.
<h3>What is the Earth system?</h3>
- The interactions between Earth's five systems—the geosphere, biosphere, cryosphere, hydrosphere, and atmosphere—create the conditions we are accustomed to.
- The rock cycle, the food chain, the carbon cycle, the nitrogen cycle, the water cycle, and the energy cycle are a few examples found in the Earth system.
- The major Earth circulation processes that move water, carbon, and nutrients renew essential elements for life and contribute to climate control. The continents, atmosphere, oceans, ice, and life on Earth are dynamic elements that constantly change and interact in a wide variety of ways.
- A system is made up of four independent spheres. A change in one sphere may result in another change because the spheres interact. Fields are plowed by humans (biosphere) using farm equipment made of geosphere materials, while plants are watered by precipitation (hydrosphere) brought by the atmosphere.
How much work does Jonathan do on the bicycle pedals within the Jonathan-bicycle-Earth system during this process?
To learn more about Earth's system, refer to:
brainly.com/question/1265737
#SPJ4
Answer:
given,
mass of copper = 100 g
latent heat of liquid (He) = 2700 J/l
a) change in energy
Q = m Cp (T₂ - T₁)
Q = 0.1 × 376.812 × (300 - 4)
Q = 11153.63 J
He required
Q = m L
11153.63 = m × 2700
m = 4.13 kg
b) Q = m Cp (T₂ - T₁)
Q = 0.1 × 376.812 × (78 - 4)
Q = 2788.41 J
He required
Q = m L
2788.41 = m × 2700
m = 1.033 kg
c) Q = m Cp (T₂ - T₁)
Q = 0.1 × 376.812 × (20 - 4)
Q = 602.90 J
He required
Q = m L
602.9 = m × 2700
m =0.23 kg
Answer:
Q = 425 kJ
Explanation:
Given that,
Mass, m = 25 kg
The clown doll head that heats up from 25°C to 35°C
The specific heat is 1700 J/kg°C
We need to find the internal energy of it. The heat required to raise the temperature is given by the formula as follows :
So, 425 kJ of thermal energy is severed.
The adversarial system is rigid – the roles are proscribed – the prosecutor wants to convict, the defendant wants a decision of not guilty. They are not just allowed but expected to bias their presentation, trusting the truth to come out between the adversaries. Science certainly has its sides of partisanship and bias. But these sides are self-imposed and can be abandoned at any time. While a prosecutor should not lie or hide evidence, and should drop a case if they become convinced the defendant is innocent, they wake up in the morning with no choice about which side of the argument they will come down on. In the criminal justice system the advocates are rigidly fixed in their roles and the jurors are rigidly neutral (the process to find a random neutral jury took as long as the trial itself). In science, the advocates are the same people as the jurors. And as a result they have to be willing to be flexible and change their minds. A good scientist shouldn’t have a pre-determined rigid answer to a question.
Lack of investigation – we jurors were told over and over not to investigate the situation ourselves. We were to make our decision only on the basis of the evidence presented to us. I can tell you in the case I was on there were at least two whopping big questions hanging over the case that nearly every juror in the room identified as very important but not addressed by either lawyer. Either one of them (whether the defendant’s schedule allowed time to drink before being stopped in the car, whether a particular medical condition could affect breathalyzer tests) could have changed the outcome. We could have answered one of these with 10 minutes on google and the other with some very simple subpoena of records. But we couldn’t use any of this. Scientists obviously are the opposite – if they need more information, they are expected to go get it before making an opinion.
Reliance on personal testimony – although science and trials share a focus on evidence, trials recognize testimony of individual people under oath as a major form of evidence. They certainly acknowledge the possibility of lying and explicitly instruct jurors to decide what testimony they believe. My case was unusual in that there was so much video footage, but still a majority of the case came down to testimony by the police officers, and most cases even a few years ago would have had only testimony. Science on the other hand, doesn’t accept testimony. Or does it? What else is the methods and results section of a paper? I’m on the fence whether science is so different on this one.
Answer:
W = 529.2 N
Explanation:
We can solve this problem using the translational equilibrium equation, where the forces are the weight of the sergeant and the thrust of the water given by Archimedes' principle
B - W = 0
where the thrust is
B = ρ g V_liquid
The volume of the displaced liquid is
V = A h
we substitute
ρ g A h = W
We reduce the magnitudes to the SI system
h = 2.7 cm = 0.027 m
ρ = 1 g / cm3 = 1000 kg / m³
let's calculate
W = 1000 9.8 2 0.027
W = 529.2 N
