Hello World

I was wondering why it seems that the light inside a rainbowisbrighter then outside the rainbow.
I was also wondering why we (should) see two rainbows and whythecolours of the second (less brighter one) are inverted. I alsoreadthat a rainbow is actually the shape of a cone, where youarestanding at the tip and it is diverting away from you (in aconeshape). Why is this? And are all of the answers related?
Thank you..

answers

watching

views

For unlimited access to Homework Help, a Homework+ subscription is required.

Related questions

25) A negative magnification for a mirror means that

A) the image is upright, and the mirror could be either concave or convex.

B) the image is inverted, and the mirror is concave.

C) the image is inverted, and the mirror could be either concave or convex.

D) the image is upright, and the mirror is convex

E) the image is inverted and the mirror is convex.

26) An object is placed in front of a thin lens, Which statements are correct in describing the image formed by the lens? (There could be more than one correct choice.)

A) If the lens is convex, the image must be real.

B) If the image is real, then it is also inverted.

C) If the image is real, then it is also upright.

D) If the lens is convex, the image will never be virtual.

E) If the lens is concave, the image must be virtual.

27) When a beam of light, originally travelling in air, enters a piece of glass having an index of refraction of 3/2, its frequency

A) is unaffected

B) is reduced to 2/3 its original value.

C) increased by a factor of 3/2.

28) The index of refraction of a type of glass is 1.50, and the index of refraction of water is 1.33. If the light enters water from the glass, the angle of refraction will be

A) equal to the angle of incidence.

B) less than the angle of incidence.

C) greater than the angle of incidence.

29) Which of the following terms describe lenses that are thinner at the center than the edges? (there could be more than one correct choice.)

A) concave lenses

B) converging lenses

C) diverging lenses

D) convex lenses

30) You may have seen ambulances on the street with the letters of the word AMBULANCE written on the front of them, in such a way to appear correctly when viewed in your car's rear-view mirror. (See the figure.) How do the letters appear when you look directly at the ambulance (not through the mirror)?

champagnehound445

This has been bothering me for a long time and I cant find anadequate explanation..

Lets say you have an infinite conducting plate with finitethickness D and it is given charge Q

the charge will be equally split into two and concentrated only onthe two surfaces.

Each surface will get Q/2

and the magnitude of electric field outside the plate isE=Q/(2A*epsilon naught) (E for a conducting plate is surface chargedensity/epsilon naught as opposed to surface chargedensity/(2epsilon naught)

Then, if you have two nonconducting plates separated by distance Dand each plate gets Q/2 which is uniformly distributed ..
then outside the space between the two plates, E = 2*(Q/4A*epsilonnaught)

But why cant we use superposition principle in the case of oneconducting plate with Q and say you get E=Q/(A epsilon naught)i.e.Q/(2A epsilon naught) from each surface...

Is it because we are looking at the mid section of the conductor assome kind of Faraday cage? (since the plate is essentially infinityand blocks the electric field from the other side?)

Also, lets look at two parallel plate capacitor..

One plate gets +Q/2 and the other gets -Q/2

I know the formula says E= charge density/epsilon naught.. so E hasto be Q/(2A epsilon naught) However, it seems rather inconsistentin the case of the parallel plate capacitor...

We know all the charge is going to be concentrated on the innersurface
So shouldnt you get E = Q/(2A epsilon naught) solely from one plateand since you have TWO plates!!!, shoudlnt you multiply Q/(2Aepsilon naught) by 2?

For my Physic class, my teacher assigned us with a project of creating a mechnical cannon, meaning no human, electrical, chemical, pneumatic energy can be applied. I was wondering if you guys have any idea of the type of mechnical mechanism that I should use to fire tennis at both a 8 m and 12 m target. Two ideas that I have right now are either to use some spring loaded mechanism or rubber bands. The rules for the testing are that we will only have two minutes to fire as many shots as possible in the hope that it will land in a trash can at the prementioned distance. We get 3 pt if the ball gets in the can, 2pt if it hits the can but does not drop into it, 1 pt if it hits within a 1/2 meter of the can. As a result, a mortar would be prefered since it is over a relatively short distance where a arc would be greatly favorable. At the same time, the mechanism must not only be accurate but fast. In the two minutes, we must fire as many shots as possible for a max of 15 at each location. So five direct hit would be enough. Since time is of the essence, I was thinking that a spring loaded mechanism would be prefered over rubber bands. Please provide any suggestion on other possible mechanism that would produce better results. Also any help on the overall design of the cannon itself will be greatly appreciated. My idea is to have a tube with a spring attached at the bottom. The firer would first pull down the spring and then the loader would drop the tennis ball, upon which the firer would release the spring. I would also appreciate it if you could explain how to add a aiming mechanism on the mortar. I plan to have it on a base plate with a bipod.

Weekly leaderboard

Home

Homework Help 3,900,000

Physics 110,000

Related textbook solutions

Physics: Principles with Applications

Related questions

Weekly leaderboard