What is a simple demonstration on Charles' Law? (Not with a balloon)?
476322
==========\n\nClose a glass bottle with a Cork at normal temperature and than put it in a freezer for one hour.\n\nThe low temperature will cause the gas to contract.\n\nNow try to open it. You will find it very difficult to open it, why?\n\nBecause of reduced temperature air inside the bottle will be contracted and thus the air pressure inside the bottle will decrease. The higher atmospheric pressure will try to push the Cork inside the bottle which will make it difficult to open the bottle.
889683
There is, it is called Standarad Deviation, if you have a decent Scientific Calculator it shouyld show how to use it.
179131
Try this:\nhttp://kr.cs.ait.ac.th/~radok/physics/f3.htm
180043
Umm....  there is no way to disprove it....thats why its called a law, not a theorem.  Also, you need to be more specific.  What ways?  Whats experiments?  \n\nAsk again with  more details and I will help you
771697
Try Google or Yahoo.  You'll find worked examples there.  I think it needs diagrams to understand; they and the accompanying explanations are too complex to attempt to reproduce here.
494540
Haha whats with all these answers, if you know basic physics, One of Newtons laws of motion is that:\n\n"for an object that is stationary or travelling at constant velocity, no force acts."\n\nso you ask what is the force?\nthere is no resultant force, the driving force and resistance are equal and cancel each other out.\n\n\nAnd additionally the basic equation to find force is:\nF=ma (force = mass x accelleration), this is evidence that an accelleration needs to be taking place for a force to act.\n\nLets say you want the force for a 50kg object accellerating at 3ms-2. F=ma  ->  F=50x3 ->  F=150N.\n\nNow lets say you want the force for a 50kg object travelling at constant velocity, no accelleration.\nF=ma  ->  F=50x0  ->  F=0N\n\n\nThere you go, wasnt that easy
991385
Experimenting with magnetorheological fluids.\nSuspending a magnet in mid-air.\nLevitating pyrolytic graphite.\nA Gauss Rifle: A Magnetic Linear Accelerator.\nBuilding a Curie-effect heat engine.\nGoing further:\n\nSuperconductors.\n\n \n \n \nThe Gauss Rifle:\nA Magnetic Linear Accelerator\n \n \n This very simple toy uses a magnetic chain reaction to launch a steel marble at a target at high speed. The toy is very simple to build, going together in minutes, and is very simple to understand and explain, and yet fascinating to watch and to use.  \n \n gauss rifle Click on image for animated view  \n \n The photo above shows six frames of video showing the gauss rifle in action. Each frame shows 1/30th of a second. In the first frame, a steel ball starts rolling towards a magnet taped to a wooden ruler. In the second frame, a second ball can be seen speeding between the rightmost two magnets. By the third frame, the accelerator has sped up so much that the ball that is seen leaving the left side of the device is just a blur as it smashes into the target. One ball, starting at rest, has caused another ball to leave the device at a very high speed.  \n \n gauss rifle materials Click on image for larger view  \n \n The materials are simple. We need a wooden ruler that has a groove in the top in which a steel ball can roll easily. Any piece of wood or aluminum or brass with a groove will work. We chose the ruler because they are easy to find around the house or at school or at a local stationery store.  \n \n We need some sticky tape. Again, almost any kind will do. Here we use Scotch brand transparent tape, but vinyl electrical tape works just as well.  \n \n We need four magnets. Most any type will do, but the stronger the magnets are, the faster the balls will go. Here we use the super strong gold-plated neodymium-iron-boron magnets we have made available in our catalog for the other projects. They work great.  \n \n We will also need nine steel balls, with a diameter that is a close match to the height of the magnets. We use 5/8 inch diameter nickel plated steel balls from our catalog.  \n \n The only tool we will need is a sharp knife for trimming the tape.  \n \n gauss rifle first\nClick on image for larger view  \n \n We start by taping the first magnet to the ruler at the 2.5 inch mark. The distance is somewhat arbitrary -- we wanted to get all four magnets on a one foot ruler. Feel free to experiment with the spacing later.  \n \n gauss rifle tape\nClick on image for larger view  \n \n With the sharp knife, trim off any excess tape. Be careful, since the knife will be strongly attracted to the magnet.  \n \n It is very important that you keep the magnets from jumping together. They are made of a brittle sintered material that shatters like a ceramic. Tape the ruler to the table temporarily, so that it doesn't jump up to the next magnet as you tape the second magnet to the ruler.  \n \n gauss rifle two\nClick on image for larger view  \n \n Continue taping the magnets to the ruler, leaving 2.5 inches between the magnets.  \n \n When all four magnets are taped to the ruler, it is time to load the gauss rifle with the balls.  \n \n gauss rifle all\nClick on image for larger view  \n \n To the right of each magnet, place two steel balls. Arrange a target to the right of the device, so the ball does not roll down the street and get lost.  \n \n To fire the gauss rifle, set a steel ball in the groove to the left of the leftmost magnet. Let the ball go. If it is close enough to the magnet, it will start rolling by itself, and hit the magnet.  \n \n gauss rifle ready\nClick on image for larger view  \n \n When the gauss rifle fires, it will happen too fast to see. The ball on the right will shoot away from the gun, and hit the target with considerable force. Our one foot long version is designed so the speed is not enough to hurt someone, and you can use your hand or foot as a target.
