Ethane consists of 6C−H bonds and 1C−C bond. Total number of bonds is 7. Each bond is made up of two electrons
<h2>
<em>#</em><em>L</em><em>E</em><em>T</em><em>S</em><em> </em><em>STUDY</em></h2>
<em>#</em><em>B</em><em>R</em><em>A</em><em>I</em><em>N</em><em>L</em><em>E</em><em>S</em><em>T</em><em> </em><em>LOVE❣️</em>
Gee. I'll have to guess at what's "commonly thought".
One thing is the scale. Nobody has an accurate picture of the scale in
his head, because we never see a true-scale drawing. THAT's because
it's almost impossible to draw one on paper.
Example:
Shrink the solar system and everything in it so that the Sun
is the size of a quarter (the 25¢ coin).
Then:
-- The Earth is in orbit around the sun, 8.6 feet from it.
That's close enough that you might think you could find the
shrunken Earth. Unfortunately, it's only 0.009 inch in diameter.
-- The shrunken Jupiter is a 'huge' gas giant almost 0.1 inch in diameter.
It's orbiting the sun, about 45 feet away from it.
-- The shrunken Uranus is another gas giant, about 0.035 inch in diameter.
It's orbiting the sun, about 165 feet away from it.
-- The nearest star outside of the solar system is 441 MILES away !
On the same shrunken scale !
And there's NOTHING between here and there !
I think that's the biggest point to make about the REAL solar system ...
its utter emptiness. With the sun reduced to something you can hold
in your hand, the planets are the size of grains of sand, with hundreds
of feet of nothingness between them.
Same for its mass: The solar system is approximately nothing but a star.
That's it. A star, with some dust and some gas around it, and here and there
in the neighborhood a microscopic pebble or a chip of mineral. But mostly
it's nothing but a star ... if you went around and gathered up all that other
rubbish in the same bag and called it a part of the same solar system, the
sun would still have more than 99% of the total mass, and the bag would
hold less than 1% of it.
Book ... It's getting late, Hillary's fading, and that's all I can think of.
I hope this much is some help.
In my opinion yes, as of now, almost anyone could get there hands on lets say an explosive. Have you heard of dynamite fishing? It is illegal, but it is still done once people have access to dynamite, then what ends up happening not only do marine wildlife get killed but it pollutes the water and lessens the chance of the natural cycle of life. Also there are several other factors, firstly, what will you do with an explosive once you get your hands on it? Perhaps you could just use an explosive for fun/personal entertainment...that isn't right and it could harm people. So, to conclude the harder it is for people to access explosives or even acclerants the better...and to add this can be possible by making people get like some sort of licence to use them, and let them be trained in certain conditions so that there is no regrets once they have access to them. I know my idea sounds far fetched but its a thought!
We know that the element Z = 119 would be placed right below the Fr, in the column of the alcaline metals.
We also know that the trend in the electronegativity is to decrease when you go up-down ia group.
The known electronegativities of the elements of this group are:
Li: 0.98
Na: 0.93
K: 0.82
Rb: 0.82
Cs: 0.79
Fr: 0.70
Then the hypotetical element Z = 119 would probably have an electronegativity slightly below 0.70, for sure in the range 0.60 - 0.70.
