with a volume and a density,


    Is it like density times volume or what?How do you find the mass of an object?!?
    I believe you are right.......m=dvHow do you find the mass of an object?!?
    Density equals mass divided by volume. That relationship can then be expressed in many ways by carefully rearranging the equation. Mass equals volume times density. Volume equals mass divided by density. Which form of the equation is used depends on what you are trying to figure out.
  • highlight colors
  • ointment cream
  • How do you compare the acceleration of an object with gravity? or, how to express it as a multiply of gravity?

    the problem i'm working with is this: an airplane accelerates at takeoff to a speed of 200km/hr in 18seconds. What is its acceleration compared to that of gravity? that is, find the acceleration in meters per second squared and express it as a multiply of g (gravity).





    this is a problem in our physics 12 class.





    help!How do you compare the acceleration of an object with gravity? or, how to express it as a multiply of gravity?
    You need to bring the km/hr to meter/second.





    velocity = 200 * 5/18 = 55.56 m/s





    final velocity = initial velocity + acceleration * time





    55.56 = acceleration * 18 (because initial velocity = 0)


    acceleration = 55.56 / 18 = 3.086 m/s虏





    Now usually g = 9.81 m/s虏. Your airplane's acceleration is 3.086 / 9.81 = 0.314 times that due to gravity.





    (Curiously, that is about a 10th of the value of pi - 蟺 )How do you compare the acceleration of an object with gravity? or, how to express it as a multiply of gravity?
    First off, let's convert 200km/hr to m/s so as to use standard S.I. units:


    U = 200 km/hr = 200000 m / hr


    now, an hour has 60*60=3600 seconds, so, finally:


    U = 200000 / 3600 = 55.56 m/s


    Now, assuming a constant acceleration, we have


    U = Uo + a*t, therefore in your case:


    55,56 = 0 + a*18 (since the aircraft was initially immobile)


    That gives us a=55.56/18 = 3,1 m/sec^2 (approx)


    and since the acceleration of gravity is g=9.81 m/s^2, your aircraft accelerates at about 3,1/9.81 = about 1/3rd of g.


    (if you want to be exact it,s 0,315g)

    An object whose absorption lines are of shorter wavelength than they would be in a stationary laboratory is?

    A. moving towards us


    B. moving away from us


    C. moving, but neither toward or away from us


    D. stationary relative to usAn object whose absorption lines are of shorter wavelength than they would be in a stationary laboratory is?
    AAn object whose absorption lines are of shorter wavelength than they would be in a stationary laboratory is?
    A - called a blueshift

    How Can I Remove An Object And Replace It With Another Object On Gimp 2?

    I have gimp 2 and i was wondering, is there a way to remove an object and replace it with another object on there??? Because theres a picture of me holding soemthing and i wanted to change the object im holding ... is there a way to do this on gimp 2????How Can I Remove An Object And Replace It With Another Object On Gimp 2?
    you can contact to an online freelancer expert for getting step by


    step advice from many website like


    helps-onlines.tk

    Hey there candy pants. Do you have a problem being seen as a sex object?

    Knowing that a man only wants to get into your pants are you offended or are you willing to ignore it and forget the guy exists? or is ir okay?Hey there candy pants. Do you have a problem being seen as a sex object?
    No, not at all. I know inside what I am so what others call me or say has little effect either way.Hey there candy pants. Do you have a problem being seen as a sex object?
    Yeah, I kinda do, which is one reason why I try to dress modestly. I don't want anyone thinking those thoughts about me. I also do it because I don't want to make my fellow Christians (the men) stumble in their thoughts. I don't want to be the reason why they stay away from church all summer (I've seen men do that to avoid being around immodestly-dressed women).





    The ONLY man who I want calling me candy pants and thinking of me in that manner is my husband. I do my darndest to catch his eye. lol
    Of course its ok





























    Are you ******* kidding me?


    Any woman with a decent amount of self respect feels absolutely degraded when she is just seen as a sex object. Men are the ones that need some growing up to do, because I, like most women, am far too intelligent and i have too much potential to be just one of your little sex toys.


    Thanks.
    it depends...if you are decent about it, some women are okay with no strings attached sex......but if you are like the creepy kind...you know, the kind who cant take a hint if the woman is not attracted to you,,...then its not nice at all..you shouldnt judge her either...because, just because you got a woman easy, it doesnt make her a slut...also, you should make your intentions clear so she doesnt get her hopes up...see what i mean?? you should be fine then... :)





    hope this helped!! :)
    Honestly I thought I would enjoy it in my younger years. But I did not like being ';eye candy'; for the older single moms and professional women at my workplace (back in the day). I know its not as bad as women, but I didn't embrace it either. Along with the stigma of how ';black men'; suppose to be in bed and with women. It was a living hell. I actually quit because of this and some other minor things when I once worked at a bank.
    Not even a little bit, Sugardick.





    If I don't know them, and all I am is a 'sex object' to them, why would I care?





    If I'm with him, it's fair play. Some times he's nothing more than a sexy jungle gym for me too. We've got a system going, so far so good. Occasionally all we are to one another is something fun to ****.





    I'll never understand why it's such an issue =o/
    Most women would take offense to being called sex objects but they do like to be seen as sex objects some of the time. Women love feeling desired. It makes them feel good and like they have value. A lot of the time it doesn't matter what they are wanted for though.
    yes, because i dont know what kind of backwards community you come from, but in normal society, men and women are equal (regardless of the y chromosome defect in men)
    Women love being seen and treated like objects. It's just a little hard for some women to be honest and accept it!





    A woman is an object. A man is the subject.
    I woke up at 5 am. I opened my computer and the first thing I read was


    'Hey there candy pants. Do you have a problem being seen as a sex object?'


    You made me spit water all over the keyboard. %26gt;;(
    The only time I wouldn't have a problem with it is when I was only interested in him for sexual reasons.
    yeah woman usually call me by the name of sex stuff





    yeah both me and my gf has a problem with it
    Yes, I do.

    What is the size of the smallest object on the Moon that can be seen by a 'scope on Earth or in Earth orbit?

    WILL WE EVENUALLY ';SEE'; THE LUNAR LANDING BASE CRAFTS TO CONFIRM THEIR PRESENCE ON THE MOON? Thanks.What is the size of the smallest object on the Moon that can be seen by a 'scope on Earth or in Earth orbit?
    Well we can currently ';see'; them by boucning lasers off of the reflecters left there, but as far as actually seeing the landers themselves? Nope. No telescope that we currentlyn have can come even close to it. As people send more things around the moon it would be quite possible that a future lunar orbiter would be able to image their location. We've done this with some of our probes on mars (imaged them from orbit, can't even come close from the earth).





    Nit-picking edit:


    CHARA won't be able to see anything on the moon. It is an intereferometer, and will measure spectral properties (wavelengths of light) with fairly high accuaracy. As an imager (full pictures) it won't do much.What is the size of the smallest object on the Moon that can be seen by a 'scope on Earth or in Earth orbit?
    Depends on the telescope. (Its lens etc.)
    The Hubble Space Telescope can resolve down to about 400 feet on the Moon's surface.





    CHARA (Center for High Angular Resolution Astronomy telescope array, to be built) will have 330 times the resolution of Hubble. That would be enough to see the module.





