Studyplace

Age Calculation Tricks:
Step1: Multiply the first number of the age by 5. (If <10, ex 5, consider it as 05. If it is >100, ex: 102, then take 10 as the first digit, 2 as the second one.)
Step2: Add 3 to the result.
Step3: Double the answer.
Step4: Add the second digit of the number with the result.
Step5: Subtract 6 from it.

Answer: That is your age.

Thanks

http://globalrtm.webs.com

http://nilshalin.blogspot.com

Math Magic/Tricks

studyplace — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:14:47 +0000

Here i have mentioned few math trick play. You can play these tricks as instructed, with your parents or friends and prove your talent to them.

Trick 1: Number below 10
Step1: Think of a number below 10.
Step2: Double the number you have thought.
Step3: Add 6 with the getting result.
Step4: Half the answer, that is divide it by 2.
Step5: Take away the number you have thought from the answer, that is, subtract the answer from the number you have thought.

Answer: 3

Trick 2: Any Number
Step1: Think of any number.
Step2: Subtract the number you have thought with 1.
Step3: Multiply the result with 3.
Step4: Add 12 with the result.
Step5: Divide the answer by 3.
Step6: Add 5 with the answer.
Step7: Take away the number you have thought from the answer, that is, subtract the answer from the number you have thought.

Answer: 8

Trick 3: Any Number
Step1: Think of any number.
Step2: Multiply the number you have thought with 3.
Step3: Add 45 with the result.
Step4: Double the result.
Step5: Divide the answer by 6.
Step6: Take away the number you have thought from the answer, that is, subtract the answer from the number you have thought.

Answer: 15

Trick 4: Same 3 Digit Number
Step1: Think of any 3 digit number, but each of the digits must be the same as. Ex: 333, 666.
Step2: Add up the digits.
Step3: Divide the 3 digit number with the digits added up.

Answer: 37

Trick 5: 2 Single Digit Numbers
Step1: Think of 2 single digit numbers.
Step2: Take any one of the number among them and double it.
Step3: Add 5 with the result.
Step4: Multiply the result with 5.
Step5: Add the second number to the answer.
Step6: Subtract the answer with 4.
Step7: Subtract the answer again with 21.

Answer: 2 Single Digit Numbers.

Trick 6: 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8
Step1: Choose a number from 1 to 6.
Step2: Multiply the number with 9.
Step3: Multiply the result with 111.
Step4: Multiply the result by 1001.
Step5: Divide the answer by 7.

Answer: All the above numbers will be present.

Trick 7: 1089
Step1: Think of a 3 digit number.
Step2: Arrange the number in descending order.
Step3: Reverse the number and subtract it with the result.
Step4: Remember it and reverse the answer mentally.
Step5: Add it with the result, you have got.

Answer: 1089

Trick 8: x7x11x13
Step1: Think of a 3 digit number.
Step2: Multiply it with x7x11x13.

Ex: Number: 456, Answer: 456456

Trick 9: x3x7x13x37
Step1: Think of a 2 digit number.
Step2: Multiply it with x3x7x13x37.

Ex: Number: 45, Answer: 454545

Trick 10: 9091
Step1: Think of a 5 digit number.
Step2: Multiply it with 11.
Step3: Multiply it with 9091.

Ex: Number: 12345, Answer: 1234512345

This is a funny tricks play of maths. Enjoy it with Fun!

Thanks Enjoy

http://globalrtm.webs.com

http://nilshalin.blogspot.com

Shocking Maths Trick

studyplace — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:10:05 +0000

Hello Friends Hear i have some intresting tricks for you.which i used on my friends & they were shocked when i told the answer of the question which i didn’t know, actually it was on my friends mind & i told the answer.

so you also try & be the Hero among your friends.

try it.

Trick 1: 2′s trick
Step1: Think of a number .
Step2: Multiply it by 3.
Step3: Add 6 with the getting result.
Step4: divide it by 3.
Step5: Subtract it from the first number used.

Answer:2

Trick 2: Any Number
Step1: Think of any number.
Step2: Double the number.
Step3: Add 9 with result.
Step4: sub 3 with the result.
Step5: Divide the result by 2.
Step6: Subtract the number with the number with first number started with.

