Yes, It is possible for the opportunity cost of an input to be very low or zero if there is no alternative use for it. It means that the statement is true.
The opportunity cost of an input is zero if it has no alternative use. This is so because the cost of alternatives refers to the value of the next best option. Since there isn't an alternative available in the scenario described, the opportunity cost is zero.
The opportunity cost of a certain activity option is defined as the loss of value or benefit that would result from engaging in that activity (the cost) as opposed to engaging in an alternative activity that offers a higher return in value or benefit in microeconomic theory.
To learn more about opportunity cost here
brainly.com/question/24319061
#SPJ4
For the answer to the question above asking <span>why does Stevens believe that Johnson should be removed from office?</span>
the reason why Stevens believe that Johnson should be removed from office is because he believes that Johnson violated his oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.
Acts is the abbreviation for "the Acts of the Apostles" (<em>five books of the New Testament</em>); a history of the early Christian church, in which Jesus ascents into heaven.
Saint Peter's life is told in the New Testament's letters; Saint Peter was the first apostle required by Jesus in the early church.
Saint Peter preached that Jesus would stay in Heaven until the restitution of all things; the main subject of the sermons preached by Peter was: <em>Jesus and His miracles.</em>
Acts describes how God achieved his plan for the salvation of the world, through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.
Thereby, the correct options are the first 2 (1&2):
1.<em>Jesus' miracles were the work of God</em> and 2.<em>Jesus' death was part of the Plan of God.</em>
The jurisdiction over cases involving the American government, the Constitution, federal laws, or disputes between states or between the U.S. authorities and overseas governments lies with the Federal Courts. Hence, Option B is the correct statement.
<h3>What do you mean by Dispute?</h3>
A dispute is a disagreement, argument, or controversy frequently one which offers an upward thrust to a legal proceeding (inclusive of arbitration, mediation, or a lawsuit).
The opposing parties are stated to be adverse to at least one another. To dispute is the corresponding verb.
Hence, The jurisdiction over cases involving the American government, the Constitution, federal laws, or disputes between states or between the U.S. authorities and overseas governments lies with the Federal Courts. Option B is the correct statement.
learn more about Disputes:
brainly.com/question/13071871
#SPJ1
Answer: Hebbian learning
Explanation: This is a type of learning which involves strengthening connections between neurons which work together. The repeated exposure to a particular stimulus can strengthen connections within a distinctive subset of cortical neurons, and this subset can provide a reliable basis for identifying the stimulus that is activating them.
It has been proven that even when an individual encounters an incomplete version of a familiar stimulus with only some of the subset of neurons representing that familiar stimulus activated at first, the connections already established through repeated coactivity will produce results that complete the familiar pattern.
