yes. Equilibrium can either be static i.e no movement or dynamic i.e movement is allowed. The main determining factor for equilibrium is that all forces acting at a point or points add up to zero.
It is impossible to tell. You can have two forces that are in equilibrium or three forces and, from outside the system, it may not be possible to tell which.However, on the basis that the unverse is expanding, though not at a constant rate, there must be at least one force that is not balanced.It is impossible to tell. You can have two forces that are in equilibrium or three forces and, from outside the system, it may not be possible to tell which.However, on the basis that the unverse is expanding, though not at a constant rate, there must be at least one force that is not balanced.It is impossible to tell. You can have two forces that are in equilibrium or three forces and, from outside the system, it may not be possible to tell which.However, on the basis that the unverse is expanding, though not at a constant rate, there must be at least one force that is not balanced.It is impossible to tell. You can have two forces that are in equilibrium or three forces and, from outside the system, it may not be possible to tell which.However, on the basis that the unverse is expanding, though not at a constant rate, there must be at least one force that is not balanced.
false
False
False
The result is a direct consequence of the sine rule.
hi, myname is david papworth. i live in pakmerston north, nz. i have a sister, mom and dad. i am they youngest. my adress is 42 russel street. come and see me any time
A body is in equilibrium when the force on it is zero, thus if a single force is on the body, the force must be zero or the body will not be equilibrium.
There has to be no force or energy between two objects to have equilibrium force. #kayleyjonas# age 10
A body is in equilibrium when the force on it is zero, thus if a single force is on the body, the force must be zero or the body will not be equilibrium.
The magnitude of the resultant force in the case of the concurrent forces in equilibrium.
No. For equilibrium, the SUM OF ALL FORCES acting on an object must be zero, and that is not possible with a single (non-zero) force.Note: For equilibrium, the sum of all torques on an object must ALSO be zero.
Restoring force, in a physics context, is a variable force that gives rise to an equilibrium in a physical system. If the system is perturbed away from the equilibrium, the restoring force will tend to bring the system back toward equilibrium.
no. a force acting perpendicularly on a body cannot cancel a force which is acting horizontally on the same body.!!!!
the force of nature. e.g. when looking at concentration gradients it is nature that urges equilibrium on.
Rest implies stationary, equilibrium implies a resultant force of zero. Therefore, a body in equilibrium could be moving, for example a sky diver at terminal velocity, where resistive forces are equal to the force of gravity. This means that a body can be in equilibrium and not at rest, but a body at rest MUST be in equilibrium, otherwise it would move. So, to answer the question is: It's impossible.
When the net force acting on the body is zero. The body will remain in equilibrium until an external force is applied to the body.
0. An object in equilibrium has constant velocity, which makes its acceleration 0. Since net force=mass times acceleration, this would make the net force zero. Note that there could be multiple forces acting on the object, but since it is in equilibrium they would have to be equal and opposite in direction, to cancel all of the forces out. This would make the net force zero.