Search results

Got English rank today. 16/197, not complaining. :)

They accepted C in the end, so I don't see why they can't accept B as well -_- Also after a bit of research, I have discovered a little formula which is quite nice. http://j.mp/keJnZL

Got my maths ranks today. 93% for 3u was 8/169 81% for 4u was 6/100 Can't complain :)

No... if it was stationary it would obviously move off in another direction and if it wasn't stationary then depending on how fast the large mass is moving, there would be either an acceleration or increase in mass of the object.

So? You would reach a certain velocity and get stuck there because the force being applied is not enough to overcome the mass, and the thrust per second is being converted into mass, not kinetic energy.

NO. If you were to do this, every single bit of acceleration would require an ever greater force due to the increased mass. F=ma If you are approaching c, then the mass is approaching infinity. In other words, F would either have to be VERY VERY VERY large or a would have to be VERY VERY VERY...

But you're entirely disregarding the problem of mass dilation and how no matter how much fuel you have, if you are applying a force at a relativistic speed, it will be converted into mass, not kinetic energy, if the force is insufficient...

No, only if there is an INFINITE FORCE being applied. Hence why I believe B is also a correct answer.

Dud? Surely you can't believe that acceleration can continue infinitely.

http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/9341/maximum-speed-of-a-rocket-with-a-potential-of-relativistic-speeds where's yo god now.

LOL but how to get answer if no assume shitty scenario? : D

What if the gases are flying out at an infinitely fast speed (ie c)?

Question never specified LOL.

First statement - well that's just retarded, no point in studying Goddard who improved fuel efficiency. Second statement - the instantaneous force is what is relevant at relativistic speeds though. If you had exerted a total force of 1000000N up to that point, but the rocket only exerts 100N...

You are assuming 100% efficiency which is never the case. I'm simply stating that if the efficiency was improved such that the thrust was greater and less of the fuel was wasted, then the maximum speed would be greater. Disagree. A greater thrust is a greater force. If a=\frac{T-mg}{m} then...

The underlying problem I see in that argument is the assumption that the thrust is sufficient to keep the rocket at a constant acceleration. As time goes on, if the amount of fuel is infinite, then you should agree that as t->infinity, then v->c. However we KNOW this is not the case due to mass...

Can you explain why? I don't understand how the amount of fuel carried limits the MAXIMUM speed of the rocket....

I put B, apparently the answer's A.

Hey guys, this is a question from my half yearly where I disagree with the given answer, was wondering what you guys thought. Ultimately, the factor limiting the maximum speed of a rocket is: a) the amount of fuel it carries b) the speed of ejection of the gases c) the mass of the rocket d)...

Since your school is ranked that high, perhaps it might be an idea to check the school annual report and see how many people get above 99 each year. (if your school publishes one). If not, I can tell you that my school gets around about 1/4 or more people with 99+ each year, which should be a...