A graph with horizontal axis time (seconds) and vertical axis position (meters). An orange line runs straight upward from 0 seco
nd zero meters. A concave blue line runs upward from the same point. Maia says that both lines on this position vs time graph show acceleration. Is she correct? Why or why not?
Maia is not correct because a straight line moving upwards on a position vs time graph has a constant slope, so it represents constant velocity. No change in velocity means no acceleration is taking place. Is the correct answer! :)
Let's start by using the definition of acceleration. Acceleration is defined as the change in velocity over the change in time. In equation, that would be Δvelocity/Δtime. Based on the axes of the given graph, it shows the trend of position over time. So, the slope of the line and the curve shows the change of position over change of time, Δdistance/Δtime. In physics, this is the definition of speed or velocity. So, Maia is incorrect. Both curves show the speed or velocity of the object, and not acceleration. If the graph used a y-axis of velocity instead of position, then only at that instance, would be Maia be correct.
The difference between the two is, the straight line shows constant velocity while the curve line shows changing velocity.
Ummm a pickle is stored in glass container usually in the fridge
Explanation:
so the pickles dont go bad they go in the fridge so they dont mold. if you were to put them in a metal container they would get very cold when you put them in the fridge.
Explanation: Because ocean tides are the effect of ocean water responding to a gravitational gradient, the moon plays a larger role in creating tides than does the sun. But the sun's gravitational gradient across the earth is significant and it does contribute to tides as well.