    But a way to confirm their presence on the moon right now is:





    http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxap鈥?/a>





    (Phil Plait's debunking of that ';Apollo Moon Hoax'; theory).

    UK I play a lot of Hidden Object games and they are too dark on my monitor, even with the brightness up full?

    I have a 19'; iiyama and want to know the best LCD for this type of game, or it's drawbacksUK I play a lot of Hidden Object games and they are too dark on my monitor, even with the brightness up full?
    I had similar problems and had to get a new monitor in the end , think you'll find changing the contrast rather than the brightness might help more and can you adjust your graphics card manually in the control panel?.I had a Nvidia which always seemed darker than ATI and with their software you could change the settings (gamma and contrast i used to play around with ) hope this helps.





    Will put link of monitor i've got :)UK I play a lot of Hidden Object games and they are too dark on my monitor, even with the brightness up full?
    Thanks for the info. Got a very similar one and it is excellent. Sorry for not picking you as Best Answer but have been shopping around and forgot all about it. Report Abuse
  • highlight colors
  • ointment cream
  • What object would you compare a walnut to using your imagination?1st person to respond will be best answer!!!!?

    My teacher Mr.Hayes wants me to write a description of a walnut. Also I'm supposed to use my ';imagination'; by using similes and stuff like that. Please help.I am desperate!!! Any help will do!!!! :(What object would you compare a walnut to using your imagination?1st person to respond will be best answer!!!!?
    Nicolas Cage. You can tell by looking at it that it used to be grand but now it's just balding and wrinkly.What object would you compare a walnut to using your imagination?1st person to respond will be best answer!!!!?
    i would compare it to a kiwi. i had to write a descriptive essay about a kiwi senior year of high school and it turned out really well. i would choose this comparison because both are rough on the outside and then you crack the shell or peel the skin and get something pretty different on the inside. like with a kiwi its a soft lime green center, and with a walnut its a nut inside the hard shell. thats all i got so far. good luck.
    I have answered this question already.





    SEE** http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;鈥?/a>


    for my answer
    What about an osterich egg? Both a walnut and osterich egg are incredibly difficult to open, but rewarding when done so.
    testicle
    a testicle or an ovary.
    rock or chocolate:p
    Brain
    a clam
    my b a l l s

    Physics question concerning free fall of an object?

    so i am really stumped on this question because im not sure how to write an equation for this since the distance is a function of time and the distance is given as a fraction in comparison of time...





    An object falls from a height h from rest. If it travels a fraction of the total height of 0.6617 in the last 1.00 s, find the time of its fall.Physics question concerning free fall of an object?
    [EDIT - The two guys below made a classic mistake. They have assumed the initial velocity after 1 second is zero. It is not. The object started from zero velocity at some time earlier at a higher starting position. As such, their answers will be wrong]





    The general equation for motion subject to a uniform acceleration due to gravity is:


    y = -1/2*g*t^2 + vo*t + yo.


    where y is the variable of height, yo is the initial position, vo is the initial velocity (positive velocities are upwards), and g is 9.8m/s^2. The first term is negative because gravity is acting downwards.





    vo = 0 since the object falls from rest.


    yo = h since that's the total height it fell.





    y = -1/2*g*t^2 + h





    When y = 0, t = T where T is the total time of the fall.


    0 = -1/2*g*T^2 + h


    h and T are both variables that are unknown.





    You know that in the last second it fell a distance of 0.6617*h. That means after T-1 seconds it was at a height of 0.6617*h.





    0.6617*h = -1/2*g*(T-1)^2 + h





    You now have two equations


    h = 1/2*g*T^2


    and


    0.3383*h = 1/2*g*(T-1)^2





    Solve those two equations


    0.3383*(1/2*g*T^2) = 1/2*g*(T-1)^2


    0.3383*T^2 = (T-1)^2


    0.3383 = ((T-1)/T)^2


    (T-1)/T = 0.58


    T-1 = 0.58T


    1 = 0.42T


    T = 2.39





    So T = 2.38 seconds and h = (1/2*g*T^2) = 28.0 meters





    Let's check these numbers against the general equation


    y = -1/2*g*t^2 + h





    What's the position after T-1 seconds


    y = -1/2*g*(T-1)^2 + 27.78


    y = 18.53





    After 1.38 seconds, the object is at a height of 18.53 meters which is 0.6618*h.





    I do believe T = 2.39 seconds

    What are the units that can be used to express the volume of an object?

    Almost any measurement cubed.What are the units that can be used to express the volume of an object?
    any length unit cubed,


    cubic foot/meter/inch/millimeter/mile/lightyea鈥?br>




    there are also some special names for some, like


    gallon,liter,fluid oz.What are the units that can be used to express the volume of an object?
    meters cubed. Volumes of liquids will be in liters, but can be converted, one milliliter = one centimeter cubed
    there are many:


    liters


    gallons


    cups


    quarts


    cubic feet


    cubic centimeters


    cubic meters


    pints





    I could go on forever...
    cm3 , m3 , mm3, inches3...anything cubed
    mm3 cm3 m3 anything cubic
    cubic
    m3

    Does anybody have any ideas of an object that has been recyled into a completely new thing? Thanks!?

    i need to know for school - like an idea of something such as old rubber wheels being turned into shoes, or something along those lines. not just like cell phones being recycles into cell phones AGAIN, something preferably new, thanks! %26lt;3.Does anybody have any ideas of an object that has been recyled into a completely new thing? Thanks!?
    jeans are always being turned into pencils.Does anybody have any ideas of an object that has been recyled into a completely new thing? Thanks!?
    sure, tires are being turned into carpeting, human bodies are being turned into diamonds. Tires and plastics are being turned into a variety of things. I bet if you googled them, you would find out lots of things.
    carbon fibre car panels are refined and turned into concreate for earthquake proof wall in china and japan.
    Rubber, Plastic and Steel are some of the most widely recyclable materials... so pretty much a car.
    they recycle old plastic soda bottles into fleece
    hey!

    How does bouyant force affect a submerged object?

    Buoyant force is the tendency of an object to float, so an object that is submerged has to overcome it's buoyant force for it to sink instead of float.

    What object has the shape of a Hexagon?

    Show me a picture of something that is in a Hexagon shape?What object has the shape of a Hexagon?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Hexag鈥?/a>What object has the shape of a Hexagon?
    snow crystal


    http://www.its.caltech.edu/~atomic/snowc鈥?/a>





    emerald


    http://www.bidorbuy.co.za/jsp/item/Item.鈥?/a>





    cigar holder


    http://cigarlight.com/store/images/ASHTR鈥?/a>





    by the way, stop sign is an octagon
    Sections of a soccor ball
    a STOP SIGN!
    A hexagon


    ___


    / \


    \___/
    couldnt be my ex-stepdads aquarium, it was octagon with an octagon terrariumn in the middle, like 55 gals, and old as hell.








    ok ok, arms wide openum er sorta in the mirror.





    adam, that allen wrench thing is only a piece of a piano tuner ,ironic huh allen why not rounded out or rounded first-6th.
    stop sign


    soccer ball


    waffle ball


    thx 4 2 pts.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_wrenc鈥?/a> ....... This is one i know well , there are other examples and better pics but you may have one of theses lying around the house too ....it is called an allen wrench , or hex wrench ....... take care here's the real deal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexagon
    Old Fashioned rifle barrels.





