[not]TheBrightestBulb

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/150207-chinese-physicists-measure-speed-of-einsteins-spooky-action-at-a-distance-at-least-10000-times-faster-than-light -[not]TheBrightestBulb

So i received my 4th quarter grade report today and was shocked to find my grades very low. Now normally i wouldnt be too astounded but when my grade is in the 70's when we've done little more than prepare for the ap's, it's a little unnerving. Maybe i havent been blogging enough or something, even though i assumed i was exempt from it now that ap's are over. but thats neither here nor there. And its not just in physics. Every ap class has given me a much lower grade than i deserve, which is weird since they havent given much in the way of homework or assignments. maybe its a fluke, or maybe i'm missing some stuff. either way, i'll have to fix that fo' sho'. Signing off, [not]TheBrightestBulb

Hello children, if some of you are not planning on buying the physics review book, then there are ample resources on the internet (obviously). The best place i've stumbled upon is simply called http://www.learnapphysics.com/apphysicsc/index.html and it goes in order from unit to unit, not adding or subtracting anything and covering the basics as well as explaining the answers to the questions fully and in detail. I've already been using this resource and i feel that it is helping me a lot and i encourage anyone to use this website as well as and any others they can find to study from and better their selves and their future grade on the AP. [not]TheBrightestBulb

I've heard around the water cooler that, due to a bee's mass, its tiny wings shouldn't physically be able to make it fly. However, I have recently learned something new about it. V irtually all insects flap their wings through a wide arc, about 165 degrees. Frequency generally varies with size: The larger the insect, the slower the wing beat. Mosquitoes, for example, beat their wings about 400 times per second, while fruit flies beat there wings about 200 times per second. Birds beat their wings much more slowly - about 50 times per second for hummingbirds-however their lift is much greater. But bees, which are 80 times as large as fruit flies, flap their wings only 230 times per second. They're ability to fly comes from their wings going through an arc of only about 90 degrees, much less than most insects. And although most insects produce the majority of lift about halfway through the stroke, when the wing is moving fastest, bees get an equally large contribution at the beginning and end of the stroke from the rotation of the wing. Always Enlightening, [not]TheBrightestBulb

So im trying to do the lab write up thing that's due tomorrow but I cant open up the website thing when i click run now. So seems like i'll have to wait til tomorrow to do it. Hopefully i can get it all done in time. Looks like I'm doing webassign instead. Boring updates brought to you by [not]TheBrightestBulb

My blogs have been rather long recently, so I'm thinking I should just keep this one brief. I think I'll talk about my future AP prep plans. First off I have recruited Tim to be a part of my 1 man study group (for those of you keeping track at home that means that now there are 2 people in it). Anyways so yeah, we've made a verbal pact that we will work extra hard to get some college cred (and street cred, maybe) from the physics AP. Can't wait to buckle down and get some work done. Looking forward to a little study buddy by my side <3. Oh and the offer is open to everyone, so join us and be a winner! Signing off with High Hopes, [not]TheBrightestBulb

ENJOY THIS VIDEO: << I can do that... Break dancing is an art form that requires immense skill and strength. A strong core is necessary for executing the intense and seemingly impossible moves. There are many different moves in the break-dancer’s repertoire, but one of the hardest is the windmill. In the windmill, the breaker rotates from his back onto his front and onto his back again while keeping his legs locked on the V-position and rotating about his center of mass. It is an extremely difficult maneuver that requires strong abdominals, quadriceps and shoulders. These muscles are used to counteract and manipulate the various physical principals involved in the move, including circular motion, momentum, friction and angular motion. To start, the break dancer must use his hands. By exerting torque he can increase rotational speed about his center of mass. The breaker must achieve a sufficient angular momentum to continue moving, because spinning adds stability, much like spinning bicycle wheels help a person maintain balance when biking. As the move progresses, the friction resulting from contact with the ground slows the dancer. The breaker’s muscles therefore must supply energy to match the frictional force and continue the move. Inertia partly explains the difficulty of this move. At each moment of the spin, the breaker’s legs want to continue moving along the path of instantaneous velocity and drag the breaker along. However, the breaker must keep the legs in circular motion. The abdominals and quadriceps keep the legs in the V-shape and the shoulders keep the upper body in position. If the breaker does not have strong muscles, the move falls apart, as force needs to be supplied to keep the body rotation in position. Angular momentum is also a large portion of this move as it keeps the body constantly spinning. The faster the breaker can push himself, the more angular momentum he will have. The shoulders play a very important role in keeping the angular momentum because the break dancer must roll the shoulders on the ground to minimize the friction and keep the energy. Many other break-dancing moves, like the flare and the head spin, deal with the same laws of physics. Circular motion, inertia, momentum, friction, and other forces must be contended with in each maneuver. The flare, much like a gymnast’s move on a pommel horse, uses torque to start rotation and keep balance. The head spin requires angular momentum and a strong core to minimize the torque from gravity and to maintain stability. The head spin is very reliant on aerodynamics and air friction, while body position is vital to the speed of the move. As always, B-boy [not]TheBrightestBulb

