Loading...
Note and Rest Values with Pictures
Quiz by Laurie Allen
Customize this quiz to suit your class
Instantly translate to 100+ languages
Tag the questions with any skills you have. Your dashboard will track each student's mastery of each skill.
Give this quiz to my class
Introduction to Free Fall A free-falling object is an object that is falling under the sole influence of gravity. Any object that is being acted upon only by the force of gravity is said to be in a state of free fall. There are two important motion characteristics that are true of free-falling objects: ⢠Free-falling objects do not encounter air resistance. ⢠All free-falling objects (on Earth) accelerate downwards at a rate of 9.8 m/s/s (often approximated as 10 m/s/s for back-of-the-envelope calculations) Because free-falling objects are accelerating downwards at a rate of 9.8 m/s/s, a ticker tape trace or dot diagram of its motion would depict an acceleration. The dot diagram at the right depicts the acceleration of a free-falling object. The position of the object at regular time intervals - say, every 0.1 second - is shown. The fact that the distance that the object travels every interval of time is increasing is a sure sign that the ball is speeding up as it falls downward. Recall from an earlier lesson, that if an object travels downward and speeds up, then its acceleration is downward. Free-fall acceleration is often witnessed in a physics classroom by means of an ever-popular strobe light demonstration. The room is darkened and a jug full of water is connected by a tube to a medicine dropper. The dropper drips water and the strobe illuminate the falling droplets at a regular rate - say once every 0.2 seconds. Instead of seeing a stream of water free-falling from the medicine dropper, several consecutive drops with increasing separation distance are seen. The pattern of drops resembles the dot diagram shown in the graphic at the right. The Acceleration of Gravity It was learned in the previous part of this lesson that a free-falling object is an object that is falling under the sole influence of gravity. A free-falling object has an acceleration of 9.8 m/s/s, downward (on Earth). This numerical value for the acceleration of a free-falling object is such an important value that it is given a special name. It is known as the acceleration of gravity - the acceleration for any object moving under the sole influence of gravity. A matter of fact, this quantity known as the acceleration of gravity is such an important quantity that physicists have a special symbol to denote it - the symbol g. The numerical value for the acceleration of gravity is most accurately known as 9.8 m/s2. There are slight variations in this numerical value (to the second decimal place) that are dependent primarily upon on altitude. We will occasionally use the approximated value of 10 m/s2 in order to reduce the complexity of the many mathematical tasks that we will perform with this number. By so doing, we will be able to better focus on the conceptual nature of physics without too much of a sacrifice in numerical accuracy. g = 9.8 m/s2, downward Look It Up! Even on the surface of the Earth, there are local variations in the value of the acceleration of gravity (g). These variations are due to latitude, altitude and the local geological structure of the region. Recall from an earlier lesson that acceleration is the rate at which an object changes its velocity. It is the ratio of velocity change to time between any two points in an object's path. To accelerate at 9.8 m/s2 means to change the velocity by 9.8 m/s each second. If the velocity and time for a free-falling object being dropped from a position of rest were tabulated, then one would note the following pattern. Time (s) Velocity (m/s) 0 0 1 - 9.8 2 - 19.6 3 - 29.4 4 - 39.2 5 - 49.0 . Observe that the velocity-time data above reveal that the object's velocity is changing by 9.8 m/s each consecutive second. That is, the free-falling object has an acceleration of approximately 9.8 m/s2. Another way to represent this acceleration of 9.8 m/s2 is to add numbers to our dot diagram that we saw earlier in this lesson. The velocity of the ball is seen to increase as depicted in the diagram at the right. (NOTE: The diagram is not drawn to scale - in two seconds, the object would drop considerably further than the distance from shoulder to toes.) Representing Free Fall by Graphs ⢠Early in Lesson 1 it was mentioned that there are a variety of means of describing the motion of objects. One such means of describing the motion of objects is through the use of graphs - position versus time and velocity vs. time graphs. In this part of Lesson 5, the motion of a free-falling motion will be represented using these two basic types of graphs. Representing Free Fall by Position-Time Graphs A position versus time graph for a free-falling object is shown below. Observe that the line on the graph curves. As learned earlier, a curved line on a position versus time graph signifies an accelerated motion. Since a free-falling object is undergoing an acceleration (g = 9.8 m/s/s), it would be expected that its position-time graph would be curved. A further look at the position-time graph reveals that the object starts with a small velocity (slow) and finishes with a large velocity (fast). Since the slope of any position vs. time graph is the velocity of the object (as learned in Lesson 3), the small initial slope indicates a small initial velocity and the large final slope indicates a large final velocity. Finally, the negative slope of the line indicates a negative (i.e., downward) velocity. Representing Free Fall by Velocity-Time Graphs A velocity versus time graph for a free-falling object is shown below. Observe that the line on the graph is a straight, diagonal line. As learned earlier, a diagonal line on a velocity versus time graph signifies an accelerated motion. Since a free-falling object is undergoing an acceleration (g = 9,8 m/s/s, downward), it would be expected that its velocity-time graph would be diagonal. A further look at the velocity-time graph reveals that the object starts with a zero velocity (as read from the graph) and finishes with a large, negative velocity; that is, the object is moving in the negative direction and speeding up. An object that is moving in the negative direction and speeding up is said to have a negative