<u>Answer:</u>
<em>Science fair always has experiments which prove science concepts.</em> Students will bring apparatus or an lab items and show experiments as a magic. There are only certain things which a Science can prove and show to other.
<em>From the given question, the following can be proved:
</em>
- <em>Does pressure have an effect on the volume of a gas?
</em>
- <em>Which brand of soap is the best for cleaning grease off dishes?
</em>
- <em>Which laboratory experiment is the most fun to perform?</em>
<em>
The below cannot be proved but can be explained
</em>
- <em>Is the information on the periodic table difficult to understand?
</em>
- <em>Which physicist was the smartest?</em>
Answer: True
Explanation:
Yes, the given statement is true that a DFA is equivalent to NFA in terms of power. For any type of NFA we can easily build an equal DFA so, the NFA are not much powerful as compared to DFA. Both NFA and DFA are characterized by a similar type of class.
DFA is a special case of NFA and They both defined in the same class of language. Each condition in the DFA get summarized by all the condition that the NFA has itself.
"force per unit area" because pressure is force per unit area.
hope this helped
Answer:
The fundamental limitation of symmetric (secret key) encryption is ... how do two parties (we may as well assume they are Alice and Bob) agree on a key? In order for Alice and Bob to communicate securely they need to agree on a secret key. In order to agree on a secret key, they need to be able to communicate securely. In terms of the pillars of IA, To provide CONFIDENTIALITY, a secret key must first be shared. But to initially share the key, you must already have CONFIDENTIALITY. It's a whole chicken-and-egg problem.
This problem is especially common in the digital age. We constantly end up at websites with whom we decide we want to communicate securely (like online stores) but with whom we there is not really an option to communicate "offline" to agree on some kind of secret key. In fact, it's usually all done automatically browser-to-server, and for the browser and server there's not even a concept of "offline" — they only exist online. We need to be able to establish secure communications over an insecure channel. Symmetric (secret key) encryption can't do this for us.
Asymmetric (Public-key) Encryption
Yet one more reason I'm barred from speaking at crypto conferences.
xkcd.com/177/In asymmetric (public key) cryptography, both communicating parties (i.e. both Alice and Bob) have two keys of their own — just to be clear, that's four keys total. Each party has their own public key, which they share with the world, and their own private key which they ... well, which they keep private, of course but, more than that, which they keep as a closely guarded secret. The magic of public key cryptography is that a message encrypted with the public key can only be decrypted with the private key. Alice will encrypt her message with Bob's public key, and even though Eve knows she used Bob's public key, and even though Eve knows Bob's public key herself, she is unable to decrypt the message. Only Bob, using his secret key, can decrypt the message ... assuming he's kept it secret, of course.
Explanation:
