So um can sum one make sure i’m write?
Answer:
may be
the discovery of new evidence
Explanation:
Accepted theories may be modified or overturned as new evidence and perspective emerges. Scientists are likely to accept a new or modified theory if it explains everything the old theory did and more. The process of theory change may take time and involve controversy, but eventually the scientific explanation that is more accurate will be accepted.
B. Ice-albedo feedback
Explanation:
The ice-albedo feedback is one process that can significantly increase the rate of greenhouse emissions in response to a decreased albedo.
Albedo is the ratio of reflected light to incident light.
A decrease in albedo suggests that a surface is absorbing more light than it is reflecting. This is typical of areas with land cover and vegetation.
Areas with a high reflectivity have a high albedo. Snow, ice and polar regions are good reflectors of solar radiation. They have a very high albedo close to 100%. Much of the surface area is buried with ice.
Examples of greenhouse gases are carbon dioxide, methane, water vapor e.t.c
How does a low albedo relates to increase in greenhouse gas emission?
- The ice-albedo feedback can substantially contribute to greenhouse gas emission.
- The high reflectivity of ice causes long wave radiation to warm the air around a icy body in polar regions.
- When ice melts, they leave land bare and exposed.
- Melt water collects in pockets.
- Exposed land leads to a decrease in albedo.
- Organisms can thrive more in warm terrain.
- Also, pockets of carbon dioxide gases trapped in ice is released.
- Organisms release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere during cellular respiration.
- Soils originally permafrost will become stable and this will encourage more human occupation of the area.
- All these activities leads to an increase in the emission of greenhouse gases in an area with low albedo.
Learn more:
Greenhouse emission brainly.com/question/4580761
#learnwithBrainly
Answer:
the animal cell will burst
Explanation:
If the salt solution in the animal cell is 30%, it means the water is at a 70% concentration. Outside is 20%, so the water is 80%.
Water will enter the cell. Water is at a higher concentration outside the cell (80%) or a lower concentration inside the cell (70%) by the process of osmosis.
Eventually, the animal cell will burst, because it does not have any cell wall to control the swelling of the cell that occurs as water flows in.
If the atoms that are bonding have identical electronegativities, then it's a completely nonpolar covalent bond. This doesn't happen in the real world unless the two atoms are of the same element. In a practical sense, any two elements with an electronegativity difference less than 0.3 is considered to be nonpolar covalent.
As the difference between the atoms increases, the covalent bond becomes increasingly polar. At a polarity difference of 1.7 (this changes depending on who you ask) we consider it no longer to be a covalent bond and to be the electrostatic interactions characteristic in an ionic compound.
Just so you know, you shouldn't take these values as exact. ALL interactions between adjacent atoms involve some sharing of electrons, no matter how big the difference in electronegativity. Sure, you wouldn't expect much sharing in KF, but there's a little sharing of electrons anyway. There's certainly no big cutoff that happens at a difference of 1.7 Pauling Electronegativity units.