acceleration (if necessary, review the vector nature of acceleration). Since the slope of any velocity versus time graph is the acceleration of the object (as learned in Lesson 4), the constant, negative slope indicates a constant, negative acceleration. This analysis of the slope on the graph is consistent with the motion of a free-falling object - an object moving with a constant acceleration of 9.8 m/s/s in the downward direction. The Kinematic Equations The goal of this first unit has been to investigate the variety of means by which the motion of objects can be described. The variety of representations that we have investigated includes verbal representations, pictorial representations, numerical representations, and graphical representations (position-time graphs and velocity-time graphs). In Lesson 6, we will investigate the use of equations to describe and represent the motion of objects. These equations are known as kinematic equations. There are a variety of quantities associated with the motion of objects - displacement (and distance), velocity (and speed), acceleration, and time. Knowledge of each of these quantities provides descriptive information about an object's motion. For example, if a car is known to move with a constant velocity of 22.0 m/s, North for 12.0 seconds for a northward displacement of 264 meters, then the motion of the car is fully described. And if a second car is known to accelerate from a rest position with an eastward acceleration of 3.0 m/s2 for a time of 8.0 seconds, providing a final velocity of 24 m/s, East and an eastward displacement of 96 meters, then the motion of this car is fully described. These two statements provide a complete description of the motion of an object. However, such completeness is not always known. It is often the case that only a few parameters of an object's motion are known, while the rest are unknown. For example as you approach the stoplight, you might know that your car has a velocity of 22 m/s, East and is capable of a skidding acceleration of 8.0 m/s2, West. However you do not know the displacement that your car would experience if you were to slam on your brakes and skid to a stop; and you do not know the time required to skid to a stop. In such an instance as this, the unknown parameters can be determined using physics principles and mathematical equations (the kinematic equations). The BIG 4 The kinematic equations are a set of four equations that can be utilized to predict unknown information about an object's motion if other information is known. The equations can be utilized for any motion that can be described as being either a constant velocity motion (an acceleration of 0 m/s/s) or a constant acceleration motion. They can never be used over any time period during which the acceleration is changing. Each of the kinematic equations include four variables. If the values of three of the four variables are known, then the value of the fourth variable can be calculated. In this manner, the kinematic equations provide a useful means of predicting information about an object's motion if other information is known. For example, if the acceleration value and the initial and final velocity values of a skidding car is known, then the displacement of the car and the time can be predicted using the kinematic equations. Lesson 6 of this unit will focus upon the use of the kinematic equations to predict the numerical values of unknown quantities for an object's motion. The four kinematic equations that describe an object's motion are: There are a variety of symbols used in the above equations. Each symbol has its own specific meaning. The symbol d stands for the displacement of the object. The symbol t stands for the time for which the object moved. The symbol a stands for the acceleration of the object. And the symbol v stands for the velocity of the object; a subscript of i after the v (as in vi) indicates that the velocity value is the initial velocity value and a subscript of f (as in vf) indicates that the velocity value is the final velocity value. Each of these four equations appropriately describes the mathematical relationship between the parameters of an object's motion. As such, they can be used to predict unknown information about an object's motion if other information is known. In the next part of Lesson 6 we will investigate the process of doing this. Kinematic Equations and Problem-Solving The four kinematic equations that describe the mathematical relationship between the parameters that describe an object's motion were introduced in the previous part of Lesson 6. The four kinematic equations are: In the above equations, the symbol d stands for the displacement of the object. The symbol t stands for the time for which the object moved. The symbol a stand for the acceleration of the object. And the symbol v stands for the instantaneous velocity of the object; a subscript of i after the v (as in vi) indicates that the velocity value is the initial velocity value and a subscript of f (as in vf) indicates that the velocity value is the final velocity value. Problem-Solving Strategy In this part of Lesson 6 we will investigate the process of using the equations to determine unknown information about an object's motion. The process involves the use of a problem-solving strategy that will be used throughout the course. The strategy involves the following steps: 1. Construct an informative diagram of the physical situation. 2. Identify and list the given information in variable form. 3. Identify and list the unknown information in variable form. 4. Identify and list the equation that will be used to determine unknown information from known information. 5. Substitute known values into the equation and use appropriate algebraic steps to solve for the unknown information. 6. Check your answer to ensure that it is reasonable and mathematically correct. The use of this problem-solving strategy in the solution of the following problem is modeled in Examples A and B below. Example Problem A . Ima Hurryin is approaching a stoplight moving with a velocity of +30.0 m/s. The light turns yellow, and Ima applies the brakes and skids to a stop. If Ima's acceleration is -8.00 m/s2, then determine the displacement of the car during the skidding process. (Note that the direction of the velocity and the acceleration vectors are denoted by a + and a - sign.) The solution to this problem begins by the construction of an informative diagram of the physical situation. This is shown below. The second step involves the identification and listing of known information in variable form. Note that the vf value can be inferred to be 0 m/s since Ima's car comes to a stop. The initial velocity (vi) of the car is +30.0 m/s since this is the velocity at the beginning of the motion (the skidding motion). And the acceleration (a) of the car is given as - 8.00 m/s2. (Always pay careful attention to the + and - signs for the given quantities.) The next step of the strategy involves the listing of the unknown (or desired) information in variable form. In this case, the problem requests information about the displacement of the car. So d is the unknown quantity. The results of the first three steps are shown in the table below. Diagram: Given: Find: vi = +30.0 m/s vf = 0 m/s a = - 8.00 m/s2 d = ?? The next step of the strategy involves identifying a kinematic equation that would allow you to determine the unknown quantity. There are four kinematic equations to choose from. In general, you will always choose the equation that contains the three known and the one unknown variable. In this specific case, the three known variables and the one unknown variable are vf, vi, a, and d. Thus, you will look for an equation that has these four variables listed in it. An inspection of the four equations above reveals that the equation on the top right contains all four variables. vf2 = vi2 + 2 ⢠a ⢠d Once the equation is identified and written down, the next step of the strategy involves substituting known values into the equation and using proper algebraic steps to solve for the unknown information. This step is shown below. (0 m/s)2 = (30.0 m/s)2 + 2 ⢠(-8.00 m/s2) ⢠d 0 m2/s2 = 900 m2/s2 + (-16.0 m/s2) ⢠d (16.0 m/s2) ⢠d = 900 m2/s2 - 0 m2/s2 (16.0 m/s2)*d = 900 m2/s2 d = (900 m2/s2)/ (16.0 m/s2) d = (900 m2/s2)/ (16.0 m/s2) d = 56.3 m The solution above reveals that the car will skid a distance of 56.3 meters. (Note that this value is rounded to the third digit.) The last step of the problem-solving strategy involves checking the answer to assure that it is both reasonable and accurate. The value seems reasonable enough. It takes a car a considerable distance to skid from 30.0 m/s (approximately 65 mi/hr) to a stop. The calculated distance is approximately one-half a football field, making this a very reasonable skidding distance. Checking for accuracy involves substituting the calculated value back into the equation for displacement and insuring that the left side of the equation is equal to the right side of the equation. Indeed it is! Example Problem B Ben Rushin is waiting at a stoplight. When it finally turns green, Ben accelerated from rest at a rate of a 6.00 m/s2 for a time of 4.10 seconds. Determine the displacement of Ben's car during this time period. Once more, the solution to this problem begins by the construction of an informative diagram of the physical situation. This is shown below. The second step of the strategy involves the identification and listing of known information in variable form. Note that the vi value can be inferred to be 0 m/s since Ben's car is initially at rest. The acceleration (a) of the car is 6.00 m/s2. And the time (t) is given as 4.10 s. The next step of the strategy involves the listing of the unknown (or desired) information in variable form. In this case, the problem requests information about the displacement of the car. So d is the unknown information. The results of the first three steps are shown in the table below. Diagram: Given: Find: vi = 0 m/s t = 4.10 s a = 6.00 m/s2 d = ?? The next step of the strategy involves identifying a kinematic equation that would allow you to determine the unknown quantity. There are four kinematic equations to choose from. Again, you will always search for an equation that contains the three known variables and the one unknown variable. In this specific case, the three known variables and the one unknown variable are t, vi, a, and d. An inspection of the four equations above reveals that the equation on the top left contains all four variables. d = vi ⢠t + ½ ⢠a ⢠t2 Once the equation is identified and written down, the next step of the strategy involves substituting known values into the equation and using proper algebraic steps to solve for the unknown information. This step is shown below. d = (0 m/s) ⢠(4.1 s) + ½ ⢠(6.00 m/s2) ⢠(4.10 s)2 d = (0 m) + ½ ⢠(6.00 m/s2) ⢠(16.81 s2) d = 0 m + 50.43 m d = 50.4 m The solution above reveals that the car will travel a distance of 50.4 meters. (Note that this value is rounded to the third digit.) The last step of the problem-solving strategy involves checking the answer to assure that it is both reasonable and accurate. The value seems reasonable enough. A car with an acceleration of 6.00 m/s/s will reach a speed of approximately 24 m/s (approximately 50 mi/hr) in 4.10 s. The distance over which such a car would be displaced during this time period would be approximately one-half a football field, making this a very reasonable distance. Checking for accuracy involves substituting the calculated value back into the equation for displacement and insuring that the left side of the equation is equal to the right side of the equation. Indeed, it is! The two example problems above illustrate how the kinematic equations can be combined with a simple problem-solving strategy to predict unknown motion parameters for a moving object. Provided that three motion parameters are known, any of the remaining values can be determined. In the next part of Lesson 6, we will see how this strategy can be applied to free fall situations. Or if interested, you can try some practice problems and check your answer against the given solutions. Kinematic Equations and Free Fall As mentioned in Lesson 5, a free-falling object is an object that is falling under the sole influence of gravity. That is to say that any object that is moving and being acted upon only be the force of gravity is said to be "in a state of free fall." Such an object will experience a downward acceleration of 9.8 m/s/s. Whether the object is falling downward or rising upward towards its peak, if it is under the sole influence of gravity, then its acceleration value is 9.8 m/s/s. Like any moving object, the motion of an object in free fall can be