Magma forms by partial melting of upper mantle and crust. Partial melt means that only a fraction of the available material forms a melt, and that the remainder stays solid. The partial melt rises because of its lower density and ascends through he crust.
In solids, particles or atom are very closely arranged compared to gasses. When these particles are arranged in such proximity, vibrations from sound are very easily transmitted from one particle to another in the solid. Hence, the sound vibrations can travel through the solid medium more quickly than through a gas medium.
Speed of sound also depends on its frequency and the wavelength.
Answer:
<h2>50 N</h2>
Explanation:
The force required can be found by using the formula
w is the workdone
d is the distance
From the question we have
We have the final answer as
<h3>50 N</h3>
Hope this helps you
Answer:
3.6 KJ
Explanation: Given that a 70-kg boy is surfing and catches a wave which gives him an initial speed of 1.6 m/s. He then drops through a height of 1.60 m, and ends with a speed of 8.5 m/s. How much nonconservative work (in kJ) was done on the boy
The workdone = the energy.
There are two different energies in the scenario - the potential energy (P.E ) and the kinetic energy ( K.E )
P.E = mgh
P.E = 70 × 9.8 × 1.6
P.E = 1097.6 J
P.E = 1.098 KJ
K.E = 1/2mv^2
K.E = 1/2 × 70 × 8.5^2
K.E = 2528.75 J
K.E = 2.529 KJ
The non conservative workdone = K.E + P.E
Work done = 1.098 + 2.529
Work done = 3.63 KJ
Therefore, the non conservative workdone is 3.6 KJ approximately
It is indeed true that scientists have known about the background radiation (commonly known as the Cosmic Microwave Background) since the early 60s. It was first discovered quite by accident by Penzias and Wilson working at Bell Labs, who detected it as an unexplainable interference in their precision radio equipment. When people finally figured out exactly what it was they were seeing, they won the Nobel Prize for their discovery. Only a few years before, George Gamow had predicted that if the Big Bang theory were correct, we should observe just such a background radiation. The CMB is not the only evidence in favor of the Big Bang, but it is one of the most important. It is a natural consequence of the theory, and is pretty unexplainable in steady-state cosmology.
The 15-20 billion year number comes not from the CMB, but rather predominantly from measurements of nearby and distant galaxies, particularly their rates of expansion away from us. We find that the distance to a galaxy is proportional to its recessional velocity. The constant of proportionality is the Hubble Constant, H, which turns out to be (approximately) the reciprocal of the age of the universe. So we measure the age by measuring recessional velocities. T = 1/H is only true, however, if the universe is not significantly accelerating or decelerating its expansion rate. If the rate of expansion is rapidly accelerating, the universe may be older than 1/H = 15 billion years, give or take. Such an acceleration would be caused by a large value of the Cosmological Constant, a sort of anti-gravity force predicted by General Relativity. There is some evidence that this might be the case.
So finally, yes, the age of the universe, being based on the empirical determination of H, is based on the observed evidence.
