No no its a true vector for infinite angular displacement
No no its a true vector for infinite angular displacement
No, angular acceleration is a true vector quantity because it has both magnitude and direction. It describes the rate at which an object's angular velocity is changing in a rotational motion.
Yes, it is true that every finite language is regular.
It can be both true or false - you can treat distance as a scalar, or as a vector. If you say that (say) the distance from the cities of Cochabamba and Quillacollo is 13 kilometers - WITHOUT specifiying the direction - then it is a scalar. If you also say that Quillacollo is to the east of Cochabamba, then it is a vector.
True. A vector quantity has both magnitude and direction, while a scalar quantity only has magnitude.
True
Yes, it does.
Yes, true
the answer is 12.
Not always. Distance is a scalar quantity that represents the total length of the path traveled, while displacement is a vector quantity that represents the shortest path between two points with direction. Usually, distance is greater than or equal to displacement, but in cases where the path taken is not straightforward, distance can be less than displacement.
That is not even true!
Without looking it up, I'll go out on a limb here and state my guess. (Then somebody else can come along and show that my guess was all wet.) I think angular velocity and acceleration are both right-hand-rule guys, with vectors formed by (R) cross (rotation direction). If true, and rotation is from west to east (counterclock viewed from above the north pole), then the angular velocity vector points into the south pole and out of the north pole. Correction: You have stated the true method for the answer above, but got the opposite answer. Since the earth rotates in a counter-clockwise direction viewed from the north pole, the angular velocity vector would point from the center of the earth to the north pole. It's magnitude would be the angular velocity of the earth's spin. -J I think that's exactly what I said ... " ... out of the north pole". Ah I see, my apologies. I think where I was confused was where you stated "into the south pole..." Instead you can state that it would originate from the center and point towards the north pole. You can rewrite it and delete our discussion :)