described by four kinematic equations. The kinematic equations that describe any object's motion are: The symbols in the above equation have a specific meaning: the symbol d stands for the displacement; the symbol t stands for the time; the symbol a stands for the acceleration of the object; the symbol vi stands for the initial velocity value; and the symbol vf stands for the final velocity. Applying Free Fall Concepts to Problem-Solving There are a few conceptual characteristics of free fall motion that will be of value when using the equations to analyze free fall motion. These concepts are described as follows: ⢠An object in free fall experiences an acceleration of -9.8 m/s/s. (The - sign indicates a downward acceleration.) Whether explicitly stated or not, the value of the acceleration in the kinematic equations is -9.8 m/s/s for any freely falling object. ⢠If an object is merely dropped (as opposed to being thrown) from an elevated height, then the initial velocity of the object is 0 m/s. ⢠If an object is projected upwards in a perfectly vertical direction, then it will slow down as it rises upward. The instant at which it reaches the peak of its trajectory, its velocity is 0 m/s. This value can be used as one of the motion parameters in the kinematic equations; for example, the final velocity (vf) after traveling to the peak would be assigned a value of 0 m/s. ⢠If an object is projected upwards in a perfectly vertical direction, then the velocity at which it is projected is equal in magnitude and opposite in sign to the velocity that it has when it returns to the same height. That is, a ball projected vertically with an upward velocity of +30 m/s will have a downward velocity of -30 m/s when it returns to the same height. These four principles and the four kinematic equations can be combined to solve problems involving the motion of free-falling objects. The two examples below illustrate application of free fall principles to kinematic problem-solving. In each example, the problem solving strategy that was introduced earlier in this lesson will be utilized. Example Problem A Luke Autbeloe drops a pile of roof shingles from the top of a roof located 8.52 meters above the ground. Determine the time required for the shingles to reach the ground. The solution to this problem begins by the construction of an informative diagram of the physical situation. This is shown below. The second step involves the identification and listing of known information in variable form. You might note that in the statement of the problem, there is only one piece of numerical information explicitly stated: 8.52 meters. The displacement (d) of the shingles is -8.52 m. (The - sign indicates that the displacement is downward). The remaining information must be extracted from the problem statement based upon your understanding of the above principles. For example, the vi value can be inferred to be 0 m/s since the shingles are dropped (released from rest; see note above). And the acceleration (a) of the shingles can be inferred to be -9.8 m/s2 since the shingles are free-falling (see note above). (Always pay careful attention to the + and - signs for the given quantities.) The next step of the solution involves the listing of the unknown (or desired) information in variable form. In this case, the problem requests information about the time of fall. So t is the unknown quantity. The results of the first three steps are shown in the table below. Diagram: Given: Find: vi = 0.0 m/s d = -8.52 m a = - 9.8 m/s2 t = ?? The next step involves identifying a kinematic equation that allows you to determine the unknown quantity. There are four kinematic equations to choose from. In general, you will always choose the equation that contains the three known and the one unknown variable. In this specific case, the three known variables and the one unknown variable are d, vi, a, and t. Thus, you will look for an equation that has these four variables listed in it. An inspection of the four equations above reveals that the equation on the top left contains all four variables. d = vi ⢠t + ½ ⢠a ⢠t2 Once the equation is identified and written down, the next step involves substituting known values into the equation and using proper algebraic steps to solve for the unknown information. This step is shown below. -8.52 m = (0 m/s) ⢠(t) + ½ ⢠(-9.8 m/s2) ⢠(t)2 -8.52 m = (0 m) *(t) + (-4.9 m/s2) ⢠(t)2 -8.52 m = (-4.9 m/s2) ⢠(t)2 (-8.52 m)/(-4.9 m/s2) = t2 1.739 s2 = t2 t = 1.32 s The solution above reveals that the shingles will fall for a time of 1.32 seconds before hitting the ground. (Note that this value is rounded to the third digit.) The last step of the problem-solving strategy involves checking the answer to assure that it is both reasonable and accurate. The value seems reasonable enough. The shingles are falling a distance of approximately 10 yards (1 meter is pretty close to 1 yard); it seems that an answer between 1 and 2 seconds would be highly reasonable. The calculated time easily falls within this range of reasonability. Checking for accuracy involves substituting the calculated value back into the equation for time and insuring that the left side of the equation is equal to the right side of the equation. Indeed it is! Example Problem B Rex Things throws his mother's crystal vase vertically upwards with an initial velocity of 26.2 m/s. Determine the height to which the vase will rise above its initial height. Once more, the solution to this problem begins by the construction of an informative diagram of the physical situation. This is shown below. The second step involves the identification and listing of known information in variable form. You might note that in the statement of the problem, there is only one piece of numerical information explicitly stated: 26.2 m/s. The initial velocity (vi) of the vase is +26.2 m/s. (The + sign indicates that the initial velocity is an upwards velocity). The remaining information must be extracted from the problem statement based upon your understanding of the above principles. Note that the vf value can be inferred to be 0 m/s since the final state of the vase is the peak of its trajectory (see note above). The acceleration (a) of the vase is -9.8 m/s2 (see note above). The next step involves the listing of the unknown (or desired) information in variable form. In this case, the problem requests information about the