    Bolt heads.





    Nuts (as in nuts and bolts)





    Geodesic dome houses.
    http://images.search.yahoo.com/search/im鈥?/a>
    HoneyComb Or plant cells
    A honeycomb.





    http://www.scifun.ed.ac.uk/card/images/f鈥?/a>
  • highlight colors
  • ointment cream
  • What happens when an object loses electrons?

    Does it become negatively charged or positively charged? o.OWhat happens when an object loses electrons?
    trammmm








    electrons have a negative charge, so think of each electron as -1





    protons are +1





    and neutrons are...well they're neutral, so they're 0





    if you lose electrons then it becomes more positive, so if it was already neutral then it will become positively charged





    it could be that it was on -1 already as a total charge (so it was already negatively charged), so if this atom loses an electron then it will just become neutral





    should've asked me on msn silly :p xxWhat happens when an object loses electrons?
    All neutral objects have an equal number of positive charges (protons) and negative charges (electron). These opposite forces cancel each other out when there are equal quantities of the two. When an object loses electrons it becomes positively charged, because then there are more protons than electrons.
    If it's neutral to start with and it loses electrons it must become positively charged. (If this positively charged object then gains electrons it will become neutral again.)
    if it loses or gains electrons then it becomes an ion


    in your case it's a positive ion

    What is a good object to sell?

    I used to sell pet rocks, at my house for $1.00. The mini kind were a cent. No, I don't mean the ugly kind of pet rock. They were 100 percent real and different colors. Now I am almost out and have nothing to sell... Ideas please? Something small and portable?What is a good object to sell?
    decorate pens, make buttons that pin on shirts, you can get candle making kits from craft stores or you might find other things at the craft store that you like better.What is a good object to sell?
    I know of a great way you can make money with your own web sites. Go to http://www.moneywebsites.net/ : check it out!
    Try selling things that you have baked like cakes, biscuits or cookies you could earn quite a lot from these
    join salehoo.url-go. com and you get many things to sell.

    Are most women who object to prostitution just jealous of good looking working girls getting paid for sex?

    why should they be jealous?these women who sell their bodies are on drugs and need help and the men who pay for sex are nothing more than scum and need to be shot


    octa you sound like one of the pervs that pays for sex.wat an ugly twat u must be lolAre most women who object to prostitution just jealous of good looking working girls getting paid for sex?
    Strictly Business is correct.





    Women do not like prostitution because it provides men with an alternative route to sex. An alternative to the official route of getting a girlfriend or wife.





    Women would like all male demand for sex to be channeled into the arena where the extortion yield is the highest, the dating scene. Why get married and support a woman for the rest of your life if you can get your needs met cheaper elsewhere?Are most women who object to prostitution just jealous of good looking working girls getting paid for sex?
    No - ridiculous suggestion. Most prostitutes aren't like Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman you know! I object to the trafficking of women from impoverished countries to be sold into sex slavery and forced to become addicted to drugs, are beaten, raped, have unwanted pregnancies, botched abortions, sexually transmitted diseases and a premature death. That's why I object to prostitution. Any woman who is truly savvy and in control of it, good luck.
    I'm a woman, I object to prostitusion because I know that these women are exposed to horrific violence and drug abuse etc. and even the high class prostitutes have no job security. There are no rules that say how these women are treated by there pimps so they are treated like dirt.





    However I also know women who object to prostitution because it cheapens sex for women as a group of people. Many women, and myself included, see sex as a very intimate activity, which you only do with people you care about and who you know respect you. It is such a special thing for a woman to let you inside of her. And prostitution kind of spits all over that point. Men who visit prostitutes don't see sex in this way..





    I hope I am making some sort of sense
    I don't think women object to prostitution because they are jealous. I think its more about not wanting our sex to be objectified. Personally I could care less. I think prostitution should be legal. Its not hurting anyone if someone wants to pay for sex and someone is willing to sell it by all means go for it! I think all victimless ';crimes'; should be legal.
    firstly prostitution is a service offered to both men and women for both men and women and secondly no! I think you will find that people walking to streets do not want to be there and are despdesperate probably addicted to substances with no way out. Apart from high end escorts we should seriously pity prostitutes and look down on any one who either forces them or creates a market where its going to keep going on.
    Hey, it's not like every whore is a CRACKHEAD whore, else the crackhead bit would be redundant, innit?





    Some are genuinely good-lookin, just trying to pay their way thru college. And I say 'bullshit' to anyone banning prostitution due to sympathy. An adult makes an informed decision, but that decision goes against your values, so you impose your values? Out of sympathy? It's not Obama taking us to the USSR then!





    Besides, sympathy pays no bills, and fear of competition doesn't erase it. If you can't ban tipple, you can't ban nipple.
    the same reason why western women hate it the fact most western guys are now getting eastern gfs because it takes away they biggest and best trump card that grants them most power sex they can no longer use sex as a tool of emotional violence against men ie it disarms them and makes them powerless and feel like crap and it scares the hell out of them thats why they try to twist it around and claim its a moral thing and use the worst examples and try to make it sound like a rule. yes there are some bad bad ugly hookers with stds but they are just junkies feeding habits . the pros are not( note no i wouldn't use a hooker although thinking maybe iit would be a better investment in the long run/ cheaper) lol.if you took that card away the mans need for them their f u c k e d and they know it thats why they went ape s h i t about that new proto type female robot they made in japan what looks real good and dose all the cleaning and is always in a good mood bla bla and is just the begging for what the future might hold . as soon as that got head lines the next week all the female mags and editors were pulling their hair out and poo pooing it. remember you aint gonna get a strait answer or an honest one from women by putting it strait like that they aint gonna show you thier under bellies man they gonna lie duh
    No. I think I look okay, and my husband says I'm a knockout. Plus I can get some for free whenever I want. ; )





    I don't envy anyone who sells their body.The reason I object to things like prostitution and stripping and porn and all that is because it's immoral and wrong. Not because I'm jealous. LOL They have nothing I want.
    Have you seen a prostitute, most of them have no teeth, arms full of holes and wearing something that looks like something pulled out the 70's....no jealousy here





    Besides most of the men are old dirty bugg'rs
    Not really considering there are some pretty ugly hookers out there.
    Oh sure that must be it. Every woman's dream is to get paid for sex with disgusting men who cant find a woman so they have to pay for it.
    I think there are some women who object to prostitution because it dilutes their sexual advantage over men...like any retailer who is concerned of a competitor coming into market...
    %26lt;sarcasm%26gt;Of course, because women are naturally programmed to be unsympathetic and jealous of each other at all times.%26lt;/sarcasm%26gt;





    Please, spare us.
    What kind of hookers are you looking at man? The ones I've seen on the corner are about 80 pounds of track marked skin popping nasty. And that's AFTER they've had their first push of the morning
    nope, hoes have a total different mindset then a regular girl





    obviously





    and not all prositutes look good
    I guess you think old, fat women with missing teeth that will do anything for crack are good looking.
    Jealous of women who have to resort to opening their legs for payment? I dont think so......pity more like
    eww...you mean are they jealous of a walking STD? doubt it.
    damn u appear to know women so well !

    If money were no object, what car would you buy?

    I wondered what car someone would buy if they had unlimited money.


