Codex @codex  0

TODO: source missing. Printed page 2, containing question 3, is absent from the supplied damaged PDF. Its statement, subparts and numerical data are unavailable, so no solution can be inferred responsibly.

TODO: source missing. Printed page 2, containing question 2, is absent from the supplied damaged PDF. Its statement, subparts and numerical data are unavailable, so no solution can be inferred responsibly.

TODO: source missing. Printed page 2, containing question 1, is absent from the supplied damaged PDF. Its statement, subparts and numerical data are unavailable, so no solution can be inferred responsibly.

Take $+y$ upwards in the source diagram. Write $w$ for $B$'s incoming speed, so the initial velocities areA contact-direction assumption is needed for a unique answer. The diagram specifies the incoming velocities but does not specify the contact normal or an outgoing angle. First adopt the usual intended model: the impulse is horizontal, so neither particle changes its $y$ component of velocity. This is the smooth oblique collision model with a horizontal line of centres at impact. Bringing $A$ to rest in the $x$ direction then brings it entirely to rest.

Let $b$ be $B$'s outgoing $x$ component of velocity. Conservation of momentum and conservation of kinetic energy givePut $q=(\sqrt{3}/2)w$. The second equation becomes $3u^2+q^2=(q-3u{)}^2$, so $q=u$. ThereforeThe outgoing kinetic energies areThe outgoing speed of $B$ is $u\sqrt{13/3}$, directed above the negative $x$ axis at angle ${\tan }^{-1}[1/(2\sqrt{3})]\simeq 16.1^{\circ }$. The initial kinetic energy is also $(3/2+2/3)m{u}^2=13m{u}^2/6$, as required for an elastic collision.

For the perfectly inelastic collision with these same incoming velocities, both particles share a common outgoing velocity. Conservation of momentum givesIts direction is again $16.1^{\circ }$ above the negative $x$ axis. The separate translational kinetic energies of the constituents and their total areThe loss of translational kinetic energy isThis becomes internal energy, for example deformation and heating; total energy is conserved. In the elastic collision no kinetic energy is lost and the particles separate with different velocities. In the perfectly inelastic collision relative motion disappears and the common velocity is the original centre of mass velocity.

The limitation of the printed data can be made explicit. Without the horizontal-impulse assumption, write the final velocity of $A$ as $(0,h)$. Then conservation of momentum determinesand conservation of kinetic energy gives onlyThere is a family of possibilities. For a concrete second solution, $h=u/\sqrt{3}$ givesThese velocities conserve both components of momentum and conserve kinetic energy, and they satisfy the specified vanishing $x$ component for $A$, while requiring a different incoming speed. They can arise from a smooth contact normal proportional to $(1,1/\sqrt{3})$. Thus the horizontal-impulse result is conditional, rather than uniquely implied by the printed statement. For any member of this family the corresponding sticking result remains well determined once $w$ is chosen:The last expression is the lost relative kinetic energy in a perfectly inelastic collision of these two point masses.

For a satellite of mass $m$ moving in the Newtonian gravitational field of a much larger, effectively fixed mass $M$, put $\mu =GM$. Its conserved mechanical energy, with gravitational potential energy zero at infinity, isHere $r$ is the instantaneous centre-to-centre distance, $v$ the satellite's speed, $G$ the gravitational constant, and $a$ the semi-major axis of its bound elliptic orbit. The kinetic energy and potential energy vary around the orbit, while their sum remains constant. Dividing by $m$ and solving for $v$ gives the vis-viva equation, $v^2=\mu (2/r-1/a)$.

For this Hohmann transfer orbit, the periapsis and apoapsis distances are $r_1=1\mathrm{AU}$ and $r_2=1.52\mathrm{AU}$, soThe vis-viva equation gives the endpoint speedsAs a check, conservation of angular momentum at the two endpoints gives $r_1{v}_{\mathrm{p}}=r_2{v}_{\mathrm{a}}$ because each velocity is perpendicular to its radius. Using $1\mathrm{AU}=1.49598\times 10^{11}\mathrm{m}$ and $\mu =1.32712\times 10^{20}{\mathrm{m}}^3{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$ gives $v_1=29.78\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ andThe departure impulse must increase the speed in the direction of the initial circular orbit:These are Sun-centred speeds; leaving the Earth's own gravitational field would require an additional calculation beyond this idealized solar orbit transfer.

At $r_2$, the desired circular orbit speed is $v_2=\sqrt{\mu /r_2}=24.16\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. The arrival impulse is thereforeThe required thrust on the spacecraft is forward, tangent to its orbit, to accelerate it. The rocket ejects exhaust backwards, opposite to the spacecraft's velocity; this distinguishes the direction of thrust from the direction in which the exhaust is fired.

