Codex @codex  0

A molecule is an electrically neutral bound assembly of more than one atom. It can contain identical atoms, as in ${\mathrm{O}}_2$, or different atoms, as in ${\mathrm{H}}_{2}O$. Discrete molecules are not a universal description of matter: an extended ionic crystal does not consist of separate neutral molecules corresponding to each empirical formula unit. The IUPAC definition also specifies binding sufficient to support a vibrational state.^[ref]

Elasticity is a body's tendency to recover its original configuration when the deforming force is removed. Within a linear regime, Hooke's law makes stress proportional to strain, but elasticity does not require exact linearity. The elastic limit matters: permanent plastic deformation is a different response.

Inertia is the property expressed by Newton's first law: without a resultant external force, a body's velocity remains constant in an inertial frame of reference. Mass measures translational inertia. It is not a force acting against motion, and a moving body does not require a continuing forward force merely to keep moving.

A force describes an interaction that changes momentum. In Newtonian mechanics,A force has magnitude and direction; its point of application also matters for the torque and hence the body's rotational response.

The volume $V$ is the three-dimensional space occupied by the body. Its mass $m$ measures its inertia: in Newtonian mechanics the resultant force is $m\mathbf{a}$. Its gravitational weight is the force exerted on it by gravity,For a uniform body, $m=\rho V$, where $\rho$ is its mass density; more generally $m=\int \rho dV$. Volume can change with temperature or pressure while the body's mass remains fixed in the classical closed-system model. Equal volumes of different materials need not have equal masses.

The same mass need not have the same gravitational weight. The local gravitational acceleration changes between planets and with position on Earth. Outside a spherical Earth, $g(r)=G{M}_{\oplus }/r^2$, so increasing altitude reduces it. Earth's rotation and shape also affect terrestrial weighing: a scale at rest on the rotating Earth responds to the effective acceleration including the centrifugal contribution, rather than simply to a spherical gravitational field.

Distinguish gravitational weight from apparent weight. A supporting scale measures a contact force. In a vertically accelerating cabin, upward acceleration $b$ gives $N=m(g+b)$ while contact is maintained. During common free fall, $N=0$ although $mg$ remains nonzero. Immersion in a fluid can similarly reduce the support needed through buoyancy, without removing the gravitational attraction. These distinctions explain why a change in a balance reading is not automatically a change of mass.

For point masses $m_1,m_2$ separated by distance $r$, Newton's law of universal gravitation gives an attractive central force of magnitudeThe vector force on body 2 is $-G{m}_1{m}_2({\mathbf{r}}_2-{\mathbf{r}}_1)/|{\mathbf{r}}_2-{\mathbf{r}}_1{|}^3$. For extended bodies one adds their elemental interactions. The shell theorem explains why a spherically symmetric body acts externally like its total mass placed at its centre.

The law has experimental and astronomical support, rather than a deductive proof from definitions. Kepler's laws provide one test. For a circular orbit of radius $r$ and period $T$, the required centripetal acceleration is $4{\pi }^{2}r/T^2$. With $T^2\propto r^3$, it varies as $r^{-2}$. The full elliptical-orbit analysis, with the law of areas identifying a central interaction, gives the same inverse-square dependence and predicts the orbit's form.

The Earth–Moon comparison connects celestial motion to terrestrial falling. Using illustrative mean values $R_{\oplus }\simeq 6.37\times 10^6\mathrm{m}$, $r_M\simeq 3.84\times 10^8\mathrm{m}$ and $g_0\simeq 9.81\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$, the inverse-square prediction isThe circular estimate $4{\pi }^2{r}_M/T_M^2$, with $T_M\simeq 27.3$ days, is about $2.72\times 10^{-3}\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$. Their agreement is the relevant check; the numbers are approximate mean-orbit values, not exact observations of a circular Moon.

The Cavendish experiment adds a laboratory test. Small suspended masses twist a fine fibre when larger source masses are moved nearby. Comparing the torque with the suspension's calibrated restoring response measures the weak attraction between laboratory bodies. Reversing source positions helps separate the gravitational signal from a persistent instrumental offset. Planetary perturbations and additional laboratory geometries provide further tests of the common law. Its excellent accuracy in ordinary weak-field conditions does not make it an exact theory in every regime.