    Something that you can actually go out and buy!If money were no object, what car would you buy?
    I would want a lambo like Bam Margera or a black SUV like Rob Dyrdek.If money were no object, what car would you buy?
    I know have you seen Rob Dyrdek's motorcycle car? That is a sweet one too. Report Abuse

    If I could have just one, it would be the Lamborghini Murcielago LP640 Roadster. When it was road-tested in Australia it actually had better on-road dynamics than a more practical Porsche 911 Turbo, and of course it has utterly shmexy looks, sound and performance.





    If I could have multiple cars:





    Daily drive: Lamborghini Gallardo LP560-4





    Track days: Ariel Atom 500 V8





    Off-roading: Volkswagen Touareg R50 V10 TDI





    Long trips: BMW M3 Saloon
    I stick with old school stuff.





    Vectro W8





    http://thegarageblog.com/garage/wp-conte鈥?/a>





    the only Vector A-WX3





    http://www.tuningfever.fr/pics-med-14974鈥?/a>





    or a Norwood A-12





    It had a 777 cubic inch engine, 1,500 horsepower, and would go over 300 mph. Only one was ever made and there are no pictures on the Internet.
    i woul dbuy many, but my first one would be a Subaru WRX . rally version pimped out, custom mint green and white with a pearl tint paint job, chrome rims, custom interior. They are fast and can handle ruggid terrain. need a nice hood scoop too
    This Car
    1966 Pontiac GTO, 389ci ';Tri-Power';
    split screen kombi





    with nice alloys


    subaru ej22 engine in it


    air bag suspension


    candy apple red paint and silver/chrome


    window tint
    Jaguar XJ Super V8 in ultimate black.
    first of all buy american the chevy malibu is rated a really good car
    A Bugatti Veyron. They cost 1.7 million dollars.
    Rolls Royce or Maybach or Hummer.
    A concept car!
    a yellow ferrari
    i would buy a aston martin
    Lamborghini Reventon





    http://www.topspeed.com/cars/lamborghini鈥?/a>
    astomaston martin dbs in white with factory body kit :) YUMMM
    Black Bentley!


    http://i14.tinypic.com/4uvfq6p.jpg


    or http://www.carforums.net/reviews/makes/p鈥?/a> :O





    well infact i would get both! :)
    an H1, Hummer the old ones... 'cause it would make my husband super happy and I could run over all the piss ant cars that get in my way...
    cadillac escalade 2009
    Smart car cause they are cute!

    What in an office directs things, but is an inanimate object?

    (just not a person)What in an office directs things, but is an inanimate object?
    the directory!!! What in an office directs things, but is an inanimate object?
    A compass?
    A sign...
    the boss.
    exit sign?
    signs
    a phone...





    Who may i direct your call to?


    *boop* presses button*

    How can you break a car window with a small object?

    my teacher told me about how his dad told him about a material that can break a car window with a small object, but he wouldnt tell what it wuz?How can you break a car window with a small object?
    My sister did it by punching a windshield while wearing a ring. She wasn't trying to break it, just get her boyfriend's attention. It worked I think. All his friends were around and they started treating her like she was all tough because of it.





    /funny story off


    Moral of the story--a moderate force concentrated on a small area can produce enough pressure to crack windshield glass.How can you break a car window with a small object?
    an automatic center punch will do it quickly %26amp; quietly.
    Take a steel ruler and hit your car window with the flat of it, hard as you like. It probably won't break it. Now hold it like a knife and firmly whack it with a protruding point or edge. The first could have you hitting the window all day, the second will quite possibly give you a first-attempt break. The difference is that you have spread all the energy over a large area, or all the energy into a single point, and that difference is what makes the difference.


    This works with soft objects too - it's just a law of nature. For example, to draw on 20 years' experience as an Addiction Counsellor, when I used to ask clients what they did when the needles got so blunt they would barb on attempting to penetrate skin, like, how did they get their 'hit'. The answer was uniform and seldom varied in any detail: just straighten out the most recent barb on the side of some sandpaper or side of a matchbox. Take a deep breath and insert as hard and fast as possible - almost like throwing a dart. In 99% of such attempts the needle would enter the targetted vein and it would exit again after performing its function without the painfulness of having been barbed again and having to draw the barb out backwards (it makes a clicking, rending sound as it tears through the tissue like the teeth of a comb, makes drawing fingernails down a blackboard seem like a desirable and fun sensation by comparison, I'm told, and with added physical pain to boot).


    Of course, what they were doing was applying the most amount of pressure in the shortest time with the smallest area projectile, and the skin was not offering any resistance, or didn't have the opportunity, as with a bullet at speed. Interested, I asked for one of a client's worst needles, and experimented a bit with cardboard sheets. Provided you fulfilled the above conditions, you could add sheets to the length of the needle (get a longer one and it would still pierce right through, like a dart thrown accurately and with great force). The comments about bullets in some of the answers further bear this out - in fact, without this principle, back in days of yore, our spears would just have bounced off dem buffalo etc, and we probably would never have evolved into two dudes (or dudettes) shooting the breeze about laws of physics. Hope this helped a little.
    you can definitely break a window by punching it.....but it hurts like hell when glass shards go in your arm
    it's not how big but rather how much force. a larger force exerted over a smaller or sharper objects has a huge impact. it's almost similar to a small bullet having so much energy
    a broken spark plug will do it, get the porcelain part and throw it at a car window and it shatters.
    Shoot it with a bullet? LOL!
    Car windows are made of ';tempered';, or ';heat treated'; glass, for two reasons. Tempered glass is 2 to 6 times stronger than normal, and when it does break, it shatters into hundreds of small chips instead of a few large razor sharp shards (this is called ';dicing';)





    Tempered glass is made by heating a glass sheet to about 1200 or more degrees, then *rapidly* cooling the sheet with a blast of cold air until it is down to about 300 or 400 degrees. This causes a huge amount of thermal strain on the surface of the glass, which in general makes it much more able to resist bending and impact forces.





    However, if you use any material that is *harder* than glass, such as a diamond, or a sharp piece of porcelain, and make a small scratch or chip, the thermal strain is strong enough to literally tear the surface of the glass apart at the weak point.





    The resulting crack then ';propagates'; into the middle of the glass, and from there, multiplies and ';spiderwebs'; through the entire pane at supersonic speed, causing it to literally ';explode'; into hundreds of fragments. The fact that it shatters into uniform sized pieces is actually a sign of a good product.....





    The key here is not necessarily how much force you use, but how *hard* the object is; any glass will break if bent or impacted with enough force, no matter what you use....





    Probably more than you wanted to know....


    ~Soylent Yellow





    P.s: The front winshield of cars is usually made out of ';laminated safety glass'; which is completely different....
    hit the object in the center of window with a large force. be away with the window for some distance while hitting.
  • highlight colors
  • ointment cream
  • How far will an object move in one second if its average speed is 5m/s?

    This is a good question. If you do not specify the interval used to compute the average speed, then we cannot tell. For example, if the average speed was measured between time t= 0 sec and time t = 100 sec, we can only tell that it did 500 m after the 100 sec. (500m /100s = 5m/s). However, it could be that it did all the 500m in the first second and didn't move after. So, the answer is we don't know.