In loving memory of THE WIDOW MAKER, I thought I would bring back some old-school physics. Well, our catapult launches the ball at a certain velocity (v), directed at, let's say, 45 degrees upward. For projectiles, you have to break the velocity into an upward and a horizontal velocity. The upward velocity is v sin(45) and the horizontal velocity is v cos(45), so they are both .707v. The reason you do this is because the projectile travels to its highest point with its upward velocity in the same amount of time it travels half of its range with its horizontal velocity. You can find this time (t) using the formula v=vi+at: 0=.707v - 9.8(t), so t =.072v. In this time, the object travels half of its range, so in twice this time the object travels its full range (lat's call it 50 meters). d = v*t, so 50 = .707v(2)(.072v), 50 = .1018 v^2, so v = 22.2 meters/second. However, we aren't in a perfect world, and THE WIDOW MAKER is not the perfect catapult (supposedly), so unfortunately it did not travel 50 meters, it traveled about half of that. Also, it snapped in half too... Sincerely, and in loving memory of THE WIDOW MAKER, [not]TheBrightestBulb

I came across this cool book and I thought the stuff in here was very interesting. Apparently this will happen all by the year 2100, and the results will be just as amazing as the technology.1. The Internet will be in your contact lens. It will recog nize people’s faces, display their biographies, and even translate their words into subtitles. 2. You will control computers and appliances via tiny sen sors that pick up your brain scans. You will be able to rearrange the shape of objects. 3. Sensors in your clothing, bathroom, and appliances will monitor your vitals, and nanobots will scan your DNA and cells for signs of danger, allowing life expectancy to increase dramatically. 4. Radically new spaceships, using laser propulsion, may replace the expensive chemical rockets of today. You may be able to take an elevator hundreds of miles into space by simply pushing the “up” button. 5. In the future, you'll simply jump into your car, turn on the Internet, turn on a movie and sit back and relax and turn on the automatic pilot, and the car will drive itself. Of course all of this is theoretical, and we as a race are very far from completing and accomplishing these feats. But perhaps those brainiacs in our class will have a hand in it and lead us towards great things. Could it be you? Sincerely, [not]TheBrightestBulb

A number of weeks ago i was driving through the snow(yes I am very far behind on my blogs, I know), when i was coming to a turn. Not only was this turn covered and i nice fresh blanket of snow, but i was also going down an incline. However, as i was nearing the turn, i ever so lightly tapped the brakes, sending me on a tangent straight for an unsuspecting mailbox. White-knuckling the steering wheel and exclaiming a number of shocked obscenities, I was able to escape certain death by mere inches. After catching my breath and scanning the area to see if anyone saw, i went quickly (but not too quickly) on my way. However this experience got me thinking about circular motion and centripetal force. As i was rounding the turn, the initial force on my car was felt inward towards the center of the curve. However, since my velocity was higher than the max velocity allowable in said situation(Vmax=(ugr)^1/2), my tires left the safety of the road and instead decided to go skiing. Since in circular motion, the velocity vector is always tangent to the curve, which is where the mailbox was so conveniently placed, I started heading right for it. Luckily hitting the breaks 50 more times and turning the steering wheel to its breaking point was enough to save me. I'm just glad there are things such as inertia and other types of friction that were able to slow me down and keep my from lowering that families property value, or Christmas would not have been so merry. As always, [not]TheBrightestBulb