Answer: 3

Trick 3: Any three digit Number
Step1: Add 7 to it.
Step2: Multiply the number with 2.
Step3: subtract 4 with the result.
Step4: Divide the result by 2.
Step5: Subtract it from the number started with.

Answer: 5

Enjoy with

http://nilshalin.blogspot.com

http://globalrtm.webs.com

___________________________________________________________

Newton’s law of universal gravitation

studyplace — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 16:52:14 +0000

Newton’s law of universal gravitation by attractions inversely proportional to the squares of the distances between massive bodies is a general physical law derived from empirical observations by what Newton called induction.^[1] It is a part of classical mechanics and was formulated in Newton’s work Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (“the Principia”), first published on 5 July 1687. (When Newton’s book was presented in 1686 to the Royal Society, Robert Hooke made a claim that Newton had obtained the inverse square law from him – see History section below.)

In modern language, the law states the following:

Every point mass attracts every other point mass by a force pointing along the line intersecting both points. The force is directly proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the point masses: ^[2]

,

where:

F is the magnitude of the gravitational force between the two point masses,

G is the gravitational constant,

m₁ is the mass of the first point mass,

m₂ is the mass of the second point mass, and

r is the distance between the two point masses.

Assuming SI units, F is measured in newtons (N), m₁ and m₂ in kilograms (kg), r in meters (m), and the constant G is approximately equal to 6.673×10⁻¹¹ N m² kg⁻². The value of the constant G was first accurately determined from the results of the Cavendish experiment conducted by the British scientist Henry Cavendish in 1798, although Cavendish did not himself calculate a numerical value for G^[3]. This experiment was also the first test of Newton’s theory of gravitation between masses in the laboratory. It took place 111 years after the publication of Newton’s Principia and 71 years after Newton’s death, so none of Newton’s calculations could use the value of G; instead he could only calculate a force relative to another force.

Newton’s law of gravitation resembles Coulomb’s law of electrical forces, which is used to calculate the magnitude of electrical force between two charged bodies. Both are inverse-square laws, in which force is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the bodies. Coulomb’s Law has the product of two charges in place of the product of the masses, and the electrostatic constant in place of the gravitational constant.

Newton’s law has since been superseded by Einstein’s theory of general relativity, but it continues to be used as an excellent approximation of the effects of gravity. Relativity is only required when there is a need for extreme precision, or when dealing with gravitation for very massive objects.

History

In 1686, when the first book of Newton‘s ‘Principia‘ was presented to the Royal Society, Robert Hooke claimed that Newton had had from him the “notion” of “the rule of the decrease of Gravity, being reciprocally as the squares of the distances from the Center”. At the same time (according to Edmond Halley‘s contemporary report) Hooke agreed that “the Demonstration of the Curves generated therby” was wholly Newton’s.^[4]

In this way arose the question what, if anything, did Newton owe to Hooke? – a subject extensively discussed since that time, and on which some points still excite some controversy.

Robert Hooke published his ideas about the “System of the World” in the 1660s, when he read to the Royal Society on 21 March 1666 a paper “On gravity”, “concerning the inflection of a direct motion into a curve by a supervening attractive principle”, and he published them again in somewhat developed form in 1674, as an addition to “An Attempt to Prove the Motion of the Earth from Observations”.^[5] Hooke announced in 1674 that he planned to “explain a System of the World differing in many particulars from any yet known”, based on three “Suppositions”: that “all Coelestial Bodies whatsoever, have an attraction or gravitating power towards their own Centers” [and] “they do also attract all the other Coelestial Bodies that are within the sphere of their activity”; that “all bodies whatsoever that are put into a direct and simple motion, will so continue to move forward in a streight line, till they are by some other effectual powers deflected and bent…”; and that “these attractive powers are so much the more powerful in operating, by how much the nearer the body wrought upon is to their own Centers”. Thus Hooke clearly postulated mutual attractions between the Sun and planets, in a way that increased with nearness to the attracting body, together with a principle of linear inertia.

