become expert | help | login
refer a friend - earn nickels!!
 advanced

  Ask & Discuss Questions with Community & Experts

Moderation Team
  500 chars left
Ask experts Expert Question: assertion reason 2........
Reply Forum Index -> Mechanics originally posted here on IIT-JEE / AIEEE community   
Email  
Author Message
vijay kharya (514)

Olaaa!! Perrrfect answer. 86  [128 rates]

vijay kharya's Avatar

total posts: 634    
Offline

STATEMENT-1 : The term collision between two bodies does not necessarily mean that the 2 bodies strike against each other

because

STATEMENT-2 : In physics a collision is said to take place if one body influences the motion of the other body

 
(A) Statement-1 is True, Statement-2 is True; Statement-2 is a correct explanation for Statement-1.
(B) Statement-1 is True, Statement-2 is True; Statement-2 is NOT a correct explanation for Statement-1.
(C) Statement-1 is True, Statement-2 is False.
(D) Statement-1 is False, Statement-2 is True.

plz. explain your answer. rates guaranteed for correct answer + explanation. in this one the answer given is A, even though i have never encountered this statement or its reason anywhere before


sucess is not a faithful girlfriend
    
muqeem khan (7)

Olaaa!! Perrrfect answer. 1  [2 rates]

muqeem khan's Avatar

total posts: 3    
Offline

after statement 1 you have used because  ,it is not required

correct ans is both r correct and explanation is correct 

read the second statement use'thats why" read first statement

 


ursmuqeem
  this reply:   5 points  (with Olaaa!! Perrrfect answer.   in 1   votes   )     [?]
 
You have to be logged on to rate
  
vijay kharya (514)

Olaaa!! Perrrfect answer. 86  [128 rates]

vijay kharya's Avatar

total posts: 634    
Offline
anyways i got the answer man this statement is true,and its reason is also correct, asked it from my coaching sir
  this reply:   0 points  (with Olaaa!! Perrrfect answer.   in 0   votes   )     [?]
 
You have to be logged on to rate
  
edison (8935)

Forum Expert

Olaaa!! Perrrfect answer. 1561  [2126 rates]

edison's Avatar

total posts: 7537    
Offline

A) Statement-1 is True, Statement-2 is True; Statement-2 is a correct explanation for Statement-1

 

In several cases the collision need not be physical. Scattering is also one of those. Several examples are there for elastic and inelastic collision too.

The case of rutherford scattering of electrons with nucleus is one such example.

Then Rayleigh scattering, Compton scattering etc.

 

  this reply:   5 points  (with Olaaa!! Perrrfect answer.   in 1   votes   )     [?]
 
You have to be logged on to rate
  
sonny (120)

Olaaa!! Perrrfect answer. 16  [36 rates]

sonny's Avatar

total posts: 205    
Offline

A

  this reply:   0 points  (with Olaaa!! Perrrfect answer.   in 0   votes   )     [?]
 
You have to be logged on to rate
  
vijay kharya (514)

Olaaa!! Perrrfect answer. 86  [128 rates]

vijay kharya's Avatar

total posts: 634    
Offline
thanks everybody, in electrostats too if we throw a charges ball towards a similar movable charged ball ( having the same charge) then also we can apply COM bcoz. one body influences the motion of the other
  this reply:   0 points  (with Olaaa!! Perrrfect answer.   in 0   votes   )     [?]
 
You have to be logged on to rate
  
akhil (267)

Olaaa!! Perrrfect answer. 45  [66 rates]

akhil's Avatar

total posts: 624    
Offline

A is the answer.


5 OUT OF 4 PEOPLE DO NOT UNDERSTAND A JOKE IN MATHS!!!!
  this reply:   0 points  (with Olaaa!! Perrrfect answer.   in 0   votes   )     [?]
 
You have to be logged on to rate
  
 
reply Forum Index -> Mechanics
Go to: 
Sponsored Links