Question

Consider why Eq. (9.6) cannot be satisfied by an increase of the $t_1$ increment.

   Consider why Eq. (9.6) cannot be satisfied by an increase of the $t_1$ increment.
NMR Spectroscopy: Basic Principles, Concepts and Applications in Chemistry
NMR Spectroscopy: Basic Principles, Concepts and Applications in Chemistry
Harald Günther 3rd Edition
Chapter 9, Problem 6 ↓
AceChat toggle button
Close icon
Ace pointing down

Please give Ace some feedback

Your feedback will help us improve your experience

Thumb up icon Thumb down icon
Thanks for your feedback!
Profile picture
Consider why Eq. (9.6) cannot be satisfied by an increase of the $t_1$ increment.
Close icon
Play audio
Feedback
Powered by NumerAI
Ivan Kochetkov David Collins
Kathleen Carty verified

Ryan Hood and 65 other educators are ready to help you.

Ask a new question

*

Labs

-

Want to see this concept in action?

NEW

Explore this concept interactively to see how it behaves as you change inputs.

View Labs

*

Recommended Videos

-
bullet-derive-eq-912-by-combining-eqs-97-and-911-to-eliminate-t

$\bullet$ Derive Eq. 9.12 by combining Eqs. 9.7 and 9.11 to eliminate $t .$

College Physics

why-cant-you-do-integration-by-parts-directly-on-the-middle-expression-in-equation-129-pull-the-ti-3

Why can't you do integration-by-parts directly on the middle expression in Equation $1.29$ - pull the time derivative over onto $x$, note that $\partial x / \partial t=0$, and conclude that $d\langle x\rangle / d t=0$ ?

Introduction to Quantum Mechanics

The Wave Function

Momentum

the-relation-rt-6t4-is-exact-for-blackbodies-and-holds-for-all-temperatures-why-is-this-relation-not-used-as-the-basis-of-a-definition-of-temperature-at-for-instance-100c-56028

The relation RT = σT^4 is exact for blackbodies and holds for all temperatures. Why is this relation not used as the basis of a definition of temperature at, for instance, 100°C?


*

Transcript

-
00:01 In this problem, we want to take these two equations and prove that they implied that this equation must be true.
00:06 And we do that by eliminating t, because as you'll notice in this final equation, there is no t.
00:12 So to start out, i'm going to take this top equation and solve for t.
00:16 This is pretty straightforward.
00:18 I just subtract omega -0 and then divide by alpha.
00:21 So i get omega -mina -not over alpha.
00:25 And then now i'm going to take this value of t and plug it into the bottom equation.
00:29 So this gives theta minus theta not is equal to omega not times omega minus omega not over alpha, plus one half alpha, and then the whole thing squared.
00:45 So omega minus omega not over alpha squared.
00:52 Now what i'm going to do is i'm going to pull this alpha squared out of the parentheses and cancel it with one of these.
00:58 And then i'm going to multiply both sides of the equation by two alpha.
01:02 Whenever i do that, i get 2 alpha times theta minus theta not.
01:09 You'll see i multiply both sides by 2 alpha...
Need help? Use Ace
Ace is your personal tutor. It breaks down any question with clear steps so you can learn.
Start Using Ace
Ace is your personal tutor for learning
Step-by-step explanations
Instant summaries
Summarize YouTube videos
Understand textbook images or PDFs
Study tools like quizzes and flashcards
Listen to your notes as a podcast
Continue solving this problem
Create a free account to:
  • View full step-by-step solution
  • Ask follow-up questions with Ace AI
  • Save progress and study later
Continue Free
Join the community

18,000,000+

Students on Numerade


Trusted by students at 8,000+ universities

Numerade

Get step-by-step video solution
from top educators

Continue with Clever
or



By creating an account, you agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Already have an account? Log In

A free answer
just for you

Watch the video solution with this free unlock.

Numerade

Log in to watch this video
...and 100,000,000 more!


EMAIL

PASSWORD

OR
Continue with Clever