Datasets:

allenai

/

ropes

like 45

Follow

Ai2 1,448

2416710441

Matter, dark matter, and dark energy are distributed homogeneously throughout the Universe over length scales longer than 300 million light-years or so. However, over shorter length-scales, matter tends to clump hierarchically; many atoms are condensed into stars, most stars into galaxies, most galaxies into clusters, superclusters and, finally, large-scale galactic filaments. The observable Universe contains approximately 300 sextillion (3×1023) stars and more than 100 billion (1011) galaxies. Typical galaxies range from dwarfs with as few as ten million (107) stars up to giants with one trillion (1012) stars. Between the larger structures are voids, which are typically 10–150 Mpc (33 million–490 million ly) in diameter. The Milky Way is in the Local Group of galaxies, which in turn is in the Laniakea Supercluster. This supercluster spans over 500 million light-years, while the Local Group spans over 10 million light-years. The Universe also has vast regions of relative emptiness; the largest known void measures 1.8 billion ly (550 Mpc) across.

Rob is an amateur astronomer. He was looking at the sky with his telescope. First he took a longer length observation. He noted his observation as case A. Then he took a shorter length observation. He noted that observation as case B. He found that it's beneficial to take both observations to get a fuller view of the observable universe.

Which observation would detect stars and galaxies well, case A or case B?

3814069402

Matter, dark matter, and dark energy are distributed homogeneously throughout the Universe over length scales longer than 300 million light-years or so. However, over shorter length-scales, matter tends to clump hierarchically; many atoms are condensed into stars, most stars into galaxies, most galaxies into clusters, superclusters and, finally, large-scale galactic filaments. The observable Universe contains approximately 300 sextillion (3×1023) stars and more than 100 billion (1011) galaxies. Typical galaxies range from dwarfs with as few as ten million (107) stars up to giants with one trillion (1012) stars. Between the larger structures are voids, which are typically 10–150 Mpc (33 million–490 million ly) in diameter. The Milky Way is in the Local Group of galaxies, which in turn is in the Laniakea Supercluster. This supercluster spans over 500 million light-years, while the Local Group spans over 10 million light-years. The Universe also has vast regions of relative emptiness; the largest known void measures 1.8 billion ly (550 Mpc) across.

Rob is an amateur astronomer. He was looking at the sky with his telescope. First he took a longer length observation. He noted his observation as case A. Then he took a shorter length observation. He noted that observation as case B. He found that it's beneficial to take both observations to get a fuller view of the observable universe.

Which observation would not detect stars and galaxies well, case A or case B?

2139127555

Around 5.4 billion years from now, the core of the Sun will become hot enough to trigger hydrogen fusion in its surrounding shell. This will cause the outer layers of the star to expand greatly, and the star will enter a phase of its life in which it is called a red giant. Within 7.5 billion years, the Sun will have expanded to a radius of 1.2 AU—256 times its current size. At the tip of the red giant branch, as a result of the vastly increased surface area, the Sun's surface will be much cooler (about 2600 K) than now and its luminosity much higher—up to 2,700 current solar luminosities. For part of its red giant life, the Sun will have a strong stellar wind that will carry away around 33% of its mass. During these times, it is possible that Saturn's moon Titan could achieve surface temperatures necessary to support life.As the Sun expands, it will swallow the planets Mercury and Venus. Earth's fate is less clear; although the Sun will envelop Earth's current orbit, the star's loss of mass (and thus weaker gravity) will cause the planets' orbits to move farther out. If it were only for this, Venus and Earth would probably escape incineration, but a 2008 study suggests that Earth will likely be swallowed up as a result of tidal interactions with the Sun's weakly bound outer envelope.Gradually, the hydrogen burning in the shell around the solar core will increase the mass of the core until it reaches about 45% of the present solar mass. At this point the density and temperature will become so high that the fusion of helium into carbon will begin, leading to a helium flash; the Sun will shrink from around 250 to 11 times its present (main-sequence) radius. Consequently, its luminosity will decrease from around 3,000 to 54 times its current level, and its surface temperature will increase to about 4770 K. The Sun will become a horizontal giant, burning helium in its core in a stable fashion much like it burns hydrogen today. The helium-fusing stage will last only 100 million years. Eventually, it will have to again resort to the reserves of hydrogen and helium in its outer layers and will expand a second time, turning into what is known as an asymptotic giant. Here the luminosity of the Sun will increase again, reaching about 2,090 present luminosities, and it will cool to about 3500 K. This phase lasts about 30 million years, after which, over the course of a further 100,000 years, the Sun's remaining outer layers will fall away, ejecting a vast stream of matter into space and forming a halo known (misleadingly) as a planetary nebula. The ejected material will contain the helium and carbon produced by the Sun's nuclear reactions, continuing the enrichment of the interstellar medium with heavy elements for future generations of stars.

Keith was playing a simulation game. In the game he could travel around the Sun in the future. He started the game in present time, which was denoted as time A. Then he traveled 5.4 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time B. Finally, he reached 7.5 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time C. He was amazed to find how the Sun would change over time.

When would the Sun's core be hotter, time A or time B?

2111864561

Around 5.4 billion years from now, the core of the Sun will become hot enough to trigger hydrogen fusion in its surrounding shell. This will cause the outer layers of the star to expand greatly, and the star will enter a phase of its life in which it is called a red giant. Within 7.5 billion years, the Sun will have expanded to a radius of 1.2 AU—256 times its current size. At the tip of the red giant branch, as a result of the vastly increased surface area, the Sun's surface will be much cooler (about 2600 K) than now and its luminosity much higher—up to 2,700 current solar luminosities. For part of its red giant life, the Sun will have a strong stellar wind that will carry away around 33% of its mass. During these times, it is possible that Saturn's moon Titan could achieve surface temperatures necessary to support life.As the Sun expands, it will swallow the planets Mercury and Venus. Earth's fate is less clear; although the Sun will envelop Earth's current orbit, the star's loss of mass (and thus weaker gravity) will cause the planets' orbits to move farther out. If it were only for this, Venus and Earth would probably escape incineration, but a 2008 study suggests that Earth will likely be swallowed up as a result of tidal interactions with the Sun's weakly bound outer envelope.Gradually, the hydrogen burning in the shell around the solar core will increase the mass of the core until it reaches about 45% of the present solar mass. At this point the density and temperature will become so high that the fusion of helium into carbon will begin, leading to a helium flash; the Sun will shrink from around 250 to 11 times its present (main-sequence) radius. Consequently, its luminosity will decrease from around 3,000 to 54 times its current level, and its surface temperature will increase to about 4770 K. The Sun will become a horizontal giant, burning helium in its core in a stable fashion much like it burns hydrogen today. The helium-fusing stage will last only 100 million years. Eventually, it will have to again resort to the reserves of hydrogen and helium in its outer layers and will expand a second time, turning into what is known as an asymptotic giant. Here the luminosity of the Sun will increase again, reaching about 2,090 present luminosities, and it will cool to about 3500 K. This phase lasts about 30 million years, after which, over the course of a further 100,000 years, the Sun's remaining outer layers will fall away, ejecting a vast stream of matter into space and forming a halo known (misleadingly) as a planetary nebula. The ejected material will contain the helium and carbon produced by the Sun's nuclear reactions, continuing the enrichment of the interstellar medium with heavy elements for future generations of stars.

Keith was playing a simulation game. In the game he could travel around the Sun in the future. He started the game in present time, which was denoted as time A. Then he traveled 5.4 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time B. Finally, he reached 7.5 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time C. He was amazed to find how the Sun would change over time.

When would the Sun's core be cooler, time A or time B?

2556724066

Around 5.4 billion years from now, the core of the Sun will become hot enough to trigger hydrogen fusion in its surrounding shell. This will cause the outer layers of the star to expand greatly, and the star will enter a phase of its life in which it is called a red giant. Within 7.5 billion years, the Sun will have expanded to a radius of 1.2 AU—256 times its current size. At the tip of the red giant branch, as a result of the vastly increased surface area, the Sun's surface will be much cooler (about 2600 K) than now and its luminosity much higher—up to 2,700 current solar luminosities. For part of its red giant life, the Sun will have a strong stellar wind that will carry away around 33% of its mass. During these times, it is possible that Saturn's moon Titan could achieve surface temperatures necessary to support life.As the Sun expands, it will swallow the planets Mercury and Venus. Earth's fate is less clear; although the Sun will envelop Earth's current orbit, the star's loss of mass (and thus weaker gravity) will cause the planets' orbits to move farther out. If it were only for this, Venus and Earth would probably escape incineration, but a 2008 study suggests that Earth will likely be swallowed up as a result of tidal interactions with the Sun's weakly bound outer envelope.Gradually, the hydrogen burning in the shell around the solar core will increase the mass of the core until it reaches about 45% of the present solar mass. At this point the density and temperature will become so high that the fusion of helium into carbon will begin, leading to a helium flash; the Sun will shrink from around 250 to 11 times its present (main-sequence) radius. Consequently, its luminosity will decrease from around 3,000 to 54 times its current level, and its surface temperature will increase to about 4770 K. The Sun will become a horizontal giant, burning helium in its core in a stable fashion much like it burns hydrogen today. The helium-fusing stage will last only 100 million years. Eventually, it will have to again resort to the reserves of hydrogen and helium in its outer layers and will expand a second time, turning into what is known as an asymptotic giant. Here the luminosity of the Sun will increase again, reaching about 2,090 present luminosities, and it will cool to about 3500 K. This phase lasts about 30 million years, after which, over the course of a further 100,000 years, the Sun's remaining outer layers will fall away, ejecting a vast stream of matter into space and forming a halo known (misleadingly) as a planetary nebula. The ejected material will contain the helium and carbon produced by the Sun's nuclear reactions, continuing the enrichment of the interstellar medium with heavy elements for future generations of stars.

Keith was playing a simulation game. In the game he could travel around the Sun in the future. He started the game in present time, which was denoted as time A. Then he traveled 5.4 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time B. Finally, he reached 7.5 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time C. He was amazed to find how the Sun would change over time.

Would the Sun's core be hotter or cooler in time A than in time B?

2557707106

Around 5.4 billion years from now, the core of the Sun will become hot enough to trigger hydrogen fusion in its surrounding shell. This will cause the outer layers of the star to expand greatly, and the star will enter a phase of its life in which it is called a red giant. Within 7.5 billion years, the Sun will have expanded to a radius of 1.2 AU—256 times its current size. At the tip of the red giant branch, as a result of the vastly increased surface area, the Sun's surface will be much cooler (about 2600 K) than now and its luminosity much higher—up to 2,700 current solar luminosities. For part of its red giant life, the Sun will have a strong stellar wind that will carry away around 33% of its mass. During these times, it is possible that Saturn's moon Titan could achieve surface temperatures necessary to support life.As the Sun expands, it will swallow the planets Mercury and Venus. Earth's fate is less clear; although the Sun will envelop Earth's current orbit, the star's loss of mass (and thus weaker gravity) will cause the planets' orbits to move farther out. If it were only for this, Venus and Earth would probably escape incineration, but a 2008 study suggests that Earth will likely be swallowed up as a result of tidal interactions with the Sun's weakly bound outer envelope.Gradually, the hydrogen burning in the shell around the solar core will increase the mass of the core until it reaches about 45% of the present solar mass. At this point the density and temperature will become so high that the fusion of helium into carbon will begin, leading to a helium flash; the Sun will shrink from around 250 to 11 times its present (main-sequence) radius. Consequently, its luminosity will decrease from around 3,000 to 54 times its current level, and its surface temperature will increase to about 4770 K. The Sun will become a horizontal giant, burning helium in its core in a stable fashion much like it burns hydrogen today. The helium-fusing stage will last only 100 million years. Eventually, it will have to again resort to the reserves of hydrogen and helium in its outer layers and will expand a second time, turning into what is known as an asymptotic giant. Here the luminosity of the Sun will increase again, reaching about 2,090 present luminosities, and it will cool to about 3500 K. This phase lasts about 30 million years, after which, over the course of a further 100,000 years, the Sun's remaining outer layers will fall away, ejecting a vast stream of matter into space and forming a halo known (misleadingly) as a planetary nebula. The ejected material will contain the helium and carbon produced by the Sun's nuclear reactions, continuing the enrichment of the interstellar medium with heavy elements for future generations of stars.