Hooke’s statements up to 1674 made no mention, however, that an inverse square law applies or might apply to these attractions. Hooke’s gravitation was also not yet universal, though it approached universality more closely than previous hypotheses.^[6] He also did not provide accompanying evidence or mathematical demonstration. On the latter two aspects, Hooke himself stated in 1674: “Now what these several degrees [of attraction] are I have not yet experimentally verified”; and as to his whole proposal: “This I only hint at present”, “having my self many other things in hand which I would first compleat, and therefore cannot so well attend it” (i.e. “prosecuting this Inquiry”).^[5] It was later on, in writing on 6 January 1679|80 to Newton, that Hooke communicated his “supposition … that the Attraction always is in a duplicate proportion to the Distance from the Center Reciprocall, and Consequently that the Velocity will be in a subduplicate proportion to the Attraction and Consequently as Kepler Supposes Reciprocall to the Distance.”^[7] (The inference about the velocity was incorrect.^[8])

Hooke’s correspondence of 1679-1680 with Newton mentioned not only this inverse square supposition for the decline of attraction with increasing distance, but also, in Hooke’s opening letter to Newton, of 24 November 1679, an approach of “compounding the celestiall motions of the planetts of a direct motion by the tangent & an attractive motion towards the centrall body”.^[9]

A recent assessment (by Ofer Gal) about the early history of the inverse square law is that “by the late 1660s,” the assumption of an “inverse proportion between gravity and the square of distance was rather common and had been advanced by a number of different people for different reasons”.^[10] (The same author does credit Hooke with a significant and even seminal contribution, but he treats Hooke’s claim of priority on the inverse square point as uninteresting since several individuals besides Newton and Hooke had at least suggested it, and he points instead to the idea of “compounding the celestiall motions” and the conversion of Newton’s thinking away from ‘centrifugal’ and towards ‘centripetal’ force as Hooke’s significant contributions.)

Newton, faced in May 1686 with Hooke’s claim on the inverse square law, denied that Hooke was to be credited as author of the idea, giving reasons. Among these, Newton recalled that the idea had been known to and discussed with Sir Christopher Wren previous to Hooke’s 1679 letter.^[11]. Newton also pointed out and acknowledged prior work of others,^[12] including Bullialdus,^[13] (who suggested, but without demonstration, that there was an attractive force from the Sun in the inverse square proportion to the distance), and Borelli^[14] (who suggested, also without demonstration, that there was a centrifugal tendency in counterbalance with a gravitational attraction towards the Sun so as to make the planets move in ellipses). D T Whiteside has described the contribution to Newton’s thinking that came from Borelli’s book (a copy of which was in Newton’s library at his death).^[15]

Newton also firmly claimed that even if it had happened that he had first heard of the the inverse square proportion from Hooke, which it had not, he would still have some rights to it in view of his demonstrations of its accuracy, because Hooke, without evidence in favour of the supposition, could only guess that it was approximately valid “at great distances from the center”: According to Newton, writing while the ‘Principia’ was still at pre-publication stage, there were so many a-priori reasons to doubt the accuracy of the inverse-square law (especially close to an attracting sphere) that “without my” (Newton’s) “Demonstrations, to which Mr Hook is yet a stranger, it cannot be beleived by a judicious Philosopher to be any where accurate.”^[16] (This remark refers among other things to Newton’s finding, supported by mathematical demonstration, that if the inverse square law applies to tiny particles, then even a large spherically symmetrical mass also attracts masses external to its surface, even close up, exactly as if all its own mass were concentrated at its center. Thus Newton gave a justification, otherwise lacking, for applying the inverse square law to large spherical planetary masses as if they were tiny particles.^[17] In addition, Newton had formulated in Propositions 43-45 of Book 1,^[18] and associated sections of Book 3, a sensitive test of the accuracy of the inverse square law, in which he showed that only where the law of force is accurately as the inverse square of the distance will the directions of orientation of the planets’ orbital ellipses stay constant as they are observed to do apart from small effects attributable to inter-planetary perturbations.)

