What happens when the centripetal force is equal and opposite to the centrifugal force?What provides the centrifugal force for planets orbiting a star?Intuitive understanding of centripetal vs. centrifugal forceDo centripetal and reactive centrifugal forces cancel each other out?What is the cause of centripetal/centrifugal force?Why is centrifugal 'force' perpendicular to line of inertiaReference frame and centrifugal forceIs centrifugal force equal in magnitude to the centripetal force in the frame of a body undergoing circular motion?Centripetal and centrifugal forceThe athlete feels a centrifugal force when whirling the hammer - is there always a centrifugal force associated with a centripetal force?Why is centrifugal force considered fictitious, when it's the one that feels real to us when we are moving in a circle?

Did Nintendo change its mind about 68000 SNES?

Worshiping one God at a time?

Does convergence of polynomials imply that of its coefficients?

Do native speakers use "ultima" and "proxima" frequently in spoken English?

What is it called when someone votes for an option that's not their first choice?

Friend wants my recommendation but I don't want to give it to him

What happens when the centripetal force is equal and opposite to the centrifugal force?

How can a new country break out from a developed country without war?

What will the Frenchman say?

Why I don't get the wanted width of tcbox?

When did hardware antialiasing start being available?

Do I need to convey a moral for each of my blog post?

Why is participating in the European Parliamentary elections used as a threat?

Unable to get newly inserted Product's Id using After Plugin for Catalog Product save controller method

Have the tides ever turned twice on any open problem?

Could any one tell what PN is this Chip? Thanks~

Hackerrank All Women's Codesprint 2019: Name the Product

How to find the largest number(s) in a list of elements, possibly non-unique?

Is VPN a layer 3 concept?

PTIJ: Why do we make a Lulav holder?

PTIJ: Where did Achashverosh's years wander off to?

How do researchers send unsolicited emails asking for feedback on their works?

What (if any) is the reason to buy in small local stores?

Should a narrator ever describe things based on a characters view instead of fact?



What happens when the centripetal force is equal and opposite to the centrifugal force?


What provides the centrifugal force for planets orbiting a star?Intuitive understanding of centripetal vs. centrifugal forceDo centripetal and reactive centrifugal forces cancel each other out?What is the cause of centripetal/centrifugal force?Why is centrifugal 'force' perpendicular to line of inertiaReference frame and centrifugal forceIs centrifugal force equal in magnitude to the centripetal force in the frame of a body undergoing circular motion?Centripetal and centrifugal forceThe athlete feels a centrifugal force when whirling the hammer - is there always a centrifugal force associated with a centripetal force?Why is centrifugal force considered fictitious, when it's the one that feels real to us when we are moving in a circle?













1












$begingroup$


We say that centrifugal force is fictitious, yet we still use it in some problems. If the centrifugal force is equal and opposite to the centripetal force wouldn't that make the net force zero?










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Santosh Khatri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    It would make the net force zero. Which is the problem. Because the body in question is accelerating.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    But that will be for the st. Line only isn't it
    $endgroup$
    – Santosh Khatri
    5 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Newton's 2nd law is not restricted to straight lines (if that is what "st. Line" is meant to convey). I know that the experience of interaction when riding a merry-go-round or carnival ride is visceral and intense, but you have to frame your thinking about it carefully. When you are going around in a circle you are not in equilibrium: you are accelerating toward the center of that circle. Believe that—really take it into account—and you can make sense of it all. The force that is applied to you is always toward the center.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    The title of the question should serve as a title to the whole question and one should probably avoid writing the text of the question in literal continuation of the phrase/sentence in the title. In other words, the body of the question should be such that it can convey some meaning on its own and need not be read in literal continuation of the title.
    $endgroup$
    – Dvij Mankad
    4 hours ago
















1












$begingroup$


We say that centrifugal force is fictitious, yet we still use it in some problems. If the centrifugal force is equal and opposite to the centripetal force wouldn't that make the net force zero?