    If we make the *assumption* that the average speed was 5m/s in the first second, we have that the object moved 5m/s x 1s = 5m, but this requires an assumption.How far will an object move in one second if its average speed is 5m/s?
    seriously...i'm not even in physics...i'm still in geometry and i even know the answer to that...it's too obviousHow far will an object move in one second if its average speed is 5m/s?
    distance = speed x time.


    so, it would be 5m/s x 1= 5m.
    ... was this a joke?

    Are there any hidden object games for PS3 or PSP?

    Also do you get any CSI type of games as well for the above.Are there any hidden object games for PS3 or PSP?
    Well, I'm not sure but there is Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, which has some hidden items and is an action game. It is one of the best games out for the PS3. I highly recommend it. Sorry but I can't help you out any more than that.

    How fast must an object be traveling to make 1 day, 1000 years relative to Earth?

    Velocity Time DilationHow fast must an object be traveling to make 1 day, 1000 years relative to Earth?
    1000 years = 365 000 days





    So you would to be travelling at a speed where 1/Sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) = 365,000.





    Solve for v to give





    v = 0.999999999996247 c





    where c is the speed of light

    What happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?

    Just curious.What happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?
    1) The force moves over the object and carries on.





    2) The force is deflected back the way it came, it is not stopped and the object is not moved.





    3) Such things cannot co-exist.What happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?
    Collision
    Isaac Asimov answered this question rather neatly, I thought. I can't remember in which of his many books I read it (it was a long time ago), but the gist of his argument was this: A universe in which there exists such a thing as an irresistible force is, by definition, a universe which cannot also contain an immovable object. And a universe which contains an immovable object cannot, by definition, also contain an irresistible force. So the question is essentially meaningless: either the force is irresistible or the object is immovable, but not both.
    chaos
    DESTRUCTION.
    well .... it may either end-up moving the object or a huge explosion would happen that would shake the planet
    Destruction
    We're back to Douglas Adams again, aren't we?





    Whatever the outcome, it would presumably be a trifle unsettling - something along the lines of the Big Bang, Armageddon, or taking afternoon tea with the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.
    Didn't that happen with Silver Surfer and the Thing?
    You're an evil little piece of crap, telling a kid he did something bad, so god killed his dog.





    You must be very happy with yourself, turd.

    If the height of the object is lowered does the total energy of the object change?

    Yes and no.





    TE = PE + KE + WE; where TE is total energy, PE is potential, KE is kinetic, and WE is work energy done by or on the object.





    When the object is lowered from a height h, the potential energy is reduced commensurately because PE(h) = mgh; where m is the object's mass and g = 9.81 m/sec^2 in SI units. To keep TE constant, which is what the conservation of energy says must happen, that potential energy loss must be compensated by an increase in kinetic energy, an increase in work, or both.





    If the object is dropped in a frictionless environment, the only work done is WE = mgs; where s = H - h and H is the starting point for the fall and h is the current height above zero ground. In other words, the work, done by the gravitational force (W = mg) is just the force mg times the distance s fallen. This is the work function equation.





    So in the frictionless environment, all the PE is converted into KE by the WE done on the object as it drops. And when the object is just about to hit ground zero, at h ~ 0, we have TE(0) = PE(0) + KE(0) = KE(0) because potential energy is almost zero as h ~ 0. That is, all the PE(h) = KE(0), which means all the potential energy at the start becomes kinetic energy. Thus, TE(h) = PE(h) = mgh = 1/2 mv^2 = KE(0) = TE(0) and the object retains its total energy throughout the fall up to just prior to impact with the ground level.





    But if there is friction F (e.g., drag or sliding), the net force doing the work would be f = W - F and WE = fs = (mg - kN)s; where s is the distance the object is worked on by the two forces. I used F = kN; where k is the friction coefficient and N is the normal weight of the object. I could have used F = 1/2 rho Cd A v^2 which is the drag equation just as well.





    Three things happen here with friction. PE goes down and KE goes up, same as in the frictionless environment. But with friction, some of the PE converts into heat and not into KE. It's the drag friction heat, for example, that makes the nose of a space shuttle glow white hot when penetrating the air. And guess what all that heat is doing...it's reducing the total energy of the shuttle.





    That work generated heat is lost from the object. Recall TE(h = 0) = PE(0) + KE(0) + WE(0) when the object is lowered to just above ground level h ~ 0. Thus, just before impact with the ground, the object has a kinetic energy that is somewhat less than the potential energy it started with at h. Why? Because, with friction, not all the PE went into KE, as it did when we assumed no friction.





    If you assume no friction in the descent, the object's TE does not change at all from when it was released or pushed down from h. In which case, the answer is no, the object's total energy does not change.





    But if you assume friction, the object does not keep all that TE it started with. Some of it is vented, if you will, to the object's environment and that work energy is not associated with the object any more.





    Thus, in the sense that some energy is lost due to friction, the total energy actually associated with the object just prior to impact is less than what it started with. In which case, yes, the total energy changes. In fact, because there is no such thing as a frictionless system in real life, the total energies at various waypoints in the system will in fact change.





    So, my answer is yes for real life and no for frictionless make believe systems.If the height of the object is lowered does the total energy of the object change?
    the energy of the 'system' changes, but not necessarially the energy of the object. Recall that energy is the 'potential to do work'.


    The object itself has internal heat energy, maybe some chemical potential energy, maybe it is elastic and has some energy stored in compression. That remains the same no matter its position.


    compare that to a 'system' where you are looking at an object suspended above some frame of reference (the ground?) by a shelf or rope or whatever other mechanism. at a given height it has some potential to do work. if it is lowered it first transfers potential energy into kinetic energy, then when it is brought to rest again that kinetic energy would be transfered into what ever braking system existed to stop its downward motion. so that system looses energy.


    hope that addresses your question

    I've got an interview at topman and I was told to take an object in which I had to use to describe topman?

    Can anybody give me some advice, I really need it, preferrably from someone who has had to do the same thing.I've got an interview at topman and I was told to take an object in which I had to use to describe topman?
    take me..im a top man lol...i dress to impress...lolI've got an interview at topman and I was told to take an object in which I had to use to describe topman?
    i would bring some building blocks and set them up in the interview in a pyramid saying 'this represents topman' . i would then point at one of the blocks and say 'this blocks represents me' i would then remove the blocks which represents me so the pyramis tumbles. the point being without you, topman can't hold itself up
    take a vibrator and tell topman to go fuc themselves with it ...your going for a interview not to be their performing monkey ..plenty of jobs out there...that's some management crap they though up to validate their crap job
    take in a young, trendy fashion magazine.





    Or,





    A friend that you could dress in their type of clothes.
  • highlight colors
  • ointment cream
  • If I masturbated with one object the a week or two later another object could I get a STD?

    I'm a girl by the way.





    Please don't be rude.If I masturbated with one object the a week or two later another object could I get a STD?
    noIf I masturbated with one object the a week or two later another object could I get a STD?
    no, STDS you get from having sexual contact with another human being

    An object wieghed on the moon will only be 1/6 as heavy as it is on earth What will that percent be?

    an object wieghed on the moon will only be 1/6 as heavy as it is on earth What will that percent be?An object wieghed on the moon will only be 1/6 as heavy as it is on earth What will that percent be?
    1/6 as a percentage is 16.666% recurring but I do not know if that is what you are asking.An object wieghed on the moon will only be 1/6 as heavy as it is on earth What will that percent be?
    1/6 x 100 = 16.7%
    16.666...repeated


    (100 divided by 6).
    roughly 17% or 16.6666666666666666

    How do you convert a Shockwave Flash Object (SWF) file?

