The easy answer would be to say that the object receives 1.0 N of force...?
If you know the angle of the throw, and the Point where the object left your hand, you'd be able to calculate the force from how far the object Went.
This is an exercise in logic. If an unstoppable force exists, then an immovable object cannot exist, because it would be able to be moved by the unstoppable force, and vice versa. Sideways Logic The unstoppable force does not "stop", the immovable object does not move : the unstoppable force ricochets off the immovable object!
Since any object's acceleration is proportional to the net force on the object, the object's motion will tell you about the net force on it, i.e., the vector sum of all forces acting on the object. However, you will not be able to tell anything about the individual forces unless there is only one.
A trade-off is obtained between the force required to move an object and the distance through which it is moved. You can use less force over a longer distance so that you can raise an object that you would not be able to lift.The efficiency of a plane depends on the work done in overcoming friction.
First you must know the amount of force used to move an object. And second, you must know the distance that the object moves
The force must couple to the object. The point of application of the force must be able to move in the direction of the force.
When the forces on an object are unbalanced, the object will accelerate in the direction of the net force.
If you know the angle of the throw, and the Point where the object left your hand, you'd be able to calculate the force from how far the object Went.
This is an exercise in logic. If an unstoppable force exists, then an immovable object cannot exist, because it would be able to be moved by the unstoppable force, and vice versa. Sideways Logic The unstoppable force does not "stop", the immovable object does not move : the unstoppable force ricochets off the immovable object!
An object maintains a constant velocity when the net force acting upon that object is zero. Therefore, a force pushing against the object that exactly opposes the force(s) due to friction (in both magnitude and direction) will result in a net force of zero, and the object will maintain a constant speed.
Since any object's acceleration is proportional to the net force on the object, the object's motion will tell you about the net force on it, i.e., the vector sum of all forces acting on the object. However, you will not be able to tell anything about the individual forces unless there is only one.
A rocket is able to lift off because of something called thrust. This means if you apply force to one direction, it will also apply force to the opposite direction.
Remember Newton's First Law - Unless acted on by a force, bodies at rest will stay at rest and bodies in motion will stay in motion. To be able to observe acceleration, first a force has to act on the object. So, the question should be reversed - "Will the force on an object affect the acceleration?" Answer - YES. How will it be affected? Refer to Newton's Second Law for that.
You have not provided a sensible question, so it is not possible to provide a sensible answer. If the object is on a horizontal surface, or in free fall, the answer is no. If the object is on an inclined surface, the answer is yes. You can, for example, push a bicycle uphill. The force you exert is mainly horizontal, but the bike goes upwards.
A trade-off is obtained between the force required to move an object and the distance through which it is moved. You can use less force over a longer distance so that you can raise an object that you would not be able to lift.The efficiency of a plane depends on the work done in overcoming friction.
When the density of a object is less than that of the surrounding fluid, the buoyant force is great enough to move it up.
First you must know the amount of force used to move an object. And second, you must know the distance that the object moves