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Santosh Khatri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    It would make the net force zero. Which is the problem. Because the body in question is accelerating.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    But that will be for the st. Line only isn't it
    $endgroup$
    – Santosh Khatri
    5 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Newton's 2nd law is not restricted to straight lines (if that is what "st. Line" is meant to convey). I know that the experience of interaction when riding a merry-go-round or carnival ride is visceral and intense, but you have to frame your thinking about it carefully. When you are going around in a circle you are not in equilibrium: you are accelerating toward the center of that circle. Believe that—really take it into account—and you can make sense of it all. The force that is applied to you is always toward the center.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    The title of the question should serve as a title to the whole question and one should probably avoid writing the text of the question in literal continuation of the phrase/sentence in the title. In other words, the body of the question should be such that it can convey some meaning on its own and need not be read in literal continuation of the title.
    $endgroup$
    – Dvij Mankad
    4 hours ago














1












1








1





$begingroup$


We say that centrifugal force is fictitious, yet we still use it in some problems. If the centrifugal force is equal and opposite to the centripetal force wouldn't that make the net force zero?










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Santosh Khatri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




We say that centrifugal force is fictitious, yet we still use it in some problems. If the centrifugal force is equal and opposite to the centripetal force wouldn't that make the net force zero?







newtonian-mechanics rotational-dynamics reference-frames centripetal-force centrifugal-force






share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Santosh Khatri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Santosh Khatri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 1 hour ago









Qmechanic

106k121961222




106k121961222






New contributor




Santosh Khatri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 5 hours ago









Santosh KhatriSantosh Khatri

122




122




New contributor




Santosh Khatri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Santosh Khatri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Santosh Khatri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    It would make the net force zero. Which is the problem. Because the body in question is accelerating.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    But that will be for the st. Line only isn't it
    $endgroup$
    – Santosh Khatri
    5 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Newton's 2nd law is not restricted to straight lines (if that is what "st. Line" is meant to convey). I know that the experience of interaction when riding a merry-go-round or carnival ride is visceral and intense, but you have to frame your thinking about it carefully. When you are going around in a circle you are not in equilibrium: you are accelerating toward the center of that circle. Believe that—really take it into account—and you can make sense of it all. The force that is applied to you is always toward the center.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    The title of the question should serve as a title to the whole question and one should probably avoid writing the text of the question in literal continuation of the phrase/sentence in the title. In other words, the body of the question should be such that it can convey some meaning on its own and need not be read in literal continuation of the title.
    $endgroup$
    – Dvij Mankad
    4 hours ago













  • 1




    $begingroup$
    It would make the net force zero. Which is the problem. Because the body in question is accelerating.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    But that will be for the st. Line only isn't it
    $endgroup$
    – Santosh Khatri
    5 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Newton's 2nd law is not restricted to straight lines (if that is what "st. Line" is meant to convey). I know that the experience of interaction when riding a merry-go-round or carnival ride is visceral and intense, but you have to frame your thinking about it carefully. When you are going around in a circle you are not in equilibrium: you are accelerating toward the center of that circle. Believe that—really take it into account—and you can make sense of it all. The force that is applied to you is always toward the center.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    The title of the question should serve as a title to the whole question and one should probably avoid writing the text of the question in literal continuation of the phrase/sentence in the title. In other words, the body of the question should be such that it can convey some meaning on its own and need not be read in literal continuation of the title.
    $endgroup$
    – Dvij Mankad
    4 hours ago








1




1




$begingroup$
It would make the net force zero. Which is the problem. Because the body in question is accelerating.
$endgroup$
– dmckee
5 hours ago




$begingroup$
It would make the net force zero. Which is the problem. Because the body in question is accelerating.
$endgroup$
– dmckee
5 hours ago












$begingroup$
But that will be for the st. Line only isn't it
$endgroup$
– Santosh Khatri
5 hours ago




$begingroup$
But that will be for the st. Line only isn't it
$endgroup$
– Santosh Khatri
5 hours ago




1




1




$begingroup$
Newton's 2nd law is not restricted to straight lines (if that is what "st. Line" is meant to convey). I know that the experience of interaction when riding a merry-go-round or carnival ride is visceral and intense, but you have to frame your thinking about it carefully. When you are going around in a circle you are not in equilibrium: you are accelerating toward the center of that circle. Believe that—really take it into account—and you can make sense of it all. The force that is applied to you is always toward the center.
$endgroup$
– dmckee
5 hours ago




