LOGO
General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here.

Reply to Thread New Thread
Old 05-06-2010, 05:53 AM   #21
lionsiy

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
565
Senior Member
Default
there are about 12 more followup questions but they had TeX in them and I didn't feel like figuring out how to get em to copy paste right

Also this was a question from the beginning of the year. Seeing as I am taking calc at the same time as physics, it was considerably harder when I was a beginner...
lionsiy is offline


Old 05-06-2010, 06:36 AM   #22
carpartsho

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
501
Senior Member
Default
You're not a physicist, you piece of ****.


When I saw that, my first thought was to quote it specifically to make sure you would too.
carpartsho is offline


Old 05-06-2010, 05:00 PM   #23
DoctorTDent

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
506
Senior Member
Default
If you would have said earlier that it was sub-optimal to exercise early since there would always be more value in selling the option (just another form of cashing in really!!)
/

This post is utterly ridiculous. I suggest you read a basic financial math book. Real investors, if they wish to take a market view, will resell the option for >= the intrinsic value in the market (strictly greater if implied volatility is anything other than 0). If the price was ever less than the intrinsic value then there exists a simple arbitrage. Exercising early is always suboptimal, modulo transaction costs and some minor difficulties like shorting at a retail level.
Like I said, please pay attention
DoctorTDent is offline


Old 05-06-2010, 10:19 PM   #24
Stoottnoiciek

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
487
Senior Member
Default
And no, selling and exercising are not just different forms of cashing in.

The point is that EVEN IF YOU'RE PREVENTED FROM EXERCISING EARLY the option price is higher than or equal to the intrinsic.
Stoottnoiciek is offline


Old 05-06-2010, 10:51 PM   #25
PlayboyAtWork

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
393
Senior Member
Default
HC, maybe you can answer a question that Kuci got wrong.

Betelgeuse is a star located 640 ly away from the earth.

RA is 5h 55m

Dec is +7 deg 24'

What are the coordinates of betelgeuse in cartesian coordinates, assuming the Sun is 0/0/0
PlayboyAtWork is offline


Old 05-06-2010, 11:11 PM   #26
Hamucevasiop

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
575
Senior Member
Default
I don't know much physics, but... wouldn't momentum be conserved? So tripling the mass of the system causes the final velocity to be one third of the original.

maybe Ben could explain this stuff:

Vi = 0

Vf = sqrt(S^2/2m)

vf= vi + a*t

sqrt(S^2/2m) = g*t

t = sqrt(S^2/2)/g
???
Hamucevasiop is offline


Old 05-06-2010, 11:37 PM   #27
F1grandprix

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
418
Senior Member
Default
The force equals Mu*N = Mu*2M*g. Even if there were friction between the slab and the surface, the coefficient doesn't change. The force changes. Ok. I missed the part where it said the connection between the ground and the slab was frictionless. I thought they were asking for that, not for the friction between the slab and the block.
F1grandprix is offline


Old 05-07-2010, 12:00 AM   #28
larentont

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
520
Senior Member
Default
this is ****ing hilarious what are you talking about krazyhorse
larentont is offline


Old 05-07-2010, 12:35 AM   #29
SzefciuCba

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
544
Senior Member
Default
That's how I solved for the velocity. Energy is conserved. You can use momentum too.

The rest is kinamatics equation. I know the final speed, and the initial speed, the acceleration and from that I can find the time.
ROFL
ROFLROFLROFLROFL
I AM RIIIIIIDING THE ROFLCOPTER
BAHAHAHA

It's kinetic friction you dumb ass, we aren't accounting for the waste heat so in this system we don't conserve energy. Jesus christ.
SzefciuCba is offline


Old 05-07-2010, 12:40 AM   #30
DurryVony

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
595
Senior Member
Default
Ben, even your algebra is wrong.
DurryVony is offline


Old 05-07-2010, 12:47 AM   #31
dremucha

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
520
Senior Member
Default
I can't believe he got it that wrong after a day to think about it.
dremucha is offline


Old 05-07-2010, 12:51 AM   #32
AngelBee

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
462
Senior Member
Default
I gave this less than five minutes effort, but I'm a lawyer, not a physicist. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong:

Spoiler: t = S/(2*g*Mu)
vf = S/2
Ff = 0 (no opposing force being applied)
The real dilemma is who I bill for that five minutes.
AngelBee is offline


Old 05-07-2010, 03:32 AM   #33
fiettariaps

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
419
Senior Member
Default
You have the wrong coefficients on your answers.


Typed it in as I had it written down without looking to see what it actually said (that is, if what I corrected is what you're referring to).
fiettariaps is offline


Old 05-07-2010, 03:45 AM   #34
Licacivelip

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
408
Senior Member
Default
What was your original answer solomwi?
Take the parentheses out of the expression for t. As it read, but inadvertently, I had Mu*g on the other end of the fraction.
Licacivelip is offline


Old 05-07-2010, 03:51 AM   #35
MrsGoo

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
569
Senior Member
Default
Why is it (S/2)?

edit: crosspost
MrsGoo is offline


Old 05-07-2010, 03:52 AM   #36
hoarrimilsora

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
624
Senior Member
Default
Your answer would be right if the masses were the same, I believe
hoarrimilsora is offline



Reply to Thread New Thread

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 11 (0 members and 11 guests)
 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:55 PM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity