![[Valid RSS]](images/valid-rss-rogers.png "Valid RSS")
This is a valid RSS feed.
This feed is valid, but interoperability with the widest range of feed readers could be improved by implementing the following recommendations.
line 19, column 1132: (10 occurrences) [help]
... .2 m, G = 6.6726 x 10-11N-m2/kg2.</p>]]></content:encoded>
^
</channel>
^
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" > <channel> <title>RSS Univers</title> <link>https://www.universator.com/</link> <description>Univers</description> <lastBuildDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2025 12:18:37 +0200</lastBuildDate> <language>en</language> <sy:updatePeriod>daily</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <item> <title>Gravitational force equation Calculator</title> <description>Newton's Law of Gravity states that 'Every particle attracts every other particle with a force that is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the distance between them. where, G = Universal ...</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img src="/img/gravity_calculation_of_a_normal.jpg" alt="Enter image description here" align="left" /><p>Newton's Law of Gravity states that 'Every particle attracts every other particle with a force that is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the distance between them. where, G = Universal Gravitational Constant = 6.6726 x 10-11N-m2/kg2 m1 = Mass of Object 1 m2 = Mass of Object 2 r = Distance Between the Objects. Case 1: Determine the force of gravitational attraction between the earth 5.98 x 1024 kg and a 70 kg boy who is standing at sea level, a distance of 6.38 x 106 m from earth's center. m1 = 5.98 x 1024 kg, m1 = 70 kg, r = 6.38 x 106 m, G = 6.6726 x 10-11N-m2/kg2 Substitute the values in the below Gravitational Force formula: This example will guide you to calculate the Gravitational Force manually. Case 2: Find the mass of one object if the magnitude of the gravitational force acting on each particle is 2 x 10-8, the one mass is 25 kg and the objects are 1.2 meters apart F = 2 x 10-8, m2 = 25 kg, r = 1.2 m, G = 6.6726 x 10-11N-m2/kg2.</p>]]></content:encoded> <category><![CDATA[Gravitational Force]]></category> <link>https://www.universator.com/GravitationalForce/gravitational-force-equation-calculator</link> <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.universator.com/GravitationalForce/gravitational-force-equation-calculator</guid> <pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2025 08:18:00 +0000</pubDate> </item> <item> <title>What is dark matter?</title> <description>Years ago I read an article by Martin Rees, in which he surveyed the options for what the dark matter of the universe might be. I forget the exact wording, but near the end he said something like “There are so many candidates ...</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img src="/img/dark_matter_map_milky_way.jpg" alt="Click for view big size" align="left" /><p>Years ago I read an article by Martin Rees, in which he surveyed the options for what the dark matter of the universe might be. I forget the exact wording, but near the end he said something like “There are so many candidates, it would be quite surprising to find ourselves living in a universe without dark matter.” I was reminded of this when I saw a Quantum Diaries post by Alex Millar, entitled “Why Dark Matter Exists.” Why do we live in a universe with five times as much dark matter as ordinary matter, anyway? As it turns out, the post was more about explaining all of the wonderful evidence we have that there is so much dark matter. That’s a very respectable question, one that I’ve covered again. The less-respectable (but still interesting to me) question is, Why is the universe like that? Is the existence of dark matter indeed unsurprising, or is it an unusual feature that we should take as an important clue as to the nature of our world? Generally, physicists love asking these kinds of questions (“why does the universe look this way, rather than that way?”), and yet are terribly sloppy at answering them. Questions about surprise and probability require a measure: a way of assigning, to each set of possibilities, some kind of probability number. Your answer wholly depends on how you assign that measure. If you have a coin, and your probability measure is “it will be heads half the time and tails half the time, ” then getting twenty heads in a row is very surprising. If you have reason to think the coin is loaded, and your measure is “it comes up heads almost every time, ” then twenty heads in a row isn’t surprising at all. Yet physicists love to bat around these questions in reference to the universe itself, without really bothering to justify one measure rather than another. With respect to dark matter, we’re contemplating a measure over all the various ways the universe could be, including both the laws of physics (which tell us what particles there can be) and the initial conditions (which set the stage for the later evolution). Clearly finding the “right” such measure is pretty much hopeless! But we can try to set up some reasonable considerations, and see where that leads us. Here are the important facts we know about dark matter: It’s dark. Doesn’t interact with electromagnetism, at least not with anywhere