$begingroup$
Newton's 2nd law is not restricted to straight lines (if that is what "st. Line" is meant to convey). I know that the experience of interaction when riding a merry-go-round or carnival ride is visceral and intense, but you have to frame your thinking about it carefully. When you are going around in a circle you are not in equilibrium: you are accelerating toward the center of that circle. Believe that—really take it into account—and you can make sense of it all. The force that is applied to you is always toward the center.
$endgroup$
– dmckee
5 hours ago












$begingroup$
The title of the question should serve as a title to the whole question and one should probably avoid writing the text of the question in literal continuation of the phrase/sentence in the title. In other words, the body of the question should be such that it can convey some meaning on its own and need not be read in literal continuation of the title.
$endgroup$
– Dvij Mankad
4 hours ago





$begingroup$
The title of the question should serve as a title to the whole question and one should probably avoid writing the text of the question in literal continuation of the phrase/sentence in the title. In other words, the body of the question should be such that it can convey some meaning on its own and need not be read in literal continuation of the title.
$endgroup$
– Dvij Mankad
4 hours ago











1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















4












$begingroup$

First, it must be stated that Newton's laws only hold in inertial frames. What this means is that accelerations must arise from forces (Second Law), and these forces arise from interactions (Third Law). The issue with rotating frames is that accelerations arise when forces of interactions are not present, so Newton's laws do not hold in rotating frames.



However, the second law ($mathbf F=mmathbf a$) is nice to use since it tells us how to determine the position and velocity of a body given initial conditions. Therefore, we define "fictitious" centrifugal and Coriolis forces in order to keep this framework. They are "fictitious" because they are an artifact of the rotating reference frame rather than interactions, but they are not fake (for example, they are very real for anyone going around a sharp turn in a car). Essentially we have opted to abandon the third law in order to keep the second law.



Now, onto your specific inquiry: If you are in a rotating frame, and there is a force equally opposing the centrifugal force, then yes the net force is zero (assuming no Coriolis force either). Therefore in the rotating frame there is no acceleration of the object in question.



Of course, if you looked at the scenario from an inertial frame you would have a non-zero acceleration of the object as there is now a non-zero net force that is the centripetal force.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$








  • 4




    $begingroup$
    You should emphasize that Newton's laws are defined for inertial frames and that the treatment of non-inertial frame by applying inertial pseudo-forces is a lash-up to lets us apply the machinery of Newtonian mechanics to situations other than those for which in which the subject finds its natural expression. Otherwise you invite misunderstanding.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    4 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    @dmckee I agree those are good points to make. I have added information pertaining to this. Thanks for the suggestion.
    $endgroup$
    – Aaron Stevens
    3 hours ago










Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);






Santosh Khatri is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f467294%2fwhat-happens-when-the-centripetal-force-is-equal-and-opposite-to-the-centrifugal%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









4












$begingroup$

First, it must be stated that Newton's laws only hold in inertial frames. What this means is that accelerations must arise from forces (Second Law), and these forces arise from interactions (Third Law). The issue with rotating frames is that accelerations arise when forces of interactions are not present, so Newton's laws do not hold in rotating frames.



However, the second law ($mathbf F=mmathbf a$) is nice to use since it tells us how to determine the position and velocity of a body given initial conditions. Therefore, we define "fictitious" centrifugal and Coriolis forces in order to keep this framework. They are "fictitious" because they are an artifact of the rotating reference frame rather than interactions, but they are not fake (for example, they are very real for anyone going around a sharp turn in a car). Essentially we have opted to abandon the third law in order to keep the second law.



Now, onto your specific inquiry: If you are in a rotating frame, and there is a force equally opposing the centrifugal force, then yes the net force is zero (assuming no Coriolis force either). Therefore in the rotating frame there is no acceleration of the object in question.