I found this article online and thought it was pretty interesting... When you hear the phrase "alternative energy," chances are your mind goes to windmills and solar panels, or perhaps fields of corn. Few people think of human beings as a renewable energy source. But a new lamp design taps into just that idea. It's not a new concept: Wind-up watches and clocks, and even hourglass-style timekeepers, have relied on humans as energy sources for many centuries. A person winds it up or flips it over, and the device has a renewed supply of potential energy with which to operate. Modern inventions like bicycle-powered blenders and kinetic battery chargers draw on energy stored in the human body, too. Much like these designs, the gravity-powered lamp envisioned by Clay Moulton, a graduate student at Virginia Tech when his lamp won second place at the 2008 Greener Gadgets Design Competition, relies on people for power. In this case, the people don't wind a gear or pedal a bike; instead, they lift a series of weights back to their starting point. The Gravia lamp is powered by the falling motion of those weights, also known as gravity. It's an interesting idea, using a (presumably) limitless resource like the pull of gravity to generate power. And while the Gravia lamp requires some advances in technology before it becomes a viable product, the concept is worth checking out. So what i think is the concept is not only gravity causing the lamp to light, but the potential energy of the masses turning into kinetic energy. Yes gravity is the force behind why that happens, but so far i don't know of anything that can truly be powered by gravity. (Except orbits and such.) As always, [not]TheBrightestBulb

Everyone has seen a figure skater spin, where the skater draws her arms and a leg in and speeds up tremendously. This is the result of conservation of angular momentum. As the skater reduces her rotational inertia by pulling her arms and leg in, her rotation speed must increase to maintain constant angular momentum. Angular momentum conservation plays a VERY important role in all figure skating routines. See for yourself: Angular momentum applies to a body rotating around a fixed object. The amount of angular momentum, say, a spinning skater depends on both the speed of rotation, and the weight and distribution of mass around the center. So once her arms and leg came into her body, the mass is much closer to her center of gravity, spinning her much faster then if they were spinning with the mass of their arms and leg away from the body. (Dependent upon radius). As always: [not]TheBrightestBulb

So as part of our assignment i was told to blog, so hear it goes. And while im sitting here watching Spongebob i might as well do something productive. In response to momentum and impulse, i embedded a video of something pretty cool. So say two cars, each of approx. 1100kg, each going 30 m/s collide head on. One a 2009 Chevy and the other a 1959 Chevy. First of all, if this collision is totally inelastic, and we can assume that Ptotal=(M1 + M2)V, and therefore (2200kg)(30m/s)=66000kg*m/s, then at the end of the collision both cars are at rest. Therefore the change on momentum, or impulse, is 66000kg*m/s. A pretty big bump in the road. And say that the collision's impact lasted the span of .2s, then that means the force felt by the drivers was 330,000 Newtons. A very big bump in the road. Without an airbag, the dummy's face is absorbing all of that damage, and then he ends up looking like chris soufleris. However, with an airbag, that force will be diminished greatly, saving someones face from utter destruction. ^^Hopefully my physics is right on this, and if its not, then God only knows how my test will end up... In Loving Memory (because after Thanksgiving, or before the test is over, I'll probably be dead), [not]TheBrightestBulb

THEEEEEE WIDOWWWMAKERRRRRRRR!!!!!! ARRRRGGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!

Calm down Souf its not what you think... I did that conservation of momentum/energy experiment at my household with a golf ball and a pretty lumpy basketball. (Of course upon examining the golf ball it also appeared to be in pretty rough shape.) Holding the golf ball from a height of 5 feet, i saw that it bounced up to a height of nearly 3 feet, and dropping the basketball from that same height it rebounded 1 foot. After dropping them together from 5 feet repeatedly my data is as shown. 1) Its much harder to drop the two balls perfectly on top of each other than Mr. Fullerton made it look. 2) After multiple failed attempts to shoot the ball straight up i noticed that the golf ball was still flying off and landing approximately 12 feet away. 3) When i finally did it right, the ball peaked at around 9 feet. All in all not a bad experiment, seeing as nothing was broken during its testing. I know that there's some physics stuff that goes along with this, but for now I just want to say it was cool and that i do understand how and why it happens. Signing off, [not]TheBrightestBulb

Where's the WIDOWMAKER​!?!?!?

After only fully completing 14 out of 24 question on the webassign (58.3%) and recieving partial credit where i can, boosting my grade to an 81.5% (thank god for the curve), i realized that the problems i knew the best were all stuff from last part of W & E, and i found it very easy to do. two weeks ago i would have been banging my head on the wall attempting them. i dont know why, but even last year i had this problem where during the unit i was stumped, but immediately after it was over i was fairly decent at it....unfortunately by then we had moved on to something else i couldnt learn on time. So i dont know what the deal is, but it seems as though my brain works on a delay, and when im in a current unit i suck, but once we leave it i can do it like nobody's business (for the most part). its really frustrating and i just wish i could learn on time so that i can get the grades i need instead of saying "oh if only this question showed up 2 weeks down the road, then i could solve it". But for now, you know who i am... Forevermore, [not]TheBrighestBulb

