A theorem can be proven (from axioms or prior theorems), using logic.
A hypothesis can be supported by evidence. The more evidence in support of the hypothesis, the more likely the hypothesis is to be correct. However, you’re always at the mercy of contrary evidence appearing in the future, to reduce the likelihood or even invalidate a hypothesis.
A (mathematical) proof suffers no such vulnerability to future evidence, as long as you hold the axioms of the theory to be true, and as long as there was no flaw in the construction of the proof.
An impact which stops a moving object must do enough work to take away its kinetic energy, so extending the distance moved during the collision reduces the impact force.
A group of individuals living in a particular geographic area is termed population.
<span>B. shining a bright light on the objects
and testing for decomposition </span>
<span>
In explanation, chemical property is a
characteristic of a certain substance came from an outcome due to chemical change
or reaction. In the situation above, more specifically toxicity is involved in
the chemical property/change. Hence, when the object is tested for
decomposition. Like for an example of decomposition simply in metals, rusting. Rusting
a process of degeneration of metals. Here it works the same. Toxicity is how
much damage did a certain entity do to the object. </span>
Your answer is 8. You add 2 + 1 + 5.3 to get 8.3. You round down to 8 because of the sig fig rules.