708599
http://www.science.uwaterloo.ca/~cchieh/cact/c120/dotstruc.html
79420
Hey babygurlgonnaloveonu you have asked what is totally QUESTION NUMBER ONE in physics. It's an exciting question which many teachers secretly don't understand and so their students get this hazy idea and kind of go thru the motions. \n\nWow, it is so basic, that it took a super-genius, I mean way smarter than Einstein, to figure it out. A good old farm boy, astrologer, magician & alchemist, religious fanatic, mathematician and all around kook. Yep. Sir Isaac Newton. You gotta wonder what kind of parents would name their kid "Sir"\n\nWell we all know what a force is, it is a sort of push or pull -- think of it as something that changes or *tries to change* the motion of stuff.\n\nNewton first figured out that if you leave a thing alone, or if the pushes and pulls on it cancel out, then it will sit there like a lump. Like those drivers wearing hats, and like sit there after the light has already turned green two minutes ago. \n\nOr else a thing  will keep moving in the same straight line direction and speed  like those drivers wearing hats who go 40 mph on the expressway with their turn signal blinking on and on. This is known as "THE HAT LAW".\n\nAll was well until he noticed that things move faster in an amount equal to how much you bully them or push them around. Twice the force, twice the fasterness and fasterness (also known as acceleration). This is called the "YOU BIG BULLY LAW".\n\nThen he discovered a fly in the ointment. His HAT and BULLY laws didn't really explain all that much. Something was gumming up this beautiful theory. We call it MASS and it is still an unknown mystery as to what it really is. So we vaguely call it the amount of stuff or matter in a thing. \n\nSo he found out that for a certain force the faster-isity (acceleration) is cut in half if you double the mass. The bully has to push twice as hard to fasterize two little kids. So he was like "I'll just add that in, and all will be cool". The "YOU BIG BULLY LAW" and "THE HAT LAW" totally did it all. Wa ta da babee!\n\nBut then Newton had a road accident. He was gunning his Harley over London bridge at like 250 when a bug  hit him in the mouth and knocked out one of his wooden teeth. He was all "Why am I so in pain?". And the bug as it squooshed said "Help! I'm a bug!"\n\nSo spitting out the splinters of his wooden tooth and the splattered bug, he had this revelation. He realized that because he was moving so fast, and the  bug slowed down so fast, that even a eentsy mass like a bug was like taking a hammer to his tooth. \n\nHe noticed that the force was equal to the mass of the bug times the speed of impact all happening in a brief moment. Since Newton spoke Latin (he  was the love child of Joe Newton and an Italian governess) he wrote "Fastus buggus ina momentum hurtus like crazy." Today we call this "momentum". It is just "mass times speed" or "force times a small moment of time". \n\nAnd he realized that the bug smashed up his tooth, but also that the bug was squashed (like a bug) because they were trading the EXACT same amount of momentum. The force on the tooth by the bug in the moment of time was PRECISELY equal to the  smacko-ing the tooth used to stop the bug dead. \n\nHe said "Hey, like he broke my tooth, but I killed him soooo dead!" He did the math and found that the force of the bug on the tooth was equal to the force of the tooth on the bug! \n\nNo way did the two equal forces cancel, after all, his tooth was hammered to splinters, and the bug was flattened. They were equal and opposite, but since one was on the tooth, and the other force was on the bug they did serious damage! Today we call this the "HELP I'M A BUG" law.\n\nNow our man 'Zack was all set. He wrote down his three laws:\n\nTHE HAT LAW (beeep! beeep! Move it Hat Guy!)\nTHE YOU BIG BULLY LAW (betcha can't kno
256104
Read Newton's 3rd law of motion.\nAlso, use F=ma to figure out your acceleration.