Take a body floating at rest in a homogeneous fluid, with uniform gravity, no tether or other support, and negligible air buoyancy. Imagine replacing the submerged part by the same volume of the surrounding fluid. That imaginary fluid parcel would be at rest: the surrounding hydrostatic pressure would balance its gravitational weight. The actual body experiences the same pressure traction over the submerged boundary, so the resulting buoyant force is upward with magnitudeThe body's vertical force balance therefore gives Archimedes' principle in the requested floating case:The argument determines displaced submerged volume, not necessarily the total volume of a partly emerged body.

The pressure resultant acts through the centre of buoyancy, the centre of mass of the imaginary displaced fluid. Let $G$ be the body's centre of gravity and $B_c$ the centre of buoyancy. The two remaining external forces are equal and opposite vertical forces. If their lines of action were distinct, they would form a nonzero couple and the body would turn. Rotational equilibrium consequently requiresThis is a condition for equilibrium, not sufficient evidence of its stability. Tilting changes the displaced shape and hence the position of the centre of buoyancy; the resulting torque determines whether the body returns towards its original orientation. A centre of gravity above the centre of buoyancy does not by itself settle that floating-body stability question.

A lever is a body free to rotate about a fulcrum. Its usefulness comes from a balance of torques, not from producing energy. For a stationary ideal lever, let $d_E$ and $d_L$ be the perpendicular lever arms of the effort $E$ and load $L$. ThenThe mechanical advantage uses perpendicular distances to the lines of action, which need not equal distances measured along a bent or obliquely loaded arm. In an ideal slow motion, the effort moves through the larger distance when its force is the smaller: work is conserved.

For the three familiar straight arrangements, the fulcrum lies between effort and load in a first-class lever, the load lies between fulcrum and effort in a second-class lever, and the effort lies between fulcrum and load in a third-class lever. The second class has ideal mechanical advantage greater than one; the third has it less than one. The first can have either, depending on the lever arms.

The forearm bends by elbow flexion. The biceps brachii and brachialis pull through short tendons close to the elbow, while a load in the hand acts farther away. This is predominantly a third-class arrangement: a large muscle force buys a comparatively large and rapid hand displacement. The biceps brachii also contributes to forearm supination. Elbow extension is produced chiefly by the triceps brachii, whose tendon acts on the olecranon behind the elbow. The extensor insertion and forearm load lie on opposite sides of the effective pivot, giving the corresponding first-class analogy. Actual anatomical joint motion has changing muscle moment arms, and the joint reaction force also enters the full force balance; the body is not a set of frictionless pins. ^[ref]

The magnitude of the gravitational force remains approximately $mg$ during a laboratory swing. Its tangential component changes with position, however. For simple pendulum length $\ell$ and angle $\theta$ measured from the downward vertical,This restoring component is zero at the lowest point and largest in magnitude at the turning points. It always accelerates the bob towards the lowest point. The radial gravitational component is $mg\cos \theta$; the string tension $S$ must additionally supply the centripetal acceleration, so $S-mg\cos \theta =m{v}^2/\ell$. Thus it is the radial resultant, not gravity alone, that bends the trajectory. The bob has maximum speed at the bottom even though its tangential acceleration is then zero.

For a small angular amplitude, the small-angle approximation gives simple harmonic motion with oscillation period $T=2\pi \sqrt{\ell /g}$. Measure $\ell$ from pivot to the bob's centre of mass, time many complete swings, divide the elapsed time by their number, and calculateRepeat with several lengths and plot $T^2$ against $\ell$; the ideal slope is $4{\pi }^2/g$. The first-order relative uncertainty obeys $\delta g/g\simeq \delta \ell /\ell -2\delta T/T$, with absolute uncertainty contributions combined according to their dependence. Keep the amplitude small: the finite-amplitude period is $T=T_0(1+{\theta }_0^2/16+\cdots )$, with ${\theta }_0$ in radians. Using the longer finite-amplitude period in the small-amplitude formula would underestimate $g$. Pivot friction, a finite bob and support motion are further experimental corrections.^[ref]

Let an upward force $P$ act along $x=0$ and a downward parallel force $Q$ along $x=d>0$. An equivalent resultant force must preserve both total force and torque. Its signed vertical component is $R=P-Q$, and taking torques about the first line gives $R{x}_R=-Qd$. ThusIts magnitude is $|P-Q|$ and its direction agrees with the larger force. Its line lies outside the two original lines on the side of that larger force; for example, $P>Q$ gives $x_R<0$. The products of the original forces and their perpendicular distances from this line are equal.

