1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Nonamiya [84]
3 years ago
5

A sound wave has a frequency of 615 hz in air and a wavelength of 0.54 m. what is the temperature of the air? assume the velocit

y of sound at 0◦c is 335 m/s. answer in units of ◦c.

Physics
1 answer:
Leno4ka [110]3 years ago
6 0
Answer is: T = -4.706°C

Explanation: Please see the image attached with this answer.

You might be interested in
Consider the following three statements: (i) For any electro-magnetic radiation, the product of the wavelength and the frequency
Scilla [17]

Answer:

A and B

Explanation:

The relation between frequency and wavelength is shown below as:

c=frequency\times Wavelength

c is the speed of light having value 3\times 10^8\ m/s

Thus, the product of the wavelength and the frequency is constant and equal to 3\times 10^8\ m/s

<u>Option A is correct.</u>

Given, Frequency = 1\times 10^{18}\ Hz

Thus, Wavelength is:

Wavelength=\frac{c}{Frequency}

Wavelength=\frac{3\times 10^8}{1\times 10^{18}}\ m

Wavelength=3\times 10^{-10}\ m

Also, 1 m = 3\times 10^{-10} Å

So,

<u>Wavelength = 3.0 Å</u>

<u>Option B is correct.</u>

As stated above, the speed of electromagnetic radiation is constant. Hence, each radiation of the spectrum travels with same speed.

<u>Option C is incorrect.</u>

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
How many grams of co2 are in 3 moles of the compound
Ber [7]

Answer:132.0285

Explanation: Hope this helps!

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
A ball of mass M collides with a stick with moment of inertia I = βml2 (relative to its center, which is its center of mass). Th
ZanzabumX [31]

Answer:

Part a)

v_2 = \frac{\frac{2\beta mL^2v_o}{d}}{(md + \frac{\beta mL^2}{d}(1 + \frac{m}{M})}

Part b)

v_1 = v_0 - \frac{m}{M}(\frac{\frac{2\beta mL^2v_o}{d}}{(md + \frac{\beta mL^2}{d}(1 + \frac{m}{M})})

Explanation:

Since the ball and rod is an isolated system and there is no external force on it so by momentum conservation we will have

Mv_o = M v_1 + m v_2

here we also use angular momentum conservation

so we have

M v_o d = M v_1 d + \beta mL^2 \omega

also we know that the collision is elastic collision so we have

v_o = (v_2 + d\omega) - v_1

so we have

\omega = \frac{v_o + v_1 - v_2}{d}

also we know

M v_o d - M v_1 d = \beta mL^2(\frac{v_o + v_1 - v_2}{d})

also we know

v_1 = v_o - \frac{m}{M}v_2

so we have

M v_o d - M(v_o - \frac{m}{M}v_2)d = \beta mL^2(\frac{v_o + v_o - \frac{m}{M}v_2 - v_2}{d})

mv_2 d = \beta mL^2\frac{2v_o}{d} - \beta mL^2(1 + \frac{m}{M})\frac{v_2}{d}

now we have

(md + \frac{\beta mL^2}{d}(1 + \frac{m}{M})v_2 = \frac{2\beta mL^2v_o}{d}

v_2 = \frac{\frac{2\beta mL^2v_o}{d}}{(md + \frac{\beta mL^2}{d}(1 + \frac{m}{M})}

Part b)

Now we know that speed of the ball after collision is given as

v_1 = v_o - \frac{m}{M}v_2

so it is given as

v_1 = v_0 - \frac{m}{M}(\frac{\frac{2\beta mL^2v_o}{d}}{(md + \frac{\beta mL^2}{d}(1 + \frac{m}{M})})

3 0
3 years ago
Why is pseudoscience bad?
USPshnik [31]

Answer:

It is quite difficult to picture a pseudoscientist—really picture him or her over the course of a day, a year, or a whole career. What kind or research does he or she actually do, what differentiates him or her from a carpenter, or a historian, or a working scientist? In short, what do such people think they are up to?

… it is a significant point for reflection that all individuals who have been called “pseudoscientists” have considered themselves to be “scientists”, with no prefix.

The answer might surprise you. When they find time after the obligation of supporting themselves, they read papers in specific areas, propose theories, gather data, write articles, and, maybe, publish them. What they imagine they are doing is, in a word, “science”. They might be wrong about that—many of us hold incorrect judgments about the true nature of our activities—but surely it is a significant point for reflection that all individuals who have been called “pseudoscientists” have considered themselves to be “scientists”, with no prefix.

What is pseudoscience?

“Pseudoscience” is a bad category for analysis. It exists entirely as a negative attribution that scientists and non‐scientists hurl at others but never apply to themselves. Not only do they apply the term exclusively as a discrediting slur, they do so inconsistently. Over the past two‐and‐a‐quarter centuries since the term popped into the Western European languages, a great number of disparate doctrines have been categorized as sharing a core quality—pseudoscientificity, if you will—when in fact they do not. It is based on this diversity that I refer to such beliefs and theories as “fringe” rather than as “pseudo”: Their defining characteristic is the distance from the center of the mainstream scientific consensus in whichever direction, not some essential property they share.

Scholars have by and large tended to ignore fringe science as regrettable sideshows to the main narrative of the history of science, but there is a good deal to be learned by applying the same tools of analysis that have been used to understand mainstream science. This is not, I stress, to imply that there is no difference between hollow‐Earth theories and geophysics; on the contrary, the differences are the point of the analysis. Focusing on the historical and conceptual relationship between the fringe and the core of the various sciences as that blurry border has fluctuated over the centuries provides powerful analytical leverage for understanding where contemporary anti‐science movements come from and how mainstream scientists might address them.

As soon as professionalization blossomed, tagging competing theories as pseudoscientific became an important tool for scientists to define what they understood science to be

The central claim of this essay is that the concept of “pseudoscience” was called into being as the shadow of professional science. Before science became a profession—with formalized training, credentialing, publishing venues, careers—the category of pseudoscience did not exist. As soon as professionalization blossomed, tagging competing theories as pseudoscientific became an important tool for scientists to define what they understood science to be. In fact, despite many decades of strenuous effort by philosophers and historians, a precise definition of “science” remains elusive. It should be noted however that the absence of such definitional clarity has not seriously inhibited the ability of scientists to deepen our understanding of nature tremendously.

Explanation:

8 0
2 years ago
Why metals have thermoconductivity higher than ceramic?
Pie

Answer:

Thermal Conductivity Easily Transmits Heat Among Fine Ceramics

4 0
2 years ago
Other questions:
  • calculate the electric field strength between two parallel plates separated by 0.50 cm, across which is a potential of 12 volts.
    12·1 answer
  • What conditions are necessary for an artesian well
    6·1 answer
  • Where the value of g is maximum
    12·2 answers
  • Sarah launches her purse straight up in air with a velocity of 30.2m/s<br> How high will it go?
    14·1 answer
  • Each of 100 identical blocks sitting on a frictionless surface is connected to the next block by a massless string. The first bl
    9·1 answer
  • If you throw a ball up with a velocity of 7 m/s, how long will it take for the ball to reach
    6·1 answer
  • I’m NC the wind is blowing from the north. If the wind changes direction and begins to blow from the south, what will most likel
    8·1 answer
  • Help me pls <br><br> really struggling with dat
    6·1 answer
  • BRAINLYIST!! NEED HELP QUICK! DO BOTH! THANKS! BRAINLIEST!!
    11·2 answers
  • A 35 kg object has -450 kgm/s of momentum. Calculate its velocity.
    14·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!