displacement of the vase (the height to which it rises above its starting height). So d is the unknown information. The results of the first three steps are shown in the table below. Diagram: Given: Find: vi = 26.2 m/s vf = 0 m/s a = -9.8 m/s2 d = ?? The next step involves identifying a kinematic equation that would allow you to determine the unknown quantity. There are four kinematic equations to choose from. Again, you will always search for an equation that contains the three known variables and the one unknown variable. In this specific case, the three known variables and the one unknown variable are vi, vf, a, and d. An inspection of the four equations above reveals that the equation on the top right contains all four variables. vf2 = vi2 + 2 ⢠a ⢠d Once the equation is identified and written down, the next step involves substituting known values into the equation and using proper algebraic steps to solve for the unknown information. This step is shown below. (0 m/s)2 = (26.2 m/s)2 + 2 â˘(-9.8m/s2) â˘d 0 m2/s2 = 686.44 m2/s2 + (-19.6 m/s2) â˘d (-19.6 m/s2) ⢠d = 0 m2/s2 -686.44 m2/s2 (-19.6 m/s2) ⢠d = -686.44 m2/s2 d = (-686.44 m2/s2)/ (-19.6 m/s2) d = 35.0 m The solution above reveals that the vase will travel upwards for a displacement of 35.0 meters before reaching its peak. (Note that this value is rounded to the third digit.) The last step of the problem-solving strategy involves checking the answer to assure that it is both reasonable and accurate. The value seems reasonable enough. The vase is thrown with a speed of approximately 50 mi/hr (merely approximate 1 m/s to be equivalent to 2 mi/hr). Such a throw will never make it further than one football field in height (approximately 100 m), yet will surely make it past the 10-yard line (approximately 10 meters). The calculated answer certainly falls within this range of reasonability. Checking for accuracy involves substituting the calculated value back into the equation for displacement and insuring that the left side of the equation is equal to the right side of the equation. Indeed, it is! Kinematic equations provide a useful means of determining the value of an unknown motion parameter if three motion parameters are known. In the case of a free-fall motion, the acceleration is often known. And in many cases, another motion parameter can be inferred through a solid knowledge of some basic kinematic principles.âThereâs No Such Thing as Sound Scienceâ by By Christie Aschwanden was a lead science writer for FiveThirtyEight. FiveThirtyEight, Science, Dec. 6, 2017 Science is being turned against itself. For decades, its twin ideals of transparency and rigor have been weaponized by those who disagree with results produced by the scientific method. Under the Trump administration, that fight has ramped up again. In a move ostensibly meant to reduce conflicts of interest, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt has removed a number of scientists from advisory panels and replaced some of them with representatives from industries that the agency regulates. Like many in the Trump administration, Pruitt has also cast doubt on the reliability of climate science. For instance, in an interview with CNBC, Pruitt said that âmeasuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do.â Similarly, Trumpâs pick to head NASA, an agency that oversees a large portion the nationâs climate research, has insisted that research into human influence on climate lacks certainty, and he falsely claimed that âglobal temperatures stopped rising 10 years ago.â Kathleen Hartnett White, Trumpâs nominee to head the White House Council on Environmental Quality, said in a Senate hearing last month that she thinks we âneed to have more precise explanations of the human role and the natural roleâ in climate change. The same entreaties crop up again and again: We need to root out conflicts. We need more precise evidence. What makes these arguments so powerful is that they sound quite similar to the points raised by proponents of a very different call for change thatâs coming from within science. This other movement strives to produce more robust, reproducible findings. Despite having dissimilar goals, the two forces espouse principles that look surprisingly alike: Science needs to be transparent. Results and methods should be openly shared so that outside researchers can independently reproduce and validate them. The methods used to collect and analyze data should be rigorous and clear, and conclusions must be supported by evidence. These are the arguments underlying an âopen scienceâ reform movement that was created, in part, as a response to a âreproducibility crisisâ that has struck some fields of science.1 But theyâre also used as talking points by politicians who are working to make it more difficult for the EPA and other federal agencies to use science in their regulatory decision-making, under the guise of basing policy on âsound science.â Scienceâs virtues are being wielded against it. What distinguishes the two calls for transparency is intent: Whereas the âopen scienceâ movement aims to make science more reliable, reproducible and robust, proponents of âsound scienceâ have historically worked to amplify uncertainty, create doubt and undermine scientific discoveries that threaten their interests. âOur criticisms are founded in a confidence in science,â said Steven Goodman, co-director of the Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford and a proponent of open science. âThatâs a fundamental difference â weâre critiquing science to make it better. Others are critiquing it to devalue the approach itself.â Calls to base public policy on âsound scienceâ seem unassailable if you donât know the termâs history. The phrase was adopted by the tobacco industry in the 1990s to counteract mounting evidence linking secondhand smoke to cancer. A 1992 Environmental Protection Agency report identified secondhand smoke as a human carcinogen, and Philip Morris responded by launching an initiative to promote what it called âsound science.