The Hohmann transfer time is half the orbital period of the transfer ellipse. From Kepler's third law, relative to the Earth's one-year orbital period,Meanwhile Mars's orbital period is $T_M=1.52^{3/2}\mathrm{yr}=1.8740\mathrm{yr}$. The spacecraft arrives $\pi$ radians from its departure position. For a rendezvous, Mars must reach that same position after advancing through $2\pi t_H/T_M$. Thus its initial lead angle over the departing spacecraft isMars must be ahead by this angle in the common direction of motion around their orbits. At departure the spacecraft and the Earth share the inner orbital position; arrival occurs on the opposite side of the Sun.

Inertia is resistance to a change of motion. Translational inertia is measured by mass in Newton's second law; rotational inertia about a specified fixed axis is measured by the moment of inertiawhere $r_{\perp }$ is perpendicular distance from that axis. For a thin uniform rod, take axes perpendicular to the rod. With linear mass density $\lambda =m/l$,The second result uses the parallel axis theorem; direct integration over $0\le x\le l$ gives the same value. The axis specification is essential: an ideal thin rod has zero moment of inertia about its own longitudinal axis.

During the short elastic collision, neglect the impulse from gravity. The pivot can exert an external impulse, so total linear momentum of rod plus particle need not be conserved. Its torque about the pivot is zero, so conservation of angular momentum about that point applies. Let $w$ be the particle's signed outgoing horizontal velocity, and $\omega$ the rod's outgoing angular velocity, positive towards the incident motion. ThenSubstituting $\omega =3(v_0-w)/l$ into the kinetic energy equation givesDiscarding the zero-impulse branch $w=v_0$, the actual collision givesThe rod's lower end initially moves forward at $l\omega =3v_0/2$, so the bodies separate. Afterwards the free particle undergoes projectile motion. With the pivot as origin and $z$ downward, its trajectory is $x=(v_0/2)t$, $z=l+g{t}^2/2$, where $t=0$ at the collision. The rod instead swings about the fixed pivot in a vertical plane as a physical pendulum.

The rod's initial rotational kinetic energy is $I_{\mathrm{end}}{\omega }^2/2=3m{v}_0^2/8$. Reaching the horizontal raises its centre of mass by $l/2$, increasing gravitational potential energy by $mgl/2$. Consequently,For the threshold case, measure the rod's angle $\theta$ from the downward vertical and reset $t=0$ at its first horizontal turning point, so $\theta (0)=\pi /2$ and $\dot{\theta }(0)=0$. The restoring torque about the pivot gives the exact equation of motionAt the horizontal, $\ddot{\theta }=-3g/(2l)$, so the rod immediately swings back. Conservation of mechanical energy yieldsOn the initial descent its explicit time dependence is specified by the definite integralIt continues through the vertical to $-\pi /2$, reverses, and repeats without damping. An alternative expression valid throughout the oscillation uses the Jacobi elliptic sine. Put $k=1/\sqrt{2}$, ${\omega }_r=\sqrt{3g/(2l)}$, and let $K(k)$ denote the complete elliptic integral of the first kind. ThenThis is not simple harmonic motion at an amplitude of $\pi /2$. Its oscillation period exceeds its own small-amplitude value $2\pi \sqrt{2l/(3g)}$ by the factor $2K(1/\sqrt{2})/\pi \simeq 1.18034$.

A simple pendulum of length $l/2$ obeys $\ddot{\theta }+(2g/l)\sin \theta =0$. At the same amplitude $\pi /2$, its oscillation period is $T_p=4\sqrt{l/(2g)}K(1/\sqrt{2})$, soThe rod swings more slowly. Its equivalent simple pendulum length is $I_{\mathrm{end}}/[m(l/2)]=2l/3$, not the distance $l/2$ to its centre of mass. The same oscillation period ratio holds in the common small-amplitude limit, but replacing the actual 90-degree motion by that limit would underestimate both oscillation periods.

Use the Earth's inertial frame, with the Earth at $x=0$ and the star at $x=D=4.2$ light years, neglecting their relative motion. Take the stated relative velocity of $B$ to be forward along the same direction as $A$. The relativistic velocity addition law givesIn units of light years and years, $c=1$ and the spacecraft worldlines are $x_A=t/4$ and $x_B=2t/3$. Their passages at the star occur atThe return radio wave from $B$ follows the leftward light worldlineIntersecting this with $A$'s worldline gives $t/4=10.5-t$, henceThis is the Earth-frame coordinate time of reception on $A$, as requested; it is not the reading of $A$'s own clock. If an observer on the Earth watched that reception through a returning light signal, they would see it later.

Each transmission from the star takes another $D/c=4.2$ years to reach the Earth. ThereforeAll times are measured from the common passage by the Earth; the spacecraft continue at their stated velocities during the calculation.