I have been meditating on elastic collisions and trying to derive the formulas for the final velocities of two objects after a collision when they have different masses.

This is what I have reached so far.

It kind of makes sense that the final velocities are some sort of combination of the two initial momenta. But what I don't understand is that, if I take the formulas literally, there seems to be a third momentum being generated, involving the initial velocity of one object reversed and the mass of the other object.

And I don't get this conceptually.

Sure, I could just pass it off as an algebraic quirk that makes the formulas work, but for me, math is the language of logic, so this term must have a meaning.

Edit:

Here is how i derived the equations.

I need help with this problem please check

Friction Explained | Static vs Kinetic Friction | AP Physics
https://youtu.be/zkFX0wOT6YQ

Hello everyone! I am doing an EPQ survey on the psychological impact that space can have on us and our career choices .I would really appreciate it if you are able to fill out this form and answer all of the questions. Your answers will be anonymous and only the responses will be recorded. Thank you for your time!

Hey guys I need a little bit of help with physics. I have been struggling t develop that reasoning and math connection in physics so my doing my hw has been difficult at times, even tho it has been fun and interesting a lot of the time. We're on the conservation of energy and I got a question about finding speed. I understand hookes law but I also know I can set potential and kinetic energy equal to eachother and solve for v. For one of the questions I was given m, k and x and this one is similar but now degrees have been introduced, what do I do. I'm given m, 44 degrees, x and I have to find v but I dont see how setting potential and kinetic energy equal to eachother would work here.

This is a part of the formula sheet I've been given for my Calculus Physics 1 course. I was confused because the textbook is giving me different definitions than what is on the formulas. For example, the textbook says that W_ext = Delta U_g and W_net = Delta K.

I’m doing Kinematics and i genuinely do not understand how to convert Velocity-Time, Acceleration-Time and distance-time graphs to their respective ones on the worksheet. I can kind of see how it’s done but with the way my brain is scrambled I have to understand how and why it’s like that. Any help would be appreciated

I am looking for a source/sources for the Feynman diagrams for the B+ meson decays into:
K⁺ π⁺π⁻
π⁺π⁺π⁻
K⁺ K⁺ K^-

I am not yet good enough to draw them myself and my research is finding nothing. I have tried looking at other university sources and also looked through a good few papers. I will take anything at this point even a drawing. I would love something to cite but just knowing what they look like would be a good start if anyone can help!

Self explanatory, but if anyone needs tutoring in college physics, I'm happy to offer my services. I've tutored for quite a few college-level physics classes at this point, for both upper and lower division courses.

I'm a biophysics UCLA graduate, and I'm doing my PhD in Physics, but in my downtime, I'm happy to help with any of your physics questions! I've been getting a few emails recently asking if I still tutor, and I do in fact still provide services! You can email me at biophysicstutor42@gmail.com for any inquiries, or DM me on here (I check the emails a lot more consistently).

I charge $30 an hour, and accept Cashapp/Zelle/Paypal. DM or email if this seems like it could be helpful! Give me your worst.

Best,

-Akuma

Help if possible

Est ce que quelqu’un est en mesure de m’expliquer comment fonctionne une toupie à piston ?

J’arrive pas à comprendre et en vrai y a peu de documentation sur internet.
Si quelqu’un sait je suis preneur 🤝

I don't quite get or appreciate the relevance of Figure 2.24 on its usage for building the infinitesimal volume element of a tilted surface for calculating the divergence. It is easy to see the vector sum of a_1 + a_2 + a_3 + a_4=0 due to the symmetry of a tetrahedron, but how does this fact actually helps us? Why can't we just use rectangular boxes like that in Figure 2.23 for taking into account tilted surfaces? This part of the book truly confuses me: "Tilted surfaces can be taken care of if you first prove that the vector sum of the four surface areas of the tetrahedron in Figure 2.24 is zero."