â In an internal memo, Philip Morris vice president of corporate affairs Ellen Merlo wrote that the program was designed to âdiscredit the EPA report,â âprevent states and cities, as well as businesses from passing smoking bansâ and âproactivelyâ pass legislation to help their cause. The sound science tactic exploits a fundamental feature of the scientific process: Science does not produce absolute certainty. Contrary to how itâs sometimes represented to the public, science is not a magic wand that turns everything it touches to truth. Instead, itâs a process of uncertainty reduction, much like a game of 20 Questions. Any given study can rarely answer more than one question at a time, and each study usually raises a bunch of new questions in the process of answering old ones. âScience is a process rather than an answer,â said psychologist Alison Ledgerwood of the University of California, Davis. Every answer is provisional and subject to change in the face of new evidence. Itâs not entirely correct to say that âthis study proves this fact,â Ledgerwood said. âWe should be talking instead about how science increases or decreases our confidence in something.â The tobacco industryâs brilliant tactic was to turn this baked-in uncertainty against the scientific enterprise itself. While insisting that they merely wanted to ensure that public policy was based on sound science, tobacco companies defined the term in a way that ensured that no science could ever be sound enough. The only sound science was certain science, which is an impossible standard to achieve. âDoubt is our product,â wrote one employee of the Brown & Williamson tobacco company in a 1969 internal memo. The note went on to say that doubt âis the best means of competing with the âbody of factââ and âestablishing a controversy.â These strategies for undermining inconvenient science were so effective that theyâve served as a sort of playbook for industry interests ever since, said Stanford University science historian Robert Proctor. The sound science push is no longer just Philip Morris sowing doubt about the links between cigarettes and cancer. Itâs also a 1998 action plan by the American Petroleum Institute, Chevron and Exxon Mobil to âinstall uncertaintyâ about the link between greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. Itâs industry-funded groupsâ late-1990s effort to question the science the EPA was using to set fine-particle-pollution air-quality standards that the industry didnât want. And then there was the more recent effort by Dow Chemical to insist on more scientific certainty before banning a pesticide that the EPAâs scientists had deemed risky to children. Now comes a move by the Trump administrationâs EPA to repeal a 2015 rule on wetlands protection by disregarding particular studies. (To name just a few examples.) Doubt merchants arenât pushing for knowledge, theyâre practicing what Proctor has dubbed âagnogenesisâ â the intentional manufacture of ignorance. This ignorance isnât simply the absence of knowing something; itâs a lack of comprehension deliberately created by agents who donât want you to know, Proctor said.2 In the hands of doubt-makers, transparency becomes a rhetorical move. âItâs really difficult as a scientist or policy maker to make a stand against transparency and openness, because well, who would be against it?â said Karen Levy, researcher on information science at Cornell University. But at the same time, âyou can couch everything in the language of transparency and it becomes a powerful weapon.â For instance, when the EPA was preparing to set new limits on particulate pollution in the 1990s, industry groups pushed back against the research and demanded access to primary data (including records that researchers had promised participants would remain confidential) and a reanalysis of the evidence. Their calls succeeded and a new analysis was performed. The reanalysis essentially confirmed the original conclusions, but the process of conducting it delayed the implementation of regulations and cost researchers time and money. Delay is a time-tested strategy. âGridlock is the greatest friend a global warming skeptic has,â said Marc Morano, a prominent critic of global warming research and the executive director of ClimateDepot.com, in the documentary âMerchants of Doubtâ (based on the book by the same name). Moranoâs site is a project of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, which has received funding from the oil and gas industry. âWeâre the negative force. Weâre just trying to stop stuff.â Some of these ploys are getting a fresh boost from Congress. The Data Quality Act (also known as the Information Quality Act) was reportedly written by an industry lobbyist and quietly passed as part of an appropriations bill in 2000. The rule mandates that federal agencies ensure the âquality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of informationâ that they disseminate, though it does little to define what these terms mean. The law also provides a mechanism for citizens and groups to challenge information that they deem inaccurate, including science that they disagree with. âIt was passed in this very quiet way with no explicit debate about it â that should tell you a lot about the real goals,â Levy said. But whatâs most telling about the Data Quality Act is how itâs been used, Levy said. A 2004 Washington Post analysis found that in the 20 months following its implementation, the act was repeatedly used by industry groups to push back against proposed regulations and bog down the decision-making process. Instead of deploying transparency as a fundamental principle that applies to all science, these interests have used transparency as a weapon to attack very particular findings that they would like to eradicate. Now Congress is considering another way to legislate how science is used. The Honest Act, a bill sponsored by Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas,3 is another example of what Levy calls a âTrojan horseâ law that uses the language of transparency as a cover to achieve other political goals. Smithâs legislation would severely limit the kind of evidence the EPA could use for decision-making. Only studies whose raw data and computer codes were publicly available would be allowed for consideration. That might sound perfectly reasonable, and in many cases it is, Goodman said. But sometimes there are good reasons why researchers canât conform to these rules, like when the data contains confidential or sensitive medical information.4 Critics, which include more than a dozen scientific organizations, argue that, in practice, the rules would prevent many studies from being considered in EPA reviews.5 It might seem like an easy task to sort good science from bad, but in reality itâs not so simple. âThereâs a misplaced idea that we can definitively distinguish the good from the not-good science, but itâs all a matter of degree,â said Brian Nosek, executive director of the Center for Open Science. âThere is no perfect study.