Whats the conclusion what does this have to do with inertia?
831398
Because of inertia, an object at rest will remain that way unless acted on by an outside force.  When you flicked the coin, only the coin that was hit was moved.  The others will fall in place.  Same trick as when a waiter yanks a tablecloth quickly, but the dishes stay in place on the table.
739302
Probablly the most novel one that I've heard of is in the "lensman" series by EE doc smith, and it involves inertialessness. He had a device that would somehow remove the inertia of the object it was hooked to, thus making it unneccesary to accelerate. I thought this was cool; it had some really interesting ramifications. Good series, too!
610689
If x is +ve then a is -ve!!!Satisfy yourself with the equation.\nThe equation means that the acceleration is proportional to the displacement but in opposite direction.\nConsider a simple pendulum.When it is at the extreme position it has maximum tendency to go back to the mean position.That tendency is the restoring force which acts opposite to the displacement and exhibits itself as acceleration.If the pendulum is displaced to half the extreme position the tendency to come back is less.Thus the acceleration is proportional to the displacement but acts in the opposite direction.\nThe equation is true in all its sense.
1130182
Um... I think maybe pull... if something is rotating/turning it is creating it's own little gravity field (I think!) therefore making it easier to pull.  I'm no scientist but this is an educated guess.
906380
First problem: You have assumed all the mass of the meter stick is concentrated at the lower end; obviously, it is uniformly distributed along the length of the stick.  Assume that the mass is concentrated at the center; then, the length of the oscillator will be 0.865 meters, and the period should correspond.  There are some complications involving moment of inertia which I am ignoring.\nSecond problem: You may be solving for the wrong thing.  It looks like you are solving for the frequency of oscillation, rather than the maximum speed of motion.  Some careful work with units will help show you what is going on.
804891
For a moment of inertia I, an angular acceleration A and a torque T we have T = IA.\n\nThe moment of inertia is equal to the mass of an object multiplied by the square of a representative length called the radius of gyration, which is in fact the root-mean-square distance of its elements from the axis of rotation. If the axis of rotation passes through the vertical part of the Y section then the elements of the section will be symmetrical around the axis of rotation and the root-mean-square distances can be measured and the radius of gyration could be calculated.
153607
Watch skating at the Olympics tonight.  When the skater brings her arms in closer to her body, she decreases her moment of inertia.  But by Conservation of Energy, her kinetic energy must remain constant.  Her kinetic energy is given by the formula\n\nK = 1/2 I w^2  , where I is the moment of inertia and w is her (angular) rotational velocity.  If I decreases, then w must increase, i.e. she spins faster as she brings her arms in.\n\nAnother example using a more conventional rigid body: some mechanical systems, and even some experimental cars, store energy in a flywheel.  The greater the moment of inertia of the flywheel, the greater the amount of energy that is stored for a given rotational speed.
1119730
ahh, good theory problem...\nlet's see, there's energy, friction, force (normal, tension, as well as the other ones mentioned), gravitation, mass, pendulum motion, gotta be more that I've missed, but no doubt someone'll be here to correct me.
840333
You need to consider conservation of angular momentum\n\nI0*w0 = If*wf\n\nI0 is the initial moment of inertia, If is the final moment of inertia, w0 is the initial angular speed, and wf is the final angular speed.\n\nI = Iss + Io\n\nwhere Iss is the (constant) moment of inertia of the student and the stool, and Io is the moment of inertia of the objects. This general relation applies to both the initial and final moments of inertia. Io can be computed from\n\nIo = 2*m*r^2\n\nwhere m is the mass of the object and r is the distance from the axis of rotation. The factor of 2 accounts for the two different objects. The first equation then becomes\n\n(Iss + 2*m*r0^2)*w0 = (Iss + 2*m*rf^2)*wf\n\nwhere r0 is the initial radius (1.0 m) and rf is the final radius (0.40 m). Solving for the final angular speed you have\n\nwf = (Iss + 2*m*r0^2)*w0/(Iss + 2*m*rf^2)\n\nUsing this expression it is easy to compute the final angular speed.
346376
Inertia.\n\nA body at rest tends to stay at rest.  It needs energy to get it moving.  Once moving in a vacuum, it will continue on that course at that speed until something acts on it to change it's speed and direction.  This might be a planet or star's gravity, or a rocket,  or some such.\n\nAccelerating hard to a given speed takes more energy than accelerating slow.  It would take more energy to get a rocket going 1000 mph in 30 seconds than it would to get it going that fast in 30 hours.  The same principle governs your car, and is the reason that you'll get horrible gas mileage if you take off like a jackrabbit to get to 60 mph, vs. accelerating slowly and gently.
57335
is due to the movement of a body , when a body is acelerating because it's spinning or something , it causes a drag force that affects the objects on that body ; it's not a ¨real force¨ (like gravity or a spring for example)cause is due to an acceleration; and because Newton's laws are applied only in inertial frames , people came out with this ¨ficticious forces¨( like this one and the centrifugal force for example) so we can be able to apply F=ma also in non inertial frames
525497
Of course yes. Inertia is described by the first Newton's law of motion, which applies to any mass, be it a rigid body or not. You can imagine this experiment: put on the bus floor a glass sphere (a good approximation of a perfectly rigid body) and imagine what happens when the bus deviates from resting or moving uniformly: the sphere moves w.r.t. the floor. Its motion is not related to its rigidity, but to the fact that the sphere is not connected to the bus structure, therefore it doesn't receive any external force contrasting its inertia.
1117792
Let's make this simple: \n\nInertia and Momentum refer to Newton's 1st Law...Momentum tell us that an object in motion will stay in motion, and inertia tell us that an object at rest will stay at rest...both until acted upon by an unbalanced force.\n\nKinectic energy refers to the energy of moving objects.  (as opposed to potential energy, that refers to objects that are not moving, but that could move.)\n\nExamples:  \n\nInertia:  A pencil sitting on my desk will not move until something moves it.  This is a very comforting thought if you stop and think about it.\n\nMomentum:  If I'm riding my bike, I will continue to move until the force of gravity pushing down on me, and friction moving against the tires, and the wind blowing in my face all conspire to stop me.\n\nKinetic energy:  This is the sum total of all the energy spent keeping my bicycle moving...my legs pedaling, gravity pushing me down the hill, then subtract the forces acting against me.\n\nHey, it ain't rocket science...it's easy!
939985
Well, yes, the gavity is pulling you down, and you are not moving. So you are subjected to an acceleration and are not moving.\nMind you, one can argue that the *resulting* force is zero, as the ground is reacting with an equal and opposite force to your weight; if you take it that way, to have an unbalanced force should result in motion.
901129
(a) Assuming the merry go round is freely rotating (not powered by a motor), then it's subject to the conservation of angular momentum:\n\nI1 * w1 = I2 * w2\n\nIts moment of inertia is:\n\nI = I-disk + m*r²\n\nWhere I-disk is the given moment of inertia for the platform, m is the man's mass and r is the man's distance from the platform's axis of rotation. Thus:\n\nI1 = I-disk + (75 kg)(0m)² = 920 kg-m²\nI2 = I-disk + (75 kg)(3m)² = 1595 kg-m²\nw1 = 2 rad/s\n\nFrom the conservation of angular momentum, the final angular velocity is:\n\nw2 = (I1 / I2) * w1\n\nw2 = (920 / 1595) * (2 rad/s)\n\nw2 = 1.154 rad/s\n\n(b) The kinetic energy of a rotating body is simply:\n\nKE = (1/2) * I * w²\n\nSince we know the moment of inertia of the system for each case, along with its corresponding angular velocity, we can find the kinetic energy for both situations as:\n\nKE1 = (1/2)(920 kg-m²)(2 rad/s)²\nKE1 = 1840 J\n\nKE2 = (1/2)(1595 kg-m²)(1.154 rad/s)²\nKE2 = 1061.3 J\n\nFINAL ANSWERS:\n\n(a) w2 = 1.154 rad/s\n(b)\nKE1 = 1840 J\nKE2 = 1061.3 J
417291
Once the rising air depletes whatever inertia it had from rising through air resistance, it basically stops rising.\n\nNote that if it was rising, it was likely because it was less dense than the surrounding atmosphere in the first place.  This is likely because it was warmer than the surrounding atmosphere (warmer air is less dense than cooler air).  \n\nSo what densifies this warmer, less dense air?  Well, it eventually loses its heat energy to the surrounding air, making it roughly the same temperature, which also makes it roughly the same density.
1016502
It has a tiny motor that has a half-circle on top of a spinning post.  When it spins, the half circle makes it off-balance, so the shaking back and forth caused by that, is the vibrating you feel.