In regard to evidence that still survives of the earlier history, manuscripts written by Newton in the 1660s show that Newton himself had arrived by 1669 at proofs that in a circular case of planetary motion, ‘endeavour to recede’ (centrifugal force by another name) had an inverse-square relation with distance from the center.^[19] At that time, Newton was thinking and writing in terms of ‘endeavour to recede’ from a center, i.e. what was later called centrifugal force. After his 1679-1680 correspondence with Hooke, Newton adopted the language of inward or centripetal force. According to Newton scholar J Bruce Brackenridge, although much has been made of the change in language and difference of point of view, as between centrifugal or centripetal forces, the actual computations and proofs remained the same either way. They also involved the combination of tangential and radial displacements, which Newton was making in the 1660s. The lesson offered by Hooke to Newton here, although significant, was one of perspective and did not change the analysis.^[20] This background shows there was basis for Newton to deny deriving the inverse square law from Hooke.

Newton also clearly expressed the concept of linear inertia long before his correspondence with Hooke: for this Newton was indebted to Descartes’ work published 1644.^[21]

On the other hand, Newton did accept and acknowledge, in all editions of the ‘Principia’, that Hooke (but not exclusively Hooke) had separately appreciated the inverse square law in the solar system. Newton acknowledged Wren, Hooke and Halley in this connection in the Scholium to Proposition 4 in Book 1.^[22] Newton also acknowledged to Halley that his correspondence with Hooke in 1679-80 had reawakened his dormant interest in astronomical matters, but that did not mean, according to Newton, that Hooke had told Newton anything new or original: “yet am I not beholden to him for any light into that business but only for the diversion he gave me from my other studies to think on these things & for his dogmaticalness in writing as if he had found the motion in the Ellipsis, which inclined me to try it …”.^[12])

Since the time of Newton and Hooke, scholarly discussion has also touched on the question whether Hooke’s 1679 mention of ‘compounding the motions’ gave Newton with something new and valuable, even though that was not a claim actually voiced by Hooke at the time. As described above, Newton’s manuscripts of the 1660s do show him actually combining tangential motion with the effects of radially directed force or endeavour, for example in his derivation of the inverse square relation for the circular case. They also show Newton clearly expressing the concept of linear inertia — for which he was indebted to Descartes’ work published 1644 (as Hooke probably was).^[21] These matters do not appear to have been learned by Newton from Hooke.

Nevertheless, a number of authors have had more to say about what Newton gained from Hooke and some aspects remain controversial.^[23]

Newton’s role in relation to the inverse square law was not as it has sometimes been represented, he did not claim to think it up as a bare idea. What Newton did was to show how the inverse-square law of attraction had many necessary mathematical connections with observable features of the motions of bodies in the solar system; and that they were related in such a way that the observational evidence and the mathematical demonstrations, taken together, gave reason to believe that the inverse square law was not just approximately true but exactly true (to the accuracy achievable in Newton’s time and for about two centuries afterwards – and with some loose ends of points that could not yet be certainly examined, where the implications of the theory had not yet been adequately identified or calculated).^[24]^[25]

In the light of the background described above, it becomes understandable how, about thirty years after Newton’s death in 1727, Alexis Clairaut, a mathematical astronomer eminent in his own right in the field of gravitational studies, wrote after reviewing what Hooke published, that “One must not think that this idea … of Hooke diminishes Newton’s glory”; and that “the example of Hooke” serves “to show what a distance there is between a truth that is glimpsed and a truth that is demonstrated”.^[26]^[27]

[edit] Bodies with spatial extent

If the bodies of question have spatial extent (rather than being theoretical point masses), then the gravitational force between them is calculated by summing the contributions of the notional point masses which constitute the bodies. In the limit, as the component point masses become “infinitely small”, this entails integrating the force (in vector form, see below) over the extents of the two bodies.

In this way it can be shown that an object with a spherically-symmetric distribution of mass exerts the same gravitational attraction on external bodies as if all the object’s mass were concentrated at a point at its centre.^[2] (This is not generally true for non-spherically-symmetrical bodies.)

For points inside a spherically-symmetric distribution of matter, Newton’s Shell theorem can be used to find the gravitational force. The theorem tells us how different parts of the mass distribution affect the gravitational force measured at a point located a distance r₀ from the center of the mass distribution:^[28]

The mass located at a radius r < r₀ causes the same force at r₀ as if all of the mass enclosed within a sphere of radius r₀ were concentrated at the center of the mass distribution (as noted above).
The mass located at a radius r > r₀ exerts no net gravitational force at r₀. I.e., the individual forces exerted by the elements of the sphere on the point at r₀ cancel each other out.