near the strength that ordinary charged particles do. It’s cold. Individual dark matter particles are moving slowly and have been for a while, otherwise they would have damped perturbations in the early universe. There’s a goodly amount of it. About 25% of the energy density of the current universe, compared to only about 5% in the form of ordinary matter. It’s stable, or nearly so. The dark matter particle has to be long-lived, or it would have decayed away a long time ago. It’s dissipationless, or nearly so. Ordinary matter settles down to make galaxies because it can lose energy through collisions and radiation; dark matter doesn’t seem to do that, giving rise to puffy halos rather than thin galactic disks. None of these properties is, by itself, very hard to satisfy if we’re just inventing new particles. But if we try to be honest — asking “What would expect to see, if we didn’t know what things actually looked like?” — there is a certain amount of tension involved in satisfying them all at once. Let’s take them in turn. Having a particle be dark isn’t hard at all. All electrically-neutral particles are dark in this sense. Photons, gravitons, neutrinos, neutrons, what have you.</p>]]></content:encoded> <category><![CDATA[Dark Matter]]></category> <link>https://www.universator.com/DarkMatter/what-is-dark-matter</link> <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.universator.com/DarkMatter/what-is-dark-matter</guid> <pubDate>Sat, 22 Mar 2025 09:05:00 +0000</pubDate> </item> <item> <title>Quantum Physics, Theories</title> <description>Quantum theory is the theoretical basis of modern physics that explains the nature and behavior of matter and energy on the atomic and subatomic level. The nature and behavior of matter and energy at that level is sometimes ...</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img src="/img/quantum_physics_theories_quantum_physics_theories.jpg" alt="The Main reason why You should" align="left" /><p>Quantum theory is the theoretical basis of modern physics that explains the nature and behavior of matter and energy on the atomic and subatomic level. The nature and behavior of matter and energy at that level is sometimes referred to as quantum physics and quantum mechanics. In 1900, physicist Max Planck presented his quantum theory to the German Physical Society. Planck had sought to discover the reason that radiation from a glowing body changes in color from red, to orange, and, finally, to blue as its temperature rises. He found that by making the assumption that energy existed in individual units in the same way that matter does, rather than just as a constant electromagnetic wave - as had been formerly assumed - and was therefore quantifiable , he could find the answer to his question. The existence of these units became the first assumption of quantum theory. Planck wrote a mathematical equation involving a figure to represent these individual units of energy, which he called . The equation explained the phenomenon very well; Planck found that at certain discrete temperature levels (exact multiples of a basic minimum value), energy from a glowing body will occupy different areas of the color spectrum. Planck assumed there was a theory yet to emerge from the discovery of quanta, but, in fact, their very existence implied a completely new and fundamental understanding of the laws of nature. Planck won the Nobel Prize in Physics for his theory in 1918, but developments by various scientists over a thirty-year period all contributed to the modern understanding of quantum theory. The Development of Quantum Theory In 1900, Planck made the assumption that energy was made of individual units, or quanta. In 1905, Albert Einstein theorized that not just the energy, but the radiation itself was quantized in the same manner. In 1924, Louis de Broglie proposed that there is no fundamental difference in the makeup and behavior of energy and matter; on the atomic and subatomic level either may behave as if made of either particles or waves. This theory became known as the principle of wave-particle duality : elementary particles of both energy and matter behave, depending on the conditions, like either particles or waves. In 1927, Werner Heisenberg proposed that precise, simultaneous measurement of two complementary values - such as the position and momentum of a subatomic particle - is impossible. Contrary to the principles of classical physics, their simultaneous measurement is inescapably flawed; the more precisely one value is measured, the more flawed will be the measurement of the other value. This theory became known as the uncertainty principle, which prompted Albert Einstein's famous comment, "God does not play dice." The Copenhagen Interpretation and the Many-Worlds Theory The two major interpretations of quantum theory's implications for the nature of reality are the Copenhagen interpretation and the many-worlds theory. Niels Bohr proposed the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory, which asserts that a particle is whatever it is measured to be (for example, a wave or a particle), but that it cannot be assumed to have specific properties, or even to exist, until it is measured. In short, Bohr was saying that objective reality does not exist. This translates to a principle