NEWTONS AND EIENSTIENS IDEA
130314
The "absolute time" is a hypothetical time that either runs at the same rate for all the observers in the universe or the rate of time of each observer can be scaled to the "absolute time" by multiplying the rate by a constant. The theory of relativity doesn't allow the existence of such time because of non existence of absolute simultaneity.\n\nIn physics, the notion of absolute space says that space is an inert arena on which other physical phenomena take place. The space affects the other phenomena, but the space itself is not affected by those phenomena. Newton's absolute space implies that there is one inertial system out of an infinite number that is unique.\n\nAbsolute space underlies the laws of classical physics of Isaac Newton. In his theories, the idea of the absolute space was superseded by the notion of spacetime in special relativity and especially dynamically curved spacetime in general relativity.
557859
They are already there to be discovered.  They can't be rewritten or changed--it's just a matter of finding out what they are.  After all--we knew something made us fall to the ground when we tripped--we just didn't know what the force was until Newton realized the concept of gravity.
525220
This may not be the simplist answer, but you may be able to read it and make it simple for him.\n\nGood luck.\n\nHeres the link:\n\nhttp://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/chem00/chem00802.htm
230466
Newton\nEinstein\nDarwin\nPasteur
89131
They used log tables.\nSimple problems like this could also be solved by using Newton's method.
590930
Momentum - P = mv (P=momentum, m=mass, v = velocity)\nThree Laws of Newton - F = ma (F=Force; a=acceleration)\nEquations of motion - 1) v = u + at\n                                    2) S = (1/2)ut + at^2\n                                    3) v^2 = u^2 + 2aS\n(v=final velocity; u = initial velocity; S=distance)\n\nIf this can help you please mail me back !\nBEST OF LUCK !!!!
266454
Newton's second law is \nforce = mass x acceleration\n\nHow about this? Two men were walking on a hill when they see a bar of chocolate at the bottom. Both are eager to get it. The first man, a skinny little guy of 120 lbs, trips and begins rolling down the hill. The second man, a fatty of 250 lbs, trips at the same time and begins rolling down the hill. Because the fat man has more mass, he is able to produce more force to accelerate himself down the hill faster than the skinny man. The happy fat man reaches the bottom of the hill first, and eats the chocolate.\n\nIllustrations shouldn't be too hard.
35428
nearest Newton?...haha...moron\nI don't have a neighbor by that name.\nYou should have said 'the nearest unit'.\nAnyway, 183 is what you need.\nI mean this is the magnitude.\nAnd the guy who has spoken a lot on this subject should have noticed that a rounded answer is needed and not a nutty professor lecture.
243117
If the forces are both acting in the same direction, add them together. = 65 Newtons
182799
Not his original, but the image in the middle of the first link I'm listing is pretty close to Descartes' from De Meteorologica.  The second source has several modern takes on the image as well as a nice physical explanation of what is going on.
20910
The last poster needs to have his dynamic physics retaught, or stop trying to sound like an engineer.\n\nThe first mistake, is identifying newtons = force x distance.  This is actually a measure of work or energy and measured in joules.  The second mistake identifying force as being measured in joules.  Force is measured in Newtons.  Since it was Isaac Newton in the second law of motion that defined Force.\n\nYour question cannot really be answered without more information.  What is the direction of motion, horizontally or vertically?  \n\nVerically?  Then 150 lbs of force.  Pounds were once used to measure force.  If you want to use metric, convert the 150 lbs to kilograms, multiply by 9.8 and then you must exert at least this much force in Newtons to overcome the force of gravity.  150 lbs is 68.04 kg.\n\nHorizontally, what type of surface?  Determine the coefficient of friction, and multiply it by the mass in kilograms.  Then this is the amount of force you need to exert to overcome the force of friction.  There are two types of friction, static and dynamic.  In other words it takes more force to move an object at rest, but once the object is in motion it takes less force to keep it move (opposing the dynamic force of friction).\n\nWatts by the way is a measurement of power, which is energy derived by time, Power = dE/dt.  Joules per second.
19029
Sorry, but with the time you spent typing these questions you could of looked them up in your physics book or googled them.  Sometimes getting others to do your leg work isn't always the best answer to a problem.  Good Luck in your new class!
634478
I think Galileo is the only one who can match Newton in breadth and depth of knowledge. Archimedes and Euclid were forced to use an undeveloped framework, Descartes was overly concerned about philosophy, Gauss, Euler and Hawking are too theoretical, Da Vinci not theoretical enough, Einstein's and Curie's fields of study were rather narrow...I think that covers all possible candidates...
