Ask question

Ask question

All categories

3 years ago

8

Which of the following best explains why we can rule out the idea that planets are usually formed by near collisions between sta

rs?
(a)- Studies of the trajectories of nearby stars relative to the Sun show that the Sun is not in danger of a near collision with any of them.
(b)-Stellar near collisions are far too rare to explain all the planets now known to orbit nearby stars.
(c)-A near collision might have created planets, but it could not have created moons, asteroids, or comets.
(d)-A near collision should have left a trail of gas extending out behind the Sun, and we see no evidence of such a trail.

1 answer:

Dafna11 [192]3 years ago

4 0

Answer:

<u>(c)-A near collision might have created planets, but it could not have created moons, asteroids, or comets.</u>

Explanation:

The planets are formed by the solar nebula, the disc type cloud of gas and dust which was leftover from the sun's formation due to the collision with larger bodies and the inner solar system was formed and the formation of planetesimals earlier were warm and gradually cooled.

As a result, some of them formed terrestrial and other gases planets. It is believed that the Tauri stars which were younger like the sun had far stronger stellar winds and drove the gas giants.

The young solar wind has cleared away all the gas and dust in the protoplanetary ring and blew it into interstellar space, ending the growth of the planets. Moon was formed by impact debris from the other planets.

You might be interested in

An object that’s

KonstantinChe [14]

An object thats NEGATIVELY charged has more electrons than protons, An object thats POSITIVELY charged has less electrons than protons, An object that NOT charged has the same number of electrons and protons.

5 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

100 g of Ice at -10°C is added into a

Andrei [34K]

Answer:

The mass of the juice responsible for melting the ice is 949.043 grams.

Explanation:

By the First Law of Thermodynamics, we understand that juice releases heat to the ice, which turns into water under the assumption that interactions between the ice-juice system and surroundings are negligible and energy processes are done in steady-state. Since juice is done with water, its specific heat will be taken as of the water. The process is described by the following formula:

$m_{i} \cdot [c_{i}\cdot (T_{1}-T_{2}) - L_{f} + c_{w}\cdot (T_{2}-T_{3})] + m_{w} \cdot c_{w}\cdot (T_{4}-T_{3}) = 0$ (1)

Where:

$m_{i}$ - Mass of ice, in grams.

$m_{w}$ - Mass of the juice, in grams.

$c_{i}$ - Specific heat of ice, in joules per gram-degree Celsius.

$c_{w}$ - Specific heat of water, in joules per gram-degree Celsius.

$L_{f}$ - Latent heat of fusion, in joules per gram.

$T_{1}$ - Initial temperature of ice, in degrees Celsius.

$T_{2}$ - Melting point of water, in degrees Celsius.

$T_{3}$ - Final temperature of the ice-juice system, in degrees Celsius.

$T_{4}$ - Initial temperature of the juice, in degrees Celsius.

If we know that $m_{i} = 100\,g$ , $c_{i} = 2.090\,\frac{J}{g\cdot ^{\circ}C}$ , $c_{w} = 4.18\,\frac{J}{g\cdot ^{\circ}C}$ , $L_{f} = 334\,\frac{J}{g}$ , $T_{1} = -10\,^{\circ}C$ , $T_{2} = 0\,^{\circ}C$ , $T_{3} = 10\,^{\circ}C$ and $T_{4} = 20\,^{\circ}C$ , then the mass of the juice is:

$m_{w} = \frac{m_{i}\cdot [c_{i}\cdot (T_{1}-T_{2}) - L_{f} + c_{w}\cdot (T_{2}-T_{3})]}{c_{w} \cdot (T_{3}-T_{4})}$

$m_{w} = \frac{(100\,g)\cdot \left[\left(2.090\,\frac{J}{g\cdot ^{\circ}C} \right)\cdot (-10\,^{\circ}C) - 334\,\frac{J}{g} +\left(4.18\,\frac{J}{g\cdot ^{\circ}C} \right)\cdot (-10\,^{\circ}C) \right]}{\left(4.180\,\frac{J}{g\cdot ^{\circ}C} \right)\cdot (-10\,^{\circ}C)}$

$m_{w} = 949.043\,g$

The mass of the juice responsible for melting the ice is 949.043 grams.

5 0

3 years ago

A Ferris wheel with a diameter of 35 m starts from rest and achieves its maximum operational tangential speed of 2.3 m/s in a ti

sveticcg [70]

First calculate the radius 35/2=17.5m

5 0

3 years ago

What visible wavelengths of light are strongly reflected from a 390-nm-thick soap bubble?

DiKsa [7]

Answer:

So visible wavelength which is possible here is

416 nm and 693.3 nm

Explanation:

As we know that for normal incidence of light the path difference of the reflected ray is given as

$2\mu t + \frac{\lambda}{2} = \Delta x$

so here we can say that for maximum intensity condition we will have

$\Delta x = N\lambda$

so we have

$2\mu t + \frac{\lambda}{2} = N\lambda$

now for visible wavelength we have

for N = 1

$2\mu t = \frac{\lambda}{2}$

$\lambda = 4\mu t$

$\lambda = 4(\frac{4}{3})(390 nm)$

$\lambda = 2080 nm$

for N = 2

$\lambda = \frac{4\mu t}{3}$

$\lambda = \frac{4(\frac{4}{3})(390 nm)}{3}$

$\lambda = 693.3 nm$

for N = 3

$\lambda = \frac{4\mu t}{5}$

$\lambda = \frac{4(\frac{4}{3})(390 nm)}{5}$

$\lambda = 416 nm$

6 0

4 years ago

The speed of a car is 40m/s after 10 sec suddenly there was a crowd and the driver reduces its speed to 20m/s. What is the decel

aliya0001 [1]

Explanation:

the number 0.4 in P4 from east

4 0

3 years ago