As a consequence, for example, within a shell of uniform thickness and density there is no net gravitational acceleration in the hollow section.

Vector form

Gravity on Earth from a macroscopic perspective.

Gravity in a room: the curvature of the Earth is negligible at this scale, and the force lines can be approximated as being parallel and pointing straight down to the center of the Earth

Newton’ law of universal gravitation can be written as a vector equation to account for the direction of the gravitational force as well as its magnitude. In this formula, quantities in bold represent vectors.

where

F₁₂ is the force applied on object 2 due to object 1,

G is the gravitational constant,

m₁ and m₂ are respectively the masses of objects 1 and 2,

|r₁₂| = |r₂ − r₁| is the distance between objects 1 and 2, and

is the unit vector from object 1 to 2.

It can be seen that the vector form of the equation is the same as the scalar form given earlier, except that F is now a vector quantity, and the right hand side is multiplied by the appropriate unit vector. Also, it can be seen that F₁₂ = −F₂₁.

[edit] Gravitational field

The gravitational field is a vector field that describes the gravitational force which would be applied on an object in any given point in space, per unit mass. It is actually equal to the gravitational acceleration at that point.

It is a generalization of the vector form, which becomes particularly useful if more than 2 objects are involved (such as a rocket between the Earth and the Moon). For 2 objects (e.g. object 2 is a rocket, object 1 the Earth), we simply write r instead of r₁₂ and m instead of m₂ and define the gravitational field g(r) as:

so that we can write:

This formulation is dependent on the objects causing the field. The field has units of acceleration; in SI, this is m/s².

Gravitational fields are also conservative; that is, the work done by gravity from one position to another is path-independent. This has the consequence that there exists a gravitational potential field V(r) such that

If m₁ is a point mass or the mass of a sphere with homogeneous mass distribution, the force field g(r) outside the sphere is isotropic, i.e., depends only on the distance r from the center of the sphere. In that case

Problems with Newton’s theory

Newton’s description of gravity is sufficiently accurate for many practical purposes and is therefore widely used. Deviations from it are small when the dimensionless quantities φ/c² and (v/c)² are both much less than one, where φ is the gravitational potential, v is the velocity of the objects being studied, and c is the speed of light.^[29] For example, Newtonian gravity provides an accurate description of the Earth/Sun system, since

where r_orbit is the radius of the Earth’s orbit around the Sun.

In situations where either dimensionless parameter is large, then general relativity must be used to describe the system. General relativity reduces to Newtonian gravity in the limit of small potential and low velocities, so Newton’s law of gravitation is often said to be the low-gravity limit of general relativity.

Theoretical concerns

There is no immediate prospect of identifying the mediator of gravity. Attempts by physicists to identify the relationship between the gravitational force and other known fundamental forces are not yet resolved, although considerable headway has been made over the last 50 years (See: Theory of everything and Standard Model). Newton himself felt the inexplicable action at a distance to be unsatisfactory (see “Newton’s reservations” below).
Newton’s theory requires that gravitational force is transmitted instantaneously. Given classical assumptions of the nature of space and time before the development of general relativity, a propagation delay leads to unstable orbits.

Disagreement with observation

Newton’s theory does not fully explain the precession of the perihelion of the orbits of the planets, especially of planet Mercury.^[30] There is a 43 arcsecond per century discrepancy between the Newtonian prediction, which arises only from the gravitational tugs of the other planets, and the observed precession.
The predicted deflection of light by gravity using Newton’s theory is only half the deflection actually observed. General relativity is in closer agreement with the observations.

The observed fact that gravitational and inertial masses are the same for all bodies is unexplained within Newton’s system. General relativity takes this as a postulate. See equivalence principle. In point of fact the experiments of Galileo decades before Newton established that objects which have the same fluid/air resistance are accelerated by the pull of earth’s gravity equally; regardless of their initial (inertial) mass. Yet the force required to accelerate masses is completely dependent upon their initial (inertial) mass.

The problem is that Newton’s theory and his mathematical formulae explain and permit the calculation of the effect of the second phenomena; but they do not predict; nor do they explain the first phenomenon; which is, the equivalence of the behavior of masses under the influence of gravity, without regard to the quantity of the masses involved.