Of course, if you looked at the scenario from an inertial frame you would have a non-zero acceleration of the object as there is now a non-zero net force that is the centripetal force.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$








  • 4




    $begingroup$
    You should emphasize that Newton's laws are defined for inertial frames and that the treatment of non-inertial frame by applying inertial pseudo-forces is a lash-up to lets us apply the machinery of Newtonian mechanics to situations other than those for which in which the subject finds its natural expression. Otherwise you invite misunderstanding.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    4 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    @dmckee I agree those are good points to make. I have added information pertaining to this. Thanks for the suggestion.
    $endgroup$
    – Aaron Stevens
    3 hours ago















4












$begingroup$

First, it must be stated that Newton's laws only hold in inertial frames. What this means is that accelerations must arise from forces (Second Law), and these forces arise from interactions (Third Law). The issue with rotating frames is that accelerations arise when forces of interactions are not present, so Newton's laws do not hold in rotating frames.



However, the second law ($mathbf F=mmathbf a$) is nice to use since it tells us how to determine the position and velocity of a body given initial conditions. Therefore, we define "fictitious" centrifugal and Coriolis forces in order to keep this framework. They are "fictitious" because they are an artifact of the rotating reference frame rather than interactions, but they are not fake (for example, they are very real for anyone going around a sharp turn in a car). Essentially we have opted to abandon the third law in order to keep the second law.



Now, onto your specific inquiry: If you are in a rotating frame, and there is a force equally opposing the centrifugal force, then yes the net force is zero (assuming no Coriolis force either). Therefore in the rotating frame there is no acceleration of the object in question.



Of course, if you looked at the scenario from an inertial frame you would have a non-zero acceleration of the object as there is now a non-zero net force that is the centripetal force.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$








  • 4




    $begingroup$
    You should emphasize that Newton's laws are defined for inertial frames and that the treatment of non-inertial frame by applying inertial pseudo-forces is a lash-up to lets us apply the machinery of Newtonian mechanics to situations other than those for which in which the subject finds its natural expression. Otherwise you invite misunderstanding.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    4 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    @dmckee I agree those are good points to make. I have added information pertaining to this. Thanks for the suggestion.
    $endgroup$
    – Aaron Stevens
    3 hours ago













4












4








4





$begingroup$

First, it must be stated that Newton's laws only hold in inertial frames. What this means is that accelerations must arise from forces (Second Law), and these forces arise from interactions (Third Law). The issue with rotating frames is that accelerations arise when forces of interactions are not present, so Newton's laws do not hold in rotating frames.



However, the second law ($mathbf F=mmathbf a$) is nice to use since it tells us how to determine the position and velocity of a body given initial conditions. Therefore, we define "fictitious" centrifugal and Coriolis forces in order to keep this framework. They are "fictitious" because they are an artifact of the rotating reference frame rather than interactions, but they are not fake (for example, they are very real for anyone going around a sharp turn in a car). Essentially we have opted to abandon the third law in order to keep the second law.



Now, onto your specific inquiry: If you are in a rotating frame, and there is a force equally opposing the centrifugal force, then yes the net force is zero (assuming no Coriolis force either). Therefore in the rotating frame there is no acceleration of the object in question.



Of course, if you looked at the scenario from an inertial frame you would have a non-zero acceleration of the object as there is now a non-zero net force that is the centripetal force.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



First, it must be stated that Newton's laws only hold in inertial frames. What this means is that accelerations must arise from forces (Second Law), and these forces arise from interactions (Third Law). The issue with rotating frames is that accelerations arise when forces of interactions are not present, so Newton's laws do not hold in rotating frames.



However, the second law ($mathbf F=mmathbf a$) is nice to use since it tells us how to determine the position and velocity of a body given initial conditions. Therefore, we define "fictitious" centrifugal and Coriolis forces in order to keep this framework. They are "fictitious" because they are an artifact of the rotating reference frame rather than interactions, but they are not fake (for example, they are very real for anyone going around a sharp turn in a car). Essentially we have opted to abandon the third law in order to keep the second law.



