you would have to apply a correlated ammount of energy. Initially it will take more energy to move the heavier object but more to slow it down, for the smaller object it is vice versa.
The mass of the first object; the mass of the second object; the distance between them.The mass of the first object; the mass of the second object; the distance between them.The mass of the first object; the mass of the second object; the distance between them.The mass of the first object; the mass of the second object; the distance between them.
Not necessarily. The size of an object is not directly proportional to its mass. For example, a small object made of dense material could have more mass than a larger object made of less dense material.
No, the speed of an object cannot be determined solely by its mass and distance. Speed is calculated as the distance an object travels over a specific time period. To determine an object's speed, you would need to know both the distance it has traveled and the time it took to cover that distance.
The less mass an object has, the less force is needed to stop its motion. This is described by Newton's second law of motion, which states that force is proportional to mass and acceleration. Therefore, an object with less mass requires less force to bring it to a stop.
For Newtonian gravity, observe that the force (F) between two bodies is a function of only the mass of the bodies and distance between the center of mass of those bodies. F = (G*m1*m2)/r^2; where, G = Gravitational constant, m1 = mass of one body, m2 = mass of second body, r = distance between bodies. It is directly proportional to the mass of the bodies and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. Thus, the methods of increasing the magnitude of the force are to increase the mass of either or both of the bodies or decrease the distance between the bodies. Reducing the force can be accomplished by doing the opposite: decreasing mass or increasing distance.
more energy would need to be added to the smaller mass to reach the same point. D = F X M (distance = force times mass) if distance is 100cm and mass of object is 30grams, it would be written - 100 = ? x 30 ( ? = 3.333) if distance is 100cm (remains the same) and mass is 50grams (larger this time) - 100 = ? x 50 ( ? = 2)
The object's mass and weight determines the force and distance, the greater the force, the less distance it covers. However, when a knife cuts the object, it covers less force and more distance.
The mass of the object, the mass of the object that is attracting it and the distance between their centres of gravity.So your weight on the moon will depend on your mass, the moon's mass and the distance from your centre of gravity to the moon's.The mass of the object, the mass of the object that is attracting it and the distance between their centres of gravity.So your weight on the moon will depend on your mass, the moon's mass and the distance from your centre of gravity to the moon's.The mass of the object, the mass of the object that is attracting it and the distance between their centres of gravity.So your weight on the moon will depend on your mass, the moon's mass and the distance from your centre of gravity to the moon's.The mass of the object, the mass of the object that is attracting it and the distance between their centres of gravity.So your weight on the moon will depend on your mass, the moon's mass and the distance from your centre of gravity to the moon's.
The mass of the first object; the mass of the second object; the distance between them.The mass of the first object; the mass of the second object; the distance between them.The mass of the first object; the mass of the second object; the distance between them.The mass of the first object; the mass of the second object; the distance between them.
The distance doesn't depend on the mass.
Before you test it, you could state the hypothesis in two different ways You could say: "The mass of a falling object has no effect on the time it takes to fall some distance." Or you could say: "The time a falling object takes to fall some distance depends on its mass." You could use the same tests to investigate EITHER hypothesis. --------------------------- The mass of a falling object has no effect on the time it takes to fall some distance assuming zero air resistance.
Not necessarily. The size of an object is not directly proportional to its mass. For example, a small object made of dense material could have more mass than a larger object made of less dense material.
You could use the terms mass, object, or body (that's what Newton used).
No, the speed of an object cannot be determined solely by its mass and distance. Speed is calculated as the distance an object travels over a specific time period. To determine an object's speed, you would need to know both the distance it has traveled and the time it took to cover that distance.
it is easier to see that when the volume of an object is so and so, it is this mass. because an object with more mass could have less volume than an object with larger volume.
The less mass an object has, the less force is needed to stop its motion. This is described by Newton's second law of motion, which states that force is proportional to mass and acceleration. Therefore, an object with less mass requires less force to bring it to a stop.
For Newtonian gravity, observe that the force (F) between two bodies is a function of only the mass of the bodies and distance between the center of mass of those bodies. F = (G*m1*m2)/r^2; where, G = Gravitational constant, m1 = mass of one body, m2 = mass of second body, r = distance between bodies. It is directly proportional to the mass of the bodies and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. Thus, the methods of increasing the magnitude of the force are to increase the mass of either or both of the bodies or decrease the distance between the bodies. Reducing the force can be accomplished by doing the opposite: decreasing mass or increasing distance.