Answer:
A primary source is anything that gives you direct evidence about the people, events, or phenomena that you are researching. Primary sources will usually be the main objects of your analysis. If you are researching the past, you cannot directly access it yourself, so you need primary sources that were produced at the time by participants or witnesses (e.g. letters, photographs, newspapers).
A secondary source is anything that describes, interprets, evaluates, or analyzes information from primary sources. Common examples include: 1. Books, articles and documentaries that synthesize information on a topic 2. Synopses and descriptions of artistic works 3. Encyclopedias and textbooks that summarize information and ideas 4. Reviews and essays that evaluate or interpret something When you cite a secondary source, it’s usually not to analyze it directly.
Examples of sources that can be primary or secondary:
A secondary source can become a primary source depending on your research question. If the person, context, or technique that produced the source is the main focus of your research, it becomes a primary source.
To determine if something can be used as a primary or secondary source in your research, there are some simple questions you can ask yourself: 1. Does this source come from someone directly involved in the events I’m studying (primary) or from another researcher (secondary)? 2. Am I interested in analyzing the source itself (primary) or only using it for background information (secondary)?
Most research uses both primary and secondary sources. They complement each other to help you build a convincing argument. Primary sources are more credible as evidence, but secondary sources show how your work relates to existing research.
A student buries an ice cube in a pan of dirt and observes the dirt as the ice cube melts. This activity is a model of the formation of a kettle.
It's an elastic wave in the earth produced by an earthquake or other means. hope it helps!
The lowland river system.
Answer:
The correct solution is Option d (when rocks develop joints or fractures
).
Explanation:
- Porosity is observable from descriptive samples taken. The drawbacks of receivable dams are that this is impossible to make true reflection temperature measurements, specific side-wall concrete samples while being often valuable can also result in poor coverage as well as dependence on log-derived porosity seems to have become the standard.
- As porosity rises, too much wind needs to pass further through most of the shelterbelt, which would be to say the less significant decrease in wind direction.
Some other available scenarios have no connexons with the particular circumstance. So this seems to be a reasonable option.
