Answer:
200 kgm/s
Explanation:
momentum = mass x velocity
Answer : The maximum concentration of silver ion is 
Solution : Given,
for AgBr = 
Concentration of NaBr solution = 0.1 m
The equilibrium reaction for NaBr solution is,

The concentration of NaBr solution is 0.1 m that means,
![[Na^+]=[Br^-]=0.1m](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=%5BNa%5E%2B%5D%3D%5BBr%5E-%5D%3D0.1m)
The equilibrium reaction for AgBr is,

At equilibrium s s
The expression for solubility product constant for AgBr is,
![K_{sp}=[Ag^+][Br^-]](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=K_%7Bsp%7D%3D%5BAg%5E%2B%5D%5BBr%5E-%5D)
The concentration of
= s
The concentration of
= 0.1 + s
Now put all the given values in
expression, we get

By rearranging the terms, we get the value of 's'

Therefore, the maximum concentration of silver ion is
.
The acceleration that Andrew experience during his ride is 3.6m/s²
The formula for calculating centripetal acceleration is expressed as:
a = v²/r
v is the speed
r is the radius
Given the following expression
v = 6m/s
r = 10m
Substitute the given parameters into the formula
a = 6²/10
a = 36/10
a = 3.6m/s²
Hence the acceleration that Andrew experience during his ride is 3.6m/s²
Learn more here: brainly.com/question/1268866
It increases confidence because the more times you conduct the same experiment over and over should either prove your hypothesis right and wrong and eliminate any random occurrences that might affect your results.
I was about to say: because people generally get comfortable with
what they think they know, and don't like the discomfort of being told
that they have to change something they're comfortable with.
But then I thought about it a little bit more, and I have a different answer.
"Society" might initially reject a new scientific theory, because 'society'
is totally unequipped to render judgement of any kind regarding any
development in Science.
First of all, 'Society' is a thing that's made of a bunch of people, so it's
inherently unequipped to deal with scientific news. Anything that 'Society'
decides has a lot of the mob psychology in it, and a public opinion poll or
a popularity contest are terrible ways to evaluate a scientific discovery.
Second, let's face it. The main ingredient that comprises 'Society' ... people ...
are generally uneducated, unknowledgeable, unqualified, and clueless in the
substance, the history, and the methods of scientific inquiry and reporting.
There may be very good reasons that some particular a new scientific theory
should be rejected, or at least seriously questioned. But believe me, 'Society'
doesn't have them.
That's pretty much why.