Use base dimensions $\mathsf{M},\mathsf{L},\mathsf{T}$ for mass, length and time. The proposed dimensional analysis givessoEquating the independent dimensional powers requiresConsequentlyThe mass density drops out because there is no other mass-bearing quantity with which to combine it under the stated assumptions.

Dimensional analysis fixes the powers but leaves a dimensionless coefficient undetermined. For a linear deep-water gravity wave, the dispersion relation is ${\omega }^2=gk$, giving phase velocity $\omega /k=g/\omega$ and group velocity $d\omega /dk=g/(2\omega )$. Both obey the inferred scaling. The phrase wave speed alone does not distinguish these two velocities or fix the coefficient.

The Huygens-Fresnel principle constructs a new wavefront as the envelope of secondary wavelets emitted by points on an earlier wavefront. Let the phase velocities in the two media be $v_1=c/n_1$ and $v_2=c/n_2$, with refractive indices evaluated at the light's fixed frequency.

For refraction from secondary wavelets, let point $A$ of the incident wavefront reach the interface first. A second point $B$ reaches the interface at $C$ after time $\Delta t$, so $BC=v_1\Delta t$. During the same interval, the secondary wavelet centered on $A$ advances radius $AD=v_2\Delta t$ into the second medium. The refracted wavefront $CD$ is tangent to this wavelet, hence $AD\perp CD$; also $BC\perp AB$ because a ray is normal to its wavefront in these isotropic media.

Let ${\theta }_1,{\theta }_2$ be the incident and refracted ray angles from the interface normal. They also equal the corresponding acute angles between the wavefronts and the interface. The two right triangles have common hypotenuse $AC$, givingTheir ratio eliminates both $AC$ and $\Delta t$:This is Snell's law. In particular, entering a medium of larger refractive index reduces the ray's angle to the normal. The construction assumes a stationary interface and homogeneous isotropic media with a propagating refracted wave.

The original diagram places the output across the $10\Omega$ resistor, in series with an ideal $1\mathrm{mH}$ inductor. Treat the voltages as phasors with time dependence $e^{i\omega t}$. The electrical impedances are $Z_R=R$ and $Z_L=i\omega L$, so the same electric current flows through both:This is an RL low-pass filter, with corner angular frequencyThe frequency response tends to one for $\omega \ll {\omega }_c$, has magnitude $1/\sqrt{2}$ at the corner, and tends to ${\omega }_c/\omega$ for $\omega \gg {\omega }_c$. The requested sketch uses a logarithmic horizontal axis and a linear voltage-gain axis:

At the two specified angular frequencies,The relative attenuation by a linear filter is the ratio of these gains:Thus the noise amplitude is attenuated by a factor of 10 relative to the signal. A squared-voltage ratio would decrease by a factor of $100$; the question's voltage transfer function gives the amplitude comparison.

Rearrange the supplied form of Kepler's third law to make the gravitational constant the subject:Convert the semi-major axis and orbital period to SI units before substitution:The central value is thereforeFor monomial uncertainty propagation, logarithmic differentiation givesIf the quoted errors are independent standard uncertainties, the variances of these contributions add:Thus ${\sigma }_G=1.61335\times 10^{-12}{\mathrm{m}}^3\mathrm{k}{\mathrm{g}}^{-1}{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$, and the measured result under that statistical convention isThe semi-major axis measurement supplies the largest individual contribution to the relative uncertainty.

The paper does not specify whether its errors are statistical uncertainties or bounds. If they are maximum input errors, the first-order worst-case error propagation estimate adds magnitudes:Correlation between input errors would instead require the covariance terms in the general propagation of uncertainty formula; they are not specified.

Field of discrete masses. Newton's law of universal gravitation and superposition give the gravitational field away from the source points:It is the force per unit test mass, with units $\mathrm{N}\mathrm{k}{\mathrm{g}}^{-1}=\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$, and points toward each positive source mass.