860857
Just search for 'moment of inertia'.  There are plenty of tables that show a square beam.  If it is offset, you can use the parallel axis theorem.
903386
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hess%27_law
360723
Use a prism like Newton did.
874570
NO!!  If people would stop (mis)quoting half-remembered precepts here, and do a spot of THINKING, instead, we might get somewhere.\n\n1.  If a moving spherical ball directly hits an identical free, stationary ball head on in an elastic collision, the moving ball STOPS, and the previously stationary one heads off with the original velocity of the other.  So ALL of the moving ball's K.E. has been transferred to the other ball.  \n\nHere are two ways to see this:\n\n1a.  The device known somewhat indelicately to British schoolboys as "Newton's balls" (but in squeamish America as "The Swinging Wonder") provides an excellent table-top demonstration of this.  Most undergraduate physics instructors must haul this out from time to time.\n\n1b.  You can easily solve it analytically, but a thought experiment will also demonstrate it.  In the originally stationary ball's frame, let the other ball approach with speed v.  Now shift (with an appropriately directed speed of v/2) to the frame in which the two equal balls are simply approaching each other, each with a speed in this frame of that same v/2 (oppositely directed, of course)!  Clearly, from the symmetry of the situation, they'll bounce off each other with the same (oppositely directed) speeds in this frame, still of v/2.  Now go back to the original frame: the previously moving ball is now completely stationary, while the originally stationary one is haring off with speed v.  (You may need to make little sketches of what is happening as viewed successively from each of these frames, to see this; I admit that that's what I did.)\n\n2a.  A similar approach can be used to solve the general case for an arbitrary ratio of masses, m (initially moving)/M (initially stationary).  Hint: have the balls approach one another in their center of mass frame with equal but opposite momenta of mv and  MV.  They'll clearly bounce off one another in such a frame, retaining the same values of their respective (but now oppositely directed) speeds.  Then you can do the other frame-jugglings from there. \n\nHowever, this analytical approach, done accurately, is a tedious mess.  So, to appreciate the general problem more physically, consider just the following:\n\n2b.  The case of m << M.\n\nConsider the "equal but opposite momentum" frame for these two balls, in which MV = mv.  This means that if ball M is VERY MASSIVE, the speed it will have in such a frame, V = (m/M)v; that is, it's VERY SMALL compared to little puny m's high speed.\n\nSo, transforming to the frame in which M itself (the big guy) is initially stationary takes only a speed shift of O(m/M)v.  (In fact identically so.)  This only affects the speed of puny m minutely, so m's initial K.E. is still of order O(m v^2).  (There's no need to do picky constant book-keeping for these purposes.)  \n\nNow after the collision: In the original frame, Big M is now moving (and in fact at 2V if you think about it.)  But, being loose about the constants, M's K.E is only O(MV^2).  \n\nSo, the ratio (m's K.E.)/(M's K.E.) ~ (mv^2)/(MV^2)\n\n= (m/M)(M/m)^2 (since mv = MV)\n\n= M/m.\n\nBINGO!  The little bugger still carries by far the larger amount of the kinetic energy.  The massive ball (i) moves sluggishly, and (ii) because  K.E. involves both mass but also the SQUARE of the speed, the TWO POWERS of (small) speed more than cancel out the effect of its (large) mass.\n\nThis is a well-known fact in particle collision theory, that little particles basically bounce off big ones.  \n\nYou could also say that it's well-known in "space billiards": when spacecraft head close to Jupiter to receive a "gravitational sling-shot effect" that sends them off to the outermost planets.  \n\nIt's more complicated because of 3-D effects there, but analogous frame-shifting methods can be used to show that the spacecraft can pick up considerable speed AND change
641452
opposite force being applied
1065017
I'm writing up a proof right now that this is not possible.\n\nCheck out the pdf at:\nhttp://www.geocities.com/euleratuo/
886267
Did you know that The same Isacc Newton invented the Calculus and aclculus is the best technique currently applied by physics of all dimentions to get the most accurate answer by spliting down a large problem into many different small steps of the problem inorder to get the most accurate answer available. thus generating the most effective solution in the world of physics.\nhe has contributed much to the society of man in the physical perspective. ironically he didn't have any prior mthematical knowledge when young.