called superposition that claims that while we do not know what the state of any object is, it is actually in all possible states simultaneously, as long as we don't look to check. To illustrate this theory, we can use the famous and somewhat cruel analogy of Schrodinger's Cat. First, we have a living cat and place it in a thick lead box. At this stage, there is no question that the cat is alive. We then throw in a vial of cyanide and seal the box. We do not know if the cat is alive or if the cyanide capsule has broken and the cat has died. Since we do not know, the cat is both dead and alive, according to quantum law - in a superposition of states. It is only when we break open the box and see what condition the cat is that the superposition is lost, and the cat must be either alive or dead.</p>]]></content:encoded> <category><![CDATA[Gravitational Field]]></category> <link>https://www.universator.com/GravitationalField/quantum-physics-theories</link> <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.universator.com/GravitationalField/quantum-physics-theories</guid> <pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2025 09:04:00 +0000</pubDate> </item> <item> <title>Gravitational pull on an object</title> <description>The framework the Universe is built from (space-time) is 'flexible' and is affected (to a degree) by the *contents* of the Universe. Particles with mass *deform* spacetime. The effect is very, very weak - but it's there, and it's ...</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img src="/img/presentation_everything_in_the_world_is.jpg" alt="Of gravitational pull on" align="left" /><p>The framework the Universe is built from (space-time) is 'flexible' and is affected (to a degree) by the *contents* of the Universe. Particles with mass *deform* spacetime. The effect is very, very weak - but it's there, and it's cumulative. You and I have hardly any effect, but a big ball of stuff like the earth deforms space-time quite a lot. It results in 'curvature' of space-time. This is the reason why when you throw a ball across the park, it moves in an arc. The ball actually moves in a straight line, but the universe (space-time) is curved towards the mass of the earth, and the ball's path traces a curve. If you find this hard to believe: Think about the path the ball would follow if you threw it in outer space, where local space-time isn't dominated by a powerful gravitational field like the one the earth creates. The ball would move in a straight line! Did you throw it differently? Or is the curvature of spacetime different? Further proof: If you fired yourself from a cannon at the same speed and direction as the ball, if you look at the ball while you both fly through the air, *the ball appears to move in a straight line*. From your perspective, space-time 'curves' less when you move in concert with the ball, compared to if you were stationary (relative to the ball).</p>]]></content:encoded> <category><![CDATA[Gravitational Pull]]></category> <link>https://www.universator.com/GravitationalPull/gravitational-pull-on-an-object</link> <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.universator.com/GravitationalPull/gravitational-pull-on-an-object</guid> <pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2025 08:37:00 +0000</pubDate> </item> <item> <title>What is black matter?</title> <description>Share This article Physics is unique in the scientific world, in that its reliance on math means it can come to a broad consensus on matters with very little evidence available. In Earth science, a veritable mountain of evidence ...</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img src="/img/what_is_dark_matter_extremetech.jpg" alt="A map of the universal Cosmic" align="left" /><p>Share This article Physics is unique in the scientific world, in that its reliance on math means it can come to a broad consensus on matters with very little evidence available. In Earth science, a veritable mountain of evidence can’t fully bury the issue of global warming, and even with the vast majority of scientists now convinced, a vocal minority still dissent. Yet in the case of physics and dark matter, a substance defined as being virtually immune to observation, there are no meaningful dark matter deniers left standing. So what is dark matter, and how has physics come to such a powerful agreement on the idea that it makes up the vast majority of matter in the universe? Matter, the regular kind that makes up the atmosphere, the Sun, Pluto, and Donald Trump, interacts with the universe in a number of ways. It absorbs, and in many cases emits, electromagnetic radiation in the form of gamma rays, visible light, infra-red, and more. It can generate magnetic fields of various sorts and strengths. And matter has mass, creating the force of gravity, the effects of which can be readily observed. All these things make matter convenient to study, in particular its interactions with light. Even a black hole, which emits no light, blocks light by sucking it in — but what if the light coming from behind a black hole simply passed right through, and on into our telescope lenses? How would we ever have proven the existence of a black hole, in that case? That’s the situation physicists face with dark matter. Dark matter does not seem