Keith was playing a simulation game. In the game he could travel around the Sun in the future. He started the game in present time, which was denoted as time A. Then he traveled 5.4 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time B. Finally, he reached 7.5 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time C. He was amazed to find how the Sun would change over time.

Would the Sun's core be hotter or cooler in time B than in time A?

56721580

Around 5.4 billion years from now, the core of the Sun will become hot enough to trigger hydrogen fusion in its surrounding shell. This will cause the outer layers of the star to expand greatly, and the star will enter a phase of its life in which it is called a red giant. Within 7.5 billion years, the Sun will have expanded to a radius of 1.2 AU—256 times its current size. At the tip of the red giant branch, as a result of the vastly increased surface area, the Sun's surface will be much cooler (about 2600 K) than now and its luminosity much higher—up to 2,700 current solar luminosities. For part of its red giant life, the Sun will have a strong stellar wind that will carry away around 33% of its mass. During these times, it is possible that Saturn's moon Titan could achieve surface temperatures necessary to support life.As the Sun expands, it will swallow the planets Mercury and Venus. Earth's fate is less clear; although the Sun will envelop Earth's current orbit, the star's loss of mass (and thus weaker gravity) will cause the planets' orbits to move farther out. If it were only for this, Venus and Earth would probably escape incineration, but a 2008 study suggests that Earth will likely be swallowed up as a result of tidal interactions with the Sun's weakly bound outer envelope.Gradually, the hydrogen burning in the shell around the solar core will increase the mass of the core until it reaches about 45% of the present solar mass. At this point the density and temperature will become so high that the fusion of helium into carbon will begin, leading to a helium flash; the Sun will shrink from around 250 to 11 times its present (main-sequence) radius. Consequently, its luminosity will decrease from around 3,000 to 54 times its current level, and its surface temperature will increase to about 4770 K. The Sun will become a horizontal giant, burning helium in its core in a stable fashion much like it burns hydrogen today. The helium-fusing stage will last only 100 million years. Eventually, it will have to again resort to the reserves of hydrogen and helium in its outer layers and will expand a second time, turning into what is known as an asymptotic giant. Here the luminosity of the Sun will increase again, reaching about 2,090 present luminosities, and it will cool to about 3500 K. This phase lasts about 30 million years, after which, over the course of a further 100,000 years, the Sun's remaining outer layers will fall away, ejecting a vast stream of matter into space and forming a halo known (misleadingly) as a planetary nebula. The ejected material will contain the helium and carbon produced by the Sun's nuclear reactions, continuing the enrichment of the interstellar medium with heavy elements for future generations of stars.

Keith was playing a simulation game. In the game he could travel around the Sun in the future. He started the game in present time, which was denoted as time A. Then he traveled 5.4 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time B. Finally, he reached 7.5 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time C. He was amazed to find how the Sun would change over time.

When would the size of the Sun be bigger, time A or time C?

2293334316

Around 5.4 billion years from now, the core of the Sun will become hot enough to trigger hydrogen fusion in its surrounding shell. This will cause the outer layers of the star to expand greatly, and the star will enter a phase of its life in which it is called a red giant. Within 7.5 billion years, the Sun will have expanded to a radius of 1.2 AU—256 times its current size. At the tip of the red giant branch, as a result of the vastly increased surface area, the Sun's surface will be much cooler (about 2600 K) than now and its luminosity much higher—up to 2,700 current solar luminosities. For part of its red giant life, the Sun will have a strong stellar wind that will carry away around 33% of its mass. During these times, it is possible that Saturn's moon Titan could achieve surface temperatures necessary to support life.As the Sun expands, it will swallow the planets Mercury and Venus. Earth's fate is less clear; although the Sun will envelop Earth's current orbit, the star's loss of mass (and thus weaker gravity) will cause the planets' orbits to move farther out. If it were only for this, Venus and Earth would probably escape incineration, but a 2008 study suggests that Earth will likely be swallowed up as a result of tidal interactions with the Sun's weakly bound outer envelope.Gradually, the hydrogen burning in the shell around the solar core will increase the mass of the core until it reaches about 45% of the present solar mass. At this point the density and temperature will become so high that the fusion of helium into carbon will begin, leading to a helium flash; the Sun will shrink from around 250 to 11 times its present (main-sequence) radius. Consequently, its luminosity will decrease from around 3,000 to 54 times its current level, and its surface temperature will increase to about 4770 K. The Sun will become a horizontal giant, burning helium in its core in a stable fashion much like it burns hydrogen today. The helium-fusing stage will last only 100 million years. Eventually, it will have to again resort to the reserves of hydrogen and helium in its outer layers and will expand a second time, turning into what is known as an asymptotic giant. Here the luminosity of the Sun will increase again, reaching about 2,090 present luminosities, and it will cool to about 3500 K. This phase lasts about 30 million years, after which, over the course of a further 100,000 years, the Sun's remaining outer layers will fall away, ejecting a vast stream of matter into space and forming a halo known (misleadingly) as a planetary nebula. The ejected material will contain the helium and carbon produced by the Sun's nuclear reactions, continuing the enrichment of the interstellar medium with heavy elements for future generations of stars.

Keith was playing a simulation game. In the game he could travel around the Sun in the future. He started the game in present time, which was denoted as time A. Then he traveled 5.4 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time B. Finally, he reached 7.5 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time C. He was amazed to find how the Sun would change over time.

When would the size of the Sun be smaller, time A or time C?

126976068

Around 5.4 billion years from now, the core of the Sun will become hot enough to trigger hydrogen fusion in its surrounding shell. This will cause the outer layers of the star to expand greatly, and the star will enter a phase of its life in which it is called a red giant. Within 7.5 billion years, the Sun will have expanded to a radius of 1.2 AU—256 times its current size. At the tip of the red giant branch, as a result of the vastly increased surface area, the Sun's surface will be much cooler (about 2600 K) than now and its luminosity much higher—up to 2,700 current solar luminosities. For part of its red giant life, the Sun will have a strong stellar wind that will carry away around 33% of its mass. During these times, it is possible that Saturn's moon Titan could achieve surface temperatures necessary to support life.As the Sun expands, it will swallow the planets Mercury and Venus. Earth's fate is less clear; although the Sun will envelop Earth's current orbit, the star's loss of mass (and thus weaker gravity) will cause the planets' orbits to move farther out. If it were only for this, Venus and Earth would probably escape incineration, but a 2008 study suggests that Earth will likely be swallowed up as a result of tidal interactions with the Sun's weakly bound outer envelope.Gradually, the hydrogen burning in the shell around the solar core will increase the mass of the core until it reaches about 45% of the present solar mass. At this point the density and temperature will become so high that the fusion of helium into carbon will begin, leading to a helium flash; the Sun will shrink from around 250 to 11 times its present (main-sequence) radius. Consequently, its luminosity will decrease from around 3,000 to 54 times its current level, and its surface temperature will increase to about 4770 K. The Sun will become a horizontal giant, burning helium in its core in a stable fashion much like it burns hydrogen today. The helium-fusing stage will last only 100 million years. Eventually, it will have to again resort to the reserves of hydrogen and helium in its outer layers and will expand a second time, turning into what is known as an asymptotic giant. Here the luminosity of the Sun will increase again, reaching about 2,090 present luminosities, and it will cool to about 3500 K. This phase lasts about 30 million years, after which, over the course of a further 100,000 years, the Sun's remaining outer layers will fall away, ejecting a vast stream of matter into space and forming a halo known (misleadingly) as a planetary nebula. The ejected material will contain the helium and carbon produced by the Sun's nuclear reactions, continuing the enrichment of the interstellar medium with heavy elements for future generations of stars.

Keith was playing a simulation game. In the game he could travel around the Sun in the future. He started the game in present time, which was denoted as time A. Then he traveled 5.4 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time B. Finally, he reached 7.5 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time C. He was amazed to find how the Sun would change over time.

When would the Sun's surface be hotter, time A or time C?

99713074

Around 5.4 billion years from now, the core of the Sun will become hot enough to trigger hydrogen fusion in its surrounding shell. This will cause the outer layers of the star to expand greatly, and the star will enter a phase of its life in which it is called a red giant. Within 7.5 billion years, the Sun will have expanded to a radius of 1.2 AU—256 times its current size. At the tip of the red giant branch, as a result of the vastly increased surface area, the Sun's surface will be much cooler (about 2600 K) than now and its luminosity much higher—up to 2,700 current solar luminosities. For part of its red giant life, the Sun will have a strong stellar wind that will carry away around 33% of its mass. During these times, it is possible that Saturn's moon Titan could achieve surface temperatures necessary to support life.As the Sun expands, it will swallow the planets Mercury and Venus. Earth's fate is less clear; although the Sun will envelop Earth's current orbit, the star's loss of mass (and thus weaker gravity) will cause the planets' orbits to move farther out. If it were only for this, Venus and Earth would probably escape incineration, but a 2008 study suggests that Earth will likely be swallowed up as a result of tidal interactions with the Sun's weakly bound outer envelope.Gradually, the hydrogen burning in the shell around the solar core will increase the mass of the core until it reaches about 45% of the present solar mass. At this point the density and temperature will become so high that the fusion of helium into carbon will begin, leading to a helium flash; the Sun will shrink from around 250 to 11 times its present (main-sequence) radius. Consequently, its luminosity will decrease from around 3,000 to 54 times its current level, and its surface temperature will increase to about 4770 K. The Sun will become a horizontal giant, burning helium in its core in a stable fashion much like it burns hydrogen today. The helium-fusing stage will last only 100 million years. Eventually, it will have to again resort to the reserves of hydrogen and helium in its outer layers and will expand a second time, turning into what is known as an asymptotic giant. Here the luminosity of the Sun will increase again, reaching about 2,090 present luminosities, and it will cool to about 3500 K. This phase lasts about 30 million years, after which, over the course of a further 100,000 years, the Sun's remaining outer layers will fall away, ejecting a vast stream of matter into space and forming a halo known (misleadingly) as a planetary nebula. The ejected material will contain the helium and carbon produced by the Sun's nuclear reactions, continuing the enrichment of the interstellar medium with heavy elements for future generations of stars.

Keith was playing a simulation game. In the game he could travel around the Sun in the future. He started the game in present time, which was denoted as time A. Then he traveled 5.4 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time B. Finally, he reached 7.5 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time C. He was amazed to find how the Sun would change over time.

When would the Sun's surface be cooler, time A or time C?

131562850

Around 5.4 billion years from now, the core of the Sun will become hot enough to trigger hydrogen fusion in its surrounding shell. This will cause the outer layers of the star to expand greatly, and the star will enter a phase of its life in which it is called a red giant. Within 7.5 billion years, the Sun will have expanded to a radius of 1.2 AU—256 times its current size. At the tip of the red giant branch, as a result of the vastly increased surface area, the Sun's surface will be much cooler (about 2600 K) than now and its luminosity much higher—up to 2,700 current solar luminosities. For part of its red giant life, the Sun will have a strong stellar wind that will carry away around 33% of its mass. During these times, it is possible that Saturn's moon Titan could achieve surface temperatures necessary to support life.As the Sun expands, it will swallow the planets Mercury and Venus. Earth's fate is less clear; although the Sun will envelop Earth's current orbit, the star's loss of mass (and thus weaker gravity) will cause the planets' orbits to move farther out. If it were only for this, Venus and Earth would probably escape incineration, but a 2008 study suggests that Earth will likely be swallowed up as a result of tidal interactions with the Sun's weakly bound outer envelope.Gradually, the hydrogen burning in the shell around the solar core will increase the mass of the core until it reaches about 45% of the present solar mass. At this point the density and temperature will become so high that the fusion of helium into carbon will begin, leading to a helium flash; the Sun will shrink from around 250 to 11 times its present (main-sequence) radius. Consequently, its luminosity will decrease from around 3,000 to 54 times its current level, and its surface temperature will increase to about 4770 K. The Sun will become a horizontal giant, burning helium in its core in a stable fashion much like it burns hydrogen today. The helium-fusing stage will last only 100 million years. Eventually, it will have to again resort to the reserves of hydrogen and helium in its outer layers and will expand a second time, turning into what is known as an asymptotic giant. Here the luminosity of the Sun will increase again, reaching about 2,090 present luminosities, and it will cool to about 3500 K. This phase lasts about 30 million years, after which, over the course of a further 100,000 years, the Sun's remaining outer layers will fall away, ejecting a vast stream of matter into space and forming a halo known (misleadingly) as a planetary nebula. The ejected material will contain the helium and carbon produced by the Sun's nuclear reactions, continuing the enrichment of the interstellar medium with heavy elements for future generations of stars.