644389
A newton is the amount of force required to accelerate a mass of one kilogram at a rate of one meter per sec per sec.\nDescription of Motion in One Dimension \nMotion is described in terms of displacement (x), time (t), velocity (v), and acceleration (a). Velocity is the rate of change of displacement and the acceleration is the rate of change of velocity. \n In order to derive new equations that can be used to describe the motion of an object in terms of its three kinematic variables: velocity, displacement, and time. There are three ways to pair them up: velocity-time, displacement-time, and velocity-displacement. In this order, they are also often called the first, second, and third equations of motion, but there is no compelling reason to learn these names. Since we are dealing with motion in a straight line, the symbol x will be used for displacement. Direction will be indicated by the sign (positive quantities point in +x direction, while negative quantities point in the -x direction). Determining which direction is positive and which negative is entirely arbitrary. The laws of physics are isotropic; that is, they are independent of the orientation of the coordinate system. As long as you are consistent, it doesn't matter. Some problems are easier to understand and solve, however, when one direction is chosen positive over another.\n\nvelocity-time\nThe relation between velocity and time is a simple one during constantly accelerated, straight-line motion. Constant acceleration implies a uniform rate of change in the velocity. The longer the acceleration, the greater the change in velocity. If after a time velocity increases by a certain amount, after twice that time it should increase by twice that amount. Change in velocity is directly proportional to time when acceleration is constant. If an object already started with a certain velocity, then its new velocity would be the old velocity plus this change. You ought to be able to see the equation in your mind's eye already.\n\nThis is the easiest of the three equations to derive formally. Start from the definition of acceleration, expand the Δv term, and solve for v as a function of t.\n\n          \na =  Δv  =  v − v0         \n  \nΔt Δt \n          \nv =  v0 + aΔt     (1) \n                  \n\nSince acceleration is also the first derivative of velocity with respect to time, this equation can also be derived using calculus. Just reverse the action of the definition. Instead of differentiating velocity to find acceleration, integrate acceleration to find velocity. Since acceleration is assumed constant, this is quite easy.\n\n          \n  a =  dv                     \n \ndt \n  dv =  a dt \nv   Δt     \n∫  dv =  ∫  a dt               \nv0   0     \nv − v0 =  aΔt  \n  v =  v0 + aΔt     (1) \n          \n\nThe symbol v0 (v nought) is called the initial velocity. It is often thought of as the "first velocity" but this is a rather naïve way to describe it. Take the case of a meteor hurtling towards the earth. What is its initial velocity? If you want v0 to be the first velocity, then the problem is over before it started. Who could possibly say what a meteor's velocity was at its birth? There is no way to answer this question. A better definition would be to say that an initial velocity is the velocity that a moving object has when it first becomes important in a problem. Say the meteor was spotted deep in space and the problem was to determine its trajectory, then the initial velocity would be the velocity at the time it was observed. But if the problem were to determine its velocity on impact, then it's initial velocity would more likely be the velocity it had when it entered the earth's atmosphere. In this case, the answer to, "What's the initial velocity?" is "It depends". This turns out to be the answer to a lot of questions.\n\nThe symbol v is then the velocity some time Δt after the initial velo
341765
Silly...  The point your instructor is making is that barring any impeding object (air) in the horizontal(to the ground) velocity vector will remain the same (First Law of Motion).  Of course his use of never is inappropriate.  Any thrown object will eventually fall, go into orbit, or escape earth's gravity and fly into space.  At which point the object might encounter another impeding object...\nI recommend that you suggest to your instructor that he reword the question. (Forget trying to get the point).  Explain to him that Newton's First Law states "An object at rest tends to stay in rest and an object in motion tends to stay in motion in a straight line at constant speed unless acted upon by an outside force."...  Notice Newton himself refrains from the use of NEVER and uses the unless clause.  Explain to the instructor that you were using the UNLESS in the 1st Law.  That is to say he did not tell you to ignore gravity or any other impeding objects.  So, tell the instructor that you now understand what he was asking BUT s/he would be better off either taking out the NEVER (which Newton would not have used) with "until it hits the ground."\n\nAddition:\nGiven the Q as a true/false statement and understnading that the question is asking about Newton's First Law and knowing that even Newton says "nisi quatenus a viribus impressis cogitur statum illum mutare." which means "unless acted upon by an external and unbalanced force."  I would say FALSE! \n(The word "never" should not have been used).
452163
Look up Vector Mechanics for Engineers and Scientists.  This deals with basic Newtonian physics as applied to static structures.\n\nBone up on chemistry.  It is easy to forget your chemistry, and as far as I know you will be required to take a few semesters of basic Chem, even if you are not planning on being a Chem Eng.\n\nDo not lose your Maths either!  Grab a pre-calc or a calculus book and keep practicing.
503484
I think the truest indication of Newton's genius was his discovery (not exactly intuitive) that the same force that causes an object to fall to the ground was none other than the same force that keeps the moon and planets in their orbits.