Infinite circular cylindrical rod. Let $b$ be the radius of the circular cross-section, so $A=\pi b^2$, and write $\lambda =\rho A$ for the linear mass density. Choose a coaxial cylindrical Gaussian surface with radius $r>b$ and length $L$. Translation and rotation symmetry make $\mathbf{g}=g_r(r)\hat{\mathbf{r}}$. The end caps have zero field flux because their normals are axial; on the curved surface the outward-normal component is the constant negative value $g_r$. Gauss's law for gravity therefore givesThe gravitational field of an infinite uniform cylinder inside the material instead has enclosed mass $\rho \pi r^{2}L$, giving $g_r=-2\pi G\rho r$. The exterior result assumes a circular cylindrical rod; area by itself would not specify the exact near field of a noncircular cross-section.

In the left panel the dashed circle is a transverse section of the coaxial Gaussian surface; the field points inward and the surface normals outward. Its side area is $2\pi rL$.

For an exterior circular orbit, Newton's second law equates the force required for centripetal acceleration to gravity:The orbital speed is independent of radius and of the orbiting object's mass, for orbits outside the infinite rod.

Finite rod. Taking the supplied field as the gravitational field of a finite uniform line segment, the corresponding balance at radius $R$ isSince $M=2a\rho A=2a\lambda$, its two limits areThe first reproduces the infinite-rod result: a nearby observer sees a very long source. The second is the familiar circular orbit speed about a point mass, since a distant observer cannot resolve the rod's length. The dimensionless curve isIt starts at a constant plateau and decreases smoothly, approaching an $R^{-1/2}$ dependence far away. For $R>0$, $dv/dR=-\sqrt{GM}R/[2(R^2+a^2{)}^{5/4}]<0$, consistent with the sketch.

Derivation of the finite-rod field. Put the source along $-a<z<a$ on the $z$ axis. In its central perpendicular plane, an element $dm=\lambda dz$ is at distance $s=\sqrt{r^2+z^2}$. Its field magnitude is $G\lambda dz/s^2$, and its inward radial component has the extra factor $r/s$. The axial components cancel between $z$ and $-z$. ThusReplacing $2a\lambda$ by $M$ givesThe integral treats the source as a line mass. For a finite cylinder of nonzero cross-section, the displayed finite-rod formula is a thin-rod approximation, not an exact field for all $r$. Its near-rod limit should therefore be read as $b\ll R\ll a$, keeping the orbit outside the material; the apparent line-source singularity at $r=0$ does not describe the interior of a real cylinder.

Equation and interpretation. The supplied equation is the time-independent Schrödinger equation for a nonrelativistic particle with mass $m$ in a prescribed potential energy $V(x)$. Equivalently,It is an eigenvalue problem for the Hamiltonian operator. A stationary energy state has full wavefunction $\Psi (x,t)=\psi (x)e^{-iEt/\hslash }$. By the Born rule, $|\psi (x){|}^{2}dx$ is the probability of finding the particle in a small interval $dx$, with wavefunction normalization ${\int }_{-\infty }^{\infty }|\psi {|}^{2}dx=1$.

Infinite barriers. Infinite exterior potential energy excludes any finite-energy probability outside the interval. The infinite square well consequently has $\psi =0$ outside and the hard-wall boundary conditionsThe interior wavefunction must meet the zero exterior amplitude continuously. Its derivative need not be continuous across an infinite wall; imposing both zero value and zero derivative would eliminate every nonzero interior solution.

Ground state. Inside the well $V=0$, so ${\psi }^{\prime \prime }+k^2\psi =0$, with $k=\sqrt{2mE}/\hslash$. Its general solution is $A\sin kx+B\cos kx$. The left wall gives $B=0$, and the right wall gives $ka=n\pi$ for $n=1,2,\dots$. Thus the discrete energy eigenvalues are $E_n=n^2{\pi }^2{\hslash }^2/(2m{a}^2)$. The smallest, $n=1$, is the ground state. Sinceits normalized wavefunction, choosing an irrelevant overall phase to make it positive inside, is

Finite barriers. For a finite step and constant particle mass, both $\psi$ and ${\psi }^{\prime }$ are continuous at $x=0,a$. Wavefunction matching at a finite potential step follows by integrating the Schrödinger equation across a vanishingly small neighborhood of the step: a bounded potential cannot generate a finite jump in ${\psi }^{\prime }$. The bound-state exterior solutions decay rather than vanish identically:Normalizability excludes the growing exterior exponentials. The equivalent interior boundary conditions are ${\psi }^{\prime }(0)=\kappa \psi (0)$ and ${\psi }^{\prime }(a)=-\kappa \psi (a)$; neither boundary value is zero for the nontrivial ground state.