Keith was playing a simulation game. In the game he could travel around the Sun in the future. He started the game in present time, which was denoted as time A. Then he traveled 5.4 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time B. Finally, he reached 7.5 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time C. He was amazed to find how the Sun would change over time.

When would the Sun be brighter, time A or time C?

149978249

Around 5.4 billion years from now, the core of the Sun will become hot enough to trigger hydrogen fusion in its surrounding shell. This will cause the outer layers of the star to expand greatly, and the star will enter a phase of its life in which it is called a red giant. Within 7.5 billion years, the Sun will have expanded to a radius of 1.2 AU—256 times its current size. At the tip of the red giant branch, as a result of the vastly increased surface area, the Sun's surface will be much cooler (about 2600 K) than now and its luminosity much higher—up to 2,700 current solar luminosities. For part of its red giant life, the Sun will have a strong stellar wind that will carry away around 33% of its mass. During these times, it is possible that Saturn's moon Titan could achieve surface temperatures necessary to support life.As the Sun expands, it will swallow the planets Mercury and Venus. Earth's fate is less clear; although the Sun will envelop Earth's current orbit, the star's loss of mass (and thus weaker gravity) will cause the planets' orbits to move farther out. If it were only for this, Venus and Earth would probably escape incineration, but a 2008 study suggests that Earth will likely be swallowed up as a result of tidal interactions with the Sun's weakly bound outer envelope.Gradually, the hydrogen burning in the shell around the solar core will increase the mass of the core until it reaches about 45% of the present solar mass. At this point the density and temperature will become so high that the fusion of helium into carbon will begin, leading to a helium flash; the Sun will shrink from around 250 to 11 times its present (main-sequence) radius. Consequently, its luminosity will decrease from around 3,000 to 54 times its current level, and its surface temperature will increase to about 4770 K. The Sun will become a horizontal giant, burning helium in its core in a stable fashion much like it burns hydrogen today. The helium-fusing stage will last only 100 million years. Eventually, it will have to again resort to the reserves of hydrogen and helium in its outer layers and will expand a second time, turning into what is known as an asymptotic giant. Here the luminosity of the Sun will increase again, reaching about 2,090 present luminosities, and it will cool to about 3500 K. This phase lasts about 30 million years, after which, over the course of a further 100,000 years, the Sun's remaining outer layers will fall away, ejecting a vast stream of matter into space and forming a halo known (misleadingly) as a planetary nebula. The ejected material will contain the helium and carbon produced by the Sun's nuclear reactions, continuing the enrichment of the interstellar medium with heavy elements for future generations of stars.

Keith was playing a simulation game. In the game he could travel around the Sun in the future. He started the game in present time, which was denoted as time A. Then he traveled 5.4 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time B. Finally, he reached 7.5 billion years into the future, which was denoted as time C. He was amazed to find how the Sun would change over time.

When would the Sun be dimmer, time A or time C?

3301321417

Apex predators can have profound effects on ecosystems, as the consequences of both controlling prey density and restricting smaller predators, and may be capable of self-regulation. They are central to the functioning of ecosystems, the regulation of disease, and the maintenance of biodiversity. When introduced to subarctic islands, for example, Arctic foxes' predation of seabirds has been shown to turn grassland into tundra. Such wide-ranging effects on lower levels of an ecosystem are termed trophic cascades. The removal of top-level predators, often through human agency, can cause or disrupt trophic cascades. For example, reduction in the population of sperm whales, apex predators with a fractional trophic level of 4.7, by hunting has caused an increase in the population of large squid, trophic level over 4 (carnivores that eat other carnivores). This effect, called mesopredator release, occurs in terrestrial and marine ecosystems; for instance, in North America, the ranges of all apex carnivores have contracted whereas those of 60% of mesopredators have grown in the past two centuries.

John was studying the species in Siberia. He found that the Siberian tiger is an apex predator. It had a pretty stable population during the sixteenth century. He noted that information as case A. Then with the introduction of guns the number of Siberian tigers decreased in the seventeenth century. He noted that information as case B.

In which case the number of mesopredators would increase, case A or case B?

3277138619

Apex predators can have profound effects on ecosystems, as the consequences of both controlling prey density and restricting smaller predators, and may be capable of self-regulation. They are central to the functioning of ecosystems, the regulation of disease, and the maintenance of biodiversity. When introduced to subarctic islands, for example, Arctic foxes' predation of seabirds has been shown to turn grassland into tundra. Such wide-ranging effects on lower levels of an ecosystem are termed trophic cascades. The removal of top-level predators, often through human agency, can cause or disrupt trophic cascades. For example, reduction in the population of sperm whales, apex predators with a fractional trophic level of 4.7, by hunting has caused an increase in the population of large squid, trophic level over 4 (carnivores that eat other carnivores). This effect, called mesopredator release, occurs in terrestrial and marine ecosystems; for instance, in North America, the ranges of all apex carnivores have contracted whereas those of 60% of mesopredators have grown in the past two centuries.

John was studying the species in Siberia. He found that the Siberian tiger is an apex predator. It had a pretty stable population during the sixteenth century. He noted that information as case A. Then with the introduction of guns the number of Siberian tigers decreased in the seventeenth century. He noted that information as case B.

In which case the number of mesopredators would decrease, case A or case B?

3399363267

Apex predators can have profound effects on ecosystems, as the consequences of both controlling prey density and restricting smaller predators, and may be capable of self-regulation. They are central to the functioning of ecosystems, the regulation of disease, and the maintenance of biodiversity. When introduced to subarctic islands, for example, Arctic foxes' predation of seabirds has been shown to turn grassland into tundra. Such wide-ranging effects on lower levels of an ecosystem are termed trophic cascades. The removal of top-level predators, often through human agency, can cause or disrupt trophic cascades. For example, reduction in the population of sperm whales, apex predators with a fractional trophic level of 4.7, by hunting has caused an increase in the population of large squid, trophic level over 4 (carnivores that eat other carnivores). This effect, called mesopredator release, occurs in terrestrial and marine ecosystems; for instance, in North America, the ranges of all apex carnivores have contracted whereas those of 60% of mesopredators have grown in the past two centuries.

John was studying the species in Siberia. He found that the Siberian tiger is an apex predator. It had a pretty stable population during the sixteenth century. He noted that information as case A. Then with the introduction of guns the number of Siberian tigers decreased in the seventeenth century. He noted that information as case B.

In case A, would the number of mesopredators be less or more than in case B?

3403688643

Apex predators can have profound effects on ecosystems, as the consequences of both controlling prey density and restricting smaller predators, and may be capable of self-regulation. They are central to the functioning of ecosystems, the regulation of disease, and the maintenance of biodiversity. When introduced to subarctic islands, for example, Arctic foxes' predation of seabirds has been shown to turn grassland into tundra. Such wide-ranging effects on lower levels of an ecosystem are termed trophic cascades. The removal of top-level predators, often through human agency, can cause or disrupt trophic cascades. For example, reduction in the population of sperm whales, apex predators with a fractional trophic level of 4.7, by hunting has caused an increase in the population of large squid, trophic level over 4 (carnivores that eat other carnivores). This effect, called mesopredator release, occurs in terrestrial and marine ecosystems; for instance, in North America, the ranges of all apex carnivores have contracted whereas those of 60% of mesopredators have grown in the past two centuries.

John was studying the species in Siberia. He found that the Siberian tiger is an apex predator. It had a pretty stable population during the sixteenth century. He noted that information as case A. Then with the introduction of guns the number of Siberian tigers decreased in the seventeenth century. He noted that information as case B.

In case B, would the number of mesopredators be less or more than in case A?

1687299423

Apex predators can have profound effects on ecosystems, as the consequences of both controlling prey density and restricting smaller predators, and may be capable of self-regulation. They are central to the functioning of ecosystems, the regulation of disease, and the maintenance of biodiversity. When introduced to subarctic islands, for example, Arctic foxes' predation of seabirds has been shown to turn grassland into tundra. Such wide-ranging effects on lower levels of an ecosystem are termed trophic cascades. The removal of top-level predators, often through human agency, can cause or disrupt trophic cascades. For example, reduction in the population of sperm whales, apex predators with a fractional trophic level of 4.7, by hunting has caused an increase in the population of large squid, trophic level over 4 (carnivores that eat other carnivores). This effect, called mesopredator release, occurs in terrestrial and marine ecosystems; for instance, in North America, the ranges of all apex carnivores have contracted whereas those of 60% of mesopredators have grown in the past two centuries.

John was studying the species in Siberia. He found that the Siberian tiger is an apex predator. It had a pretty stable population during the sixteenth century. He noted that information as case A. Then with the introduction of guns the number of Siberian tigers decreased in the seventeenth century. He noted that information as case B.

In which case biodiversity would increase, case A or case B?

1663116625

Apex predators can have profound effects on ecosystems, as the consequences of both controlling prey density and restricting smaller predators, and may be capable of self-regulation. They are central to the functioning of ecosystems, the regulation of disease, and the maintenance of biodiversity. When introduced to subarctic islands, for example, Arctic foxes' predation of seabirds has been shown to turn grassland into tundra. Such wide-ranging effects on lower levels of an ecosystem are termed trophic cascades. The removal of top-level predators, often through human agency, can cause or disrupt trophic cascades. For example, reduction in the population of sperm whales, apex predators with a fractional trophic level of 4.7, by hunting has caused an increase in the population of large squid, trophic level over 4 (carnivores that eat other carnivores). This effect, called mesopredator release, occurs in terrestrial and marine ecosystems; for instance, in North America, the ranges of all apex carnivores have contracted whereas those of 60% of mesopredators have grown in the past two centuries.

John was studying the species in Siberia. He found that the Siberian tiger is an apex predator. It had a pretty stable population during the sixteenth century. He noted that information as case A. Then with the introduction of guns the number of Siberian tigers decreased in the seventeenth century. He noted that information as case B.

In which case biodiversity would decrease, case A or case B?

40642234

Apex predators can have profound effects on ecosystems, as the consequences of both controlling prey density and restricting smaller predators, and may be capable of self-regulation. They are central to the functioning of ecosystems, the regulation of disease, and the maintenance of biodiversity. When introduced to subarctic islands, for example, Arctic foxes' predation of seabirds has been shown to turn grassland into tundra. Such wide-ranging effects on lower levels of an ecosystem are termed trophic cascades. The removal of top-level predators, often through human agency, can cause or disrupt trophic cascades. For example, reduction in the population of sperm whales, apex predators with a fractional trophic level of 4.7, by hunting has caused an increase in the population of large squid, trophic level over 4 (carnivores that eat other carnivores). This effect, called mesopredator release, occurs in terrestrial and marine ecosystems; for instance, in North America, the ranges of all apex carnivores have contracted whereas those of 60% of mesopredators have grown in the past two centuries.

John was studying the species in Siberia. He found that the Siberian tiger is an apex predator. It had a pretty stable population during the sixteenth century. He noted that information as case A. Then with the introduction of guns the number of Siberian tigers decreased in the seventeenth century. He noted that information as case B.

