Can You Answer 5th Grade Science Questions?

[daws101]

can i use that excuse the next time I need to bullshit my way out of something?

The next time? You must be an expert...

hardly, I just know a great bullshit line when I see one.

You really need to work on expanding your vocabulary.

why? bullshit is bullshit

8/8 on a 5th grade test obviously is the high point of your career.

another fine example of bullshit

 

[Delta4Embassy]

5th graders can answer 5th grade science questions not because they have command of the information and understand how it works, but rather because for them it's fresher in their recollection having only just learned it. This is why adults who haven't had the informaiton in decades perhaps seem to have difficulty answering.

You'd get the same result though giving 5th graders post-graduate elvel information. But their ability to recite doesn't translate into actual mastery of the information. It's merely recitation, not creative thinking or problem-solving.

 

[longknife]

And, for those who haven't figured it out, I posted it as a diversion from all the "serious" BS going on in the forum.

 

[n0spam4me]

And, for those who haven't figured it out, I posted it as a diversion from all the "serious" BS going on in the forum.

and now for something completely different...... see post # 6 of this thread. any discussion here?

 

[longknife]

And, for those who haven't figured it out, I posted it as a diversion from all the "serious" BS going on in the forum.

and now for something completely different...... see post # 6 of this thread. any discussion here?

Heck no. I don't understand any of it.

 

[Tresha91203]

I missed the machine question and how long it takes light to reach the earth from the sun, so 6 of 8 ... epic fail.

 

[ogibillm]

And, for those who haven't figured it out, I posted it as a diversion from all the "serious" BS going on in the forum.

and now for something completely different...... see post # 6 of this thread. any discussion here?

Heck no. I don't understand any of it.

most of it is gibberish. 900ft doesn't matter at all. since force is the product of mass times acceleration, and the mass is presumed constant since it's the same object, if the acceleration of the object is 64% of the regular, it's force, or weight, is 64% of the normal.

 

[n0spam4me]

And, for those who haven't figured it out, I posted it as a diversion from all the "serious" BS going on in the forum.

and now for something completely different...... see post # 6 of this thread. any discussion here?

Heck no. I don't understand any of it.

most of it is gibberish. 900ft doesn't matter at all. since force is the product of mass times acceleration, and the mass is presumed constant since it's the same object, if the acceleration of the object is 64% of the regular, it's force, or weight, is 64% of the normal.

Considering that at 100% of "normal" acceleration, the object would be weightless, how do you figure the 64% at 64% of the acceleration of gravity? The real explanation is that the weight is the inverse of the acceleration so that at 64% of the acceleration of gravity the weight is 36% of what it would be at rest.

 

[ogibillm]

And, for those who haven't figured it out, I posted it as a diversion from all the "serious" BS going on in the forum.

and now for something completely different...... see post # 6 of this thread. any discussion here?

Heck no. I don't understand any of it.

most of it is gibberish. 900ft doesn't matter at all. since force is the product of mass times acceleration, and the mass is presumed constant since it's the same object, if the acceleration of the object is 64% of the regular, it's force, or weight, is 64% of the normal.

Considering that at 100% of "normal" acceleration, the object would be weightless, how do you figure the 64% at 64% of the acceleration of gravity? The real explanation is that the weight is the inverse of the acceleration so that at 64% of the acceleration of gravity the weight is 36% of what it would be at rest.

No. That's just wrong. Objects do not become weightless as they fall. Weight is actually just a measure of the force caused by rhe acceleration due to gravity.

 

[n0spam4me]

And, for those who haven't figured it out, I posted it as a diversion from all the "serious" BS going on in the forum.

and now for something completely different...... see post # 6 of this thread. any discussion here?

Heck no. I don't understand any of it.

most of it is gibberish. 900ft doesn't matter at all. since force is the product of mass times acceleration, and the mass is presumed constant since it's the same object, if the acceleration of the object is 64% of the regular, it's force, or weight, is 64% of the normal.

Considering that at 100% of "normal" acceleration, the object would be weightless, how do you figure the 64% at 64% of the acceleration of gravity? The real explanation is that the weight is the inverse of the acceleration so that at 64% of the acceleration of gravity the weight is 36% of what it would be at rest.

No. That's just wrong. Objects do not become weightless as they fall. Weight is actually just a measure of the force caused by rhe acceleration due to gravity.

You get what happens in ORBIT, right, stuff retains its mass, but becomes weightless. If say you were in an elevator and said elevator was out-of-control and dropping at the acceleration of gravity, what would people inside experience?

 

[bodecea]

I missed "special machine" because I didn't take the time to look up this invented terminology, which seems to have replaced actual learning and understanding in our schools.