â Requiring regulators to wait until they have (nonexistent) perfect evidence is essentially âa way of saying, âWe donât want to use evidence for our decision-making,ââ Nosek said. Most scientific controversies arenât about science at all, and once the sides are drawn, more data is unlikely to bring opponents into agreement. Michael Carolan, who researches the sociology of technology and scientific knowledge at Colorado State University, wrote in a 2008 paper about why objective knowledge is not enough to resolve environmental controversies. âWhile these controversies may appear on the surface to rest on disputed questions of fact, beneath often reside differing positions of value; values that can give shape to differing understandings of what âthe factsâ are.â Whatâs needed in these cases isnât more or better science, but mechanisms to bring those hidden values to the forefront of the discussion so that they can be debated transparently. âAs long as we continue down this unabashedly naive road about what science is, and what it is capable of doing, we will continue to fail to reach any sort of meaningful consensus on these matters,â Carolan writes. The dispute over tobacco was never about the science of cigarettesâ link to cancer. It was about whether companies have the right to sell dangerous products and, if so, what obligations they have to the consumers who purchased them. Similarly, the debate over climate change isnât about whether our planet is heating, but about how much responsibility each country and person bears for stopping it. While researching her book âMerchants of Doubt,â science historian Naomi Oreskes found that some of the same people who were defending the tobacco industry as scientific experts were also receiving industry money to deny the role of human activity in global warming. What these issues had in common, she realized, was that they all involved the need for government action. âNone of this is about the science. All of this is a political debate about the role of government,â she said in the documentary. These controversies are really about values, not scientific facts, and acknowledging that would allow us to have more truthful and productive debates. What would that look like in practice? Instead of cherry-picking evidence to support a particular view (and insisting that the science points to a desired action), the various sides could lay out the values they are using to assess the evidence. For instance, in Europe, many decisions are guided by the precautionary principle â a system that values caution in the face of uncertainty and says that when the risks are unclear, it should be up to industries to show that their products and processes are not harmful, rather than requiring the government to prove that they are harmful before they can be regulated. By contrast, U.S. agencies tend to wait for strong evidence of harm before issuing regulations. Both approaches have critics, but the difference between them comes down to priorities: Is it better to exercise caution at the risk of burdening companies and perhaps the economy, or is it more important to avoid potential economic downsides even if it means that sometimes a harmful product or industrial process goes unregulated? In other words, under what circumstances do we agree to act on a risk? How certain do we need to be that the risk is real, and how many people would need to be at risk, and how costly is it to reduce that risk? Those are moral questions, not scientific ones, and openly discussing and identifying these kinds of judgment calls would lead to a more honest debate. Science matters, and we need to do it as rigorously as possible. But science canât tell us how risky is too risky to allow products like cigarettes or potentially harmful pesticides to be sold â those are value judgements that only humans can make.1) Note/Rest Chart and Simple Addition QuizLand warfare is a complex domain that involves the application of military power on the ground to achieve political and strategic objectives. Modern military doctrine, such as that used by the U.S. Army and the Indian Army, categorizes these elements into Combat Power and the Principles of War. 1. The 8 Elements of Combat Power Combat power is the total means of destructive, constructive, and information capabilities that a military unit can apply. It is typically broken down into eight key elements: ElementDescriptionLeadershipThe "multiplier" of all other elements. It provides purpose, direction, and motivation to soldiers.InformationEnables commanders to make informed decisions and creates opportunities to achieve results.Mission CommandThe system used to integrate the other elements. It focuses on decentralized execution based on the commander's intent.Movement & ManeuverThe movement of forces to gain a positional advantage over the enemy to deliver lethal or non-lethal effects.IntelligenceThe understanding of the enemy, terrain, weather, and civil considerations.FiresThe use of weapon systems (artillery, mortars, air support) to create specific lethal or non-lethal effects.SustainmentThe logistics required to maintain operations, including ammunition, fuel, food, and medical support.ProtectionThe preservation of the force so that the commander can apply maximum combat power.2. The Principles of War These are the enduring "rules of thumb" that guide how land forces are employed strategically and tactically: Objective: Direct every operation toward a clearly defined and attainable goal. Offensive: Seize, retain, and exploit the initiative. You cannot win by defending alone. Mass: Concentrate the effects of combat power at the most advantageous place and time. Economy of Force: Allocate the minimum essential combat power to secondary efforts so you can "mass" elsewhere. Maneuver: Place the enemy in a position of disadvantage through flexible movement. Unity of Command: Ensure all forces operate under a single responsible commander toward a common objective. Security: Prevent the enemy from gaining an unexpected advantage. Surprise: Strike the enemy at a time, place, or in a manner for