Science geek brain teasers
-
Minus forty?
The narrow specialist in the broad sense of the word is a complete idiot in the narrow sense of the word. Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
*Ding* Correct.
-
I was thinking that there's enough geeks here - maths, computing, physics, you name it - that we could easily put together a bunch of questions that are answerable by most, but a little tricky. I'll start the ball rolling: Q. In a constant graviational field, how can you accelerate while keeping a steady speed? Hmm - just found braingle.com[^]. There goes a productive day...
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
They aren't science geek questions, but are probably close enough ;) Q. Assuming a system which uses physical addressing mode (no virtual address space of any sort) and operates in Virtual 8086 mode, what would be the result of writing to a null pointer? Q. Where in physical memory can the RSDP be located?
OSDev :)
-
No, the airplane will move forward and eventually take of regardless the conveyer belt, because his wheels have nothing to do with the airplane movement.
The narrow specialist in the broad sense of the word is a complete idiot in the narrow sense of the word. Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
Well.... thats not strictly true. They are stopping the bottom of the plane scraping on the ground, which would increase the friction coefficient quite a bit I'd imagine ;P
-
Q. What alcohol and in what quantities will bring Mick to a stand still?
Michael Martin Australia "I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
Double.MaxValue?
-
Here's a simple one. A scientist is measuring the temperature of a substance, but the label for the units on the thermometer has worn off. At what temperature, would it not matter if it was in Celsius or Fahrenheit?
modified on Tuesday, May 4, 2010 3:34 PM
-40 degrees is the same for F and C
-
I was thinking that there's enough geeks here - maths, computing, physics, you name it - that we could easily put together a bunch of questions that are answerable by most, but a little tricky. I'll start the ball rolling: Q. In a constant graviational field, how can you accelerate while keeping a steady speed? Hmm - just found braingle.com[^]. There goes a productive day...
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
-
I was thinking that there's enough geeks here - maths, computing, physics, you name it - that we could easily put together a bunch of questions that are answerable by most, but a little tricky. I'll start the ball rolling: Q. In a constant graviational field, how can you accelerate while keeping a steady speed? Hmm - just found braingle.com[^]. There goes a productive day...
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
Knowing that the distance from Earth to the center of the galaxy is approximately 2.5704*E17 km, is it possible to travel to the center of the galaxy during a lifetime at the speed of light? If it is, how long would it take?
-
Bah, too easy... This site is full of geeks... Everyone should know this already... Circular orbit = Constantly accelerating toward the center of the circle, causing speed to remain constant (Only direction changes). Now, if you said constant VELOCITY, then there would be no answer :)
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)personnally i would have said : "run around in circles" ;-)
-
I was thinking that there's enough geeks here - maths, computing, physics, you name it - that we could easily put together a bunch of questions that are answerable by most, but a little tricky. I'll start the ball rolling: Q. In a constant graviational field, how can you accelerate while keeping a steady speed? Hmm - just found braingle.com[^]. There goes a productive day...
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
Here's one that I don't personally have an answer to, but which has had me wondering for years. Why is the speed of light limited to 186,000 miles/second. Why this particular speed - what is the determining factor, and why can't the speed of light be exceeded?
With knowledge comes responsibilty; just think of splitting the atom as an obvious example.
-
The classic that is far too easy to google for now. If you have an aircraft on a conveyor belt. The air craft attempts to take off and the conveyor belt runs in the opposite direction matching the speed of the air craft. Does the plane take off?
-
I was thinking that there's enough geeks here - maths, computing, physics, you name it - that we could easily put together a bunch of questions that are answerable by most, but a little tricky. I'll start the ball rolling: Q. In a constant graviational field, how can you accelerate while keeping a steady speed? Hmm - just found braingle.com[^]. There goes a productive day...
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
Travel in a circle. Speed is distance per unit time (e.g. miles per hour). Acceleration is a change in speed OR direction. Traveling in a circle requires a constant change in direction hence a constant acceleration. I used the short explanation so as not to become too boring.
-
Yes always switch... probability of winning has just doubled after what host has done... :cool:
-
And the even more classic Monty Hall problem: Suppose you're on a game show, and you're given the choice of three doors: Behind one door is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick a door, say No. 1, and the host, who knows what's behind the doors, opens another door, say No. 3, which has a goat. He then says to you, "Do you want to pick door No. 2?" Is it to your advantage to switch your choice?
