It’s probe, space observatory and space station
According to Newtons' second law of motion, acceleration of an object is Net force acting on the object divided by the mass
Mathematically, a = F/m
Hope this helps!
Answer:
Gamma rays
Explanation:
The penetrating power of gamma rays is maximum as compared to beta and alpha rays. Gamma rays are nothing but the photons i.e. the packets of energy. Their energy range lies from kilo electron volts to 8 mega electron volts. It is emitted during the decay of many radioactive isotopes, such as U-238 and I-131. A large amount of energy is produced in decay of uranium 238.
Hence, the correct option is " gamma rays ".
The total moment of inertia of the system is the sum of the moment of inertia of the disk plus the moment of the inertia of the person.
The moment of inertia of a uniform disk is Id = [1/2] Md * (R^2)
And the moment of inertia of the person standing on the rim of the disk is Ip = Mp(R^2).
So the total amounf ot inertia is: I = Id + Ip = [1/2]Md(R^2) + Mp(R^2).
There you only need to plug in the values that you are given for the problem:
If Md = 193 kg, Mp = 77 kg, and R = 2.07 m
I = [1/2]*193kg*(2.07m)^2 + 77kg * (2.07m)^2 = 743.43 kg * m^2
Answer: 743.43 kg * m^2
If a group of scientists have access to one data, from the data they can draw conclusions either through mathematics or just thought experiments.
Those thought experiments is different for any scientist, no one thinks the same especially when the topic is difficult.
For example when talking about parallel universes, scientists have come up with the weirdest examples of a multiverse. Some thinking of a brane universe, while others say that its a landscape universe, quilted universe. All of their 'evidence' seems correct but they have opposite meanings.
A weird analogy is 'religion'. All the religions seem to have 'evidences' (hardly) that attract people towards it, they all make sense but that doesn't mean that their evidence is right.
----
Now if they're trying to break down the data using maths, there could be a great uncertainty and measurement error that if done enough could change the whole idea behind the data.
Interesting question, I can babble for days for this but lets keep it as that