In case A, would the biodiversity be less or more than in case B?

673261274

Apex predators can have profound effects on ecosystems, as the consequences of both controlling prey density and restricting smaller predators, and may be capable of self-regulation. They are central to the functioning of ecosystems, the regulation of disease, and the maintenance of biodiversity. When introduced to subarctic islands, for example, Arctic foxes' predation of seabirds has been shown to turn grassland into tundra. Such wide-ranging effects on lower levels of an ecosystem are termed trophic cascades. The removal of top-level predators, often through human agency, can cause or disrupt trophic cascades. For example, reduction in the population of sperm whales, apex predators with a fractional trophic level of 4.7, by hunting has caused an increase in the population of large squid, trophic level over 4 (carnivores that eat other carnivores). This effect, called mesopredator release, occurs in terrestrial and marine ecosystems; for instance, in North America, the ranges of all apex carnivores have contracted whereas those of 60% of mesopredators have grown in the past two centuries.

John was studying the species in Siberia. He found that the Siberian tiger is an apex predator. It had a pretty stable population during the sixteenth century. He noted that information as case A. Then with the introduction of guns the number of Siberian tigers decreased in the seventeenth century. He noted that information as case B.

In case B, would the biodiversity be less or more than in case A?

249245041

Apex predators can have profound effects on ecosystems, as the consequences of both controlling prey density and restricting smaller predators, and may be capable of self-regulation. They are central to the functioning of ecosystems, the regulation of disease, and the maintenance of biodiversity. When introduced to subarctic islands, for example, Arctic foxes' predation of seabirds has been shown to turn grassland into tundra. Such wide-ranging effects on lower levels of an ecosystem are termed trophic cascades. The removal of top-level predators, often through human agency, can cause or disrupt trophic cascades. For example, reduction in the population of sperm whales, apex predators with a fractional trophic level of 4.7, by hunting has caused an increase in the population of large squid, trophic level over 4 (carnivores that eat other carnivores). This effect, called mesopredator release, occurs in terrestrial and marine ecosystems; for instance, in North America, the ranges of all apex carnivores have contracted whereas those of 60% of mesopredators have grown in the past two centuries.

John was studying the species in Siberia. He found that the Siberian tiger is an apex predator. It had a pretty stable population during the sixteenth century. He noted that information as case A. Then with the introduction of guns the number of Siberian tigers decreased in the seventeenth century. He noted that information as case B.

Which case would more likely see disruption of trophic cascades, case A or case B?

264056181

Apex predators can have profound effects on ecosystems, as the consequences of both controlling prey density and restricting smaller predators, and may be capable of self-regulation. They are central to the functioning of ecosystems, the regulation of disease, and the maintenance of biodiversity. When introduced to subarctic islands, for example, Arctic foxes' predation of seabirds has been shown to turn grassland into tundra. Such wide-ranging effects on lower levels of an ecosystem are termed trophic cascades. The removal of top-level predators, often through human agency, can cause or disrupt trophic cascades. For example, reduction in the population of sperm whales, apex predators with a fractional trophic level of 4.7, by hunting has caused an increase in the population of large squid, trophic level over 4 (carnivores that eat other carnivores). This effect, called mesopredator release, occurs in terrestrial and marine ecosystems; for instance, in North America, the ranges of all apex carnivores have contracted whereas those of 60% of mesopredators have grown in the past two centuries.

John was studying the species in Siberia. He found that the Siberian tiger is an apex predator. It had a pretty stable population during the sixteenth century. He noted that information as case A. Then with the introduction of guns the number of Siberian tigers decreased in the seventeenth century. He noted that information as case B.

Which case would less likely see disruption of trophic cascades, case A or case B?

168709068

The dangers of global warming are being increasingly studied by a wide global consortium of scientists. These scientists are increasingly concerned about the potential long-term effects of global warming on our natural environment and on the planet. Of particular concern is how climate change and global warming caused by anthropogenic, or human-made releases of greenhouse gases, most notably carbon dioxide, can act interactively, and have adverse effects upon the planet, its natural environment and humans' existence. It is clear the planet is warming, and warming rapidly. This is due to the greenhouse effect, which is caused by greenhouse gases, which trap heat inside the Earth's atmosphere because of their more complex molecular structure which allows them to vibrate and in turn trap heat and release it back towards the Earth. This warming is also responsible for the extinction of natural habitats, which in turn leads to a reduction in wildlife population.The most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the group of the leading climate scientists in the world) concluded that the earth will warm anywhere from 2.7 to almost 11 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 to 6 degrees Celsius) between 1990 and 2100.

Rob was evaluating two research studies on climate change, study A and study B. Study A explained how increased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. On the other hand, study B showed how decreased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. Rob found the studies very interesting.

In which study more heat would be trapped inside the Earth's atmosphere, study A or study B?

186665936

The dangers of global warming are being increasingly studied by a wide global consortium of scientists. These scientists are increasingly concerned about the potential long-term effects of global warming on our natural environment and on the planet. Of particular concern is how climate change and global warming caused by anthropogenic, or human-made releases of greenhouse gases, most notably carbon dioxide, can act interactively, and have adverse effects upon the planet, its natural environment and humans' existence. It is clear the planet is warming, and warming rapidly. This is due to the greenhouse effect, which is caused by greenhouse gases, which trap heat inside the Earth's atmosphere because of their more complex molecular structure which allows them to vibrate and in turn trap heat and release it back towards the Earth. This warming is also responsible for the extinction of natural habitats, which in turn leads to a reduction in wildlife population.The most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the group of the leading climate scientists in the world) concluded that the earth will warm anywhere from 2.7 to almost 11 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 to 6 degrees Celsius) between 1990 and 2100.

Rob was evaluating two research studies on climate change, study A and study B. Study A explained how increased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. On the other hand, study B showed how decreased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. Rob found the studies very interesting.

In which study less heat would be trapped inside the Earth's atmosphere, study A or study B?

3053603656

The dangers of global warming are being increasingly studied by a wide global consortium of scientists. These scientists are increasingly concerned about the potential long-term effects of global warming on our natural environment and on the planet. Of particular concern is how climate change and global warming caused by anthropogenic, or human-made releases of greenhouse gases, most notably carbon dioxide, can act interactively, and have adverse effects upon the planet, its natural environment and humans' existence. It is clear the planet is warming, and warming rapidly. This is due to the greenhouse effect, which is caused by greenhouse gases, which trap heat inside the Earth's atmosphere because of their more complex molecular structure which allows them to vibrate and in turn trap heat and release it back towards the Earth. This warming is also responsible for the extinction of natural habitats, which in turn leads to a reduction in wildlife population.The most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the group of the leading climate scientists in the world) concluded that the earth will warm anywhere from 2.7 to almost 11 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 to 6 degrees Celsius) between 1990 and 2100.

Rob was evaluating two research studies on climate change, study A and study B. Study A explained how increased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. On the other hand, study B showed how decreased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. Rob found the studies very interesting.

Would less or more heat be trapped inside the Earth's atmospher in study A than in study B?

3965733736

The dangers of global warming are being increasingly studied by a wide global consortium of scientists. These scientists are increasingly concerned about the potential long-term effects of global warming on our natural environment and on the planet. Of particular concern is how climate change and global warming caused by anthropogenic, or human-made releases of greenhouse gases, most notably carbon dioxide, can act interactively, and have adverse effects upon the planet, its natural environment and humans' existence. It is clear the planet is warming, and warming rapidly. This is due to the greenhouse effect, which is caused by greenhouse gases, which trap heat inside the Earth's atmosphere because of their more complex molecular structure which allows them to vibrate and in turn trap heat and release it back towards the Earth. This warming is also responsible for the extinction of natural habitats, which in turn leads to a reduction in wildlife population.The most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the group of the leading climate scientists in the world) concluded that the earth will warm anywhere from 2.7 to almost 11 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 to 6 degrees Celsius) between 1990 and 2100.

Rob was evaluating two research studies on climate change, study A and study B. Study A explained how increased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. On the other hand, study B showed how decreased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. Rob found the studies very interesting.

Would less or more heat be trapped inside the Earth's atmospher in study B than in study A?

498287441

The dangers of global warming are being increasingly studied by a wide global consortium of scientists. These scientists are increasingly concerned about the potential long-term effects of global warming on our natural environment and on the planet. Of particular concern is how climate change and global warming caused by anthropogenic, or human-made releases of greenhouse gases, most notably carbon dioxide, can act interactively, and have adverse effects upon the planet, its natural environment and humans' existence. It is clear the planet is warming, and warming rapidly. This is due to the greenhouse effect, which is caused by greenhouse gases, which trap heat inside the Earth's atmosphere because of their more complex molecular structure which allows them to vibrate and in turn trap heat and release it back towards the Earth. This warming is also responsible for the extinction of natural habitats, which in turn leads to a reduction in wildlife population.The most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the group of the leading climate scientists in the world) concluded that the earth will warm anywhere from 2.7 to almost 11 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 to 6 degrees Celsius) between 1990 and 2100.

Rob was evaluating two research studies on climate change, study A and study B. Study A explained how increased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. On the other hand, study B showed how decreased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. Rob found the studies very interesting.

Which study would see more wildlife population, study A or study B?

507855701

The dangers of global warming are being increasingly studied by a wide global consortium of scientists. These scientists are increasingly concerned about the potential long-term effects of global warming on our natural environment and on the planet. Of particular concern is how climate change and global warming caused by anthropogenic, or human-made releases of greenhouse gases, most notably carbon dioxide, can act interactively, and have adverse effects upon the planet, its natural environment and humans' existence. It is clear the planet is warming, and warming rapidly. This is due to the greenhouse effect, which is caused by greenhouse gases, which trap heat inside the Earth's atmosphere because of their more complex molecular structure which allows them to vibrate and in turn trap heat and release it back towards the Earth. This warming is also responsible for the extinction of natural habitats, which in turn leads to a reduction in wildlife population.The most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the group of the leading climate scientists in the world) concluded that the earth will warm anywhere from 2.7 to almost 11 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 to 6 degrees Celsius) between 1990 and 2100.

Rob was evaluating two research studies on climate change, study A and study B. Study A explained how increased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. On the other hand, study B showed how decreased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. Rob found the studies very interesting.

Which study would see less wildlife population, study A or study B?

1103905339

The dangers of global warming are being increasingly studied by a wide global consortium of scientists. These scientists are increasingly concerned about the potential long-term effects of global warming on our natural environment and on the planet. Of particular concern is how climate change and global warming caused by anthropogenic, or human-made releases of greenhouse gases, most notably carbon dioxide, can act interactively, and have adverse effects upon the planet, its natural environment and humans' existence. It is clear the planet is warming, and warming rapidly. This is due to the greenhouse effect, which is caused by greenhouse gases, which trap heat inside the Earth's atmosphere because of their more complex molecular structure which allows them to vibrate and in turn trap heat and release it back towards the Earth. This warming is also responsible for the extinction of natural habitats, which in turn leads to a reduction in wildlife population.The most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the group of the leading climate scientists in the world) concluded that the earth will warm anywhere from 2.7 to almost 11 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 to 6 degrees Celsius) between 1990 and 2100.

Rob was evaluating two research studies on climate change, study A and study B. Study A explained how increased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. On the other hand, study B showed how decreased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. Rob found the studies very interesting.

Would study A see less or more wildlife population than study B?

1107182139

The dangers of global warming are being increasingly studied by a wide global consortium of scientists. These scientists are increasingly concerned about the potential long-term effects of global warming on our natural environment and on the planet. Of particular concern is how climate change and global warming caused by anthropogenic, or human-made releases of greenhouse gases, most notably carbon dioxide, can act interactively, and have adverse effects upon the planet, its natural environment and humans' existence. It is clear the planet is warming, and warming rapidly. This is due to the greenhouse effect, which is caused by greenhouse gases, which trap heat inside the Earth's atmosphere because of their more complex molecular structure which allows them to vibrate and in turn trap heat and release it back towards the Earth. This warming is also responsible for the extinction of natural habitats, which in turn leads to a reduction in wildlife population.The most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the group of the leading climate scientists in the world) concluded that the earth will warm anywhere from 2.7 to almost 11 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 to 6 degrees Celsius) between 1990 and 2100.