You mean "simple machine"?

 

[ogibillm]

and now for something completely different...... see post # 6 of this thread. any discussion here?

Heck no. I don't understand any of it.

most of it is gibberish. 900ft doesn't matter at all. since force is the product of mass times acceleration, and the mass is presumed constant since it's the same object, if the acceleration of the object is 64% of the regular, it's force, or weight, is 64% of the normal.

Considering that at 100% of "normal" acceleration, the object would be weightless, how do you figure the 64% at 64% of the acceleration of gravity? The real explanation is that the weight is the inverse of the acceleration so that at 64% of the acceleration of gravity the weight is 36% of what it would be at rest.

No. That's just wrong. Objects do not become weightless as they fall. Weight is actually just a measure of the force caused by rhe acceleration due to gravity.

You get what happens in ORBIT, right, stuff retains its mass, but becomes weightless. If say you were in an elevator and said elevator was out-of-control and dropping at the acceleration of gravity, what would people inside experience?

and now for something completely different...... see post # 6 of this thread. any discussion here?

Heck no. I don't understand any of it.

most of it is gibberish. 900ft doesn't matter at all. since force is the product of mass times acceleration, and the mass is presumed constant since it's the same object, if the acceleration of the object is 64% of the regular, it's force, or weight, is 64% of the normal.

Considering that at 100% of "normal" acceleration, the object would be weightless, how do you figure the 64% at 64% of the acceleration of gravity? The real explanation is that the weight is the inverse of the acceleration so that at 64% of the acceleration of gravity the weight is 36% of what it would be at rest.

No. That's just wrong. Objects do not become weightless as they fall. Weight is actually just a measure of the force caused by rhe acceleration due to gravity.

You get what happens in ORBIT, right, stuff retains its mass, but becomes weightless. If say you were in an elevator and said elevator was out-of-control and dropping at the acceleration of gravity, what would people inside experience?

People inside a falling elevator would 'feel weightless, because there would be no normal force counteracting the force of gravity. However, they would not be weightless.
Orbit only works because gravity keeps the object falling around the planet.

 

[n0spam4me]

Heck no. I don't understand any of it.

most of it is gibberish. 900ft doesn't matter at all. since force is the product of mass times acceleration, and the mass is presumed constant since it's the same object, if the acceleration of the object is 64% of the regular, it's force, or weight, is 64% of the normal.

Considering that at 100% of "normal" acceleration, the object would be weightless, how do you figure the 64% at 64% of the acceleration of gravity? The real explanation is that the weight is the inverse of the acceleration so that at 64% of the acceleration of gravity the weight is 36% of what it would be at rest.

No. That's just wrong. Objects do not become weightless as they fall. Weight is actually just a measure of the force caused by rhe acceleration due to gravity.

You get what happens in ORBIT, right, stuff retains its mass, but becomes weightless. If say you were in an elevator and said elevator was out-of-control and dropping at the acceleration of gravity, what would people inside experience?

Heck no. I don't understand any of it.

most of it is gibberish. 900ft doesn't matter at all. since force is the product of mass times acceleration, and the mass is presumed constant since it's the same object, if the acceleration of the object is 64% of the regular, it's force, or weight, is 64% of the normal.

Considering that at 100% of "normal" acceleration, the object would be weightless, how do you figure the 64% at 64% of the acceleration of gravity? The real explanation is that the weight is the inverse of the acceleration so that at 64% of the acceleration of gravity the weight is 36% of what it would be at rest.

No. That's just wrong. Objects do not become weightless as they fall. Weight is actually just a measure of the force caused by rhe acceleration due to gravity.

You get what happens in ORBIT, right, stuff retains its mass, but becomes weightless. If say you were in an elevator and said elevator was out-of-control and dropping at the acceleration of gravity, what would people inside experience?

People inside a falling elevator would 'feel weightless, because there would be no normal force counteracting the force of gravity. However, they would not be weightless.
Orbit only works because gravity keeps the object falling around the planet.

Do you get the definition(s) that is the difference between weight & mass?

 

[ricechickie]

I missed "special machine" because I didn't take the time to look up this invented terminology, which seems to have replaced actual learning and understanding in our schools.

It's not a "special machine," it's a simple machine. And it's a common concept, far from an "invented terminology."

Embarrassingly, I only got 5 out of 8 correct. I thought light took a lot longer to get from the sun to the earth, and I thought sound waves traveled faster in space. I forget the other one I got wrong.

