the best expalanation abiut the newton ring?
97196
Super cool question.\n\nThe best explanation is just PIZZA and old fashioned arithmetic division.\n\nI mean like 18,000 ÷ 600 = 30\n\nImagine you are in Tom's Pizzeria, sitting near the window. It's the kind of place where they have a sheet of glass on the table. \n\nNow Tom's is a classy joint, so the table is spotless. You take off your glasses and put them face down on the glass table top.\n\nNow imagine that at one particular spot, there is a tiny air gap between your eyeglass lens and the glass table top which is a certain thickness.\n\nAnd this little gap is 18,000 nanometers thick. 18,000 nm is about the thickness of three strands of spider web silk.\n\nNow there is an orange neon PIZZA sign hanging in the window directly over your table. This light has a wavelength of about 600 nanometers. 600 namometers is about the size of sneeze virus. Yuck nasty germs!\n\nSo this orange light is shining down on your table and you notice something odd -- right at this particular point on your glasses, the reflection is about TWICE as bright.\n\nThat is because if you do the division up above, you can see that the light fits into the gap an even number of times.\n\nSo since light can be considered to be waves like water in a tank, if it fits evenly in between two reflecting surfaces, the peaks and valleys of the waves will line up nicely and you will see a brighter light!\n\nNow if your glasses are cool circular mod style and they are  exactly sitting on the center of the lens, you can easily imagine that there would be a circular ring on the lens which is always 18,000 nm above the glass table top.\n\nAll along this ring, the light is brighter.\n\nIn fact if you move out from the center you will come to another spot which is 18,600 nanometers, and since the light fits into this gap 31 times exactly, you get another bright ring.\n\nThere is a nasty formula with square roots and stuff in it, but for a spherical lens sitting on a flat glass plate it tells you where the bright rings are.\n\nSir Isaac Newton was one of the first scientists to think about this and so the rings are named after him.\n\nIf you have light of mixed colors, like sunlight, and you have a gap of varying thickness, like a gasoline or oil slick on water, you not only get bright and dark curving lines, but you also get rainbow colors.\n\nGreat stuff!
1109075
Einstein's law of gravitation. It certainly looks nicer than Newton's :P
662586
I say Newton in about 1700:\n\n"Newton’s form of Kepler’s third law shows that one can use orbital motion to determine the masses of the objects."
774727
try http://www.rube-goldberg.com/
185470
A  The Reflecting Telescope \n\nIn October 1667, soon after his return to Cambridge, Newton was elected to a minor fellowship at Trinity College. Six months later he received a major fellowship and shortly thereafter was named Master of Arts. During this period he devoted much of his time to practical work in optics. His earlier experiments with the prism convinced him that a telescope’s resolution is limited not so much by the difficulty of building flawless lenses as by the general refraction differences of differently colored rays. Newton observed that lenses refract, or bend, different colors of light by a slightly different amount. He believed that these differences would make it impossible to bring a beam of white light (which includes all the different colors of light) to a single focus. Thus he turned his attention to building a reflecting telescope, or a telescope that uses mirrors instead of lenses, as a practical solution. Mirrors reflect all colors of light by the same amount. \n\nScottish mathematician James Gregory had proposed a design for a reflecting telescope in 1663, but Newton was the first scientist to build one. He built a reflecting telescope with a 1.3-in (3.3-cm) mirror in 1668. This telescope magnified objects about 40 times and differed slightly from Gregory’s in design. Three years later, the Royal Society, England’s official association of prominent scientists and mathematicians, invited Newton to submit his telescope for inspection. He sent one similar to his original model, and the Society established Newton’s dominance in the field by publishing a description of the instrument.\n\nB  Calculus (Newton’s “Fluxional Method”) \n\nIn 1669 Newton gave his Trinity mathematics professor Isaac Barrow an important manuscript, which is generally known by its shortened Latin title, De Analysi. This work contained many of Newton’s conclusions about calculus (what Newton called his “fluxional method”). Although the paper was not immediately published, Barrow made its results known to several of the leading mathematicians of Britain and Europe. This paper established Newton as one of the top mathematicians of his day and as the founder of modern calculus (along with Leibniz). Calculus addresses such concepts as the rate of change of a certain quantity, the slope of a curve at a given point, the computation of maximum and minimum values of functions, and the calculation of areas bounded by curves. When Barrow retired in 1669, he suggested to the college that Newton succeed him. Newton became the new professor of mathematics and chose optics as the subject of his first course of lectures.\n\nC  Newton’s First Published Works \n\nIn early 1672 Newton was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society. Shortly afterward Newton offered to submit a paper detailing his discovery of the composite nature of white light. Much impressed by his account, the Society published it. This publication triggered a long series of objections to Newton’s scientific views in general, mostly by European scientists from outside England. Many of the criticisms later proved unsound. The strongest criticism of Newton’s work, however, concerned his work on the theory of gravity and came from English inventor, mathematician, and curator of the Royal Society Robert Hooke. Hooke insisted that he had suggested fundamental principles of the law of gravitation to Newton. Newton answered these objections carefully and at first patiently but later with growing irritation. These public arguments aggravated Newton’s sensitivity to criticism, and for several years he stopped publishing his findings.