Rob was evaluating two research studies on climate change, study A and study B. Study A explained how increased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. On the other hand, study B showed how decreased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. Rob found the studies very interesting.

Would study B see less or more wildlife population than study A?

1532576342

The dangers of global warming are being increasingly studied by a wide global consortium of scientists. These scientists are increasingly concerned about the potential long-term effects of global warming on our natural environment and on the planet. Of particular concern is how climate change and global warming caused by anthropogenic, or human-made releases of greenhouse gases, most notably carbon dioxide, can act interactively, and have adverse effects upon the planet, its natural environment and humans' existence. It is clear the planet is warming, and warming rapidly. This is due to the greenhouse effect, which is caused by greenhouse gases, which trap heat inside the Earth's atmosphere because of their more complex molecular structure which allows them to vibrate and in turn trap heat and release it back towards the Earth. This warming is also responsible for the extinction of natural habitats, which in turn leads to a reduction in wildlife population.The most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the group of the leading climate scientists in the world) concluded that the earth will warm anywhere from 2.7 to almost 11 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 to 6 degrees Celsius) between 1990 and 2100.

Rob was evaluating two research studies on climate change, study A and study B. Study A explained how increased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. On the other hand, study B showed how decreased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. Rob found the studies very interesting.

Which study involved more complex molecules, study A or study B?

1541620314

The dangers of global warming are being increasingly studied by a wide global consortium of scientists. These scientists are increasingly concerned about the potential long-term effects of global warming on our natural environment and on the planet. Of particular concern is how climate change and global warming caused by anthropogenic, or human-made releases of greenhouse gases, most notably carbon dioxide, can act interactively, and have adverse effects upon the planet, its natural environment and humans' existence. It is clear the planet is warming, and warming rapidly. This is due to the greenhouse effect, which is caused by greenhouse gases, which trap heat inside the Earth's atmosphere because of their more complex molecular structure which allows them to vibrate and in turn trap heat and release it back towards the Earth. This warming is also responsible for the extinction of natural habitats, which in turn leads to a reduction in wildlife population.The most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the group of the leading climate scientists in the world) concluded that the earth will warm anywhere from 2.7 to almost 11 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 to 6 degrees Celsius) between 1990 and 2100.

Rob was evaluating two research studies on climate change, study A and study B. Study A explained how increased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. On the other hand, study B showed how decreased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. Rob found the studies very interesting.

Which study involved less complex molecules, study A or study B?

952653670

Some processes in the body are regulated by positive feedback. Positive feedback is when a response to an event increases the likelihood of the event to continue. An example of positive feedback is milk production in nursing mothers. As the baby drinks her mother's milk, the hormone prolactin, a chemical signal, is released. The more the baby suckles, the more prolactin is released, which causes more milk to be produced. Other examples of positive feedback include contractions during childbirth. When constrictions in the uterus push a baby into the birth canal, additional contractions occur.

John is a doctor at the children's hospital. He had two different cases to investigate, case A and case B. In case case A, a baby continued to suckle mother's milk. But in case B, a baby stopped suckling mother's milk. He had to determine the different effects these two cases were causing.

In which case more prolactin would be released, case A or case B?

963794794

Some processes in the body are regulated by positive feedback. Positive feedback is when a response to an event increases the likelihood of the event to continue. An example of positive feedback is milk production in nursing mothers. As the baby drinks her mother's milk, the hormone prolactin, a chemical signal, is released. The more the baby suckles, the more prolactin is released, which causes more milk to be produced. Other examples of positive feedback include contractions during childbirth. When constrictions in the uterus push a baby into the birth canal, additional contractions occur.

John is a doctor at the children's hospital. He had two different cases to investigate, case A and case B. In case case A, a baby continued to suckle mother's milk. But in case B, a baby stopped suckling mother's milk. He had to determine the different effects these two cases were causing.

In which case less prolactin would be released, case A or case B?

2159695844

Some processes in the body are regulated by positive feedback. Positive feedback is when a response to an event increases the likelihood of the event to continue. An example of positive feedback is milk production in nursing mothers. As the baby drinks her mother's milk, the hormone prolactin, a chemical signal, is released. The more the baby suckles, the more prolactin is released, which causes more milk to be produced. Other examples of positive feedback include contractions during childbirth. When constrictions in the uterus push a baby into the birth canal, additional contractions occur.

John is a doctor at the children's hospital. He had two different cases to investigate, case A and case B. In case case A, a baby continued to suckle mother's milk. But in case B, a baby stopped suckling mother's milk. He had to determine the different effects these two cases were causing.

In case A would less or more prolactin be released than in case B?

2163365860

Some processes in the body are regulated by positive feedback. Positive feedback is when a response to an event increases the likelihood of the event to continue. An example of positive feedback is milk production in nursing mothers. As the baby drinks her mother's milk, the hormone prolactin, a chemical signal, is released. The more the baby suckles, the more prolactin is released, which causes more milk to be produced. Other examples of positive feedback include contractions during childbirth. When constrictions in the uterus push a baby into the birth canal, additional contractions occur.

John is a doctor at the children's hospital. He had two different cases to investigate, case A and case B. In case case A, a baby continued to suckle mother's milk. But in case B, a baby stopped suckling mother's milk. He had to determine the different effects these two cases were causing.

In case B would less or more prolactin be released than in case A?

2016564568

Some processes in the body are regulated by positive feedback. Positive feedback is when a response to an event increases the likelihood of the event to continue. An example of positive feedback is milk production in nursing mothers. As the baby drinks her mother's milk, the hormone prolactin, a chemical signal, is released. The more the baby suckles, the more prolactin is released, which causes more milk to be produced. Other examples of positive feedback include contractions during childbirth. When constrictions in the uterus push a baby into the birth canal, additional contractions occur.

John is a doctor at the children's hospital. He had two different cases to investigate, case A and case B. In case case A, a baby continued to suckle mother's milk. But in case B, a baby stopped suckling mother's milk. He had to determine the different effects these two cases were causing.

In which case more milk would be produced, case A or case B?

2026394972

Some processes in the body are regulated by positive feedback. Positive feedback is when a response to an event increases the likelihood of the event to continue. An example of positive feedback is milk production in nursing mothers. As the baby drinks her mother's milk, the hormone prolactin, a chemical signal, is released. The more the baby suckles, the more prolactin is released, which causes more milk to be produced. Other examples of positive feedback include contractions during childbirth. When constrictions in the uterus push a baby into the birth canal, additional contractions occur.

John is a doctor at the children's hospital. He had two different cases to investigate, case A and case B. In case case A, a baby continued to suckle mother's milk. But in case B, a baby stopped suckling mother's milk. He had to determine the different effects these two cases were causing.

In which case less milk would be produced, case A or case B?

3262338518

Some processes in the body are regulated by positive feedback. Positive feedback is when a response to an event increases the likelihood of the event to continue. An example of positive feedback is milk production in nursing mothers. As the baby drinks her mother's milk, the hormone prolactin, a chemical signal, is released. The more the baby suckles, the more prolactin is released, which causes more milk to be produced. Other examples of positive feedback include contractions during childbirth. When constrictions in the uterus push a baby into the birth canal, additional contractions occur.

John is a doctor at the children's hospital. He had two different cases to investigate, case A and case B. In case case A, a baby continued to suckle mother's milk. But in case B, a baby stopped suckling mother's milk. He had to determine the different effects these two cases were causing.

In case A would less or more milk be produced than in case B?

3265680854

Some processes in the body are regulated by positive feedback. Positive feedback is when a response to an event increases the likelihood of the event to continue. An example of positive feedback is milk production in nursing mothers. As the baby drinks her mother's milk, the hormone prolactin, a chemical signal, is released. The more the baby suckles, the more prolactin is released, which causes more milk to be produced. Other examples of positive feedback include contractions during childbirth. When constrictions in the uterus push a baby into the birth canal, additional contractions occur.

John is a doctor at the children's hospital. He had two different cases to investigate, case A and case B. In case case A, a baby continued to suckle mother's milk. But in case B, a baby stopped suckling mother's milk. He had to determine the different effects these two cases were causing.

In case B would less or more milk be produced than in case A?

670586145

Some processes in the body are regulated by positive feedback. Positive feedback is when a response to an event increases the likelihood of the event to continue. An example of positive feedback is milk production in nursing mothers. As the baby drinks her mother's milk, the hormone prolactin, a chemical signal, is released. The more the baby suckles, the more prolactin is released, which causes more milk to be produced. Other examples of positive feedback include contractions during childbirth. When constrictions in the uterus push a baby into the birth canal, additional contractions occur.

John is a doctor at the children's hospital. He had two different cases to investigate, case A and case B. In case case A, a baby continued to suckle mother's milk. But in case B, a baby stopped suckling mother's milk. He had to determine the different effects these two cases were causing.

Which is an example of positive feedback, case A or case B?

2205046418

Some processes in the body are regulated by positive feedback. Positive feedback is when a response to an event increases the likelihood of the event to continue. An example of positive feedback is milk production in nursing mothers. As the baby drinks her mother's milk, the hormone prolactin, a chemical signal, is released. The more the baby suckles, the more prolactin is released, which causes more milk to be produced. Other examples of positive feedback include contractions during childbirth. When constrictions in the uterus push a baby into the birth canal, additional contractions occur.

John is a doctor at the children's hospital. He had two different cases to investigate, case A and case B. In case case A, a baby continued to suckle mother's milk. But in case B, a baby stopped suckling mother's milk. He had to determine the different effects these two cases were causing.

Which is not an example of positive feedback, case A or case B?

4273249945

In addition to insects, weeds have also been a menace to farmers - just ask anyone with a garden how much they hate weeds. They can quickly compete for water and nutrients needed by other plants. Sure, farmers can use herbicides to kill weeds, but do these chemicals also harm the crops? Can biotechnology help with this issue? Some crops have also been genetically engineered to acquire tolerance to the herbicides - allowing the crops to grow, but killing the weeds. But the lack of cost effective herbicides with a broad range of activity - that do not harm crops - is a problem in weed management. Multiple applications of numerous herbicides are routinely needed to control the wide range of weeds that are harmful to crops. And at times these herbicides are being used as a preventive measure – that is, spraying to prevent weeds from developing rather than spraying after weeds form. So these chemicals are being added to crops. This practice is followed by mechanical and/or hand weeding to control weeds that are not controlled by the chemicals. Crops that are tolerant of herbicides would obviously be a tremendous benefit to farmers ( Figure above ). The introduction of herbicide tolerant crops has the potential to reduce the number of chemicals needed during a growing season, thereby increasing crop yield due to improved weed management and decreased harm to the crops.

Dan studied genetic engineering. He was applying his knowledge of genetic engineering to develop better crops. Recently, he had successfully developed a crop, crop A, that was herbicide tolerant. To determine the versatility of the crop he compared it with another crop that was not tolerant of herbicides, crop B. The results of his research would allow his company to market the new crop.

Which crop would be more beneficial to farmers, crop A or crop B?

4282818205

In addition to insects, weeds have also been a menace to farmers - just ask anyone with a garden how much they hate weeds. They can quickly compete for water and nutrients needed by other plants. Sure, farmers can use herbicides to kill weeds, but do these chemicals also harm the crops? Can biotechnology help with this issue? Some crops have also been genetically engineered to acquire tolerance to the herbicides - allowing the crops to grow, but killing the weeds. But the lack of cost effective herbicides with a broad range of activity - that do not harm crops - is a problem in weed management. Multiple applications of numerous herbicides are routinely needed to control the wide range of weeds that are harmful to crops. And at times these herbicides are being used as a preventive measure – that is, spraying to prevent weeds from developing rather than spraying after weeds form. So these chemicals are being added to crops. This practice is followed by mechanical and/or hand weeding to control weeds that are not controlled by the chemicals. Crops that are tolerant of herbicides would obviously be a tremendous benefit to farmers ( Figure above ). The introduction of herbicide tolerant crops has the potential to reduce the number of chemicals needed during a growing season, thereby increasing crop yield due to improved weed management and decreased harm to the crops.

