Talk:Inelastic collision: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:12, 18 September 2011

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Physics Start‑class High‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

"inelastic" redirect

searching for "inelastic" redirects to the disambiguation page for the word "elastic" either inelastic collisions should be added to the disambiguation page for "elastic" or a search for "inelastic" should redirect to this article. I do not know how to do the latter, and am not sure of which course of action should be taken. -aliencam (talk) 08:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Expound on formulas

I can't help but notice that several physics and chemistry articles present formulas as though these formulas are infallible and should just be swallowed as is without being understood. There should be an explanation on the principles behind the formula. Micasta (talk) 00:42, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

True dat. -random person- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.149.186.41 (talk) 19:32, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 True dat. -random person-  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/67.149.186.41|67.149.186.41]] ([[User talk:67.149.186.41|talk]]) 19:32, 17 May 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
-"Inelastic collisions may not conserve kinetic energy, but they do obey conservation of momentum. Simple ballistic pendulum problems obey the conservation of kinetic energy only when the block swings to its largest angle."
-This is plain wrong.  In a completely inelastic collision, the receiving body absorbs all momentum of the striking body and therefore does not move.  Therefore the resulting momentum is zero as the resultant velocity is zero.
-Therefore I have clobbered this sentence.