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
kap26 [50]
3 years ago
11

What lasts longer and why?: A solar eclipse or a lunar eclipse?

Physics
1 answer:
Liono4ka [1.6K]3 years ago
5 0
Lunar eclipse can lasts longer because it lasts around 3 hours but can last as long as four hours. Solar eclipse last shorter than lunar eclipse because the moon only creates a small shadow on the earth and the moon travels through the suns vision (as seen on earth) in a short amount of time.
You might be interested in
Which of the following would have the smallest gravitational attraction between the two masses?
expeople1 [14]

Answer: Distance= 100,000 km

   Mass= 15 million kg        Mass= 5 million kg

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What are 3 artificial and 2 natural sources of electromagnetic radiation?
KatRina [158]

Answer: its b bro

Explanation:

ajafa'jfbA'FJ

8 0
2 years ago
According to Wien's Law, how many times hotter is an object whose blackbody emission spectrum peaks in the blue, at a wave lengt
scZoUnD [109]

Answer:1.55 times

Explanation:

Given

First wavelength(\lambda _1)=450 nm

Second wavelength(\lambda _2)=700 nm

According wien's diplacement law

\lambda T=constant

where \lambda =wavelength

T=Temperature

Let T_1 and T_2 be the temperatures corresponding to \lambda _1 & \lambda _2 respectively.

\lambda _1\times T_1=\lambda _2\times T_2

\frac{T_1}{T_2}=\frac{\lambda _2}{\lambda _1}

\frac{T_1}{T_2}=\frac{700}{450}=1.55

Thus object with \lambda 450 nm is 1.55 times hotter than object with wavelength \lambda =700 nm

8 0
3 years ago
A very strong, but inept, shot putter puts the shot straight up vertically with an initial velocity of 11.1 m/s. How long does h
balandron [24]
We need to use the kinematic equation
S=ut+(1/2)at^2
where
S=displacement (+=up, in metres)
u=initial velocity (m/s)
t=time (seconds)
a=acceleration (+=up, in m/s^2)

Substitute values
S=displacement = 1.96-2.27 = -0.31 m (so that shot does not hit his head)
u=11.1
a=-9.81 (acceleration due to gravity)

-0.31=11.1t+(1/2)(-9.81)t^2
Rearrange and solve for t
-4.905t^2+11.1t-0.31=0
t=-0.02756 or t=2.291 seconds 
Reject the negative root to give
t=2.29 seconds (to 3 significant figures)

3 0
3 years ago
How would improvement in use of renewable energy sources impact climate change sea-level rise?
bonufazy [111]

Answer:

Almost immeasurably small.

Explanation:

The STORY is that humans are BAD for the environment and have caused a HUGE change in the amount of CO₂ in the atmosphere.

Let's look at the reports and draw our own conclusions.

Current CO₂ levels are 409.8 parts per million (PPM)

at the beginning of the Industrial revolution in the 1700's, the presumed beginning of the huge increase in CO₂ the level was about 280 PPM

For perspective lets assume we capture the whole atmosphere and squish it down to 2400 one liter bottles of air

That's 100 cases of 24 bottles per case.

We now separate all the air components into their own bottles

Nitrogen is 78% of our air, so we subtract 78 cases from our 100 leaving 22

Subtracting Oxygen at 21% of air leaves 1 case of liter bottles left

Of those 24 bottles, Argon makes up 0.93% of air so we subtract 22 bottles

The remaining two bottles contain all of the other gasses in our air, One of those bottles contains CO₂.

If we take the CO₂ levels from the 1700's at about 280 PPM as a baseline and assume ALL of the increase is human caused, that is (410 -280) / 280 = 46 % of the total.

The human caused addition of CO₂ would be 460 mililiters out of 2400 liters over the course of 250 years 

The claim is, that less than half of a liter of CO₂ out of 2400 liters of air is responsible for heating not only the gas in all the other bottles but also the surface of the earth itself.

Personally, it boggles my mind.

And it says NOTHING of a far more powerful greenhouse gas that is far more prevalent in the atmosphere...water vapor.

Water vapor is about 1% of air at sea level and about 0.4% overall. It was not considered in the above analysis because water vapor can condense out and is not a constant in the air.

Notice that there is about 100 times the amount of water vapor in the air as compared to CO₂. Water vapor also has between 4 and 8 times the greenhouse effect that CO₂ does.

Makes one wonder why we choose to pick on CO₂.

7 0
2 years ago
Other questions:
  • A teacher performing demonstration finds that a piece of cork displaces 23.5 ml of water. The piece of cork has a mass 5.7 g. Wh
    10·1 answer
  • Hi, does anyone know the answer for question 2 or 3? Thank you
    8·1 answer
  • The father of scientific management is- (
    8·1 answer
  • For a given Prandtl-Meyer expansion, the upstream Mach number is 3 and the pressure ratio across the wave is P2/P1 = 0.4. Calcul
    6·1 answer
  • A.) If its booster rockets accelerate the space shuttle at 15m/s2, how high will it be one minute after launch?
    6·1 answer
  • How can one add vectors and subtract vectors ​
    8·1 answer
  • A car drives 200 miles east then makes a turn and travels 50 miles north before
    9·1 answer
  • 7. Un niño tiene 35 kg esta sobre un trineo que tiene una masa de 5 kg. Si el niño y el trineo
    8·1 answer
  • "An object at rest starts accelerating. If it is going 120 m/s after traveling 202 meters, how quickly did it speed up?"
    13·1 answer
  • What is thermal energy.
    12·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!