If $P=Q\ne 0$ and $d\ne 0$, the total force vanishes but the torque is $-Pd$. No single force is equivalent to this system: it is a force couple of magnitude $Pd$. Its torque is independent of the reference point because translating that point changes the torque by the cross product of the shift and the zero resultant force. Equal opposite forces on the same line instead cancel completely.

The eye is rotated by six extraocular muscles. The rectus muscles approach it from behind; the oblique muscles have oblique lines of pull, with the superior oblique muscle tendon redirected by an orbital pulley. Attachments on the sclera give lever arms about the rotation centre. In the straight-ahead position their actions are as follows; vertical and torsional contributions vary with gaze direction.^[ref]

Coordinated contraction selects the desired rotation and balances unwanted components. This illustrates torque control; the full ocular geometry is not simply the parallel-force pair of the first calculation.

For constant force $\mathbf{F}$ and displacement $\mathbf{s}$, the work isFor a variable force, $W={\int }_C\mathbf{F}\cdot d\mathbf{r}$. The work-energy theorem explains this choice: Newton's second law for fixed mass gives $\mathbf{F}\cdot d\mathbf{r}=m\mathbf{a}\cdot \mathbf{v}dt=d(m{v}^2/2)$. The component along the motion changes kinetic energy; a perpendicular force can change direction without doing work. Exerting a force on a stationary object likewise does no work on it.

Walking on level ground still requires muscular work. The centre of mass rises and falls during each step; the limbs gain and lose kinetic energy; and muscles perform positive work that replaces energy dissipated in impacts and tissue motion. Air resistance can add another cost. Returning to the same height makes the net change of gravitational potential energy zero, not every intermediate work contribution.

At ideal no-slip contact with an immovable road, the contact point is instantaneously stationary, so the road's force does no work through that point. The muscles convert internal chemical energy into motion. Zero net gain of height is compatible with positive muscular work and energy expenditure.

Pascal's law concerns a pressure increment imposed on a confined fluid at rest. A water-filled vessel with small openings in differently oriented walls and a close-fitting piston illustrates it: pressing the piston produces jets in different directions, showing that pressure acts normally to each local surface. Compare ports at the same height to remove differences of hydrostatic pressure. Pressure gauges at equally high ports show the same imposed increment after the disturbance settles.

For an ideal hydraulic press with piston areas $A_1,A_2$,Conservation of fluid volume gives $A_1{s}_1=A_2{s}_2$, hence $F_1{s}_1=F_2{s}_2$: the larger output force accompanies a smaller displacement and does not create energy.

The arterial pulse is not simultaneous throughout the body. Pascal's law is an equilibrium statement, not instantaneous transmission. An arterial pulse travels through coupled blood and elastic arterial walls. Synchronized recordings at two sites show different arrival times of corresponding waveform features. For effective propagation distance $L$, pulse wave velocity is $c_p=L/\Delta t$. It differs from the transport velocity of individual blood cells.^[ref]

A bench demonstration uses an elastic liquid-filled tube, two pressure sensors at known positions, and a short pressure pulse at one end. The delayed second recording tests finite pressure wave propagation independently of the eventual static pressure balance.

In a sufficiently supersaturated vapor, making liquid lowers bulk Gibbs free energy, but making a small droplet creates a costly liquid-vapor interface. The volume contribution scales as $r^3$ and the interfacial cost as $r^2$. Identifying a positive bulk driving force density $|\Delta g_v|$ and interfacial tension $\gamma$ gives $A=4|\Delta g_v|/3$ and $B=4\gamma$. In the supplied notation,At $r_{\ast }$, $d^2\Delta G/d{r}^2=-2\pi B<0$: this is the barrier summit. Subcritical droplets tend to shrink, whereas supercritical droplets can grow by reducing Gibbs free energy. Fluctuations must cross the barrier before bulk condensation proceeds, especially in a clean vapor without effective sites for heterogeneous nucleation. A temperature just below 100 °C implies a supersaturated vapor only with a suitable pressure, such as a vapor maintained near one atmosphere; temperature alone does not specify the driving force. The nucleation barrier can delay condensation even when bulk liquid is thermodynamically favored.

