on the other hand, tell me what NONCONSERVATIVE FORCE is\ngive me some examples
122046
Conservative forces are the forces that keep the energy in the system eventhough a work is done. Gravity is an example of conservative force. If you move a book to a shelf from floor, there is a work done but the energy is still stored in the system. \n\nOn the other hand, nonconservative forces are the forces that doesn't keep the energy in the system. For example friction is an example for this one. Friction is a force that turns the energy of the system into heat.\n\nI guess that is the as plain as it gets.
367753
A force at its most simplistic is a push or a pull. According to Newton's laws of motion, when something is at rest or travelling at constant velocity, there is NO force acting on it. \n\nNewton's second law states that Force = mass x acceleration which means that a force causes a _change_ in velocity (acceleration). So for continuing motion, there is only a force when there is acceleration.
122880
There are 4 fundemental forces in nature,\nthe Strong Nuclear force, the Weak nuclear force, Electromagnetic force, and Gravitiy.\n\nThe strong nuclear force has to due how the particles are held together in the nucleus of an atom.  Ordinarily, positively charged protons do not like to be around eachother and neutrally charged neutrons have no reason to be attracted to protons, and yet and the same time, they all are packed very tightly into the atoms nucleus.  The strong nuclear force explain this.\n\nThe weak nuclear force is the force effecting radioactive decay and the active for in the atomic bomb.  Who would have thought that an atomic bomb would represent a "Weak" force.\n\nRead more about the 4 fundemental forces of nature here,\nhttp://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/forces/funfor.html
608626
none of the answers is correct , actually magnetic lines of force will be acting in anticlockwise direction.
381387
Inertia\n\nInertia is not a force.\n\na property of matter\n\nThe following are a consequence of the property of matter known as inertia:\nresistance to change in velocity\nthe tendency to maintain constant velocity\nresistance to acceleration\n\nAssuming ideal conditions:\nThe net force on the cheese is zero.\nThe cheese:\naccelerates at a constant rate\nremains at rest\nmaintains constant velocity\n\nIn an actual situation, I doubt the cheese would survive such forces.  I believe the cheese would be rent in twain.
410127
The maximum possible net force is 125N, if the two forces are pushing in the exact same direction.\n\nForce is a vector quantity, which means that any measurement of force includes both a magnitude (size, the number) and a direction (the way that the force is pushing).  The simplest way to indicate direction is with a positive or negative sign, which only gives us two options: left/right, forward/backward, up/down, etc.\n\nIn your question, no direction is specified for either of the forces, but we can figure out the minimum and maximum possible net force rather easily.  The minimum net force would result when the two forces are pushing directly against one another:  100 -25 = 75N (toward the direction that the 100N was pushing).  Similarly, the maximum net force would result when the two forces are pushing together in the same direction:  100 +25 = 125N.\n\nIn general, then, the maximum possible net force (in cases where you are not given directions with the forces) can be found by adding the magnitudes of the forces together, as if they were all pushing in the same direction.
425617
Er, gravity really has nothing to do with this question. Fk = coefficient*Fn.  Fn = mg.  -19.6 is your Normal Force.  But yea, the answer is correct.
338242
Gravity, centrifugal forces and centripetal forces
465627
the cell dividing force lol. theres no such force. it's a spontaneous occurence
378629
For every action force there is an equal and opposite reaction force.\n\nThe force your oars apply to the water creates a reactionary force of the water to your oars.  Since the oars are a part of your boat, the boat pushes forward.
363096
Due to my ignorance on this issue, I can not take a stand so I'd like to here the conservative counter to this. This sounds very intriguing.
193261
*copied from previous post\n\nYour question is unclear about what set of assumptions you want to use. You seem to imply a perfectly constructed stool, with a perfectly centered force, using incompressible material. You want the stool to have no mass, and you imply that you want to use statics to solve this problem. Strictly applying statics, this system is indeterminate, NOT the ridiculous answer of 0 [N] in two legs and W/2 [N] in the others. There are only 3 equations of equilibrium here, 1 for vertical forces and 2 for moments. Since you have four legs, this system cannot be solved by statics alone. Treating the stool as a deformable structure, you can use geometric compatibility to get a fourth equation. I challenge you to find a competently built stool that has 0 [N] in any leg (a physical stool built of real materials), or an incompetently built stool with 0 [N] in any two legs (unstable system that is obviously not static). The answer indicated as "correct" requires an incorrect application of statics. A large part of studying physics is learning when to use a particular tool, and the physical limits of that tool.
424719
1)))  inertia would be best described as\n       resistance to acceleration\n       a property of matter\n2)))zero\n\n3)))Yes\n\n4)))a))please specify the direction in which you want to calculate force\n    b))please specify whether the body was going raght or left\n\n5)))We experience the pseudoforce
519222
It's not exactly a binding force like the strong.  I haven't run across any way it affects orbiting electrons.  See the reference for some info.  But it seems to me like a force without an identity.  Its range is extremely short.
82211
Newton's laws of motion only apply to systems that are larger than atomic and molecular. They definitely DO NOT apply to any atomic or molecular systems. Microscopic systems, yes. Macroscopic systems, yes. Sub-microscopic systems (sub-visual), no.
511443
The only way to really find out is by experiment. I mean, this is the science section, not the philosophy section. Go out and fight something.
589379
They don't call it a Law for nothing you know.\nWherever you look, you will always see an action-reaction paired up.  Newton's 3rd Law fits nicely in with another law which we know holds true in all cases...the Law of conservation of momentum.