<span>Much of our understanding of the basic structure and composition of Earth and the other planets in our solar system is not strenuously debated. We can infer a surprising amount of information from the size, mass and moment of inertia of the planets, all of which can be determined from routine astronomical observations. Measurements of surface chemical composition, either by direct sampling (as has been done on Earth, the moon, and Mars) or through spectroscopic observations, can be used to estimate elemental abundances and the degree of chemical differentiation that occurred as the planets condensed from the solar nebula. Remote observations of the gravitational field can be used to understand how a planet's mass is distributed, whereas the strength and shape of the magnetic field provides some constraint on the structure of a metallic core. The specifics of structure and composition, however, are much more debatable. And it is these details that tell us a much more extensive and ultimately more interesting story about the internal dynamics of the planets and their evolution. As a result, trying to determine them is frontier research in almost all fields of earth and planetary science.
</span>
hope that helped *smiles*
Answer:
The breathing rate increases.
Answer:
There was no sulfur compound added to the medium, that could be used as an electron donor.
Explanation:
Bacteria that use light for energy requirements mean that they get their energy from photosynthesis and transferring energy through the molecules.
Bacteria play a major part in the reductive and oxidative cycle of the sulfur which is mediated by the help of photosynthetic bacteria, so the sulfur or sulfur compounds are major requirements for their growth in the habitat or the medium.
Thus, the correct answer would be- There was no sulfur compound added to the medium, that could be used as an electron donor.
