Simply divide the distance traveled by the time.
They are incompatible and can't be converted from one another. In order to get a velocity you would also need the time spent to cover the distance. Then you can use the formula distance/time=velocity. For example if you travelled 120 miles in 3 hours, you've travelled at 40 mph. If you have covered 200 kilometers in 4 hours, you've travelled 50 kilometers per hour.
15 miles per hour,south
(79 km/hr) x (5.7 hr) = 450.3 kmThat's the displacement, if the direction of the velocity was constant throughout the trip.
He travelled to Mexico in 1535, and from there, he travelled overland to what is now the south-west of America in 1540.
Velocity is speed and direction. The velocity would be zero because the 50 miles N cancel the 50 miles S. The speed is 100 mi/5 h = 20 mph.
South, as from the North Pole, the only possible direction is south.
What I mean is can you have a negative velocity followed by "south". (i.e. -7.5 m/s south) or would the velocity be 7.5 m/s south? My opinion is that the negative sign is not necessary since south is already "negative" so you would be canceling out the negative if you have the sign making it 7.5 m/s north.
Paddington Bear.
An object's velocity is it's speed plus direction. example: 55mph south Hope this helps:)
That is incorrect. The distance travelled north cancels out the distance travelled south. Therefore - he only travels three blocks east.
An object's velocity is it's speed plus direction. example: 55mph south Hope this helps:)
Was Alfred famous for travelling? He ruled from South-western England but travelled all around England, especially the south