The ground state of a finite square well remains symmetric about $a/2$ and has no nodes. It bends smoothly into exponential tails at both walls, extending over a larger region than the infinite-well state. Its maximum after normalization is lower for the deep well considered here. When $V_w\gg E$, the penetration length $1/\kappa$ is short, so the two shapes are close except near the walls and in the exterior tails.

The finite curve is an illustrative exact matched solution with $V_w=10E_{1,\infty }$; no numerical wall height is specified by the question.

Energy comparison. The finite barriers relax the confinement, allowing a less rapidly varying interior wavefunction and therefore smaller kinetic energy. More explicitly, the even interior solution is proportional to $\cos [k(x-a/2)]$, and matching to the tails gives $k\tan (ka/2)=\kappa$. The lowest root lies at $0<ka<\pi$, while the infinite well has $ka=\pi$. HenceAs $V_w\to \infty$, the tails disappear and the finite-well energy approaches the infinite-well value from below. This comparison uses the same zero of potential energy inside both wells.

Reflection and central spot. At a boundary from lower to higher refractive index, the near-normal electric-field reflection coefficient is negative, $r=(n_1-n_2)/(n_1+n_2)$. This gives a $\pi$ wave phase reversal on reflection from the glass plate through the air film. Reflection at the lens's glass-to-air underside has no such reversal. These are consequences of the Fresnel equations for the reflected electric field.

At ideal contact the film thickness is zero, so the two reflected contributions have zero geometrical optical path difference but a relative $\pi$ phase reversal. They produce destructive interference, and the central spot is dark. This conclusion concerns the film reflection; other lens surfaces can add a weak background.

Rings and their radii. At radial distance $r$, let the air thickness be $t$. The two relevant rays reflect at the upper and lower film interfaces. The lower reflection accumulates an extra round-trip optical path length $2t$, plus the relative $\pi$ reflection shift. As $t$ increases away from contact, alternating constructive and destructive thin-film interference forms Newton's rings. At near-normal incidence, a bright ring satisfiesThe extended source can illuminate these localized film fringes: each incident contribution interferes with its own two reflected paths; unrelated source points need not be mutually coherent.

For the spherical lens surface, geometry gives $r^2+(R-t{)}^2=R^2$, so $r^2=2Rt-t^2$. Since $t\ll R$, $t\simeq r^2/(2R)$. Combining the equations yieldsThe $m=0$ bright ring is the first bright ring around the dark contact point.

Curvature from ring diameters. Writing $D_m=2r_m$, subtract the squared diameters to eliminate the unknown initial order:Using SI units,

Liquid-filled film. With film refractive index $n=1.4$, still smaller than both glass indices, there remains exactly one relative reflection phase reversal. The round-trip optical path length is now $2nt$, soHere $\lambda =500\mathrm{nm}$ is the illuminating vacuum wavelength, approximately its air value, rather than its shorter value inside the liquid. The ring labelled $m=2$ therefore has diameterFilling the gap contracts each ring radius by $1/\sqrt{n}$ at fixed order and curvature.

Complex impedance. In sinusoidal steady state write physical voltage and electric current as real parts of $\tilde{V}{e}^{i\omega t}$ and $\tilde{I}{e}^{i\omega t}$. The electrical impedance $Z=\tilde{V}/\tilde{I}$ is a ratio of phasors; its magnitude gives the voltage-to-current amplitude ratio and its argument gives their phase difference. It is measured in ohms.

For an ideal capacitor, $q=Cv$ and $i=dq/dt=Cdv/dt$. Consequently $\tilde{I}=i\omega C\tilde{V}$, givingWith this time convention the voltage lags the electric current by $\pi /2$.

