<u>It helps the writers visualize the inside of a black hole. </u>
<em>The other options can described bluntly and scientifically with just names and numbers. </em>
If the writer were to use more formal writing to describe things so abstract like a black hole, it would be hard for the common reader to understand.
____________________________
for example,
The black hole looks like a giant vacuum of nothingness (informal)
The black hole is like a mass whose Schwarzchild radius is outside of itself (formal)
Which is easier to understand? Most likely the first one because of the use of informal language and writing.
Hope I helped!
Answer:
My most uncomfortable moment came as a freshman in high school. I was chosen to go to the regional FFA competition to represent my school in impromptu speaking. This was an enormous task for me to undertake. I was given a binder of information, and three minutes to write an appropriate speech. Then, I had to go to a special room in front of four judges that I didn't know. The speech started with an introduction of myself and my topic, fruits and vegetables. I talked about soil preparation and weed control, and it was the longest three minutes of my life. My knees starting shaking, and I had to grab the podium to hold myself up. The whole podium started shaking, and the judges asked me if I was o.k. It took me a couple of minutes to get started because I dropped my cards, and had to reorganize them. I was sweating like a mad dog, and I then flew threw the speech. I honestly don't know if I stuttered at all, but I lost the competition, and the judges gave me a superior, which is what they give anyone who isn't good enough to win. This is a feel good mercy rating they gave me, but I made it through it and survived.
Explanation:
Take it one step at a time. dont try to cram all of it at one time :)
I would go with:
Refers to an argument based on false or exaggerated information about the losing argument