    I just want to upload it for my website :)How do you convert a Shockwave Flash Object (SWF) file?
    Hi, if you want to upload a SWF to your website, you can just embed it with HTML 'embed' tag like this -


    %26lt;object classid=';clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-


    11cf-96B8-444553540000'; codebase=';http://download.macromedia


    .com/pub/shockwave/cabs/


    flash/swflash.cab#version=7,0,19,0'; width=';432'; height=';330'; title=';game';%26gt;


    %26lt;param name=';movie'; value=';/flash/yourflash.swf'; /%26gt;


    %26lt;param name=';quality'; value=';high'; /%26gt;


    %26lt;embed src=';../flash/yourflash.swf'; quality=';high'; pluginspage=';http://www.macromedia.com/


    go/getflashplayer'; type=';application/x-shockwave-flash'; width=';432'; height=';330';%26gt;%26lt;/embed%26gt;


    %26lt;/object%26gt;





    I also heard that you can use SWFObject to embed Flash file to web page, and it's better than the 'embed' tag above, check this - http://blog.deconcept.com/swfobject/





    But if it is too technical to you, you can use Moyea web player Pro - http://www.flash-video-mx.com/web-player鈥?/a>


    It's very easy to use even if you don't know code. It is a flash video player maker that provides quick and easy solution to add videos to web pages and produce the html page with an embedded skinnable flash video player to put on your website as well.


    Here is the tutorial - http://www.flash-video-mx.com/web-player鈥?/a>


    p.s. Using Moyea web player Pro, you need to convert the SWF to FLV with the SWF4Tube converter that recommended in the 'Encoder tab', then you can import the converted FLV file to the program.How do you convert a Shockwave Flash Object (SWF) file?
    Magic Swf2Avi can help you convert flash video to flv simply, directly, high-quality.





    you can download this software FREE:


    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en%26amp;q=mag鈥?/a>


    or


    http://effectmatrix.com/swf2avi/index.ht鈥?/a>





    features:


    a. Professional, High-Quality, No skip frames and Lossless audio for your Flash conversion


    b. One step to convert flash(swf) to your iPod, PSP, Zune, 3GP mobile phone(Nokia, Sony Ericsson, Motorola), Apple TV, iPhone, etc.


    c. Convert and Burn flash(swf) file to DVD, SVCD, VCD and Audio CD.


    d. Support the output video formats: AVI, MPEG, MPEG2 TS, MP4, WMV, 3GP, GIF, H.264/MPEG-4 AVC, H.264/PSP AVC Video, MOV, FLV, etc..


    e. Extract and Convert flash(swf) file audio to other popular audio formats, like MP2, MP3, AC3, WMA, WAV, FLAC, M4A, OGG, AAC, AU, MMF etc..


    f. Convert flash(swf) to JPG, BMP image sequences, TAG, TIFF, PNG image sequences with alpha transparent channel.
    The quickest, best software with the least amount of hassles is E.M. Magic Swf2Avi. I've been using it for years with no problems and it is is the extremely powerful Flash converter software to convert SWF to AVI and other popular formats.





    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en%26amp;q=E.M鈥?/a>
    Use Converting Software that is able to perform this action.





    Total Video Converter (Old Version) 3.10





    Do yourself a huge favor and visit the www.forgot2thought.wordpress.com website and get the step-by-step instructions on performing this task.
    Here's how to embed it to a website;





    http://animation.about.com/od/flashanima鈥?/a>

    What object is found at 09h 30m RA and -9 degrees declination?

    what is the name and which constellation is it in?What object is found at 09h 30m RA and -9 degrees declination?
    The star Alphard - in the constellation Hydra.

    How do you emboss text on an object in a video? Like the episode titles in the opening scene of Heroes.?

    Does anyone know how to do this using Adobe Premiere Pro?





    If you noticed in the opening scenes of ';Heroes';. Usually the episode title is on certain objects. (e.g. on the floor, against the wall, on the curb.. etc) and even if the camera moves, the text still stays where it is. As if really stuck/engraved to the object. I wanna be able to do this.





    Can anyone point me in the right direction? A guide? Or if you know how, could you explain to me how to do it?





    Thanks!How do you emboss text on an object in a video? Like the episode titles in the opening scene of Heroes.?
    you emboss the text by using your computer.

    An object has an initial velocity ';v0'; and an acceleration ';a';. How far (';x';) does it travel in a time t?

    Please use algebra to explain and give me a solution. This is taken from the Idiots Guide to Physics. They say that the answer is x= v0 t +1/2 at squared. why?An object has an initial velocity ';v0'; and an acceleration ';a';. How far (';x';) does it travel in a time t?
    If initial speed is V0 and the speed after a time t second is V,





    Acceleration is change in speed per unit time.





    Acceleration a = (V - VO) / t.





    The average speed during this time t is





    V (average) = (V + V0) / 2.





    Note; if any quantity is changing uniformly, the average is found by adding the initial and final value and dividing the sum by 2.





    The average speed can also be determined by dividing the total distance by total time of travel.





    V (average) = S / t.





    Therefore S/t = (V + V0) / 2.





    S = (V + V0)* t / 2.





    From a = (V - V0) / t we have V = V0 +at.





    Therefore S = {V0 +at + VO} * t /2


    --------------- = {2 V0 t + at t } /2





    -------------- S = V0t + 0.5 a ttAn object has an initial velocity ';v0'; and an acceleration ';a';. How far (';x';) does it travel in a time t?
    Initial velocity : v0


    Acceleration : a


    Initial distance : x0


    Distance travelled : x


    Time taken : t





    v = dx /dt


    dx = v dt


    integrate both sides:


    x 聽聽聽聽 聽螖t聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 螖t


    鈭? dx = 鈭? v dt = 鈭? (v0 + a螖t )dt


    x0聽聽聽 聽0聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 聽聽0





    x 鈭?x0 = v0螖t + 陆 a螖t2





    x = x0 + v0螖t + 陆 a螖t虏


    as x0 is zero


    and 螖t = t - 0 = t,


    thus,





    x = v0t + 陆 at虏





    Have a nice day ...


    :)
    distance=(1/2)*a*t*t
    u= initial velocity


    v= final velocity





    v= u + at


    average speed S =[u + v]/2 = [u + u+ at]/2 = [2u+at]/2= u +i/2at








    distance travelled x= average speed x time = S x t = [u+1/2at] t= ut + 1/2 at^2








    substituting v0 for u as in ur problem,





    x= v0 t +1/2 at^2
    Take the equation v = u + at. By definition, this has to be correct.





    then you'll get ds/dt = u + at


    ds = (u+at).dt





    ds = u.dt + at.dt





    Integrate





    s = ut + a * 1/2 t^2





    s = ut + 1/2 a.t^2 - Voila!
  • highlight colors
  • ointment cream
  • How much horsepower does a 170 pound object have when it's moving 25mph?