Bridge output. The original diagram has $R_1$ and $C_1$ in parallel in the upper-left arm, and $R_2$ and $C_2$ in series in the lower-left arm. The point labelled $C$ is connected to the upper supply node. Set the lower supply node to zero, so $V_C=V_i$. Assuming the measured output draws negligible electric current, the two voltage dividers giveTheir difference is thereforeThe reactive-arm electrical impedances are

Balance. Setting $V_{AB}=0$ and cross-multiplying gives $R_3{Z}_2=R_4{Z}_1$. For this Wien bridge,The right-hand side must be the real number $R_4/R_3$. Equating imaginary and real parts givesPositive capacitances require $R_4/R_3>R_2/R_1$. In the equal-component case $R_1=R_2=R$ and $C_1=C_2=C$, this reduces to

Band-pass output and phase. Preserve the requested voltage polarity: $V_{AC}=V_A-V_C$. Since $V_C=V_i$,Put $u=\omega RC>0$. The equal-component ratio is $Z_2/Z_1=2+i(u-u^{-1})$, so the Wien bridge band-pass response isAt finite positive frequency, its imaginary part vanishes exactly when $u-u^{-1}=0$. ThusThe magnitude $|H|=[9+(u-u^{-1}{)}^2{]}^{-1/2}$ is maximal there and tends to zero at both frequency extremes, as expected for a band-pass filter.

A convenient continuous, unwrapped wave phase isIt decreases from $-\pi /2$ as $\omega \to 0^{+}$, passes through $-\pi$ at ${\omega }_r$, and tends to $-3\pi /2$ as $\omega \to \infty$. A principal-value plot instead jumps from $-\pi$ to $+\pi$ at resonance; both represent the same phasor. Reversing the output to $V_{CA}$ would shift the phase by $\pi$ and make the resonant ratio $+1/3$, but that is a different output polarity from the one printed.

Axial moment of inertia. In the original diagram $R_1$ is the outer radius and $R_2$ the inner radius. For uniform mass density $\rho$, a coaxial annulus of thickness $dr$ has $dm=2\pi \rho Lrdr$. Therefore the axial moment of inertia of a hollow cylinder isSince $M=\pi \rho L(R_1^2-R_2^2)$, factorizing the fourth-power difference givesFor a solid cylinder $R_2\to 0$, giving $I=M{R}_1^2/2$. For a thin cylindrical shell with fixed mass and $R_1,R_2\to R$, $I=M{R}^2$. The latter limit agrees with every mass element being at radius $R$.

Undamped rolling oscillations. Let $x$ be axle displacement from the spring equilibrium. Rolling without slipping imposes $|{\omega }_{\mathrm{roll}}|=|\dot{x}|/R$. The sum of translational and rotational kinetic energy isThe potential energy is $U=k{x}^2/2$. Differentiating $T+U$ in the absence of damping, or applying the force and torque equations below, givesFor the thin shell $I=m{R}^2$, the effective inertia is $2m$, and the angular frequency of the simple harmonic motion isStatic contact friction supplies the required torque but does no work when the contact point is instantaneously stationary.

Damped force balance. Take rightward force as positive and counterclockwise rotation as positive. Write $f$ for the signed static friction at the bottom contact. ThenEliminate $f=-I\ddot{x}/R^2$ and use $I=m{R}^2$:Here $b$ has units $\mathrm{kg}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, so $B$ has units ${\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ and $C$ units ${\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$. The stated drag force is interpreted as acting through the axle, with no additional viscous torque. An oil bath could also exert such a torque physically, but its magnitude is not specified by this force-only model.

Light damping. Substitution of $z=A{e}^{-pt}$ into the differential equation gives $p^2-Bp+C=0$. In the underdamped regime $B^2<4C$,Taking real linear combinations gives the general damped harmonic oscillator displacementThe constants are fixed by the initial displacement and velocity. For example, release from rest at $x_0$ gives $A_1=x_0$ and $A_2=b{x}_0/(4m{\omega }_d)$. Light damping means $b^2\ll 8mk$, in which case ${\omega }_d\simeq {\omega }_0$ and the envelope decays slowly compared with an oscillation.

