General Thoughts: Physics (2 Viewers)

machine2035

Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Messages
65
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
ah fuck man, I didn't do calculations, and I just explained it :p
I started like that when I realised the question specifically mentioned calculations.. I went below "End of question" on the page so the marker probs be mad.
 

harudew

New Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2012
Messages
8
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
Anyone got any thoughts on that tower question. Where we supposed to take it as an inertial frame or referance? If not what the fwark.
 

Zeroes

Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
263
Location
Sydney
Gender
Female
HSC
2012
Anyone got any thoughts on that tower question. Where we supposed to take it as an inertial frame or referance? If not what the fwark.
I talked about how they would both appear to fall straight down from an observer on the earth's frame of reference like hit ground at same time, same acceleration etc (edit: assuming g = 9.8) but from a frame of reference external to the earth but stationary with respect to tower A, B would appear to fall with a parabolic trajectory due to the earth's rotational velocity.
My teacher agreed so I think that's right...
 
Last edited:

luke0410

New Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
22
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
I talked about how they would both appear to fall straight down from an observer on the earth's frame of reference like hit ground at same time, same acceleration etc but from a frame of reference external to the earth but stationary with respect to tower A, B would appear to fall with a parabolic trajectory due to the earth's rotational velocity.
My teacher agreed so I think that's right...
i wrote about the exact same thing, but according to everyone elses answer
i wanna cry lol
 

luke0410

New Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
22
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
and the "thought experiment" in the title made me lean towards simultaneity woops
 

lance687876

Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
127
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
Uni Grad
2016
I talked about how they would both appear to fall straight down from an observer on the earth's frame of reference like hit ground at same time, same acceleration etc but from a frame of reference external to the earth but stationary with respect to tower A, B would appear to fall with a parabolic trajectory due to the earth's rotational velocity.
My teacher agreed so I think that's right...
l think your teacher's just tryna cheer you up lol
 

Zeroes

Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
263
Location
Sydney
Gender
Female
HSC
2012
I didn't know what to write for Q.34, c)

Like I didn't know how to relate that neutron shit to De Broglie's work :S
Was that the neutron one? You talk about how de Broglie's hypothesis about particles exhibiting wave-like properties and having a wave length, and because of that neutrons can be diffracted, analyse diffraction patterns etc.
 

Zeroes

Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
263
Location
Sydney
Gender
Female
HSC
2012
l think your teacher's just tryna cheer you up lol
Someone else asked her, I hadn't even told her my answer.
So no.

Edit: Oh, I see what you mean, you interpreted it as a question about the difference in the value of g. You probably needed to mention frames of references as well, you won't get 3 marks just for saying the earth isn't perfectly round.
 
Last edited:

Heydosaurus

Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
55
Location
Maitland, NSW
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
Was that the neutron one? You talk about how de Broglie's hypothesis about particles exhibiting wave-like properties and having a wave length, and because of that neutrons can be diffracted, analyse diffraction patterns etc.
I looked at this and was like "DAFUCK DID I MISS A QUESTION?!"

Then I realised, option that I didn't do. Pheww. Actually, on the options, I really wish that we did Age of Silicon in class. Those questions looked awesome. Right up my alley, and it would have been complimentary with Engineering Studies, and to an extent, IPT.
 

LlamaBoi

Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2012
Messages
31
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
Really fair exam imo but 2 things...

Best would be B because A was high current (max power lost) and C was way too fkin expensive :p
It didn't ask about price, so C was actually the best choice because of its efficiency
and also for that length contraction one it was 40.2 cm because it was asking from the electron's point of reference. I came across a question very similar to this one where you had to really think about your reference points
But otherwise I pretty much agree with everything else :)
 

DrWho94

Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2010
Messages
68
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
urgh if it was from the electrons frame of reference, then there would be no change since the laws of physics hold true in an inertial frame of reference. (remain 40cm)
I Thought this too but I remember reading that for length contraction space appear to contract not necessarily just the vehicle or in this case the particle. So I went with that.
 

RishBonjour

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Messages
1,261
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
Really fair exam imo but 2 things...



It didn't ask about price, so C was actually the best choice because of its efficiency
and also for that length contraction one it was 40.2 cm because it was asking from the electron's point of reference. I came across a question very similar to this one where you had to really think about your reference points
But otherwise I pretty much agree with everything else :)
electrons frame of reference will be short since its travelling at relativistic speed. from its point of view, the cathode is movign towards it at relativistic speed - hence its 39.something cm. The one you are talking about was the other way around.
 

brianphamm

Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
40
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
^But you need to use more power for cooling in C than you would lose in B, right?
(My calculations were fucked so I'm not 100% sure on this)
+1

electrons frame of reference will be short since its travelling at relativistic speed. from its point of view, the cathode is movign towards it at relativistic speed - hence its 39.something cm. The one you are talking about was the other way around.
+1
 

LlamaBoi

Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2012
Messages
31
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
electrons frame of reference will be short since its travelling at relativistic speed. from its point of view, the cathode is movign towards it at relativistic speed - hence its 39.something cm. The one you are talking about was the other way around.
That was the whole point, you have to imagine that the particle is stationary and the anode is moving towards it, not the other way around. So if it asked from an observers perspective then it would contract but from the electrons perspective it would increase.
Bad example but if youve ever seen star trek or something and as soon as they start travelling at light speed (which is impossible but whatever) all of the stars stretch out around them, because everything around them gets longer.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 2)

Top