In article <HBG%8.17949$Fq6.2185466 at news2.west.cox.net> "John Knight" <johnknight at usa.com> writes:
<
<"Cary Kittrell" <cary at afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
<news:ahmuii$7mj$1 at oasis.ccit.arizona.edu...
<> In article "John Knight" <johnknight at usa.com> writes:
<> <west.cox.net> <ah46lo$qcu45$1 at ID-150265.news.dfncis.de>
<<GGoZ8.5881$Fq6.333515 at news2.west.cox.net> <3D364506.68C7F9B9 at yahoo.com>
<<ah73mn$dr3$1 at oasis.ccit.arizona.edu>
<<4SEZ8.446$sR2.9177 at news4.ulv.nextra.no> <3D37BEC6.77D62C86 at yahoo.com>
<<ce660175.0207201
<> <
<> <
<> <"Cary Kittrell" <cary at afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
<> <news:ahkjf2$rvp$1 at oasis.ccit.arizona.edu...
<> <>
<> <> In article "Parse Tree" <parsetree at hotmail.com> writes:
<>
<> {...}
<> <> <
<> <> <The initial spring tension is unknown. You're assuming that the
<bottom
<> <> <sphere is suspended from the top one. It simply says that it's
<suspended
<> <at
<> <> <rest. Which could simply mean that the system is suspended at rest.
<Who
<> <> <knows? Actually, I find many of these questions to be very imprecise.
<> <> <
<> <> <Regardless, the acceleration of the system is g. And the acceleration
<of
<> <> <all of the parts are g. Thus the string's tension should be 0.
<> <>
<> <> Assuming an infinitely strong string -- one whose relaxation is zero --
<> <then
<> <> you are correct.
<> <>
<> <>
<> <> -- cary
<> <>
<> <>
<> <
<> <Every bit of information that's required to answer the quesion correctly
<was
<> <provided. There's nothing about the string being "infinitely strong",
<and
<> <in fact the question specifically states that it's a "light string",
<cary!
<> <
<>
<> Well then, obviously none of the given answers is technically correct, is
<> it?
<>
<> Of course it's clear what the designers of the test had in mind, but
<> if one wants to get all geeky about it, you need the Young's modulus of
<> the "light string" for a more correct approximation. And then you
<> need to apply further corrections for tidal effects. And then
<> there are tiny General Relativistic corrections beyond all that.
<>
<> Clearly the question wasn't looking for any of this, but Parse Tree
<> and I are just having a bit of fun playing with it. Come on
<> in John, any number can play: let's hear your discussion of the physics
<> involved. Here, use this space:
<>
<
<Not only did the test question not ask for all that, not only is it
<irrelevant to answering the question, not only have you already SEEN the
<correct answer, but you're answering the wrong question.
<
<The correct answer would be the one that addresses what you believe it is
<about American 12th grade girls that their correct answers to ONE THIRD of
<these questions were lower than if they'd just guessed. Not just a little
<bit lower, but a LOT lower. Not just a few questions like this simple one,
<but ONE THIRD of them.
<
<Unless your muddling around like this is intended to demonstrate the mental
<process that you think might have been involved, you're ignoring the most
<important question.
<
Can't do it, eh?
Imagine my surprise.
-- cary