Nobody in my group has even attempted to start our catapult (thatguy and daboss), so looks like im going to have to do it all AS USUAL. However i've heard many opinions saying that building a trebuchet will be more efficient and overall better than a catapult. well i'm here to say i have no sort of time to do that kind of construction. My catapult wont even be a real catapult. Im going to have to rely on a big spring to do the work of shooting the arm around to throw the ball. Basically you're going to see a makeshift wooden mechanism that more or less wont work. Im going to look for a spring with the highest spring constant just so it will have the most power and cause the arm to have a high acceleration. Therefore as i pull back, the force pulling against it will become greater and greater, until eventually it will shoot the ball with a great force the other way. Thanks for you wasting your time on reading this, ill be sure to disappoint you all on thursday. -Forever and for always, [not]TheBrightestBulb

hole, not whole

Since i missed last weeks blog, i thought i'd entertain the masses by posting a few very interesting physics facts! If the Sun were made of bananas, it would be just as hot. If, instead of hydrogen, you got a billion billion billion tons of bananas and hung it in space, it would create just as much pressure, and therefore just as high a temperature. So it would make very little difference to the heat whether you made the Sun out of hydrogen, or bananas, or patio furniture. All the matter that makes up the human race could fit in a sugar cube. Atoms are 99.9999999999999 per cent empty space. Now make a fist. If you forced all the atoms together, removing the space between them, crushing them down so all the vast emptiness were compressed into the fist-sized nuclei, a single teaspoon or sugar cube of the resulting mass would weigh five billion tons; about ten times the weight of all the humans who are currently alive. The faster you move, the heavier you get. Light speed is the speed limit of the universe. So if something is travelling close to the speed of light, and you give it a push, it can’t go very much faster. But you’ve given it extra energy, and that energy has to go somewhere.Where it goes is mass. According to relativity, mass and energy are equivalent. So the more energy you put in, the greater the mass becomes. This is negligible at human speeds . In several experiments, objects accelerated to 86 percent of the speed of light have doubled in weight. The theory also postulates the rather incomprehensible notion that given enough speed, an object will become as large as the universe itself. Always your, [not]TheBrightestBulb

:banghead) :banghead) :banghead) :banghead) :banghead) :banghead) :banghead) :banghead) :banghead) :banghead) this is what i feel like doing right now. i just struggled through the webassign and everything is so tough. I looked through my notes, which to me look like a foreign language, and i tried looking through the book to help me out, but even that offered little comfort to me. I know yelling at the computer screen wont help me any more on this webassign, but i do enjoy it. I made it all the way to 90%, and that seems to be the best that it's going to get. A scout walks 6.5 km due east from camp, then turns left and walks 4.55 km along the arc of a circle centered at the campsite, and finally walks 3.25 km directly toward the camp. (a) How far is the scout from camp at the end of his walk? km ( In what direction is the scout's position relative to the campsite? ° (from north) © What is the ratio of the final magnitude of the displacement to the total distance walked? ​ This one caused me considerable trouble, and i know if i could understand my own notes i would be able to do that, but i cant. And the questions about wind and planes and the angle it needs to fly also gets me. I know Vab + Vbc = Vac or something along those lines, but again my rushed and skewed notes fail to deliver. I need me some help.

Its without a doubt that physics is at work in virtually every aspect of the game of football, but it is shocking to see just how intense the physics truly is on the human body. The average tackle creates anywhere from 30-60 G's of force. That's an acceleration of anywhere from nearly 300 m/s^2 to 600m/s^2. Luckily, however, that force is experienced for only an instant, and usually leave the player a little sore but relatively unharmed. If this type of force was experienced for any longer, it could cause serious injury or even death. The most extreme football impacts range anywhere from 100 to 150 G's, which needless to say are much more dangerous. At 100 G's, a concussion can occur, and anything greater could lead to a loss of consciousness. Its not just the big guys who create this force either. A 5'11", 200 pound defensive back can easily create a tackling force of 100 G's. Its all about the speed that's behind the tackler when contact is made. Loyally Yours, [not]TheBrightestbulb

Thank you tim! Today i learned how to derive a polynomial in physics class. Since my precalc class never covered derivatives last year, i was completely lost for a few minutes today in class. Once my table partner was made aware of this fact, he taught me what to do, and now i am smarter going out of the class than i was coming in. Who knew? -As always, [not]TheBrightestBulb

i <3 jigsaw puzzles...i agree with the words you say. See you in 9th. Bye

*Senioritis