-
I was thinking that there's enough geeks here - maths, computing, physics, you name it - that we could easily put together a bunch of questions that are answerable by most, but a little tricky. I'll start the ball rolling: Q. In a constant graviational field, how can you accelerate while keeping a steady speed? Hmm - just found braingle.com[^]. There goes a productive day...
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
Ok, this is a fun one. Just jump in your car on a Sunday morning, find a big empty parking lot, crank the wheel just enough so that you can complete a circuit without crashing into anything, and set your cruise control to 5MPH. This will keep you in a constant gravitational field (near the surface of the Earth), a steady speed (courtesy of your cruise control), and under constant acceleration because you will be constantly changing direction (acceleration is defined as a change in speed or direction).
-
Bah, too easy... This site is full of geeks... Everyone should know this already... Circular orbit = Constantly accelerating toward the center of the circle, causing speed to remain constant (Only direction changes). Now, if you said constant VELOCITY, then there would be no answer :)
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)Not quite right. You could have reached terminal velocity (eg. sky-diving), and so your velocity would be constant (no change in speed or direction). Unless you don't count that as a constant gravitational field because you're getting closer to earth, and therefore it's getting stronger ;P
-
Not quite right. You could have reached terminal velocity (eg. sky-diving), and so your velocity would be constant (no change in speed or direction). Unless you don't count that as a constant gravitational field because you're getting closer to earth, and therefore it's getting stronger ;P
If your velocity isn't changing, then you aren't accelerating. You're being acted upon by quite a few forces, but the net change to your velocity is still zero, and acceleration is defined as a change in velocity over time.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
Wrong. The engines are moving it forward but the belt is moving it backwards at the same speed. As a result its net velocity is zero meaning the wings aren't generating lift so it stays put. The only way it could get aloft is if it's a helicopter/vtol/or it's a windy day and the AC is an ultralight with a takeoff velocity lower than the wind speed. Edit: ooops.
3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18
modified on Tuesday, May 4, 2010 3:53 PM
Dan Neely wrote:
Wrong. The engines are moving it forward but the belt is moving it backwards at the same speed. As a result its net velocity is zero meaning the wings aren't generating lift so it stays put. The only way it could get aloft is if it's a helicopter/vtol/or it's a windy day and the AC is an ultralight with a takeoff velocity lower than the wind speed. Edit: ooops.
Either I'm missing a very important point, or I'm right and so WERE you... but I fully agree with everything you crossed out. Just answer one question, may I assume, that, the conveyor belt matches the planes speed so accurately that friction etc etc is ruled out and thus the resulting airspeed is 0? If so, the plane will never "take-off" since there is no lift. Edit: O.k I understand now that my assumption is invalid. The plane will eventually reach take-off velocity since the conveyor belt doesn't influence the movement generated by the jet engine/prop. But those wheels should be greased like non-other!
modified on Thursday, May 6, 2010 4:05 AM
-
Knowing that the distance from Earth to the center of the galaxy is approximately 2.5704*E17 km, is it possible to travel to the center of the galaxy during a lifetime at the speed of light? If it is, how long would it take?
If you travel at the speed of light, time is irrelevant. From the traveller's perspective, no time elapses. Therefore, there is no meaning to 'during a lifetime' for the traveller as all distances take no time at all. However, from an external observer's perspective, you could only travel for ~70 light years during a lifetime, assuming that 70 years is a typical lifespan and that the observer started observing as soon as he / she was born, as after that the observer's lifetime would have ended. (But the traveller's lifetime would not. )
-
Q. How many roads must a man walk down? :-D
Do I know what "rhetorical" means? ;P http://grammar.about.com/od/rhetoricstyle/a/homerhet.htm[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
If you travel at the speed of light, time is irrelevant. From the traveller's perspective, no time elapses. Therefore, there is no meaning to 'during a lifetime' for the traveller as all distances take no time at all. However, from an external observer's perspective, you could only travel for ~70 light years during a lifetime, assuming that 70 years is a typical lifespan and that the observer started observing as soon as he / she was born, as after that the observer's lifetime would have ended. (But the traveller's lifetime would not. )
That's correct, the meaningless of 'during lifetime' was exactly the decoy applied on a college exam some years ago. Just to add, by traveling on the speed of light, the traveler can get anywhere instantly.