If a group of scientists have access to one data, from the data they can draw conclusions either through mathematics or just thought experiments.
Those thought experiments is different for any scientist, no one thinks the same especially when the topic is difficult.
For example when talking about parallel universes, scientists have come up with the weirdest examples of a multiverse. Some thinking of a brane universe, while others say that its a landscape universe, quilted universe. All of their 'evidence' seems correct but they have opposite meanings.
A weird analogy is 'religion'. All the religions seem to have 'evidences' (hardly) that attract people towards it, they all make sense but that doesn't mean that their evidence is right.
----
Now if they're trying to break down the data using maths, there could be a great uncertainty and measurement error that if done enough could change the whole idea behind the data.
Interesting question, I can babble for days for this but lets keep it as that
Yes u can help I need to see th worksheet to help tho
Answer:
1.56 J
Explanation:
The potential energy only depends on the vertical height from the ground level.
We consider the ground level to have zero P.E.
So when it is 2 m above the ground level,
P.E. = mgh
= 0.078×10×2
= 1.56 J
Answer:
A radio telescope helped the astronomers discover the CMB.
Explanation:
- Penzias and Wilson while experimenting with a radio telescope in 1964, accidentally discovered the radiation that exists universally also known as the CMB.
- This was used to support the "Big Bang Theory" and not the "Steady State Theory"
- CMB is the faint cosmic radiation that fills up the universe. It provides important data for understanding early universe.
- This data tells us about the composition of the universe and its age which raises new questions about the universe.