Dan studied genetic engineering. He was applying his knowledge of genetic engineering to develop better crops. Recently, he had successfully developed a crop, crop A, that was herbicide tolerant. To determine the versatility of the crop he compared it with another crop that was not tolerant of herbicides, crop B. The results of his research would allow his company to market the new crop.

Which crop would be less beneficial to farmers, crop A or crop B?

36019876

In addition to insects, weeds have also been a menace to farmers - just ask anyone with a garden how much they hate weeds. They can quickly compete for water and nutrients needed by other plants. Sure, farmers can use herbicides to kill weeds, but do these chemicals also harm the crops? Can biotechnology help with this issue? Some crops have also been genetically engineered to acquire tolerance to the herbicides - allowing the crops to grow, but killing the weeds. But the lack of cost effective herbicides with a broad range of activity - that do not harm crops - is a problem in weed management. Multiple applications of numerous herbicides are routinely needed to control the wide range of weeds that are harmful to crops. And at times these herbicides are being used as a preventive measure – that is, spraying to prevent weeds from developing rather than spraying after weeds form. So these chemicals are being added to crops. This practice is followed by mechanical and/or hand weeding to control weeds that are not controlled by the chemicals. Crops that are tolerant of herbicides would obviously be a tremendous benefit to farmers ( Figure above ). The introduction of herbicide tolerant crops has the potential to reduce the number of chemicals needed during a growing season, thereby increasing crop yield due to improved weed management and decreased harm to the crops.

Dan studied genetic engineering. He was applying his knowledge of genetic engineering to develop better crops. Recently, he had successfully developed a crop, crop A, that was herbicide tolerant. To determine the versatility of the crop he compared it with another crop that was not tolerant of herbicides, crop B. The results of his research would allow his company to market the new crop.

Which crop would need less number of chemicals, crop A or crop B?

26975904

In addition to insects, weeds have also been a menace to farmers - just ask anyone with a garden how much they hate weeds. They can quickly compete for water and nutrients needed by other plants. Sure, farmers can use herbicides to kill weeds, but do these chemicals also harm the crops? Can biotechnology help with this issue? Some crops have also been genetically engineered to acquire tolerance to the herbicides - allowing the crops to grow, but killing the weeds. But the lack of cost effective herbicides with a broad range of activity - that do not harm crops - is a problem in weed management. Multiple applications of numerous herbicides are routinely needed to control the wide range of weeds that are harmful to crops. And at times these herbicides are being used as a preventive measure – that is, spraying to prevent weeds from developing rather than spraying after weeds form. So these chemicals are being added to crops. This practice is followed by mechanical and/or hand weeding to control weeds that are not controlled by the chemicals. Crops that are tolerant of herbicides would obviously be a tremendous benefit to farmers ( Figure above ). The introduction of herbicide tolerant crops has the potential to reduce the number of chemicals needed during a growing season, thereby increasing crop yield due to improved weed management and decreased harm to the crops.

Dan studied genetic engineering. He was applying his knowledge of genetic engineering to develop better crops. Recently, he had successfully developed a crop, crop A, that was herbicide tolerant. To determine the versatility of the crop he compared it with another crop that was not tolerant of herbicides, crop B. The results of his research would allow his company to market the new crop.

Which crop would need more number of chemicals, crop A or crop B?

3043466767

In addition to insects, weeds have also been a menace to farmers - just ask anyone with a garden how much they hate weeds. They can quickly compete for water and nutrients needed by other plants. Sure, farmers can use herbicides to kill weeds, but do these chemicals also harm the crops? Can biotechnology help with this issue? Some crops have also been genetically engineered to acquire tolerance to the herbicides - allowing the crops to grow, but killing the weeds. But the lack of cost effective herbicides with a broad range of activity - that do not harm crops - is a problem in weed management. Multiple applications of numerous herbicides are routinely needed to control the wide range of weeds that are harmful to crops. And at times these herbicides are being used as a preventive measure – that is, spraying to prevent weeds from developing rather than spraying after weeds form. So these chemicals are being added to crops. This practice is followed by mechanical and/or hand weeding to control weeds that are not controlled by the chemicals. Crops that are tolerant of herbicides would obviously be a tremendous benefit to farmers ( Figure above ). The introduction of herbicide tolerant crops has the potential to reduce the number of chemicals needed during a growing season, thereby increasing crop yield due to improved weed management and decreased harm to the crops.

Dan studied genetic engineering. He was applying his knowledge of genetic engineering to develop better crops. Recently, he had successfully developed a crop, crop A, that was herbicide tolerant. To determine the versatility of the crop he compared it with another crop that was not tolerant of herbicides, crop B. The results of his research would allow his company to market the new crop.

Would crop A need less or more number of chemicals than crop B?

3046743567

In addition to insects, weeds have also been a menace to farmers - just ask anyone with a garden how much they hate weeds. They can quickly compete for water and nutrients needed by other plants. Sure, farmers can use herbicides to kill weeds, but do these chemicals also harm the crops? Can biotechnology help with this issue? Some crops have also been genetically engineered to acquire tolerance to the herbicides - allowing the crops to grow, but killing the weeds. But the lack of cost effective herbicides with a broad range of activity - that do not harm crops - is a problem in weed management. Multiple applications of numerous herbicides are routinely needed to control the wide range of weeds that are harmful to crops. And at times these herbicides are being used as a preventive measure – that is, spraying to prevent weeds from developing rather than spraying after weeds form. So these chemicals are being added to crops. This practice is followed by mechanical and/or hand weeding to control weeds that are not controlled by the chemicals. Crops that are tolerant of herbicides would obviously be a tremendous benefit to farmers ( Figure above ). The introduction of herbicide tolerant crops has the potential to reduce the number of chemicals needed during a growing season, thereby increasing crop yield due to improved weed management and decreased harm to the crops.

Dan studied genetic engineering. He was applying his knowledge of genetic engineering to develop better crops. Recently, he had successfully developed a crop, crop A, that was herbicide tolerant. To determine the versatility of the crop he compared it with another crop that was not tolerant of herbicides, crop B. The results of his research would allow his company to market the new crop.

Would crop B need less or more number of chemicals than crop A?

1017551535

In addition to insects, weeds have also been a menace to farmers - just ask anyone with a garden how much they hate weeds. They can quickly compete for water and nutrients needed by other plants. Sure, farmers can use herbicides to kill weeds, but do these chemicals also harm the crops? Can biotechnology help with this issue? Some crops have also been genetically engineered to acquire tolerance to the herbicides - allowing the crops to grow, but killing the weeds. But the lack of cost effective herbicides with a broad range of activity - that do not harm crops - is a problem in weed management. Multiple applications of numerous herbicides are routinely needed to control the wide range of weeds that are harmful to crops. And at times these herbicides are being used as a preventive measure – that is, spraying to prevent weeds from developing rather than spraying after weeds form. So these chemicals are being added to crops. This practice is followed by mechanical and/or hand weeding to control weeds that are not controlled by the chemicals. Crops that are tolerant of herbicides would obviously be a tremendous benefit to farmers ( Figure above ). The introduction of herbicide tolerant crops has the potential to reduce the number of chemicals needed during a growing season, thereby increasing crop yield due to improved weed management and decreased harm to the crops.

Dan studied genetic engineering. He was applying his knowledge of genetic engineering to develop better crops. Recently, he had successfully developed a crop, crop A, that was herbicide tolerant. To determine the versatility of the crop he compared it with another crop that was not tolerant of herbicides, crop B. The results of his research would allow his company to market the new crop.

Which crop would have higher yields, crop A or crop B?

2732628577

In addition to insects, weeds have also been a menace to farmers - just ask anyone with a garden how much they hate weeds. They can quickly compete for water and nutrients needed by other plants. Sure, farmers can use herbicides to kill weeds, but do these chemicals also harm the crops? Can biotechnology help with this issue? Some crops have also been genetically engineered to acquire tolerance to the herbicides - allowing the crops to grow, but killing the weeds. But the lack of cost effective herbicides with a broad range of activity - that do not harm crops - is a problem in weed management. Multiple applications of numerous herbicides are routinely needed to control the wide range of weeds that are harmful to crops. And at times these herbicides are being used as a preventive measure – that is, spraying to prevent weeds from developing rather than spraying after weeds form. So these chemicals are being added to crops. This practice is followed by mechanical and/or hand weeding to control weeds that are not controlled by the chemicals. Crops that are tolerant of herbicides would obviously be a tremendous benefit to farmers ( Figure above ). The introduction of herbicide tolerant crops has the potential to reduce the number of chemicals needed during a growing season, thereby increasing crop yield due to improved weed management and decreased harm to the crops.

Dan studied genetic engineering. He was applying his knowledge of genetic engineering to develop better crops. Recently, he had successfully developed a crop, crop A, that was herbicide tolerant. To determine the versatility of the crop he compared it with another crop that was not tolerant of herbicides, crop B. The results of his research would allow his company to market the new crop.

Which crop would have lower yields, crop A or crop B?

2594675344

In addition to insects, weeds have also been a menace to farmers - just ask anyone with a garden how much they hate weeds. They can quickly compete for water and nutrients needed by other plants. Sure, farmers can use herbicides to kill weeds, but do these chemicals also harm the crops? Can biotechnology help with this issue? Some crops have also been genetically engineered to acquire tolerance to the herbicides - allowing the crops to grow, but killing the weeds. But the lack of cost effective herbicides with a broad range of activity - that do not harm crops - is a problem in weed management. Multiple applications of numerous herbicides are routinely needed to control the wide range of weeds that are harmful to crops. And at times these herbicides are being used as a preventive measure – that is, spraying to prevent weeds from developing rather than spraying after weeds form. So these chemicals are being added to crops. This practice is followed by mechanical and/or hand weeding to control weeds that are not controlled by the chemicals. Crops that are tolerant of herbicides would obviously be a tremendous benefit to farmers ( Figure above ). The introduction of herbicide tolerant crops has the potential to reduce the number of chemicals needed during a growing season, thereby increasing crop yield due to improved weed management and decreased harm to the crops.

Dan studied genetic engineering. He was applying his knowledge of genetic engineering to develop better crops. Recently, he had successfully developed a crop, crop A, that was herbicide tolerant. To determine the versatility of the crop he compared it with another crop that was not tolerant of herbicides, crop B. The results of his research would allow his company to market the new crop.

Would crop A have lower or higher yields than crop B?

2597296784

In addition to insects, weeds have also been a menace to farmers - just ask anyone with a garden how much they hate weeds. They can quickly compete for water and nutrients needed by other plants. Sure, farmers can use herbicides to kill weeds, but do these chemicals also harm the crops? Can biotechnology help with this issue? Some crops have also been genetically engineered to acquire tolerance to the herbicides - allowing the crops to grow, but killing the weeds. But the lack of cost effective herbicides with a broad range of activity - that do not harm crops - is a problem in weed management. Multiple applications of numerous herbicides are routinely needed to control the wide range of weeds that are harmful to crops. And at times these herbicides are being used as a preventive measure – that is, spraying to prevent weeds from developing rather than spraying after weeds form. So these chemicals are being added to crops. This practice is followed by mechanical and/or hand weeding to control weeds that are not controlled by the chemicals. Crops that are tolerant of herbicides would obviously be a tremendous benefit to farmers ( Figure above ). The introduction of herbicide tolerant crops has the potential to reduce the number of chemicals needed during a growing season, thereby increasing crop yield due to improved weed management and decreased harm to the crops.

