Answer:
true! : )
(i underlined the place where the answer is the other information is just as important but if you do not want to read it you do not have to)
Explanation:
Since gravitational force is inversely proportional to the square of the separation distance between the two interacting objects, more separation distance will result in weaker gravitational forces. So as two objects are separated from each other, the force of gravitational attraction between them also decreases. the greater the mass, the greater the gravitational pull. <u>gravitational pull decreases with an increase in the distance between two objects.</u> Since gravitational force is inversely proportional to the square of the separation distance between the two interacting objects, more separation distance will result in weaker gravitational forces. So as two objects are separated from each other, the force of gravitational attraction between them also decreases.
Assume there is a smallest rational integer that has the following form: a/b
Then observe that we can define a/(b+1), which is strictly less than a/b because its divisor is bigger and is rational because it is the product of two numbers. Due to the contradiction created by our original claims that a/b is the smallest rational number that is possible, we might conclude that there is no such thing as the smallest rational number.
There can therefore be no smallest rational number because we may always define a smaller rational number than the one we now possess.
<h3>What is Rational number ?</h3>
Any number that can be expressed as a ratio is considered reasonable. It is therefore possible to represent it as a fraction when the numerator and denominator are both full numbers.
Learn more about Rational number here:
brainly.com/question/12088221
#SPJ4