    Focus on the laws of motion.How much horsepower does a 170 pound object have when it's moving 25mph?
    None. It takes no power to maintain that speed (on level ground, no friction). The object has kinetic energy (0.5 * m * v^2). Power was required to put it in motion and power can be recovered by decelerating it. If you do the math, the energy is 3551.86 ft-lb, equivalent to 1 horsepower for 6.458 seconds. Answer 1 neglected the fact that weight must be converted to mass by dividing by g, and energy is proportional to v^2.How much horsepower does a 170 pound object have when it's moving 25mph?
    The best answer that I chose is...


    Guitar_Junkie_





    P.S. I made a mistake by putting this question to vote. Report Abuse

    Your first mistake was the way you phrased your question. Now it seems you are asking about a force of 170 lb exerted at 25 mph (for instance moving your 170 lb object UPWARD at 25 mph), which Guitar_J answers correctly. Anyway, thanks for making the second mistake. Report Abuse

    I thought if you were to exert a 170 pound object forward, then you put a load onto the wheels, it would put 11.33 horsepower out into the load, but I'm confused, because


    ';rahul_303'; said it will put out 12.79 horsepower, so which rating is correct? Report Abuse

    horsepower is a RATE


    the object moving has an AMOUNT of energy


    Good thing you are a cop and not a physicist! Report Abuse

    Oh S#隆鈥? you can still interpret law!!


    Retire. Report Abuse

    746 watts is equal to 1 horsepower


    How much energy does 746 watts have?


    Well, it depends on how long you apply it for.


    Is a light bulb going on in your head?





    You could legitimately ask; How many horsepower-hours is it equivalent to, but I expect you will just write a citation. Report Abuse

    AP, re your followup question: Force and velocity are both vectors, meaning they have direction. The power is the force times the velocity times the cosine of the angle between their directions. A rolling object exerts a force (its weight) downwards, but travels horizontally. (continued) Report Abuse

    What I thought...for example...If you had a 170 pound pile of bricks, then, you cranked it up on a spring, then pressed the ';release'; button, ...CONTINUES ON NEXT COMMENT... Report Abuse

    ...CONTINUING...%26amp; it accelerates to 25 mph. What you don't answer is...';HOW MUCH HORSEPOWER WOULD IT PUT OUT WHILE FREEWHEELING ON A FLAT GROUND BEFORE IT WILL COME TO A STOP???';. Report Abuse

    (continued) This means the two vectors are at right angles so no power is needed (or exerted) to MAINTAIN that motion. When force and velocity are in the same direction, power is exerted and the object accelerates. So power is needed to ACHIEVE that motion. Report Abuse

    NO, I'm not talking about the vectors...This thing that we're using to talk requires a limit of 300 characters, so I mean I have to split it up into 2. Anyway, to make it easy, how much horsepower would it take to get the 170 pound object going to 25mph in 1 second? Report Abuse

    You can't say how much POWER it puts out while slowing due to friction unless you know the friction force (which is typically assumed to be constant no matter what the velocity is). Even then it's complicated because the power isn't constant, it decreases as the velocity decreases. (continued) Report Abuse

    You can say how much kinetic ENERGY it has given its mass and velocity, that's 0.5*M*V^2, and it will lose all that energy when it finally stops. Report Abuse

    Well, then how much horsepower would it have at peak speed (25mph)? Report Abuse

    How much power to reach 25 mph in one second? Solve this:


    P=KE/T (power, kinetic energy, time)


    KE=0.5*M*V^2 (mass in slug, velocity in ft/sec)


    M=W/G (weight in lb, grav. acceleration, = 32.17405 ft/sec^2)


    P will be in ft-lb/sec. Divide by 550 to get hp. Report Abuse

    Thanks, that's ALL I wanted to know.





    Good bye. Report Abuse

    How much hp would it have...? No answer. A horizontally coasting object doesn't have power, it has energy. Power is the rate of change of energy. Add friction (eg put on the brakes) and you do get power as energy is drained off; the brakes are dissipating power and getting hot. Report Abuse

    Is that a P.S. Because I basically wanted the conversation to end, but you seem to want to start A new one. I'm talking about an object freewheeling from the laws of motion on flat ground. Report Abuse

    If you get (for example) a bike as fast as you can get it going (with you on it), then even if you are on a flat ground, %26amp; you stop petaling, the bike can freewheel from the laws of motion (inercia). Report Abuse

    Let's say that if it crashed into another object on wheels, that is a few pounds lighter, then the bike slows down, %26amp; other object starts to move because a moving object has tork (measured in HORSEPOWER). PROOF: Because it will start to push the other object on wheels (even while freewheeling). Report Abuse

    Torque is not measured in horsepower. That is why a motor is rated in both units. Report Abuse

    You would make a fantastic South Korean stem cell researcher. Report Abuse

    Just make up a number that satisfies your will! Report Abuse

    The only reason I continued the conversation was that the comments display doesn't update while you're typing a comment. While I was answering 'How much hp...' you wrote your bye-bye and posted it, but I didn't see it until after I posted my reply. Bye-bye. Report Abuse

    O.K. Conversation ends here.





    Note: 25 mph might not be as fast as you can (depends on what bike you're using).





    2nd of all, I would recommend using a dummy in this experiment. Report Abuse

    1 hp = 550 ft-lbf/sec





    watch units





    = 170 lbf * 36.67 ft/sec = 6233.9 ft-lbf/sec





    6233.9/550 = 11.33 hp
    Power is the rate of doing work. A such an object does not have ';horsepower'; or any other unit of power for that matter.





    It will have energy though:





    72.3 kg @ 11.111 m/s





    Ek = 0.5 * 72.3 * 11.111^2 = 4463 J
    12.79 horse power


    follow the calculation





    170 pound = 0.45 x 170 = 76.5 kilogram force


    1 mile = 1852 meter


    1 hour = 60 mins, 1 mins = 60 sec , 1hour = 60x60=3600sec


    25 mph = 25 x 1852/3600 = 12.86 meter/sec





    work require to move the object = weight x velocity


    = 76.5 x 12.86 = 983.79 kgf-m





    1 kgf.meter/sec = 0.013 metric horsepower





    hence 983.79 kgf.meter/sec = 12.79 Horsepower(metric)





    for conversion go to http://www.onlineconversion.com/





    good luck,





    rahul......
    Power is the rate of doing work.





    Power = Work done/Time (s)





    Power = Watts = Joules/second in S.I. units





    Work done = Force x Distance





    Distance = Velocity x Time





    Convert velocity of 25 mph into feet/minute





    You can calculate it from there as horse power in Imperial units was defined in a previous question I answered.





    Good luck.

    Have you ever wondered what happens when an unstoppable force meets an unmovable object?

    No, not at all. I wonder about possible physical phenomina; not impossible ones...like travel faster than light, travel into the past, unsotoppable objects, immovable objects, infinitely thin strings, etc.





    By the way, we can easily show the impossibility of your scenario. Consider dp = Fdt which is the impulse of your collision. The are two possible outcomes: either momentum changes, dp %26lt;%26gt; 0, or it does not, dp = 0.





    And dt = 0 in either case because unstoppable and immoveable imply perfect elasticity and no deformation losses. Both effects require some passage of time if they are not perfect and/or deformation occurs during the collision. Otherwise, dt = 0 must be true.





    Thus F = dp/dt = dp/0 ---%26gt; infinity if dp %26lt;%26gt; 0 or indeterminate if dp = 0. In other words, this is an impossible scenario because in a finite universe with finite energy infinity does not exist in any form.