Dan studied genetic engineering. He was applying his knowledge of genetic engineering to develop better crops. Recently, he had successfully developed a crop, crop A, that was herbicide tolerant. To determine the versatility of the crop he compared it with another crop that was not tolerant of herbicides, crop B. The results of his research would allow his company to market the new crop.

Would crop B have lower or higher yields than crop A?

1566865631

Noble gases are also used to fill the glass tubes of lighted signs like the one in the Figure below . Although noble gases are chemically nonreactive, their electrons can be energized by sending an electric current through them. When this happens, the electrons jump to a higher energy level. When the electrons return to their original energy level, they give off energy as light. Different noble gases give off light of different colors. Neon gives off reddish-orange light, like the word “Open” in the sign below. Krypton gives off violet light and xenon gives off blue light.

John wanted to make some lighted signs for his business. To that end, he chose noble gases, neon, krypton, and xenon. First, he kept the noble gases in containers. He called it step A. Then he passed electric current through them. He called it step B. In the process, he came up with three signs, sign A, sign B, and sign C. Sign A used neon. Sign B used krypton, and sign C used xenon.

In which step the the electrons would jump to higher energy level, step A or step B?

1188919888

Noble gases are also used to fill the glass tubes of lighted signs like the one in the Figure below . Although noble gases are chemically nonreactive, their electrons can be energized by sending an electric current through them. When this happens, the electrons jump to a higher energy level. When the electrons return to their original energy level, they give off energy as light. Different noble gases give off light of different colors. Neon gives off reddish-orange light, like the word “Open” in the sign below. Krypton gives off violet light and xenon gives off blue light.

John wanted to make some lighted signs for his business. To that end, he chose noble gases, neon, krypton, and xenon. First, he kept the noble gases in containers. He called it step A. Then he passed electric current through them. He called it step B. In the process, he came up with three signs, sign A, sign B, and sign C. Sign A used neon. Sign B used krypton, and sign C used xenon.

In which step the the electrons would not jump to higher energy level, step A or step B?

1029929134

Noble gases are also used to fill the glass tubes of lighted signs like the one in the Figure below . Although noble gases are chemically nonreactive, their electrons can be energized by sending an electric current through them. When this happens, the electrons jump to a higher energy level. When the electrons return to their original energy level, they give off energy as light. Different noble gases give off light of different colors. Neon gives off reddish-orange light, like the word “Open” in the sign below. Krypton gives off violet light and xenon gives off blue light.

John wanted to make some lighted signs for his business. To that end, he chose noble gases, neon, krypton, and xenon. First, he kept the noble gases in containers. He called it step A. Then he passed electric current through them. He called it step B. In the process, he came up with three signs, sign A, sign B, and sign C. Sign A used neon. Sign B used krypton, and sign C used xenon.

In step A would the electrons be in the higher or lower energy level than in step B?

1034778798

Noble gases are also used to fill the glass tubes of lighted signs like the one in the Figure below . Although noble gases are chemically nonreactive, their electrons can be energized by sending an electric current through them. When this happens, the electrons jump to a higher energy level. When the electrons return to their original energy level, they give off energy as light. Different noble gases give off light of different colors. Neon gives off reddish-orange light, like the word “Open” in the sign below. Krypton gives off violet light and xenon gives off blue light.

John wanted to make some lighted signs for his business. To that end, he chose noble gases, neon, krypton, and xenon. First, he kept the noble gases in containers. He called it step A. Then he passed electric current through them. He called it step B. In the process, he came up with three signs, sign A, sign B, and sign C. Sign A used neon. Sign B used krypton, and sign C used xenon.

In step B would the electrons be in the higher or lower energy level than in step A?

659779261

Noble gases are also used to fill the glass tubes of lighted signs like the one in the Figure below . Although noble gases are chemically nonreactive, their electrons can be energized by sending an electric current through them. When this happens, the electrons jump to a higher energy level. When the electrons return to their original energy level, they give off energy as light. Different noble gases give off light of different colors. Neon gives off reddish-orange light, like the word “Open” in the sign below. Krypton gives off violet light and xenon gives off blue light.

John wanted to make some lighted signs for his business. To that end, he chose noble gases, neon, krypton, and xenon. First, he kept the noble gases in containers. He called it step A. Then he passed electric current through them. He called it step B. In the process, he came up with three signs, sign A, sign B, and sign C. Sign A used neon. Sign B used krypton, and sign C used xenon.

What color would sign A have, reddish-orange or violet?

3824839386

Noble gases are also used to fill the glass tubes of lighted signs like the one in the Figure below . Although noble gases are chemically nonreactive, their electrons can be energized by sending an electric current through them. When this happens, the electrons jump to a higher energy level. When the electrons return to their original energy level, they give off energy as light. Different noble gases give off light of different colors. Neon gives off reddish-orange light, like the word “Open” in the sign below. Krypton gives off violet light and xenon gives off blue light.

John wanted to make some lighted signs for his business. To that end, he chose noble gases, neon, krypton, and xenon. First, he kept the noble gases in containers. He called it step A. Then he passed electric current through them. He called it step B. In the process, he came up with three signs, sign A, sign B, and sign C. Sign A used neon. Sign B used krypton, and sign C used xenon.

What color would sign B have, violet or blue?

1183280596

Noble gases are also used to fill the glass tubes of lighted signs like the one in the Figure below . Although noble gases are chemically nonreactive, their electrons can be energized by sending an electric current through them. When this happens, the electrons jump to a higher energy level. When the electrons return to their original energy level, they give off energy as light. Different noble gases give off light of different colors. Neon gives off reddish-orange light, like the word “Open” in the sign below. Krypton gives off violet light and xenon gives off blue light.

John wanted to make some lighted signs for his business. To that end, he chose noble gases, neon, krypton, and xenon. First, he kept the noble gases in containers. He called it step A. Then he passed electric current through them. He called it step B. In the process, he came up with three signs, sign A, sign B, and sign C. Sign A used neon. Sign B used krypton, and sign C used xenon.

What color would sign C have, blue or reddish-orange?

3516887149

Noble gases are also used to fill the glass tubes of lighted signs like the one in the Figure below . Although noble gases are chemically nonreactive, their electrons can be energized by sending an electric current through them. When this happens, the electrons jump to a higher energy level. When the electrons return to their original energy level, they give off energy as light. Different noble gases give off light of different colors. Neon gives off reddish-orange light, like the word “Open” in the sign below. Krypton gives off violet light and xenon gives off blue light.

John wanted to make some lighted signs for his business. To that end, he chose noble gases, neon, krypton, and xenon. First, he kept the noble gases in containers. He called it step A. Then he passed electric current through them. He called it step B. In the process, he came up with three signs, sign A, sign B, and sign C. Sign A used neon. Sign B used krypton, and sign C used xenon.

Which sign would have reddish-orange color, sign A or sign B?

1340632438

Noble gases are also used to fill the glass tubes of lighted signs like the one in the Figure below . Although noble gases are chemically nonreactive, their electrons can be energized by sending an electric current through them. When this happens, the electrons jump to a higher energy level. When the electrons return to their original energy level, they give off energy as light. Different noble gases give off light of different colors. Neon gives off reddish-orange light, like the word “Open” in the sign below. Krypton gives off violet light and xenon gives off blue light.

John wanted to make some lighted signs for his business. To that end, he chose noble gases, neon, krypton, and xenon. First, he kept the noble gases in containers. He called it step A. Then he passed electric current through them. He called it step B. In the process, he came up with three signs, sign A, sign B, and sign C. Sign A used neon. Sign B used krypton, and sign C used xenon.

Which sign would have violet color, sign B or sign C?

1851288714

Noble gases are also used to fill the glass tubes of lighted signs like the one in the Figure below . Although noble gases are chemically nonreactive, their electrons can be energized by sending an electric current through them. When this happens, the electrons jump to a higher energy level. When the electrons return to their original energy level, they give off energy as light. Different noble gases give off light of different colors. Neon gives off reddish-orange light, like the word “Open” in the sign below. Krypton gives off violet light and xenon gives off blue light.

John wanted to make some lighted signs for his business. To that end, he chose noble gases, neon, krypton, and xenon. First, he kept the noble gases in containers. He called it step A. Then he passed electric current through them. He called it step B. In the process, he came up with three signs, sign A, sign B, and sign C. Sign A used neon. Sign B used krypton, and sign C used xenon.

Which sign would have blue color, sign C or sign A?

4213521969

Another thing we can see in this animation is that particles are constantly colliding with one another. One assumption that we make when talking about collisions between gas particles is that they are completely elastic collisions. In an elastic collision , momentum is conserved, which means that none of the kinetic energy of the colliding particles is lost in some other form (such as the emission of light). This makes sense, because if energy were lost in collisions, the speeds of the particles would gradually decrease over time, and eventually everything would condense down into a solid form.

Dan is in his physics lab. He is experimenting with colliding particles. He has two samples of particles, sample A and sample B. Sample A contains gas particles, but sample B does not contain gas particles.

Which sample would have elastic collisions, sample A or sample B?

4167516066

Another thing we can see in this animation is that particles are constantly colliding with one another. One assumption that we make when talking about collisions between gas particles is that they are completely elastic collisions. In an elastic collision , momentum is conserved, which means that none of the kinetic energy of the colliding particles is lost in some other form (such as the emission of light). This makes sense, because if energy were lost in collisions, the speeds of the particles would gradually decrease over time, and eventually everything would condense down into a solid form.

Dan is in his physics lab. He is experimenting with colliding particles. He has two samples of particles, sample A and sample B. Sample A contains gas particles, but sample B does not contain gas particles.

Which sample would not have elastic collisions, sample A or sample B?

763772867

Another thing we can see in this animation is that particles are constantly colliding with one another. One assumption that we make when talking about collisions between gas particles is that they are completely elastic collisions. In an elastic collision , momentum is conserved, which means that none of the kinetic energy of the colliding particles is lost in some other form (such as the emission of light). This makes sense, because if energy were lost in collisions, the speeds of the particles would gradually decrease over time, and eventually everything would condense down into a solid form.

Dan is in his physics lab. He is experimenting with colliding particles. He has two samples of particles, sample A and sample B. Sample A contains gas particles, but sample B does not contain gas particles.

In which sample the momentum would be conserved, sample A or sample B?

848642356

Another thing we can see in this animation is that particles are constantly colliding with one another. One assumption that we make when talking about collisions between gas particles is that they are completely elastic collisions. In an elastic collision , momentum is conserved, which means that none of the kinetic energy of the colliding particles is lost in some other form (such as the emission of light). This makes sense, because if energy were lost in collisions, the speeds of the particles would gradually decrease over time, and eventually everything would condense down into a solid form.

Dan is in his physics lab. He is experimenting with colliding particles. He has two samples of particles, sample A and sample B. Sample A contains gas particles, but sample B does not contain gas particles.

In which sample the momentum would not be conserved, sample A or sample B?

1504590889

Another thing we can see in this animation is that particles are constantly colliding with one another. One assumption that we make when talking about collisions between gas particles is that they are completely elastic collisions. In an elastic collision , momentum is conserved, which means that none of the kinetic energy of the colliding particles is lost in some other form (such as the emission of light). This makes sense, because if energy were lost in collisions, the speeds of the particles would gradually decrease over time, and eventually everything would condense down into a solid form.

Dan is in his physics lab. He is experimenting with colliding particles. He has two samples of particles, sample A and sample B. Sample A contains gas particles, but sample B does not contain gas particles.

Would momenturm be conserved or not conserved in sample A?

1504721962

Another thing we can see in this animation is that particles are constantly colliding with one another. One assumption that we make when talking about collisions between gas particles is that they are completely elastic collisions. In an elastic collision , momentum is conserved, which means that none of the kinetic energy of the colliding particles is lost in some other form (such as the emission of light). This makes sense, because if energy were lost in collisions, the speeds of the particles would gradually decrease over time, and eventually everything would condense down into a solid form.

Dan is in his physics lab. He is experimenting with colliding particles. He has two samples of particles, sample A and sample B. Sample A contains gas particles, but sample B does not contain gas particles.

