Answer:
This is really a personal opinion, since whether it is correct to send people to mars or not depends largely on your point of view and personal beliefs. Clearly, humans are far more capable than robots, and they can explore space and eventually other planets much better than a rover. On the other hand, sending people to Mars is not only extremely expensive, but it is also extremely dangerous for the astronauts themselves.
Imagine so many people died trying to get to space and then to the moon, and that was very easy compared to getting to Mars and back.
We can find millions of better ways to use the money than sending people to space, and that is really hard to argue against. Our planet, our country, state or even city could all benefit and use the money more productively.
But lets say that we do not care about the money because Mr. Bezos or some other billionaire decided to donate it. Now we would face the technical issues of going to Mars and actually staying there for a long time. A trip to mars is not something that would be carried out for just a couple of hours (like moon walking). Astronauts will have to stay in Mars for weeks, months or even years before they can return. This results in an extreme danger to their health due to cosmic rays. Can humans survive long term exposure to cosmic rays? The answer is NO and Mars's atmosphere doesn't help.
If we analyze this situation from a technical point of view, it would be better and safer to send astronauts to Titan (Saturn's moon), and would probably be also more useful. Titan's environment is similar to Earth's in many ways, and if we are actually doing it for a scientific purpose besides simply being curious, then it is much more useful to go to Titan. The scientific purpose of going to mars instead of other possible destinations is not very solid. Mars is really different to Earth and unless someone finds Martians living there, there is not much you can do.
Answer:
- <u>an airline targeting customers with over 500k miles of travel on its airline</u>
Explanation:
Note, the focus of behavioral segmentation is to identify and separate the marketing strategy used on clients/customers based on mainly their behavior, and not on demography (age, gender, etc) or geography.
Hence, the best scenario from the above options is that of an airline that targets customers with over 500k miles of travel on its airline. In other words, their traveling behavior (distances covered) is the basis why they are targeted, without consideration of demography or their geography.
previously answered this question
Answer:
The correct answer would be option A, The lump sum is always better.
Explanation:
If I would have to give advice to my friend who is in the same situation as i was in some time back, I would recommend him to go for the Lump sum choice. This is because of the fact that the interest rate compounded in three years payment schedule will result in the less value of what I am getting today. Accepting the lump sum value in contrast with accepting the yearly payments on 9% interest rate would be better off because it has more value at present.
Answer:
d. The maintenance costs associated with the napkin folding machine.
Explanation:
The cost that required one or more processors to produced a final product is known as joint cost
Here in the given question, the maintenance cost is not considered to be a joint cost as this cost are associated with the paper napkins
Also, the pulping, screening, rolling, etc are considered to be joint cost
Hence, the correct option is d.