Now, onto your specific inquiry: If you are in a rotating frame, and there is a force equally opposing the centrifugal force, then yes the net force is zero (assuming no Coriolis force either). Therefore in the rotating frame there is no acceleration of the object in question.



Of course, if you looked at the scenario from an inertial frame you would have a non-zero acceleration of the object as there is now a non-zero net force that is the centripetal force.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 3 hours ago

























answered 5 hours ago









Aaron StevensAaron Stevens

13.1k42248




13.1k42248







  • 4




    $begingroup$
    You should emphasize that Newton's laws are defined for inertial frames and that the treatment of non-inertial frame by applying inertial pseudo-forces is a lash-up to lets us apply the machinery of Newtonian mechanics to situations other than those for which in which the subject finds its natural expression. Otherwise you invite misunderstanding.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    4 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    @dmckee I agree those are good points to make. I have added information pertaining to this. Thanks for the suggestion.
    $endgroup$
    – Aaron Stevens
    3 hours ago












  • 4




    $begingroup$
    You should emphasize that Newton's laws are defined for inertial frames and that the treatment of non-inertial frame by applying inertial pseudo-forces is a lash-up to lets us apply the machinery of Newtonian mechanics to situations other than those for which in which the subject finds its natural expression. Otherwise you invite misunderstanding.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    4 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    @dmckee I agree those are good points to make. I have added information pertaining to this. Thanks for the suggestion.
    $endgroup$
    – Aaron Stevens
    3 hours ago







4




4




$begingroup$
You should emphasize that Newton's laws are defined for inertial frames and that the treatment of non-inertial frame by applying inertial pseudo-forces is a lash-up to lets us apply the machinery of Newtonian mechanics to situations other than those for which in which the subject finds its natural expression. Otherwise you invite misunderstanding.
$endgroup$
– dmckee
4 hours ago





$begingroup$
You should emphasize that Newton's laws are defined for inertial frames and that the treatment of non-inertial frame by applying inertial pseudo-forces is a lash-up to lets us apply the machinery of Newtonian mechanics to situations other than those for which in which the subject finds its natural expression. Otherwise you invite misunderstanding.
$endgroup$
– dmckee
4 hours ago













$begingroup$
@dmckee I agree those are good points to make. I have added information pertaining to this. Thanks for the suggestion.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
3 hours ago




$begingroup$
@dmckee I agree those are good points to make. I have added information pertaining to this. Thanks for the suggestion.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
3 hours ago










Santosh Khatri is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









draft saved

draft discarded


















Santosh Khatri is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












Santosh Khatri is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











Santosh Khatri is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f467294%2fwhat-happens-when-the-centripetal-force-is-equal-and-opposite-to-the-centrifugal%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

名間水力發電廠 目录 沿革 設施 鄰近設施 註釋 外部連結 导航菜单23°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.7113923°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.71139計畫概要原始内容臺灣第一座BOT 模式開發的水力發電廠-名間水力電廠名間水力發電廠 水利署首件BOT案原始内容《小檔案》名間電廠 首座BOT水力發電廠原始内容名間電廠BOT - 經濟部水利署中區水資源局

Prove that NP is closed under karp reduction?Space(n) not closed under Karp reductions - what about NTime(n)?Class P is closed under rotation?Prove or disprove that $NL$ is closed under polynomial many-one reductions$mathbfNC_2$ is closed under log-space reductionOn Karp reductionwhen can I know if a class (complexity) is closed under reduction (cook/karp)Check if class $PSPACE$ is closed under polyonomially space reductionIs NPSPACE also closed under polynomial-time reduction and under log-space reduction?Prove PSPACE is closed under complement?Prove PSPACE is closed under union?

Is my guitar’s action too high? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)Strings too stiff on a recently purchased acoustic guitar | Cort AD880CEIs the action of my guitar really high?Μy little finger is too weak to play guitarWith guitar, how long should I give my fingers to strengthen / callous?When playing a fret the guitar sounds mutedPlaying (Barre) chords up the guitar neckI think my guitar strings are wound too tight and I can't play barre chordsF barre chord on an SG guitarHow to find to the right strings of a barre chord by feel?High action on higher fret on my steel acoustic guitar