to interact with the universal electromagnetic field in the slightest — that is, it does not absorb or emit light of any kind. In fact, dark matter seems only to interact with the universe as we can observe it through a single physical force: gravity. So, in the case of our invisible black hole, we might have been able to notice it by seeing how light coming to us from a certain section of sky was bent relative to our expectations, knocked slightly off course by passing close to an object bending the surface of the spacetime it’s traversing. Adding up enough light-bending observations, scientists could probably figure out the position and even mass of the invisible singularity. However, dark matter is harder to study than even that, because it does not come conveniently clumped into super-dense balls like stars and black holes — that would be far too easy. Instead, the primary theory of dark matter says that it is made of hypothetical particles called Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs), which are about as well understood as their catch-all name implies. WIMPs don’t even seem to interact with each other through anything more than gravity, meaning dark matter does not fuse to form larger or more complex molecules, and remains in a simple and highly diffuse gas-like state. Thus, dark matter’s gravitational impact is extremely spread out and, it turns out, can only be observed when we look at the large-scale distribution of visible matter in the universe — things like galactic super-clusters, and the corresponding super-voids. It’s theorized that after the Bing Bang, the properties of dark matter would have led it to settle down far more quickly than regular matter, going from a totally uniform gas-cloud to a somewhat clumped network of smaller clouds and connecting tendrils. These tendrils can stretch across the universe; the distribution of dark matter soon after the Big Bang is thought to have directed where regular matter eventually collected, and thus where and how galaxies formed.</p>]]></content:encoded> <category><![CDATA[Dark Matter]]></category> <link>https://www.universator.com/DarkMatter/what-is-black-matter</link> <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.universator.com/DarkMatter/what-is-black-matter</guid> <pubDate>Sun, 23 Feb 2025 08:34:00 +0000</pubDate> </item> <item> <title>What is the laws of relativity?</title> <description>Law of relativity is another and it states that nothing is good or bad, big or small... until you RELATE it to something The law of relativity tells us that everything in our physical world is only made real by its relationship ...</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img src="/img/relativitys_long_string_of_successful_predictions.jpg" alt="Relativity" align="left" /><p>Law of relativity is another and it states that nothing is good or bad, big or small... until you RELATE it to something The law of relativity tells us that everything in our physical world is only made real by its relationship or comparison to something. Light only exist because we compare it to dark. Good can only exist because we compare it to bad. Hot can only exist because we compare it to cold. If you practice relating your situation to something much worse then yours will be much better - it will always look good. All things are relative. If you are an average income earner and you compare youserself to a millionaire your economic situation would not look good, but if you compare yourself to a poor boy in Africa your situation would be one of abundance. There is no big nor small, fast nor slow, except by comparison. Everything just IS. I remember many years ago when I visited Columbia. I was amazed at how cheap everything was. I could get a beer for 10 cents and in my country 10 cents would not get me anything. So, what we choose to compare things to will determine if we perceive it as good or bad. Everything in life just IS and it is we who decide what value we put on it. If you own a 5 year old car and you compare it to a brand new Porche yours would look worse, but if you compare your car to a 15 year old, run down car yours will look good. When you relate something you do that you are not proficient at, to something another person does that they have mastered, you will not look good. You are using the law against yourself. Begin using this law to heighten your self esteem. You will then become aware of how special you are in the light of truth! Whenever the law is properly used, you win. Let's remember that everyone does something better than you and, likewise, you do something better than every person you meet. Picture 3 buildings - let us call them Building 1, 2 and 3. Building 2 is bigger than buiding 1 and building 3 is bigger than building 2. When you relate building 2 to building 3 then building 2 will look small, but if you relate building 2 to building 1 it will look big. The Law of relativity states that all things are relative. We make it what it is. As such you can choose to use this Law in your favour or not. Use it to make yourself look good. If you constantly use it to relate to people who have mastered something better than you the law will not serve you. You will use the law to put yourself down. Avoid doing this. Use it to make yourself good. Relate yourself to people or situations that will make you look good. Nothing in life has any meaning, except for the meaning that we give it so make sure to use the law of relativity in ypur favour.