Answer:
The right option is option E. None of the answer choices given are totally correct.
Explanation:
All insulators normally have an equal amount of positive and negative charges distributed on their surface.
The amber rod (an insulator) is called negative because after the coming together with fur (another insulator), the amber rod rubs off electrons from the fur onto itself and has an overall more negatively charged particles than positively charged particles on its surface.
The fur in turn becomes positive because it has more positive charges than negative on its surface.
So, the convention allows the now rubbed off amber rod to be called negative.
So, it is evident that none of the answer choices are totally correct, the right answer is more of a mix of some of the answer choices and more!
Hope this helps!!
Answer and Explanation:
a. An oxygen-filled balloon is not able to float in the air, because the oxygen inside the balloon is of the same density, that is, the same "weight" as the oxygen outside the balloon and present in the atmosphere. The balloon can only float if the gas inside it is less dense than atmospheric oxygen. Helium gas is less dense than atmospheric gas, so if a balloon is filled with helium gas, that balloon will be able to float because of the difference in density.
b. The ship is able to float in the water because its steel construction is hollow and full of air. This makes the average density of this ship less than the density of water, which makes the ship lighter than water and for this reason, this ship is able to float. In addition, the ship is partially immersed, allowing the weight of the ship on the water to counteract the buoyant force that the water promotes on the ship. Weight and buoyant are two opposing forces that keep the ship afloat.
Answer:
134r kgm^-1 or 1344 kg /m
Explanation:
Momentum is is given by:
p=mv
Where:
p is momentum, m is mass in kg and v is velocity in ms−1
p=120kg×11.2 m/ s= 1344 kgms=1344kgm^−1
You asked a question. I'm about to answer it.
Sadly, I can almost guarantee that you won't understand the solution.
This realization grieves me, but there is little I can do to change it.
My explanation will be the best of which I'm capable.
Here are the Physics facts I'll use in the solution:
-- "Apparent magnitude" means how bright the star appears to us.
-- "Absolute magnitude" means the how bright the star WOULD appear
if it were located 32.6 light years from us (10 parsecs).
-- A change of 5 magnitudes means a 100 times change in brightness,
so each magnitude means brightness is multiplied or divided by ⁵√100 .
That's about 2.512... .
-- Increasing magnitude means dimmer.
Decreasing magnitude means brighter.
+5 is 10 magnitudes dimmer than -5 .
-- Apparent brightness is inversely proportional to the square
of the distance from the source (just like gravity, sound, and
the force between charges).
That's all the Physics. The rest of the solution is just arithmetic.
____________________________________________________
-- The star in the question would appear M(-5) at a distance of
32.6 light years.
-- It actually appears as a M(+5). That's 10 magnitudes dimmer than M(-5),
because of being farther away than 32.6 light years.
-- 10 magnitudes dimmer is ( ⁵√100)⁻¹⁰ = (100)^(-2) .
-- But brightness varies as the inverse square of distance,
so that exponent is (negative double) the ratio of the distances,
and the actual distance to the star is
(32.6) · (100)^(1) light years
= (32.6) · (100) light years
= approx. 3,260 light years . (roughly 1,000 parsecs)
I'll have to confess that I haven't done one of these calculations
in over 50 years, and I'm not really that confident in my result.
If somebody's health or safety depended on it, or the success of
a space mission, then I'd be strongly recommending that you get
a second opinion.
But, quite frankly, I do feel that mine is worth the 5 points.
Answer:
Matter is made up of atoms.