860287
since it is a smooth vertical circle i.e.\npie 22/7,the let the highest point of the string to the lowest be h,given: ring=w,angle=2a\ntherefore the ring will go wobbly down and the string will tighten.
991890
Try the 2-2 pattern. it's the best way. The 3 is done with that criss-cross pattern, but the 2-2 allows you to continue the circle, just make it have a big radius
392796
The quality of the ring.
810893
Oscar. You have written too much. This 125m tower stuff does not matter compared to r=6.38*10^6. Why is this talk about 1.00 km and angle theta? See what “zipper” above says. Besides I answer your last question << Why is the trajectory of the cannonball not parabolic?>>. Why should it be if both you and Newton demand it to be circular? Assume that V1 of cannonball is the 1st cosmic speed corresponding to a circular track. Let V2 be > than V1, then you receive an oval track. Take V3 > than V2, then the track may become parabolic, so that cannonball would never return back to the cannon to linger out among planets and stars. If you are intrigued calculate a set of velocities and corresponding orbits of the cannonball. If cannon is not available consider a football! I like your inventive wits – to be honest!
966154
The magnitude of a force is measured in newtons(N)
733729
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_law_of_universal_gravitation
407911
So you are doing some numerical analysis... if you have a spreadsheet program you can use that. Use the trapezoid rule or Simpson's rule for some small increment in x.  Your spreadsheet program is able to evaluate arctan.  The second question can be evaluated with Newton's method.
129856
I suggest the Celestron FirstScope 114 EQ Short Newtonian Reflector.  It's an excellent first or second telescope for an excellent price.  On sale right now actually for $159  at:   http://www.telescopes.com/products/Celestron_FirstScope_114_EQ_Short_Newtonian_Reflector_5936.html
368987
Many. Try http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html.\nBut what are you looking for exactly?
279317
gravity.\n\nany shape of mass that is not spherical is gravitationally unstable
302498
Newton's rings are a fun demonstration of the wave nature of light, and also of the fact that white light is made up of many components of different wavelengths.
535952
Assuming a big ring that rotates, we need to fix the radius and the velocity out on the edge.  The acceleration toward the middle (which causes the feeling of gravity) is given by\n\na = v^2/r\n\nTo match gravity on earth, assume 9.80 m/s^2\n\nYou can make the radius what ever you want.  Assume 100 meters.\n\nThen 9.80 = v^2/100.  So, v^2 = 980.  v = 31.30495.\n\nSo, how fast is it spinning?\n\nThe circumference is 2*pi*r = 2*100*3.14159 = 200*pi.\n\nThe time it takes for it to do one rotation is:\n\n200*pi (meters)\n--------------------\n31.30495 (meters/sec)\n\n= or 20.07088 seconds.\n\nThe angular velocity is 360 deg/20.07088 seconds = 17.9364 deg/sec\n\nor, 2pi radians/20.07088 = .3130495 rads/sec.\n\nNotice, this is exactly what you would have gotten by taking v/r and getting the angular velocity.  I don't know if you are studying that part of rotational dynamics yet.\n\nSo, the bottom line is, as long as v^2/r = 9.80, you can then get the rotational velocity in radians from v/r.