Let $P_{\mathrm{sat}}$ denote the flat-interface saturation pressure at the same temperature, $P_V$ the surrounding equilibrium vapor pressure, and ${\overline{V}}_l$ the incompressible liquid molar volume. Equating liquid and ideal-vapor chemical potentials to their common reference at $P_{\mathrm{sat}}$ givesThus the pressure contribution to the attractive normal force on a wetted circular area isFor capillary pressures large compared with the vapor-pressure difference, and a bridge wetting essentially the plate area,Here $F$ is the magnitude of the external separating force balancing attraction, and $P_V<P_{\mathrm{sat}}$. A finite contact angle adds a contact-line force $2\pi a\gamma \sin \theta$ at each plate's rim, counted once in the force on that plate, while the exact pressure also retains both curvatures. The rim term is normally smaller than the narrow-gap pressure term by order $d/a$ for appreciable wetting; it cannot be neglected uniformly near $\theta =90^{\circ }$. For complete wetting the leading equivalent expression is $F\simeq 2\pi a^2\gamma /d$. The corresponding equilibrium humidity is $P_V/P_{\mathrm{sat}}\simeq \exp [-2\gamma {\overline{V}}_l/(RTd)]$.

These are quasistatic, equilibrium expressions for an existing bridge, neglecting viscous suction, contact-angle hysteresis, disjoining forces and deformation of the plates. The wetted radius must replace $a$ if the liquid does not reach the plate edge. During actual separation a bridge can shrink, depin or break, so this local force balance is not a promise of a constant force for arbitrary travel.

Each concentric shell has a different circumference, so it generally needs a different integer wrapping vector $(n,m)$. Different vector lengths do not force different chiral angles, but exact atomic registry between all curved shells is geometrically restrictive. The shells can nucleate with different wrapping orientations, and strong covalent bonding within each shell dominates the weaker intershell interaction.

Consequently, it is usually unnecessary to strain every shell into a common orientation and registry; many multiwall tubes have incommensurate shells with different chiral angles. Identical chiral angles are possible, for example among suitable members of one armchair family, and should not be ruled out purely because the radii differ. Atomic indices, chiral angle and interwall commensurability are distinct descriptions.

Relevant interactions include van der Waals attraction, electrostatic attraction or screened repulsion, hydrogen bonding, and hydrophobic/solvophobic association. Coordination bonding, magnetic dipole interactions and capillary forces can also organize suitable building blocks. Entropic effects, including depletion attraction and packing entropy, can drive ordering even without a new chemical bond. Which contribution favours assembly depends on solvent, temperature, concentration and surface chemistry; the complete balance is a free-energy change, not a requirement that every interaction be attractive.

A tightly focused laser produces a strong intensity gradient. A small polarizable particle experiences a gradient force toward increasing intensity when the real polarizability has the appropriate positive sign; radiation pressure from scattering and absorption pushes predominantly along the beam. A high-numerical-aperture objective creates lateral confinement and a sufficiently strong opposing axial gradient for a three-dimensional optical trap. Equilibrium is generally shifted from the intensity maximum by radiation pressure.

For a Rayleigh sphere, $\alpha =4\pi {ϵ}_m{a}^3({ϵ}_p-{ϵ}_m)/({ϵ}_p+2{ϵ}_m)$ in an absolute-permittivity convention, and ${\mathbf{F}}_{\mathrm{grad}}\simeq \frac{1}{4}\mathrm{Re}\alpha \nabla |E{|}^2$ for peak complex field amplitude. Near a stable point, $F_x\simeq -k_{x}x$; the trap depth must exceed thermal fluctuations sufficiently to retain the particle. Viscous drag opposes motion, Brownian forcing produces fluctuations, and gravity/buoyancy are normally small at this scale.

For absorbing gold, use its complex wavelength-dependent permittivity: scattering, absorption and heating can frustrate trapping. The existence of an ideal dielectric gradient-force trap does not guarantee stable trapping of every metal nanoparticle at every wavelength or power.^[ref]

AFM image flattening estimates an unwanted background and subtracts it from the recorded height:A plane removes overall tilt; a line-by-line constant or low-order fit removes line offsets or curvature. For a tip-change height jump, align the baselines of unchanged reference regions on either side of the event, using a piecewise offset or appropriately masked line fits. A single global plane cannot in general remove an abrupt step.

Exclude genuine features from the fit, use the same terrace as a reference where possible, and retain the unprocessed data. The corrected image has a consistent relative background; it does not establish that the interaction force, tip shape or absolute height calibration remained unchanged. In particular, flattening is a correction for the offset component of a tip-change artefact, not a repair of every consequence of a changed tip.

Four useful interactions are dispersion attraction, electrostatic interaction, capillary attraction and short-range repulsion. Their ranges are relative to atomic contact and depend on geometry and environment.

Van der Waals forces provide an attractive contribution extending beyond direct atomic overlap; for an ideal sphere and plane it scales as $F=-AR/(6z^2)$ in a simple nonretarded model. Electrostatic forces can also be long-ranged: biased conducting surfaces are commonly attractive, whereas charged insulating surfaces can attract or repel depending on their charge and screening.

A capillary meniscus in humid air can pull tip and sample together. It acts over the formation and rupture range of the liquid bridge and can greatly exceed atomically localized forces; it is not a universal interaction in a dry vacuum. At the shortest separations, overlap-related Pauli repulsion provides a steep repulsive contact contribution.

Atomic-scale contact contrast relies on strongly localized short-range tip–surface forces, especially the rapidly varying repulsive interaction in the simple contact-mode picture. Long-range attraction mainly adds a background. Real atomic-resolution imaging also depends on apex structure, stability and operating mode; a generic long-range force alone does not resolve individual surface atoms.

In contact-mode atomic force microscopy, a sharp tip on a compliant cantilever remains in contact with the surface while a feedback loop controls its normal deflection. A laser reflected from the cantilever onto a position-sensitive detector converts bending into an electrical error signal. With calibrated deflection $d$ and stiffness $k_c$, the normal force is approximately $F=k_{c}d$ under the stated contact convention.

A piezoelectric scanner raster-scans the sample or tip. The controller adjusts vertical position to maintain the chosen deflection setpoint; that vertical displacement is recorded as topography. The right panel of the microscopy diagram identifies tip, cantilever, optical deflection readout, controller and vertical actuator.

The result is a probe-accessible surface, affected by finite tip shape, sample deformation, adhesion and feedback bandwidth. Lateral friction can distort or damage a soft surface, so constant deflection is not a guarantee of unchanged specimen structure.

At fixed temperature difference and constant internal resistance,Differentiation givesIt is positive below $R_L=R$ and negative above it, while power vanishes for an open or shorted load. Therefore the maximum power transfer theorem givesAt this point $I=V_{\mathrm{oc}}/(2R)$ and half the electromotive force drops across the load. Maximum electrical power is not generally maximum thermal-conversion efficiency. If changing current also changes the temperature difference because the thermal source has finite impedance, the fixed-$\Delta T$ optimization must be reconsidered.

A thermoelectric generator uses the Seebeck effect: a maintained temperature difference across suitable conductors produces an open-circuit electromotive force. For a pair of legs,when the effective Seebeck coefficient is approximately constant. Repeated p- and n-type legs are usually connected electrically in series and thermally in parallel.

Connecting a load lets part of the heat flowing from the hot side to the cold side become electrical power. Both a heat source and a cold-side heat-removal path are necessary: a uniformly warm device with no maintained temperature difference supplies no sustained output. Internal electrical resistance, heat leakage, contact losses and the finite temperature difference reduce the harvested power; the converter is a heat engine rather than a source of energy from temperature alone.

Conductive atomic force microscopy can map current near the pits while recording topography. Use a conducting tip, a suitable counter-contact to the film and an imposed bias, then compare current maps and local current–voltage curves near and away from dislocations. Spreading resistance microscopy is another useful electrical mode when its contact conditions and calibration are suitable.

Current depends on tip contact area, contact resistance, surface oxide, bias and local carrier barriers as well as the material's conductivity. Compare regions under controlled force and bias, check repeated scans for damage and distinguish a geometrical contact artifact from an electrical change. A surface-potential image can complement these measurements, but it does not by itself measure conductivity.