 

[ogibillm]

most of it is gibberish. 900ft doesn't matter at all. since force is the product of mass times acceleration, and the mass is presumed constant since it's the same object, if the acceleration of the object is 64% of the regular, it's force, or weight, is 64% of the normal.

Considering that at 100% of "normal" acceleration, the object would be weightless, how do you figure the 64% at 64% of the acceleration of gravity? The real explanation is that the weight is the inverse of the acceleration so that at 64% of the acceleration of gravity the weight is 36% of what it would be at rest.

No. That's just wrong. Objects do not become weightless as they fall. Weight is actually just a measure of the force caused by rhe acceleration due to gravity.

You get what happens in ORBIT, right, stuff retains its mass, but becomes weightless. If say you were in an elevator and said elevator was out-of-control and dropping at the acceleration of gravity, what would people inside experience?

most of it is gibberish. 900ft doesn't matter at all. since force is the product of mass times acceleration, and the mass is presumed constant since it's the same object, if the acceleration of the object is 64% of the regular, it's force, or weight, is 64% of the normal.

Considering that at 100% of "normal" acceleration, the object would be weightless, how do you figure the 64% at 64% of the acceleration of gravity? The real explanation is that the weight is the inverse of the acceleration so that at 64% of the acceleration of gravity the weight is 36% of what it would be at rest.

No. That's just wrong. Objects do not become weightless as they fall. Weight is actually just a measure of the force caused by rhe acceleration due to gravity.

You get what happens in ORBIT, right, stuff retains its mass, but becomes weightless. If say you were in an elevator and said elevator was out-of-control and dropping at the acceleration of gravity, what would people inside experience?

People inside a falling elevator would 'feel weightless, because there would be no normal force counteracting the force of gravity. However, they would not be weightless.
Orbit only works because gravity keeps the object falling around the planet.

Do you get the definition(s) that is the difference between weight & mass?

i do. do you understand what weight is? it's defined as the force caused by the acceleration due to gravity on an object

 

[n0spam4me]

Considering that at 100% of "normal" acceleration, the object would be weightless, how do you figure the 64% at 64% of the acceleration of gravity? The real explanation is that the weight is the inverse of the acceleration so that at 64% of the acceleration of gravity the weight is 36% of what it would be at rest.

No. That's just wrong. Objects do not become weightless as they fall. Weight is actually just a measure of the force caused by rhe acceleration due to gravity.

You get what happens in ORBIT, right, stuff retains its mass, but becomes weightless. If say you were in an elevator and said elevator was out-of-control and dropping at the acceleration of gravity, what would people inside experience?

Considering that at 100% of "normal" acceleration, the object would be weightless, how do you figure the 64% at 64% of the acceleration of gravity? The real explanation is that the weight is the inverse of the acceleration so that at 64% of the acceleration of gravity the weight is 36% of what it would be at rest.

No. That's just wrong. Objects do not become weightless as they fall. Weight is actually just a measure of the force caused by rhe acceleration due to gravity.

You get what happens in ORBIT, right, stuff retains its mass, but becomes weightless. If say you were in an elevator and said elevator was out-of-control and dropping at the acceleration of gravity, what would people inside experience?

People inside a falling elevator would 'feel weightless, because there would be no normal force counteracting the force of gravity. However, they would not be weightless.
Orbit only works because gravity keeps the object falling around the planet.

Do you get the definition(s) that is the difference between weight & mass?

i do. do you understand what weight is?

& yes, weight is a function of gravity acting on the mass, therefore something with a weight of X on earth would only weigh X/6 on the moon.

 

[jwoodie]

OK, I misread "simple machine" as "special machine." Simple machine is a term of art invented by Archimedes to describe mechanical advantage. Seems like more of a history question than a science question.

 

[ogibillm]

& yes, weight is a function of gravity acting on the mass, therefore something with a weight of X on earth would only weigh X/6 on the moon.

so if someone is in freefall, gravity has not stopped acting upon them, has it?

 

[ricechickie]

OK, I misread "simple machine" as "special machine." Simple machine is a term of art invented by Archimedes to describe mechanical advantage. Seems like more of a history question than a science question.

No, knowing who invented the term might be a history question. Knowing what the term means is a science question.

 

[n0spam4me]

& yes, weight is a function of gravity acting on the mass, therefore something with a weight of X on earth would only weigh X/6 on the moon.

so if someone is in freefall, gravity has not stopped acting upon them, has it?

yes, in free fall, gravity is acting upon the falling body, however it is said to be weightless because the falling mass is not expressing that weight downward because it is falling at the acceleration of gravity. If you attempted to weigh a falling object you would have to stop it first. ( and that is a rather different tangent )