Momentum identity. From the Lorentz factor, $v^2/c^2=1-{\gamma }^{-2}$. The relativistic three-momentum therefore satisfiesTogether with relativistic energy $E=\gamma m{c}^2$, this gives the energy–momentum relation $E^2-p^2{c}^2=m^2{c}^4$.

Parent in the laboratory. The rest energy is $m_0{c}^2=1\mathrm{GeV}$, while the total relativistic energy is $3\mathrm{GeV}$. ConsequentlyIts momentum magnitude is $p_{0}c=\sqrt{3^2-1^2}\mathrm{GeV}=\sqrt{8}\mathrm{GeV}$.

Daughters in the zero-momentum frame. The centre-of-momentum frame is initially the parent's rest frame. Conservation of momentum gives ${\mathbf{p}}_1^{\ast }=-{\mathbf{p}}_2^{\ast }$. Equal daughter rest masses then imply equal relativistic energies. Conservation of relativistic energy givesTheir speeds are thereforeThe two velocities are opposite, and $p_X^{\ast }c=\sqrt{(1/2{)}^2-(1/3{)}^2}\mathrm{GeV}=\sqrt{5}\mathrm{GeV}/6$. Their total kinetic energy is $m_0{c}^2-2m_X{c}^2=m_0{c}^2/3$.

Invariant of the complete system. Before the decay, in the centre-of-momentum frame,After the relativistic two-body decay,In the laboratory, four-momentum conservation fixes the summed daughter energy to $3\mathrm{GeV}$ and their summed momentum to the parent's ${\mathbf{p}}_0$. Thus the same calculation isThe invariant is formed after summing the daughter four-momenta; adding their separate squared rest energies would omit the relative-motion contribution to the invariant mass of the pair.

Directions. Choose $+x$ along the horizontal spindle from the pivot to the disk, and $+z$ vertically upward. With lever arm $\mathbf{r}=l\hat{\mathbf{x}}$ and weight ${\mathbf{F}}_g=-mg\hat{\mathbf{z}}$, the torque about the pivot isClockwise precession viewed from above has $\mathbf{\Omega }=-\Omega \hat{\mathbf{z}}$. The relation $\mathbf{\tau }=\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{L}$ therefore requires the spin angular momentum to point along $-x$, from the disk toward the pivot. The disk spins clockwise when viewed from its outer face looking along the spindle toward the pivot. Looking from the pivot reverses that apparent rotation. The right-hand rule fixes these signs unambiguously.

The drawing shows an instantaneous top view; the disk's angular momentum and the horizontal spindle turn clockwise together. The pivot force has zero torque about the pivot.

Rate of precession. For steady horizontal motion the spin contribution has magnitude $L=I\omega$ and turns through $d\varphi =\Omega dt$ in time $dt$. Its change is perpendicular to itself and has magnitude $dL=Ld\varphi$. HenceThis is the usual slow steady gyroscope precession relation. Any constant vertical angular momentum associated with steady precession has zero time derivative; the horizontal spin contribution supplies the changing component here. Transient nutation is excluded by the prescribed horizontal steady motion.

Clock design. Convert both rotation rates to angular frequencies:For the moment of inertia of a uniform disc, $I=m{R}^2/2$, so the mass cancels:

Spin friction. At fixed geometry, reducing $\omega$ increases $\Omega \propto 1/\omega$. The precession period, $T_p=2\pi /\Omega$, therefore decreases. This trend holds while slow steady precession remains a suitable description; it cannot be extrapolated to a stopped disk.

Counterweight. To oppose the disk's gravitational torque, place the counterweight on the other side of the pivot, at $-l_c\hat{\mathbf{x}}$. The net torque isA horizontal axle can remain fixed when this vanishes, givingFor the fixed spin direction already found, counterbalanced gyroscope precession has signed rateMoving the counterweight outward from the pivot first slows the clockwise motion, eliminates its driving torque at balance, and then reverses the steady motion to counterclockwise. A counterweight on the disk's side would add to the gravitational torque. These statements neglect axial spin moment of inertia of the counterweight and assume the stated horizontal motion, without a separately imposed precession at balance.

