Answer:
<em> -4.7 x 10^-3 J/K-s</em>
Explanation:
The Power generated by metabolizing food = 80 W
The watt W is equivalent to the Joules per sec J/s
therefor power = 80 J/s
20% of this energy is not used for heating, amount available for heating is
==> H = 80% of 80 = 0.8 x 80 = 64 J/s
The inner body temperature = 37 °C = 273 + 37 = 310 K
The entropy of this inner body ΔS = ΔH/T
ΔS = 64/310 = 0.2065 J/K-s
The skin temperature is cooler than the inner body by 7 °C
Temperature of the skin = 37 - 7 = 30 °C = 273 + 30 = 303 K
The entropy of the skin = ΔS = ΔH/T
ΔS = 64/303 = 0.2112 J/K-s
change in entropy of the person's body = (entropy of hot region: inner body) - (entropy of cooler region: skin)
==> 0.2065 - 0.2112 =<em> -4.7 x 10^-3 J/K-s</em>
When a star is moving away from earth it appears blue
Answer:
B. normal force
Explanation:
Because there is no frictional or resistance force. However gravitational force is applied downroad from the center of the cup thus the contact force that is perpendicular to the surface that an object contacts which is the normal force exerted upward from the table that prevents an object from falling.
The density increases.
When gases are compressed, their volume decreases, and the resulting pressure increases. The temperature will change if either P or V are held constant. Since the volume decreases, then density, or m/V, increases.
P×V ~ T
I was about to say: because people generally get comfortable with
what they think they know, and don't like the discomfort of being told
that they have to change something they're comfortable with.
But then I thought about it a little bit more, and I have a different answer.
"Society" might initially reject a new scientific theory, because 'society'
is totally unequipped to render judgement of any kind regarding any
development in Science.
First of all, 'Society' is a thing that's made of a bunch of people, so it's
inherently unequipped to deal with scientific news. Anything that 'Society'
decides has a lot of the mob psychology in it, and a public opinion poll or
a popularity contest are terrible ways to evaluate a scientific discovery.
Second, let's face it. The main ingredient that comprises 'Society' ... people ...
are generally uneducated, unknowledgeable, unqualified, and clueless in the
substance, the history, and the methods of scientific inquiry and reporting.
There may be very good reasons that some particular a new scientific theory
should be rejected, or at least seriously questioned. But believe me, 'Society'
doesn't have them.
That's pretty much why.