</p>]]></content:encoded> <category><![CDATA[Newton Universal Law]]></category> <link>https://www.universator.com/NewtonUniversalLaw/what-is-the-laws-of-relativity</link> <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.universator.com/NewtonUniversalLaw/what-is-the-laws-of-relativity</guid> <pubDate>Fri, 14 Feb 2025 08:33:00 +0000</pubDate> </item> <item> <title>Dark energy Stars</title> <description>For three days in April, 2005, I was a speaker and panelist at the NASA-sponsored “Physics for the 3rd Millennium II Conference” in Huntsville, Alabama, where twelve of us, including two Nobel Laureates, were invited to give ...</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img src="/img/or_just.jpg" alt="In" align="left" /><p>For three days in April, 2005, I was a speaker and panelist at the NASA-sponsored “Physics for the 3rd Millennium II Conference” in Huntsville, Alabama, where twelve of us, including two Nobel Laureates, were invited to give 50-minute lectures about cutting-edge physics to an audience of NASA engineers, teachers, students, parents, and other interested attendees. In this column, I want to tell you about the work described in one of the talks, given by Dr. George Chapline of the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory...</p>]]></content:encoded> <category><![CDATA[Dark Energy]]></category> <link>https://www.universator.com/DarkEnergy/dark-energy-stars</link> <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.universator.com/DarkEnergy/dark-energy-stars</guid> <pubDate>Wed, 05 Feb 2025 08:10:00 +0000</pubDate> </item> <item> <title>Gravitational field of the Earth</title> <description>Geophysicists utilize slight variations in gravitational force to characterize the mass of subsurface features. Particularly useful in petroleum exploration, subtle gravitational field differences can help identify solid ...</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img src="/img/frank_bauer_research_and_development_in.jpg" alt="Gravitational Field of the" align="left" /><p>Geophysicists utilize slight variations in gravitational force to characterize the mass of subsurface features. Particularly useful in petroleum exploration, subtle gravitational field differences can help identify solid subsurface plutonic bodies or fluid filled reservoirs. 1n 1687, English physicist Sir Isaac Newton (1642–1727) published a law of universal gravitation in his important and influential work Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy). In its simplest form, Newton's law of universal gravitation states that bodies with mass attract each other with a force that varies directly as the product of their masses and inversely as the square of the distance between them. This mathematically elegant law, however, offered a remarkably reasoned and profound insight into the mechanics of the natural world because it revealed a cosmos bound together by the mutual gravitational attraction of its constituent particles. Moreover, along with Newton's laws of motion, the law of universal gravitation became the guiding model for the future development of physical law. Newton's law of universal gravitation was derived from German mathematician and astronomer Johannes Kepler's (1571–1630) laws of planetary motion, the concept of "action-at-a-distance, " and Newton's own laws of motion. Building on Italian astronomer and physicist Galileo Galilei's (1564–1642) observations of falling bodies, Newton asserted that gravity is a universal property of all matter. Although the force of gravity can become infinitesimally small at increasing distances between bodies, all bodies of mass exert gravitational force on each other. Newton extrapolated that the force of gravity (later characterized by the gravitational field) extended to infinity and, in so doing, bound the universe together. Newton's law of gravitation, mathematically expressed as F= (G)(m1 m2) /r2, stated that the gravitational attraction between two bodies with masses m1 and m2 was directly proportional to the masses of the bodies, and inversely proportional to the square of the distance (r) between the centers of the masses. Accordingly, a doubling of one mass resulted in a doubling of the gravitational attraction while a doubling of the distance between masses resulted in a reduction of the gravitational force to a fourth of its former value. Nearly a century passed, however, before English physicist Henry Cavendish (1731–1810) was to determine the missing gravitational constant (G) that allowed a reasonably accurate determination of Earth's actual gravitational force.</p>]]></content:encoded> <category><![CDATA[Gravitational Field]]></category> <link>https://www.universator.com/GravitationalField/gravitational-field-of-the-earth</link> <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.universator.com/GravitationalField/gravitational-field-of-the-earth</guid> <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jan 2025 08:08:00 +0000</pubDate> </item> <item> <title>Law of gravity formula</title> <description>Why do some objects float while others sink? One of the factors that determines this is the density of the object. The density of an object is related to another important factor called specific gravity, which will be the main ...</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img src="/img/universal_law_of_gravity_ck_12.jpg" alt="Space Station" align="left" /><p>Why do some objects float while others sink? One of the factors that determines this is the density of the object. The density of an object is related to another important factor called specific gravity, which will be the main focus of this lesson. Click "next lesson" whenever you finish a lesson and quiz. Got It You now have full access to our lessons and courses. Watch the lesson now or keep exploring. Got It You're 25% of the way through this course! Keep going at this rate, and you'll be done before you know it. Way to go! If you watch at least 30 minutes of lessons each day you'll master your goals before you know it. Go to Next Lesson Take Quiz Congratulations on earning a badge for watching 10 videos but you've only scratched the surface. Keep it up! Go to Next Lesson Take Quiz You've just earned a badge for watching 50 different lessons. Keep it up, you're making great progress! Go to Next Lesson Take Quiz You have earned a badge for watching 20 minutes of lessons. You have earned a badge for watching 50 minutes of lessons. You have earned a badge for watching 100 minutes of lessons. You have earned a badge for watching 250 minutes of lessons. You have earned a badge for watching 500 minutes of lessons.</p>]]></content:encoded> <category><![CDATA[Dark Energy]]></category> <link>https://www.universator.com/DarkEnergy/law-of-gravity-formula</link> <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.universator.com/DarkEnergy/law-of-gravity-formula</guid> <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jan 2025 11:08:00 +0000</pubDate> </item> <item> <title>Universal Gravitation answers</title> <description>Top Question: Define force of gravitation. Answer: The force of attraction which exists between any two objects in the universe is known as force of gravitation. Question: State Newton's law of gravitation. Answer: According to ...</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<img src="/img/universal_law_of_gravity_ck_12.jpg" alt="Newton's Apple" align="left" /><p>Top Question: Define force of gravitation. Answer: The force of attraction which exists between any two objects in the universe is known as force of gravitation. Question: State Newton's law of gravitation. Answer: According to this law, "Every particle in this universe attracts every other particle with a force which is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them". Question: Why is G called a universal constant? Answer: G is known as universal constant, because its value remains the same throughout the universe. Question: List out the physical quantities on which the gravitational force between objects depends. Answer: The gravitational force between two objects depends on a) the mass and b) the distance between them Question: What do you mean by a freely falling object? Answer: An object which moves towards the earth due to force of gravity is described as a freely falling object. Question: What is acceleration due to gravity? Answer: The acceleration produced in a body due to force of gravity is known as acceleration due to gravity. Question: Two bodies of mass 10 kg and 12 kg are falling freely. What is the acceleration produced in the bodies due to force of gravity? Answer: The acceleration due to gravity produced in both the bodies is the same as it is independent of the mass of the body. Acceleration produced in both the bodies 10 kg and 12 kg is 9.8 m/s2. Question: What will happen to the force of gravitation between two objects A and B if the distance between them is reduced to half? Answer: Let d be the distance between the two objects A and B of mass m1 and m2 respectively, The force between A and B when distance between them is reduced to half F1 = 4 F i.e., the force increases. The force of gravitation between any two objects increases by a factor 4 if the distance between the objects is reduced to half. Question: What would you observe if there are two massive bodies A and B of equal masses which experience only force of gravitation? Answer: The objects A and B would be moving around each other.</p>]]></content:encoded> <category><![CDATA[Universal Gravitation Constant]]></category> <link>https://www.universator.com/UniversalGravitationConstant/universal-gravitation-answers</link> <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.universator.com/UniversalGravitationConstant/universal-gravitation-answers</guid> <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jan 2025 11:01:00 +0000</pubDate> </item> </channel></rss>If you would like to create a banner that links to this page (i.e. this validation result), do the following:
Download the "valid RSS" banner.
Upload the image to your own server. (This step is important. Please do not link directly to the image on this server.)
Add this HTML to your page (change the image src attribute if necessary):
If you would like to create a text link instead, here is the URL you can use:
http://www.feedvalidator.org/check.cgi?url=https%3A//www.universator.com/feed/rss/