Newton’s reservations

While Newton was able to formulate his law of gravity in his monumental work, he was deeply uncomfortable with the notion of “action at a distance” which his equations implied. In 1692, in his third letter to Bentley, he wrote: “That one body may act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without the mediation of anything else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one another, is to me so great an absurdity that, I believe, no man who has in philosophic matters a competent faculty of thinking could ever fall into it.”

He never, in his words, “assigned the cause of this power”. In all other cases, he used the phenomenon of motion to explain the origin of various forces acting on bodies, but in the case of gravity, he was unable to experimentally identify the motion that produces the force of gravity (although he invented two mechanical hypothesis in 1675 and 1717). Moreover, he refused to even offer a hypothesis as to the cause of this force on grounds that to do so was contrary to sound science. He lamented that “philosophers have hitherto attempted the search of nature in vain” for the source of the gravitational force, as he was convinced “by many reasons” that there were “causes hitherto unknown” that were fundamental to all the “phenomena of nature”. These fundamental phenomena are still under investigation and, though hypotheses abound, the definitive answer has yet to be found. And in Newton’s 1713 General Scholium in the second edition of Principia: “I have not yet been able to discover the cause of these properties of gravity from phenomena and I feign no hypotheses… It is enough that gravity does really exist and acts according to the laws I have explained, and that it abundantly serves to account for all the motions of celestial bodies.”^[31]

Einstein’s solution

These objections were mooted by Einstein’s theory of general relativity, in which gravitation is an attribute of curved spacetime instead of being due to a force propagated between bodies. In Einstein’s theory, masses distort spacetime in their vicinity, and other particles move in trajectories determined by the geometry of spacetime. This allowed a description of the motions of light and mass that was consistent with all available observations.

Notes

Find more about Newton’s law of universal gravitation on Wikipedia’s sister projects: Definitions from Wiktionary
Textbooks from Wikibooks
Quotations from Wikiquote
Source texts from Wikisource
Images and media from Commons
News stories from Wikinews

