HCl is a strong electrolyte and when it dissolves in water it separates almost completely into positively - charged hydrogen ions and negatively - charged chloride ions. This aqueous solution is usually called hydrochloric acid.
Answer:
308,000 or 30.8×10^3
Explanation:
v=f×lamda
v is ?, f is 875Hz, lamda is 352m
v=875×352
v=308,000
v=30.8×10^3 m/s
Answer:

Generally given that the electric field is negative it mean that its direction is opposite to that of the force
Explanation:
From the question we are told that
The charge on the small object is 
The force is 
Generally the magnitude of the electric field is mathematically represented as

=> 
=> 
Generally given that the electric field is negative it mean that its direction is opposite to that of the force
Answer:
The pilot is 2214.22 miles from her starting position
Explanation:
Since the pilot is traveling at a constant speed of 635 mph, the total distance traveled can be easily found as follows:

There was a 10 degrees deviation, so the angle between the trajectory of both legs is 170 degrees.
The distance we need to find is that from the start of the first leg to the end of the second leg, those three distances form a triangle and since the side we're interested in is opposite to the 170 degrees angle, we can determine its length by the law of cosines:

The pilot is 2214.22 miles from her starting position
Answer: hope it helps you...❤❤❤❤
Explanation: If your values have dimensions like time, length, temperature, etc, then if the dimensions are not the same then the values are not the same. So a “dimensionally wrong equation” is always false and cannot represent a correct physical relation.
No, not necessarily.
For instance, Newton’s 2nd law is F=p˙ , or the sum of the applied forces on a body is equal to its time rate of change of its momentum. This is dimensionally correct, and a correct physical relation. It’s fine.
But take a look at this (incorrect) equation for the force of gravity:
F=−G(m+M)Mm√|r|3r
It has all the nice properties you’d expect: It’s dimensionally correct (assuming the standard traditional value for G ), it’s attractive, it’s symmetric in the masses, it’s inverse-square, etc. But it doesn’t correspond to a real, physical force.
It’s a counter-example to the claim that a dimensionally correct equation is necessarily a correct physical relation.
A simpler counter example is 1=2 . It is stating the equality of two dimensionless numbers. It is trivially dimensionally correct. But it is false.