Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stop the War! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AK2004 who wrote (19691)	7/22/2003 2:34:22 PM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 21614

Was out for the afternoon.... I assume that gravity is in play; it wasn't excluded as friction was. Different assumption....the x-axis comment makes me unsure of this assumption...but I'll say it anyway and give two sets of answers..the constraints of the problem state flat, but not level. If level is not a constraint then "all of the above" would be an answer. You could change the incline of one surface to make any outcome desired. If the constraint is "level". Then I would pick "b) ball #2 reaches a 1st". I think for that to be the correct answer there has to be some interpretation of what "slight bend" means. Presumably the intention is to suggest that any difference in length has the well known property "negligible" difference in length. Both balls travel at the same rate, until the "slight bend begins", at which time gravity applies and additional force that results in increased speed, at the bottom of the bend gravity will start to decrease the speed of ball #2, at the top of the bend the speed of ball #2 returns to the speed at which it entered the bend. But over the distance of the bend, the average speed exceeds the original speed. As the bend is slight and the actual length of the surfaces would be virtually the same length, it follow that ball #2 should traverse the entire length faster than ball #1. I'll take that as answer number 2. I suppose there are some variations that come to play if the bend is not symmetric.....but this is a text post and not an oral.... That's my take. jttmab

To: AK2004 who wrote (19691)	7/22/2003 6:27:16 PM
From: 49thMIMOMander	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21614

Yes, the instant 5 minute IQ-dream of many Tarzanian superiority dreams have been crushed again and again by someone who just bothered to double-check the stuff. However, I am sure Tarzan could have figured it out with the help of Cheetah and luckily only some few cultures in the world base their educational system on how fun it is to set up tests to get the right gaussian and bernoullian result, for those uncorrelated stochastic but inherited variables. However, others have actually proven that it only takes some 3-5 generations to have really fun with "little bends" Not to forget that three boxes and then there are only two left.. PS have you thought of changing the time limit to 5 seconds, 2 to think and 3 to explain?? Or do you favor a scale of years, as in normal education and productive life??? Or a question "whaddya mean slightly bent"??