I forgot to introduce the condition that s (braking) should satisfy that (1/2) m * v ^ 2 m * g = 0,

Studieportalen.dk recommend: Linear correlation A bicycle's braking distance Brake and braking distances Measurement of braking distance speed of string waves speed of sound transversalbølgers speed Dry Speed and acceleration
New in Physics palmetto state armory C: background that x and y are proportional to o .. (1) B: G-forces (1) A: g stimulus (0) A: Doppler effect (0) V: Rafter (droop) (2 ) 9: Neutralization experiments (1) 9: Neutralization experiments (3) C: Lattice Constant (3) 9: Risø sources (2) C: The dump or not? (3) A: Physics in 3g (4) A: The modulus of elasticity (4) B: Energy sentence (1) C: Fluorescent - explanation - URGENT (3) C: Law of Radioactive Decay (3) 7: What does the ozone layer? (1) C: Physics C - Energy and phase shift. (6) 7: Why is the mailboxes in Sweden yellow? (4) C: emission spectrum - explanation (3) C: The ecliptic palmetto state armory (IMPORTANT) (3)
I'm palmetto state armory sitting with a task in which it is stated that the braking force is given by F (braking) = μ * F (thinner), where μ = 1 This I interpret as that F (braking) = μ * m * g By this, I derive a formula for the relationship between braking distance and velocity palmetto state armory v. I assume that you have to use the formula for kinetic energy is given by E (kin) = (1/2), etc. ^ 2 I get this s (braking) = (1/2 ) m * v ^ 2 m * g, but the results are weird and I can not argue that we possibly palmetto state armory calculate a length here.
I forgot to introduce the condition that s (braking) should satisfy that (1/2) m * v ^ 2 m * g = 0, ie. E (kin)-F (braking) = 0 or E (kin) = F (braking), but it was perhaps a little too fun mix. By your comment, I understand that I should go about it this way: s (braking) = E (kin) / F (braking) ... or what?
See also: Skolediskusjon.no | Studienet.dk | Studienett.no | Studienet.se | Schulhilfe.de palmetto state armory