Answer:The process of science is iterative.
Science circles back on itself so that useful ideas are built upon and used to learn even more about the natural world. This often means that successive investigations of a topic lead back to the same question, but at deeper and deeper levels. Let's begin with the basic question of how biological inheritance works. In the mid-1800s, Gregor Mendel showed that inheritance is particulate — that information is passed along in discrete packets that cannot be diluted. In the early 1900s, Walter Sutton and Theodor Boveri (among others) helped show that those particles of inheritance, today known as genes, were located on chromosomes. Experiments by Frederick Griffith, Oswald Avery, and many others soon elaborated on this understanding by showing that it was the DNA in chromosomes which carries genetic information. And then in 1953, James Watson and Francis Crick, again aided by the work of many others, provided an even more detailed understanding of inheritance by outlining the molecular structure of DNA. Still later in the 1960s, Marshall Nirenberg, Heinrich Matthaei, and others built upon this work to unravel the molecular code that allows DNA to encode proteins. And it doesn't stop there. Biologists have continued to deepen and extend our understanding of genes, how they are controlled, how patterns of control themselves are inherited, and how they produce the physical traits that pass from generation to generation. The process of science is not predetermined.
Any point in the process leads to many possible next steps, and where that next step leads could be a surprise. For example, instead of leading to a conclusion about tectonic movement, testing an idea about plate tectonics could lead to an observation of an unexpected rock layer. And that rock layer could trigger an interest in marine extinctions, which could spark a question about the dinosaur extinction — which might take the investigator off in an entirely new direction. At first this process might seem overwhelming. Even within the scope of a single investigation, science may involve many different people engaged in all sorts of different activities in different orders and at different points in time — it is simply much more dynamic, flexible, unpredictable, and rich than many textbooks represent it as. But don't panic! The scientific process may be complex, but the details are less important than the big picture …
Answer:
See explanation
Explanation:
A. Constitutional or structural isomers have the same molecular formula but different structural formulas.
B. Conformational isomers are compounds having the same atom to atom connectivity but differ by rotation about one or more single bonds.
C. Stereo isomers are compounds having the same molecular mass and atom to atom connectivity but different arrangement of atoms and groups in space.
I. Enantiomers are stereo isomers (optical isomers particularly) that are non-superimposable mirror images of each other.
II. Diasteromers are optical isomers that are not mirror images of each other.
Both diasteromers and enantiomers are types of optical isomers which in turn is one of the types of stereo isomers.
Stereo isomers differ from conformational isomers in that the arrangement of atoms in stereo isomers is permanent while conformational isomers results from free rotations in molecules about single bonds.
Answer:
By walking and stuff, duh.
Explanation:
We walk, motion.
We drive, motion.
We eat, motion.
We talk, motion.
Answer:
a single compound
Explanation:
which is produced in a synthesis reaction