which they are unprepared. Simplicity: Prepare clear, uncomplicated plans to minimize confusion in the "fog of war." 3. The Modern Legal Framework Land warfare is also governed by the Law of Land Warfare (International Humanitarian Law), which rests on four pillars: Military Necessity: Actions must be necessary to achieve a legitimate military goal. Distinction: Forces must distinguish between combatants and non-combatants (civilians). Proportionality: The anticipated harm to civilians must not be excessive in relation to the concrete military advantage gained. Unnecessary Suffering: Weapons and methods must not cause gratuitous or superfluous injury. Note: Contemporary land warfare is increasingly "Multi-Domain," meaning land forces must now integrate with cyber, space, and electronic warfare to be effective. , While land warfare uses many tools, the two primary "philosophies" of how to win a war are Attrition and Maneuver. Most modern conflicts are a spectrum of both, but understanding the pure form of each helps explain military strategy. 1. Attrition Warfare: The "Sledgehammer" Attrition warfare is a strategy where one side attempts to win by wearing down the enemy to the point of collapse through continuous losses in personnel, equipment, and supplies. Core Logic: "I have more than you." It assumes that if you can destroy the enemyâs resources faster than they can replace them, you will eventually win. Focus: Firepower and mass. Success is measured by "body counts," equipment destroyed, and the steady seizing of terrain. Command Style: Usually centralized and methodical. It requires strict synchronization of massive resources (artillery, logistics, manpower). Historical Example: The Battle of Verdun (WWI). German Chief of Staff Erich von Falkenhayn famously stated his goal was to "bleed France white" by forcing them to defend a position they could not afford to lose, regardless of the cost in lives. 2. Maneuver Warfare: The "Scalpel" Maneuver warfare seeks to shatter the enemyâs moral and physical cohesionâtheir ability to act as a unified forceârather than simply destroying every soldier. Core Logic: "I am faster and more unpredictable than you." It aims to create a state of chaos where the enemy's leadership can no longer make effective decisions. Focus: Speed, surprise, and dislocation (forcing the enemy to be in the wrong place at the wrong time). The OODA Loop: Developed by Col. John Boyd, this is the heart of maneuver theory. It stands for Observe, Orient, Decide, Act. The goal is to cycle through these steps faster than the enemy, essentially "getting inside" their decision-making process until they collapse from confusion. Historical Example: The 1940 Invasion of France (Blitzkrieg). Instead of fighting a line-by-line battle of attrition, German forces used speed and concentrated armor to bypass strongpoints, cut communication lines, and cause a total systemic collapse of the French military in weeks. 3. Key Differences at a Glance FeatureAttrition WarfareManeuver WarfareObjectivePhysical destruction of the enemy army.Functional/Psychological collapse of the enemy.TargetThe enemy's strength (mass).The enemy's weakness (vulnerability).Primary ToolMassed Firepower.Movement and Tempo.Command"Command Push" (Top-down, rigid)."Recon Pull" (Decentralized, flexible).Success MetricExchange ratios (Kill counts).Disruption and loss of enemy control.4. The Modern Synthesis: "Schwerpunkt" In practice, no army is purely "maneuver" or "attrition." To maneuver successfully, you often need a period of attrition to punch a hole in the enemy's line. A critical concept here is the Schwerpunkt (Center of Gravity/Focus of Effort). A commander identifies the single most important place to strike and concentrates all available "elements of power" there. While the rest of the front might look like attrition, the Schwerpunkt is where the maneuver happens to achieve a breakthrough. Modern Reality: In high-intensity conflicts today (like the war in Ukraine), we see a "return to attrition" because modern sensors (drones, satellites) make it very difficult to achieve the surprise needed for pure maneuver warfare. When you can see everything, it's hard to be "unexpected."A piece thatâs sung as opposed to played. Answer: Cantata A hymn tune of the Lutheran church. Answer: Chorale A part for keyboard (harpsichord or organ) and cello or bass. The keyboard player reads the cello line and provides an accompaniment based on the figured Bass. Answer: Basso continuo The numbers written under the cello part indicating chords and their positions to the keyboard player. Answer: Figured Bass A piece for choir. Answer: Chorus A style of singing that is more related in pitch and rhythm to speech than song. In the 18th Century it was used extensively in Opera as âDialogueâ between Characters. Answer: Recitative (Dry) Accompanied only by continuo. Answer: Recitativo secco More expressive and accompanied by the orchestra. Answer: Recitativo stromentato Contrapuntal device whereby a motif or phrase is presented successively by different voices. Answer: Imitation To turn a motif or phrase âup-side downâ. Answer: Inversion A song for 1 or more voices, popular in Opera and Cantata as a contrast with Recitative. Answer: Aria A type of piece that was written as a set of variations on an Ostinato. Answer: Chaconne A musical idea repeating many times. Answer: Ostinato A sustained or repeated note over which the harmonies change. Answer: Pedal Point Point of rest. Answer: Cadence Change of key. Answer: Modulation Where the composer gives prominence or illustrates words in musical terms. Answer: Word Painting A motif that has more than 1 note per syllable is said to be melismatic. Often used as word painting. Answer: Melisma Where 1 note per syllable is used. Answer: Syllabic A polyphonic composition in which a part is imitated by 1 or more parts so that successive statements of the melody overlap. Answer: Canon Any rhythmically independent movement between parts. Answer: Polyphony A combination of 2 or more independent melodies. Answer: Counterpoint A structure consisting of 3 sections-ABA. Answer: Ternary Form Back to the beginning as in the Da Capo Aria. Answer: Da Capo (D.C.) Back to the sign. Answer: Dal Segno (D.S.) A motif which is repeated at a different pitch in the same part. Answer: SequenceNote Durations and RestsNote ID and ValueNotice and Note Signposts