1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
LenaWriter [7]
2 years ago
14

Watch the video of the 1969 moon landing from the Apollo mission. In the video, notice how Neil Armstrong is almost bouncing whe

n he walks on the moon. How is walking on the surface of the moon different from walking on the surface of Earth? What do you think causes this to happen? *

History
2 answers:
SIZIF [17.4K]2 years ago
5 0

The correct answer to this open question is the following.

How is walking on the surface of the moon different from walking on the surface of Earth?

Answer: the lack of gravity is the answer. On planet earth, we have the gravity force. This allows all people and things to stay on the planet. No gravity on earth would mean no life on planet earth.

On the moon is different. The pull is greater on planet Earth than it is on the moon. The gravitational force limits astronauts to walk easily on the moon's surface. That is why we watch how funny Neil Amstrong walk-jumps on the surface of the moon.

On July 20, 1969, Neil Armstrong was the first man to walk on the moon. That is when he said his famous words: "That's a small step for man, one giant step for humanity," while millions of people were watching the historic event.

LiRa [457]2 years ago
3 0

Answer:

<em> I hope this helps</em>

Explanation:

You might be interested in
. In a famous speech, William Jennings Bryan A. refused to be allied with the so-called "silverists." B. declared his staunch su
hjlf
In a famous speech at the 1896 Democratic National Convention in Chicago,  William Jennings Bryan declared that mankind should not be "crucified on a cross of gold."
6 0
3 years ago
What were the international implications of southern nationalism?
Zepler [3.9K]
This debate isn't merely historical. As could be gleaned from the flaps surrounding statements by Attorney General John Ashcroft and Interior Secretary Gale Norton during their confirmation periods, issues stemming from the Civil War go to the heart of many current political debates: What is the proper role of the federal government? Is a strong national government the best guarantor of rights against local despots? Or do state governments stand as a bulwark against federal tyranny? And just what rights are these governments to protect? Those of the individual or those of society? Such matters are far from settled.

So why was the Civil War fought? That seems a simple enough question to answer: Just look at what those fighting the war had to say. If we do that, the lines are clear. Southern leaders said they were fighting to preserve slavery. Abraham Lincoln said the North fought to preserve the Union, and later, to end slavery.

Some can't accept such simple answers. Among them is Charles Adams. Given Adams' other books, which include For Good and Evil: The Impact of Taxes on the Course of Civilization and Those Dirty Rotten Taxes: The Tax Revolts that Built America, it isn't surprising that he sees the Civil War as a fight about taxes, specifically tariffs.

In When in the Course of Human Events, he argues that the war had nothing to do with slavery or union. Rather, it was entirely about tariffs, which the South hated. The tariff not only drove up the price of the manufactured goods that agrarian Southerners bought, it invited other countries to enact their own levies on Southern cotton. In this telling, Lincoln, and the North, wanted more than anything to raise tariffs, both to support a public works agenda and to protect Northern goods from competition with imports.

Openly partisan to the South, Adams believes that the Civil War truly was one of Northern aggression. He believes that the Southern states had the right to secede and he believes that the war's true legacy is the centralization of power in Washington and the deification of the "tyrant" Abraham Lincoln. To this end, he collects all the damaging evidence he can find against Lincoln and the North. And he omits things that might tarnish his image of the South as a small-government wonderland.

Thus, we hear of Lincoln's use of federal troops to make sure that Maryland didn't secede. We don't learn that Confederate troops occupied eastern Tennessee to keep it from splitting from the rest of the state. Adams tells us of Union Gen. William Sherman's actions against civilians, which he persuasively argues were war crimes. But he doesn't tell us of Confederate troops capturing free blacks in Pennsylvania and sending them south to slavery. Nor does he mention the Confederate policy of killing captured black Union soldiers. He tells us that Lincoln suspended habeas corpus; he doesn't mention that the Confederacy did also.

Adams argues that Lincoln's call to maintain the Union was at root a call to keep tariff revenues coming in from Southern ports. Lincoln, he notes, had vowed repeatedly during the 1860 presidential campaign that he would act to limit the spread of slavery to the West, but he would not move to end it in the South. Lincoln was firmly committed to an economic program of internal improvements -- building infrastructure, in modern terms -- that would be paid for through higher tariffs. When the first Southern states seceded just after Lincoln's election, Adams argues, it was to escape these higher taxes. Indeed, even before Lincoln took office, Congress -- minus representatives from rebel Southern states -- raised tariffs to an average of almost 47 percent, more than doubling the levy on most goods.

7 0
3 years ago
What was the point of the French Constitution of 1791
svet-max [94.6K]
It created the Legislative Assembly and made political matters voted through secret ballot :)
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What information does Abhidhamma Pitaka provide?​
Lana71 [14]

Answer:

He gave the Dharma on the importance of life and the value of the present moment in his own words.

4 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
When light strikes an object it can pass the room be reflected or be
kati45 [8]
The answer would be that light can be reflected or refracted
6 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • The system of making the loser of the presidential election vice president was ended because:
    8·2 answers
  • In at least three sentences, compare the role of the federal government to the role of the state and local governments in regula
    8·2 answers
  • Which was not a member of the early Chinese social classes?
    8·1 answer
  • The term ________________ refers to “identification as someone who is challenging, questioning, or changing gender from that ass
    6·1 answer
  • 1
    7·1 answer
  • Which statements are true of the silk road
    9·1 answer
  • Who were the people who helped Sarah, Anne, their families, or other Jews?
    14·2 answers
  • Should we replace the Electoral College?
    13·1 answer
  • Which of the following best describes the beliefs of those who founded the empire of Ghana?
    8·2 answers
  • When a leader is competent what is he?
    6·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!