All categories

3 years ago

WILL GIVE BRAINLIEST!!!!!!

Physics

1 answer:

DENIUS [597]3 years ago

8 0

Answer: option d: The nucleus of Atom Q is more stable than the nucleus of Atom P.

Explanation:

Atom P is radioactive and disintegrates, it emits beta particles (high speed electrons or positrons) because it is not stable. On disintegration, it forms a stable Atom Q which is non-radioactive and thus it does not disintegrates further.

Thus, the correct option is only d. The nucleus of Atom Q is more stable than the nucleus of Atom P.

You might be interested in

Explain the meaning and use of the following acronyms: HELIOS, Exo-FMS, HAZMAT, NIRSpec.

adelina 88 [10]

Answer:

HELIOS- The god of the sun in

HAZMAT-Hazardous materials

NIRSpec- Near Infrared Spectrograph

Explanation:

4 0

1 year ago

If 1.8 amp flows through a 40 ohm resistor, the voltage across the resistor is :

GenaCL600 [577]

Answer:

72 volts.

Explanation:

To solve this, we have to use the Ohm's law.

The ohm's law tells us that the voltage drop of a resistor is directly proportional to the current applied to the conductor.

$V=I*R$

in this case the current is 1.8 amps and the resistor is 40 ohm

$V=1.8*40$

$V=72 volts$ .

5 0

3 years ago

How do you do this problem?

mojhsa [17]

Answer:

Explanation:

When A and B come in contact with each other, +12 - 12 = 0 so their changes cancel.

Now C has a charge of +12

When A and C come together they each have an equal share of that 12, so each of them has 6

So the answer is

A B C

6 0 6

which is C

4 0

2 years ago

In reaching her destination, a backpacker walks with an average velocity of 1.41 m/s, due west. This average velocity results, b

V125BC [204]

The total average velocity $v=+1.41 m/s$ (I assume west as positive direction) is given by the total displacement, S, divided by the total time taken, t:
$v= \frac{S}{t}= \frac{S_1+S_2}{t_1+t_2}$
where:
-The total displacement S is the algebraic sum of the displacement in the first part of the motion ( $S_1=6.30 km=6300 m$ , due west) and of the displacement in the second part of the motion ( $S_2$ , due east).
-The total time taken t is the time taken for the first part of the motion, $t_1$ , and the time taken for the second part of the motion, $t_2$ . $t_1$ can be found by using the average velocity and the displacement of the first part:
$t_1= \frac{S_1}{v_1}= \frac{6300 m}{2.49 m/s}=2530 s$

$t_2$ , instead, can be written as $\frac{S_2}{v_2}$ , where $v_2=-0.630 m/s$ is the average velocity of the second part of the motion (with a negative sign, since it is due east).

Therefore, we can rewrite the initial equation as:
$v=1.41 = \frac{6300+S_2}{2530- \frac{S_2}{0.630} }$
And by solving it, we find the displacement in the second part of the motion (i.e. how far did the backpacker move east):
$S_2=-844 m=-0.844 km$

4 0

3 years ago

A centrifugal pump is operating at a flow rate of 1 m3/s and a head of 20 m. If the specific weight of water is 9800 N/m3 and th

tamaranim1 [39]

Answer:

<em>The power required by the pump is nearly 230.588 kW</em>

Explanation:

Flow rate of the pump Q = 1 m^3/s

the head flow H = 20 m

specific weight of water γ = 9800 N/m^3

efficiency of the pump η = 85%

First note that specific gravity of water is the product of the density of water and acceleration due to gravity.

γ = ρg

where ρ is density. For water its value is 1000 kg/m^3

g is the acceleration due to gravity = 9.81 m/s^2

The power to lift this water at this rate will be gotten from the equation

P = ρgQH

but ρg = γ

therefore,

P = γQH

imputing values, we'll have

P = 9800 x 1 x 20 = 196000 W

But the centrifugal pump that will be used will only be able to lift this amount of water after the efficiency factor has been considered. The power of pump needed must be greater than this power.

we can say that

196000 W is 85% of the power of the pump power needed, therefore

196000 = 85% of $P_{p}$

where $P_{p}$ is the power of the pump needed

85% = 0.85

196000 = 0.85 $P_{p}$

$P_{p}$ = 196000/0.85 = 230588.24 W

<em>Pump power = 230.588 kW</em>

3 0

3 years ago