Most geologists accept radiometric dating techniques as valid because radioactive elements decay at a constant and measurable rate.
Answer: Option C
<u>Explanation:</u>
Scientists prefer radioactive dating to carbon dating because it is more accurate in measuring. The analysis depends upon the radioactive decay of radioactive isotopes of any matter in a given rock or soil.
The parent atoms and daughter atoms are compared while studying, and hence age can be calculated easily. Radioactive decay depends upon the given half-life of the atom, which is a constant and is known. So, it would be very easy to calculate the number of progeny atoms and parent atoms and find out their age.
In order to calculate the angle, we can use the formula below for a constructive interference (the interference is constructive because the fringe is bright):
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/47fd5/47fd5bdea5bc91c0c9c868450984d0c88deffb57" alt="d\sin\theta=m\lambda"
Where d is the distance between the slits, m is the order of the interference and lambda is the wavelength.
So, using d = 8.25 * 10^-5, m = 2 and lambda = 4.5 * 10^-7, we have:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7d7ec/7d7ec7bfe914e0015916ae667df1084047fcec7b" alt="\begin{gathered} 8.25\cdot10^{-5}\cdot\sin\theta=2\cdot4.5\cdot10^{-7}\\ \\ \sin\theta=\frac{9\cdot10^{-7}}{8.25\cdot10^{-5}}\\ \\ \sin\theta=1.091\cdot10^{-2}\\ \\ \theta=0.625° \end{gathered}"
Therefore the correct option is the second one.
Answer:
if i do give me brainliest ok ok
Explanation: