what is the difference between rigid body and particel?
923178
These are terms to describe theoretical objects.  \n\nA particle has no dimensions, like a point in geometry.  In physics, we can say that this particle has any mass we choose, but by making it dimensionless, we don't have to worry about other physics phenomena like moment of inertia (important in rotational physics).\n\nA rigid body is made up of more than one point.  We're concerned with things like lever arms where length is important.  We say that it is rigid, so that we can ignore other physical attributes of real objects -- which are not really perfectly rigid, but have different degrees of rigidity.  A wood plank may have more "give" than a steel beam.  But by saying that the object in a physics problem is rigid, we don't worry about these degrees.  We assume that it is perfectly rigid.
809550
A centipede has a pair of legs for every segment of its body.\nThis makes it differ from millipede which has at least two pairs of legs for every segment
13833
Simply put it is rotational inertia.\n\nAn example might help. Inertia causes moving things to stay in motion and stopped things to oppose motion. Now if you  have seen figure skating you might have noticed that the skater revolves slowly when her hands are outstretched but she starts to revolve very fast when she compacts her body by bringing her hand together.\n\nWell, on her outstretched hands moment of Inertia is more and therefore she is revolving slower but when she brings them together the moment of inertia is reduced. You can try it yourself on a revolving chair - if you don't know how to skate.\n\nIt is directly proportional to mass and distance from axis of rotation. Different objects will have different moment of Inertia based on shape and axis of rotation.\n\nThis might help http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mi.html
756380
Firstly, let me point out to you which answers are wrong and which answers are right. Otherwise you'll be just as confused as you were to begin with.\n\nThe first answer is confused. The second and third answers have no idea of what their talking about. The other answers are correct.\n\nHere's why the first answer is confused:\n\nSpeed and velocity use exactly the same units. \nSo it is perfectly acceptable to say "a car travels around a sharp curve a 60 km/hr". \n\nRestated, what we are saying is that the car moves around a curve at constant speed of 60 km/hr. The statement above does not include directional information. \n\n(However, suppose we said "a car travels around a sharp curve with constant velocity of 60 km/hr". Then, clearly this would be wrong. Velocity does change as it goes around the curve.)\n\nSecondly, let us recall some basic facts of 'Uniform Circular Motion' \nAn object that travels with Uniform Circular Motion has:\n- constant speed \n- changing velocity  \n- acceleration towards the centre\n\nNow, the car in question displays uniform circular motion. This is so even though we are considering a partial circular path.\n\nSo, we can use this import formula (you should memorise it) \n\n    ar = v ^2 /r\n\nThis relates the centripetal acceleration, ar, to the radius of the circle (or in the case of a partial circle, the radius of curvature), r.\n\nFrom the formula you can see that a sharp bend, i.e. a small r, will give a larger value of centripetal acceleration compared to a gentle bend, i.e a large r. \n\nSubstitute v=60 and different values of r into the formula above to verify this.
845473
decagon - 2 d figure\nor \ndecahedron - 3 d figure
511989
Because of the rotation all the molecules in the ring separate a little bit. So there is more tension. The reasen is, that all the molecules need more centripetal force.
1058187
for a rigid rotor, the transition lines are equally spaced in the wavenumber space. However, this is not always the case, except for the rigid rotor model. \n\nfor non-rigid rotor model, we need to consider changes in the moment of inertia of the molecule due to centrifugal distortion and the effects of vibration on the rotation.\n\nthe formulas are hard to write here, better to look at the references in \nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotational_spectroscopy\nor elsewhere.
46623
in rotation, the movement is around the axis. while in circular motion. the movement is around a point, away frm the geometrical centre of the body.
874216
its newtons first law, (objects in rest stay at rest unless a force is acted upon it which causes acceleration) and objects in motion stays in motion\n\naka intertia keeps the smaller peices moving in the same direction
124077
centripital and centrifigal
705060
If I understand the question, you are giving a velocity to the cube and don't want it to touch the hemisphere at any time in its flight. I think you want the minimum, not the maximum hor. velocity to do this, right? Because any arbitrarily high velocity will do it. I'll use a planar analysis where the hemisphere is a semicircle.\nAssuming the semicircle is centered at x=y=0, the trajectory will be a parabola y=r-kx^2 and at y=0, |x| must be >r. Another constraint arises when we consider the region of the semicircle near the top. Here the semicircle approximates a parabola, since 1-cos(small angle) approaches small angle^2/2. Thus deltay = r(1-cos(small angle)) = r-y approaches r*small angle^2/2 = r(x/r)^2/2, or x approaches sqrt(2/r*deltay*r^2) = sqrt(2r*deltay).\nDownward acceleration is g and horizontal velocity is v. When y=0, 0.5gt^2=r, so t=sqrt(2r/g), and x=vt must be >r. Thus the 1st condition (for clearance at the bottom) is v > r/sqrt(2r/g), or\nv > sqrt(rg/2).\nThe 2nd condition requires that when r-y=deltay is small, then and x=vt must be >sqrt(2r*deltay) where t=sqrt(2deltay/g), or  \nv > sqrt(2r*deltay) / sqrt(2deltay/g) or \nv > sqrt(rg).\nThis latter is the more stringent of the two requirements and thus is the minimum clearance velocity.
738471
I woudn't say that either program is easier or harder than the other. They both offer different things. AutoCAD is more for making Construction Documents with high levels of precision. 3DSMax is more for renderings and design.
74552
these are data from end fixing of the structure you should introduce to solve the system of equations, otherwise you would get infinite solutions or (rigide body motion)-Good Luck
817586
The main difference is that inertial motion is constant velocity with no acceleration, while gravitational motion is under constant acceleration.
659614
In order to get better responses, you will need to more specific and explain what you mean by that "question".\n\nThe first thing that came to my mind was centripetal force which maintains circular motion.  Without centripetal force, the object would not be in circular motion (thus linear motion).
792058
you should visit the following link\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centripetal_acceleration
411042
Sure. Particullary at the same time.