Powered vertical flight. Take upward velocity $v$ as positive, and let $v_e>0$ be the downward exhaust speed relative to the rocket. During $dt$ the rocket's mass changes by $dm<0$, and exhaust mass $-dm$ leaves with Earth-frame velocity $v-v_e$. Compare the momentum of the rocket plus this newly expelled exhaust before and after the interval:Discard the second-order product $dmdv$. The result is $mdv+v_{e}dm=-mgdt$, orThe positive rocket thrust is $-v_e\dot{m}$. Integrating with $v(0)=0$ and $m(0)=m_0$ gives the rocket equation with gravitational loss:Using $d(mv)/dt$ for the rocket alone without the exhaust momentum flux would give the wrong equation for this open system.

Orbital speed under the stated gravity assumption. A circular orbit of radius $r_o=R_E+h_o=7.90\times 10^6\mathrm{m}$ requires centripetal acceleration $v_o^2/r_o$. If the magnitude of gravitational acceleration is the stipulated constant $g=9.8\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$ even at the orbit,This treats gravity as centrally directed for the orbital calculation, while retaining its constant magnitude. The subsequent flat-surface approximation treats its direction as locally vertical.

Burnout height. During the unpowered projectile motion, horizontal velocity is constant. At the top of the trajectory the vertical component vanishes, so the horizontal component must equal the orbital speed $v_o$. At burnout, therefore,These follow either by integrating $\ddot{y}=-g$ or by the vertical work-energy theorem. Substituting the preceding constant-$g$ orbital result givesThe vertical component is initially positive, as required to reach the orbit after burnout.

Alternative inverse-square interpretation. A real Earth's exterior Newtonian gravitational field is not constant over a $1500\mathrm{km}$ altitude change. If $9.8\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$ instead means the surface value $g_0$, then Newton's law of universal gravitation gives $GM=g_0{R}_E^2$ andUsing this orbital speed but the paper's constant-$g$ flat projectile motion approximation for the coast would giveThis alternative changes the global constant-gravity assumption; it is not the same model as the $183\mathrm{km}$ result. An exact curved Kepler orbit coast would also abandon the prescribed flat trajectory. The printed assumptions support the constant-magnitude answers above, while the inverse-square values explain the different answer obtained from the usual physical Earth-orbit formula.

Put the charged sheet at $z=0$ and the grounded plates at $z=\pm d/2$. By symmetry the electric field points away from the positive sheet with equal magnitude in the two gaps. A Gaussian pillbox crossing the sheet givesThe plate boundary conditions fix their electric potentials to zero. For the charged sheet between grounded parallel plates, the central potential isWith vacuum permittivity ${\epsilon }_0=8.85419\times 10^{-12}\mathrm{F}{\mathrm{m}}^{-1}$, $V_s\simeq 28.24\mathrm{V}$. An electron has electric charge $-e$, so moving from a grounded plate to this positive potential decreases its potential energy by $e{V}_s$. Conservation of energy then givesThe unrounded value is $3.15\times 10^6\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, about $0.0105c$. Either plate gives the same speed. The ideal calculation neglects the electron's disturbance of the prescribed field and image-force effects at its release point, consistently with treating it as a test particle.

For a photon, the photon energy formula and the vacuum relation $\nu =c/\lambda$ give $E_{\gamma }=hc/\lambda$. For an electron, the de Broglie wavelength gives the same momentum magnitude $p=h/\lambda$, but the nonrelativistic kinetic energy is $K_e=p^2/(2m_e)$. Using $h=6.62607015\times 10^{-34}\mathrm{J}\mathrm{s}$, $m_e=9.10938\times 10^{-31}\mathrm{kg}$ and $1\mathrm{eV}=1.602176634\times 10^{-19}\mathrm{J}$,Thus, to the precision of the wavelength,The electron answer is its kinetic energy, as required for the diffraction experiment; its relativistic energy would additionally include the approximately $511\mathrm{keV}$ rest energy. Since $K_e\ll m_e{c}^2$, the nonrelativistic approximation is well justified. Equal wavelengths imply equal momenta, not equal energies for particles with different energy–momentum relations.