Learning resources from Wikiversity

^ Isaac Newton: “In [experimental] philosophy particular propositions are inferred from the phenomena and afterwards rendered general by induction”: “Principia“, Book 3, General Scholium, at p.392 in Volume 2 of Andrew Motte’s English translation published 1729.
^ ^a ^b – Proposition 75, Theorem 35: p.956 – I.Bernard Cohen and Anne Whitman, translators: Isaac Newton, The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. Preceded by A Guide to Newton’s Principia, by I.Bernard Cohen. University of California Press 1999 ISBN 0-520-08816-6 ISBN 0-520-08817-4
^ The Michell-Cavendish Experiment, Laurent Hodges
^ H W Turnbull (ed.), Correspondence of Isaac Newton, Vol 2 (1676-1687), (Cambridge University Press, 1960), giving the Halley-Newton correspondence of May to July 1686 about Hooke’s claims at pp.431-448, see particularly page 431.
^ ^a ^b Hooke’s 1674 statement in “An Attempt to Prove the Motion of the Earth from Observations”, is available in online facsimile here.
^ See page 239 in Curtis Wilson (1989), “The Newtonian achievement in astronomy”, ch.13 (pages 233-274) in “Planetary astronomy from the Renaissance to the rise of astrophysics: 2A: Tycho Brahe to Newton”, CUP 1989.
^ Page 309 in H W Turnbull (ed.), Correspondence of Isaac Newton, Vol 2 (1676-1687), (Cambridge University Press, 1960), document #239.
^ See Curtis Wilson (1989) at page 244.
^ Page 297 in H W Turnbull (ed.), Correspondence of Isaac Newton, Vol 2 (1676-1687), (Cambridge University Press, 1960), document #235, 24 November 1679.
^ See “Meanest foundations and nobler superstructures: Hooke, Newton and the ‘Compounding of the Celestiall Motions of the Planetts’”, Ofer Gal, 2003 at page 9.
^ Page 433 in H W Turnbull (ed.), Correspondence of Isaac Newton, Vol 2 (1676-1687), (Cambridge University Press, 1960), document #286, 27 May 1686.
^ ^a ^b Pages 435-440 in H W Turnbull (ed.), Correspondence of Isaac Newton, Vol 2 (1676-1687), (Cambridge University Press, 1960), document #288, 20 June 1686.
^ Bullialdus (Ismael Bouillau) (1645), “Astronomia philolaica”, Paris, 1645.
^ Borelli, “Theoricae Mediceorum Planetarum ex causis physicis deductae”, Florence, 1666.
^ D T Whiteside, “Before the Principia: the maturing of Newton’s thoughts on dynamical astronomy, 1664-1684″, Journal for the History of Astronomy, i (1970), pages 5-19; especially at page 13.
^ Page 436, Correspondence, Vol.2, already cited.
^ Propositions 70 to 75 in Book 1, for example in the 1729 English translation of the ‘Principia’, start at page 263.
^ Propositions 43 to 45 in Book 1, in the 1729 English translation of the ‘Principia’, start at page 177.
^ D T Whiteside, “The pre-history of the ‘Principia’ from 1664 to 1686″, Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London, 45 (1991), pages 11-61; especially at 13-20.
^ See J. Bruce Brackenridge, “The key to Newton’s dynamics: the Kepler problem and the Principia”, (University of California Press, 1995), especially at pages 20-21.
^ ^a ^b See page 10 in D T Whiteside, “Before the Principia: the maturing of Newton’s thoughts on dynamical astronomy, 1664-1684″, Journal for the History of Astronomy, i (1970), pages 5-19.
^ See for example the 1729 English translation of the ‘Principia’, at page 66.
^ Discussion points can be seen for example in the following papers: N Guicciardini, “Reconsidering the Hooke-Newton debate on Gravitation: Recent Results”, in Early Science and Medicine, 10 (2005), 511-517; Ofer Gal, “The Invention of Celestial Mechanics”, in Early Science and Medicine, 10 (2005), 529-534; M Nauenberg, “Hooke’s and Newton’s Contributions to the Early Development of Orbital mechanics and Universal Gravitation”, in Early Science and Medicine, 10 (2005), 518-528.
^ See for example the results of Propositions 43-45 and 70-75 in Book 1, cited above.
^ See also G E Smith, in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “Newton’s Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica”.
^ The second extract is quoted and translated in W.W. Rouse Ball, “An Essay on Newton’s ‘Principia’” (London and New York: Macmillan, 1893), at page 69.
^ The original statements by Clairaut (in French) are found (with orthography here as in the original) in “Explication abregée du systême du monde, et explication des principaux phénomenes astronomiques tirée des Principes de M. Newton” (1759), at Introduction (section IX), page 6: “Il ne faut pas croire que cette idée … de Hook diminue la gloire de M. Newton”, [and] “L’exemple de Hook” [serve] “à faire voir quelle distance il y a entre une vérité entrevue & une vérité démontrée”.
^ Equilibrium State
^ Misner, Charles W.; Thorne, Kip S.; Wheeler, John Archibald (1973), Gravitation, New York: W. H.Freeman and Company, ISBN 0-7167-0344-0 Page 1049.
^ – Max Born (1924), Einstein’s Theory of Relativity (The 1962 Dover edition, page 348 lists a table documenting the observed and calculated values for the precession of the perihelion of Mercury, Venus, and Earth.)
^ – The Construction of Modern Science: Mechanisms and Mechanics.

Thanks

http://nilshalin.blogspot.com

http://globalrtm.webs.com

Download World Famous wallpaper

studyplace — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 20:23:53 +0000

Download all Famous wallpaper & Look How Beautiful it is.!

http://www.ziddu.com/download/6449344/Hero-Honda-Hunk.jpg.html

http://www.ziddu.com/download/6449345/rajasthan-03.jpg.html

http://www.ziddu.com/download/6449346/mer12d.jpg.html

http://www.ziddu.com/download/6449347/rajasthan-06.jpg.html

http://www.ziddu.com/download/6449348/lan17h.jpg.html

http://www.ziddu.com/download/6449349/lam16a.jpg.html

http://www.ziddu.com/download/6449350/lan16d.jpg.html

http://www.ziddu.com/download/6449351/rajasthan-07.jpg.html

———————-

http://www.ziddu.com/download/6449352/rajasthan-04.jpg.html

———————–

http://www.ziddu.com/download/6449353/rajasthanjaisalmer-05.jpg.html

Earn $$$ Registration free

studyplace — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 07:20:41 +0000

Friends now money making is not a hard job for everyone, who have the basic knowledge of internet & surfing.

you have to do onli one thing just register your self on link below & get $100 next second in your account.

friends now it is free for every one who wants to be rich.

so n’s time to earn.