    BTW, the answer claiming unstoppable force is mixing energy with force. While there is a conservation of energy law, there is no such thing for force.Have you ever wondered what happens when an unstoppable force meets an unmovable object?
    (Johnny Mercer, 1954)


    When an irresistible force such as you


    Meets an old immovable object like me


    You can bet as sure as you live


    Somewhere, sometime, somehow


    Something's gotta give





    Johnny was right about this. Something's gotta give. No matter strong the force, there is probably some object that could stop it. And no matter the mass of the object, there is probably a force strong enough to move it.Have you ever wondered what happens when an unstoppable force meets an unmovable object?
    Unstoppable object would just change directions. Say there's an unmovable wall and an unstopable force hits it, the force would either carry on up the wall( there is enough force behind it to do this because it is unstoppable) or it will begin to go up the wall, gravity would take its toll, and it would fall back down and keep doing that over and over. I guess it could get eventually turned around too and go the opposite direction forever. But yeah he's right, violation of Newton's laws. Never gonna happen.
    I'm glad you said ';unstoppable force'; rather than ';unstoppable object';. Force can go from one object into another, and even exit as a different form of energy.





    In your example, the unstoppable force would go into the unmovable object, and since it's unmovable, the force will exit, most likely as heat, sound, or even light.
    Things like unstoppable forces and unmovable objects don't exist or do they? IMO there is a possibility that in the universe there is either ONE unstoppable force or ONE unmovable object. Both can't exist.
    It is impossible due to a language thing because if the object is unmovable then the force must be stoppable.
    since both require an amount of energy not present in the universe, i never bothered to.


    take that, chinese proverbians!
    It's like a carwreck with a parked car.


    The parked car is totaled, and moved.
    How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck would chuck wood?





    Nonsense questions get nonsense answers!
    Violation of Newton's 2nd law.
    Everytime I bump into my mother-in-law...
    Total Chaos, The Big Bang.

    Can an object have a constant speed and at the same time a varying velocity?

    It happens when an object is moving at constant speed along a curved path (like a circular motion at constant speed).


    Speed only tells how fast is moving any object, but velocity is determined by speed and the direction of speed. In a curve path an object that is moving at constant speed, the direction is changing all the time.Can an object have a constant speed and at the same time a varying velocity?
    Yes. Because velocity is speed that has a definite direction. 20 mph is a speed but 20 mph due east is a velocity, so by varying your direction you also vary your velocity. If traveling in a straight line, velocity is a simple equation with vrepresenting velocity, s the speed and t the the time interval (';per hour'; in most cases).


    Looks like this


    v=s/t (within a defined direction or vector)





    Speed, within a determined vector or direction, is a measurement of velocity.





    To get really confused, go to wikipedia and enter velocity and read the entire article. G'day!Can an object have a constant speed and at the same time a varying velocity?
    An object's velocity is defined as its speed and direction. Since it is possible for an object to have a constant speed while changing direction; the answer is yes it is possible.
    Speed is a scalar value and velocity can be assigned direction. Let us say that an object is traveling along a line, any line. It's speed along that line is given by the distance covered along that straght line divided by the time it takes to travel along that distance.





    Now, let's say that object is also moving perpendicular to that same line, going away from the line and then returning to go in the opposite direction perpendicular only to return again. It is oscillating about the line as it travels with the same speed described above.





    The speed remains the same for both scenarios in the direction of the line. The velocity, however, does change. The Velocity would be defined in the first scenario as the vector equivalant of the speed. So, speed and velocity would be the same value in the first scenario. In the second scenario, the velocity would be the same as in the first scenaio for the direction along the line, PLUS the added velocity of the motion perpendicular to our original line, which would be some function which I am sure you will be encountering soon.





    Hope this helps.
    Yes. If the object has a constant speed but it is changing its DIRECTION while moving, then its velocity is changing; Velocity is a vector. Vectors have magnitude (number value and a unit) and a direction.

    What is the speed of a free falling object?

    For steady state, it is whatever speed that gives air-resistance equal to weight and it's called terminal velocity.





    For ';air-resistance'; read any-fluid resistance. If falling within a vacuum there is no limit to the speed.





    120mph is the figure quoted for an average human being, in averagely baggy clothing (and the person's attitude will affect things a lot), in air.


    .


    .What is the speed of a free falling object?
    9.8 meters per second squared is the acceleration of an free falling object. So many round that to 10 meters a second. And of course speed is the total distance over a period of time. So say for instance an object takes 6 seconds to fall, each second is about 10 meters, so 6 seconds times 10 meters is 60 meters per second is the top speed of the free falling object.What is the speed of a free falling object?
    Roughly 120 miles per hour. I believe that equates to 30 feet per second squared.

    Girls, Which object is best to masturbate with?

    I need to know which object is most pleasurable masturbating with.Girls, Which object is best to masturbate with?
    do an internet search for ';female masturbation techniques';Girls, Which object is best to masturbate with?
    1: A carrot lubricated with grapeseed oil: Rub it very quickly over your clit.


    2: Drops of water: Drop drops of water on your clit.


    3: Showerhead: Take the showerhead and point it up to your clit.


    4: Hands: There are many ways. Watch a video on YouTube called C Spot Orgasms. There are more such as G, A, U and S stop orgasms.





    Ok! That was my cousin KB! He is a female orgasm expert.
    EASY!


    HoMEDICS pain percussion massager with heat. Available in the drug stores.
    you're hands darling. you're hands.
    Something cylindrical .
    your hands
    Oral-B Vitality tooth brush.Make sure it's not the same one you use to brush your teeth though, lol.
    your hands, cucumbers, the end of your hairbrush, end of a tooth brush :)
    My Penis.

    In dealing with Java: What is the relationship between a client of an object and the object's public members?

    It's the only problem that I can't answer on this pre-lab assignment, I have for my programming fundamentals class. It's due in 2.5 hours :(In dealing with Java: What is the relationship between a client of an object and the object's public members?
    class MyObject {


    public String isdnNum;


    private double price;


    // constructor


    public MyObject( String isdn, double amt ) {


    isdnNum = isdn;


    price = amt;


    }


    // method


    public String getPrice() {


    return price;


    }


    }


    In the above example client can only see the public members.


    MyObject obj = new MyObject( ';123456';, 9.95 );





    client can see the isdn as obj.isdnNum;


    client cannot see price as obj.price, instead


    double thePrice = obj.getPrice();





    this example is very simple, you normally would not expose price that way, but it shows if the value 'price' is private, the only access is to use a member.method() and programmers carefully code the access modifiers: default, public, private, protected
  • highlight colors
  • ointment cream
  • How do I find the mass of an object given its density and volume?

    m = d/v





    So, you divide your density by your volume.














    Hope I helpedd! =)How do I find the mass of an object given its density and volume?
    density=mass/volume

    What could increase the gravitational force of an object, besides mass?

    DISTANCE OF THE BODY FROM NEIGHBOURING ONESWhat could increase the gravitational force of an object, besides mass?
    the gravitational constant . except mass of two body, the gravitational constant also important . F= GMm/r^2


    so the distance between two body also important :-)

    Can an object of a superclass access members declared in a subclass?

    can an object of a superclass access members declared in a subclass?Can an object of a superclass access members declared in a subclass?
    No, a superclass (base class) could not even know about members declared in a descendant class.