& if you don’t have the time & also intrested in earning so just click the link below

http://www.surfjunky.com/?r=nilshalin

it makes $$$ without doing hard work.

so easy to use.

Have fun with Earning.

http://nilshalin.blogspot.com

Hero Honda Hunk Technical Specifications, Features, Colors, Wallpapers & Price Details Unveiled

studyplace — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 19:04:35 +0000

ENJOY HUNKING

Hero Honda, world’s largest two wheeler maker has launched the new Hunk 150cc in the month of October 2007. The Hunk 150cc engine is integrated with advance tumble flow induction (ATFI) technology, which delivers a balance of fuel efficiency and power.

Pawan Munjal, Managing Director and CEO, HHML, said “The ‘Hunk’ is our tribute to the Youth of India today – confident and ready to take on the world. It personifies the very fighting spirit and resilience of our youngsters, who are making a mark for themselves in their chosen fields of vocation. Some of the key findings of our extensive research amongst the youth have been incorporated into the ‘Hunk’ to make it a complete package of world class technology, unprecedented features and stunning looks. I am sure there will be many more ‘Hunks’ on Indian roads soon.”

Hero Honda Hunk Features:

Broad, Muscular Fuel Tank Brawny Shoulders
Glaring Headlight with aggressive styled visor
Fiery Red Chromed Ringed speedometer
Gas Reservoir Suspension
Contoured Sporty Saddle
Tuff-Up Tube
Anti- Kickback mechanism
Tumble Flow Induction Technology

Hero Honda Hunk Colors:

Red
Silver
Blue
Black
Panther Black

Hero Honda Hunk is Priced at Rs 55175 (Ex-Showroom, Delhi) for Kick Start and Rs 56175 (Ex-Showroom, Delhi) for self Start. * Prices may vary from time to time.

Hero Honda Hunk Technical Specifications:

Engine
Type	Air-cooled, 4-stroke single cylinder OHC
Displacement (cc)	149.2 cc
Maximum Power	10.6 Kw (14.4 Ps) @ 8500 rpm
Maximum Torque	12.80 Nm @ 6500 rpm
Starting	Self Start / Kick Start
Bore x Stroke (mm)	57.3 x 57.8
Ignition	AMI – Advanced microprocessor Ignition System
Compression Ratio	9.1:1
Carburettor	C.V. Type
Idle Speed	1400 rpm

Transmission:
Clutch	Multiplate Wet
Gear Box	5 speed Constant Mesh

Chassis:
Type	Tubular, diamond type

Dimensions:
Wheelbase (mm)	1325
Length (mm)	2080
Width (mm)	765
Height (mm)	1095
Ground Clearance (mm)	145
Kerb Weight (Kgs)	143 (Kick) / 146 (Self)

Suspension:
Front	Telescopic Hydraulic Shock Absorbers
Rear	Swing Arm with 5 step adjustable Nitrox GRS (Gas Reservoir Suspension)

Brakes:
Front Disc	240 mm Dia, Disc – Non Asbestoes type
Rear Drum	Internal Expanding Shoe Type (130 mm Dia); Liners – Non Asbestoes type

Wheels:
Rim Size Front	18 x 1.85 Alloy Wheel
Rim Size Rear	18 x 2.15 Alloy Wheel

Tyres:
Front	2.75 x 18 – 42 P
Rear	100/90 x 18 – 56 p (with tuff-up tube)

Electricals:
Battery	12V – 7 ah
Head Lamp	12V – 35W / 35W – Halogen Bulb (Multi-Reflector Type)
Tail Lamp	12V – 5 W
Turn Signal Lamp	12V – 10W x 4 nos (Multi – Reflector)

Fuel:
Tank Capacity	12.4 Ltrs (Min)
Reserve	2.2 Ltrs (usable reserve)

Orkut Büyükkökten The Real master of Orkut

studyplace — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 19:23:22 +0000