Would momenturm be conserved or not conserved in sample B?

448215521

Another thing we can see in this animation is that particles are constantly colliding with one another. One assumption that we make when talking about collisions between gas particles is that they are completely elastic collisions. In an elastic collision , momentum is conserved, which means that none of the kinetic energy of the colliding particles is lost in some other form (such as the emission of light). This makes sense, because if energy were lost in collisions, the speeds of the particles would gradually decrease over time, and eventually everything would condense down into a solid form.

Dan is in his physics lab. He is experimenting with colliding particles. He has two samples of particles, sample A and sample B. Sample A contains gas particles, but sample B does not contain gas particles.

Would kinetic energy in sample A be lost or retained?

3177856140

Another thing we can see in this animation is that particles are constantly colliding with one another. One assumption that we make when talking about collisions between gas particles is that they are completely elastic collisions. In an elastic collision , momentum is conserved, which means that none of the kinetic energy of the colliding particles is lost in some other form (such as the emission of light). This makes sense, because if energy were lost in collisions, the speeds of the particles would gradually decrease over time, and eventually everything would condense down into a solid form.

Dan is in his physics lab. He is experimenting with colliding particles. He has two samples of particles, sample A and sample B. Sample A contains gas particles, but sample B does not contain gas particles.

Would kinetic energy in sample B likely be lost or retained?

1798782588

Another thing we can see in this animation is that particles are constantly colliding with one another. One assumption that we make when talking about collisions between gas particles is that they are completely elastic collisions. In an elastic collision , momentum is conserved, which means that none of the kinetic energy of the colliding particles is lost in some other form (such as the emission of light). This makes sense, because if energy were lost in collisions, the speeds of the particles would gradually decrease over time, and eventually everything would condense down into a solid form.

Dan is in his physics lab. He is experimenting with colliding particles. He has two samples of particles, sample A and sample B. Sample A contains gas particles, but sample B does not contain gas particles.

Which sample's kinetic energy likely be lost, sample A or sample B?

1853702150

Another thing we can see in this animation is that particles are constantly colliding with one another. One assumption that we make when talking about collisions between gas particles is that they are completely elastic collisions. In an elastic collision , momentum is conserved, which means that none of the kinetic energy of the colliding particles is lost in some other form (such as the emission of light). This makes sense, because if energy were lost in collisions, the speeds of the particles would gradually decrease over time, and eventually everything would condense down into a solid form.

Dan is in his physics lab. He is experimenting with colliding particles. He has two samples of particles, sample A and sample B. Sample A contains gas particles, but sample B does not contain gas particles.

Which sample's kinetic energy likely be retained, sample A or sample B?

3494733871

For example, a radioactive isotope of iodine (I-131) is used in both the diagnosis and treatment of thyroid cancer. The thyroid will normally absorb some iodine to produce iodine-containing thyroid hormones. An overactive thyroid gland will absorb a larger amount of the radioactive material. If this is the case, more and more radioactive iodine can be administered, where it will cluster in the diseased portion of the thyroid tissue and kill some of the nearby cells. Cancer treatments often cause patients to feel very sick, because while the radiation treatment kills the unwanted cancer cells, it causes damage to some healthy cells in the process.

John is a doctor in a local hospital. Today, he is seeing two patients, patient A and patient B. Patient A has thyroid cancer, but patient B does not have thyroid cancer. John is trying to see the difference between these two patients' reports.

Which patient's diagnosis would require radioactive isotope of iodine, patient A or patient B?

1942907296

For example, a radioactive isotope of iodine (I-131) is used in both the diagnosis and treatment of thyroid cancer. The thyroid will normally absorb some iodine to produce iodine-containing thyroid hormones. An overactive thyroid gland will absorb a larger amount of the radioactive material. If this is the case, more and more radioactive iodine can be administered, where it will cluster in the diseased portion of the thyroid tissue and kill some of the nearby cells. Cancer treatments often cause patients to feel very sick, because while the radiation treatment kills the unwanted cancer cells, it causes damage to some healthy cells in the process.

John is a doctor in a local hospital. Today, he is seeing two patients, patient A and patient B. Patient A has thyroid cancer, but patient B does not have thyroid cancer. John is trying to see the difference between these two patients' reports.

Which patient's diagnosis would not require radioactive isotope of iodine, patient A or patient B?

4250362256

For example, a radioactive isotope of iodine (I-131) is used in both the diagnosis and treatment of thyroid cancer. The thyroid will normally absorb some iodine to produce iodine-containing thyroid hormones. An overactive thyroid gland will absorb a larger amount of the radioactive material. If this is the case, more and more radioactive iodine can be administered, where it will cluster in the diseased portion of the thyroid tissue and kill some of the nearby cells. Cancer treatments often cause patients to feel very sick, because while the radiation treatment kills the unwanted cancer cells, it causes damage to some healthy cells in the process.

John is a doctor in a local hospital. Today, he is seeing two patients, patient A and patient B. Patient A has thyroid cancer, but patient B does not have thyroid cancer. John is trying to see the difference between these two patients' reports.

Which patient would have an overactive thyroid gland, patient A or patient B?

2276942593

For example, a radioactive isotope of iodine (I-131) is used in both the diagnosis and treatment of thyroid cancer. The thyroid will normally absorb some iodine to produce iodine-containing thyroid hormones. An overactive thyroid gland will absorb a larger amount of the radioactive material. If this is the case, more and more radioactive iodine can be administered, where it will cluster in the diseased portion of the thyroid tissue and kill some of the nearby cells. Cancer treatments often cause patients to feel very sick, because while the radiation treatment kills the unwanted cancer cells, it causes damage to some healthy cells in the process.

John is a doctor in a local hospital. Today, he is seeing two patients, patient A and patient B. Patient A has thyroid cancer, but patient B does not have thyroid cancer. John is trying to see the difference between these two patients' reports.

Which patient would not have an overactive thyroid gland, patient A or patient B?

3893848996

For example, a radioactive isotope of iodine (I-131) is used in both the diagnosis and treatment of thyroid cancer. The thyroid will normally absorb some iodine to produce iodine-containing thyroid hormones. An overactive thyroid gland will absorb a larger amount of the radioactive material. If this is the case, more and more radioactive iodine can be administered, where it will cluster in the diseased portion of the thyroid tissue and kill some of the nearby cells. Cancer treatments often cause patients to feel very sick, because while the radiation treatment kills the unwanted cancer cells, it causes damage to some healthy cells in the process.

John is a doctor in a local hospital. Today, he is seeing two patients, patient A and patient B. Patient A has thyroid cancer, but patient B does not have thyroid cancer. John is trying to see the difference between these two patients' reports.

Which patient's thyroid gland would absorb larger amount of radioacive material, patient A or patient B?

1501326359

For example, a radioactive isotope of iodine (I-131) is used in both the diagnosis and treatment of thyroid cancer. The thyroid will normally absorb some iodine to produce iodine-containing thyroid hormones. An overactive thyroid gland will absorb a larger amount of the radioactive material. If this is the case, more and more radioactive iodine can be administered, where it will cluster in the diseased portion of the thyroid tissue and kill some of the nearby cells. Cancer treatments often cause patients to feel very sick, because while the radiation treatment kills the unwanted cancer cells, it causes damage to some healthy cells in the process.

John is a doctor in a local hospital. Today, he is seeing two patients, patient A and patient B. Patient A has thyroid cancer, but patient B does not have thyroid cancer. John is trying to see the difference between these two patients' reports.

Which patient's thyroid gland would absorb smaller amount of radioacive material, patient A or patient B?

1752460159

For example, a radioactive isotope of iodine (I-131) is used in both the diagnosis and treatment of thyroid cancer. The thyroid will normally absorb some iodine to produce iodine-containing thyroid hormones. An overactive thyroid gland will absorb a larger amount of the radioactive material. If this is the case, more and more radioactive iodine can be administered, where it will cluster in the diseased portion of the thyroid tissue and kill some of the nearby cells. Cancer treatments often cause patients to feel very sick, because while the radiation treatment kills the unwanted cancer cells, it causes damage to some healthy cells in the process.

John is a doctor in a local hospital. Today, he is seeing two patients, patient A and patient B. Patient A has thyroid cancer, but patient B does not have thyroid cancer. John is trying to see the difference between these two patients' reports.

Would patient A's thyroid gland absorb larger or smaller amount of radioactive material than patient B?

1758161791

For example, a radioactive isotope of iodine (I-131) is used in both the diagnosis and treatment of thyroid cancer. The thyroid will normally absorb some iodine to produce iodine-containing thyroid hormones. An overactive thyroid gland will absorb a larger amount of the radioactive material. If this is the case, more and more radioactive iodine can be administered, where it will cluster in the diseased portion of the thyroid tissue and kill some of the nearby cells. Cancer treatments often cause patients to feel very sick, because while the radiation treatment kills the unwanted cancer cells, it causes damage to some healthy cells in the process.

John is a doctor in a local hospital. Today, he is seeing two patients, patient A and patient B. Patient A has thyroid cancer, but patient B does not have thyroid cancer. John is trying to see the difference between these two patients' reports.

Would patient B's thyroid gland absorb larger or smaller amount of radioactive material than patient A?

364470191

For example, a radioactive isotope of iodine (I-131) is used in both the diagnosis and treatment of thyroid cancer. The thyroid will normally absorb some iodine to produce iodine-containing thyroid hormones. An overactive thyroid gland will absorb a larger amount of the radioactive material. If this is the case, more and more radioactive iodine can be administered, where it will cluster in the diseased portion of the thyroid tissue and kill some of the nearby cells. Cancer treatments often cause patients to feel very sick, because while the radiation treatment kills the unwanted cancer cells, it causes damage to some healthy cells in the process.

John is a doctor in a local hospital. Today, he is seeing two patients, patient A and patient B. Patient A has thyroid cancer, but patient B does not have thyroid cancer. John is trying to see the difference between these two patients' reports.

Which patient would risk damaging healthy cells, patient A or patient B?

2489803022

For example, a radioactive isotope of iodine (I-131) is used in both the diagnosis and treatment of thyroid cancer. The thyroid will normally absorb some iodine to produce iodine-containing thyroid hormones. An overactive thyroid gland will absorb a larger amount of the radioactive material. If this is the case, more and more radioactive iodine can be administered, where it will cluster in the diseased portion of the thyroid tissue and kill some of the nearby cells. Cancer treatments often cause patients to feel very sick, because while the radiation treatment kills the unwanted cancer cells, it causes damage to some healthy cells in the process.

John is a doctor in a local hospital. Today, he is seeing two patients, patient A and patient B. Patient A has thyroid cancer, but patient B does not have thyroid cancer. John is trying to see the difference between these two patients' reports.

Which patient might not risk damaging healthy cells, patient A or patient B?

651081972

Naturally occurring uranium is composed almost entirely of two isotopes, uranium-238 (99%) and uranium-235 (1%). It is the uranium-235 that is fissionable (will undergo fission) and therefore, this is the uranium isotope than can be used for fuel in a nuclear reactor. For uranium to be used as fuel, the percent of uranium-235 must be increased to at least 3%. Uranium in which the U-235 content is more than 1% is called enriched uranium. Somehow, the two isotopes must be separated so that enriched uranium is available for use as fuel. Separating the isotope by chemical means (chemical reactions) is not successful because the isotopes have exactly the same chemistry. The only essential difference between U-238 and U-235 is their atomic masses; as a result, the two isotopes are separated by a physical means that takes advantage of the difference in mass.

John is a nuclear scientist who works at the Fermi lab. Today, in front of him he has four samples, sample A, sample B, sample C, and sample D. Sample A is the naturally occurring uranium. Sample B is enriched uranium. Sample C is the U-238, and sample D is the U-235. He needs to figure out how to best use them.

Which sample would have higher percentage of uranium-235, sample A or sample B?

1875818662

Naturally occurring uranium is composed almost entirely of two isotopes, uranium-238 (99%) and uranium-235 (1%). It is the uranium-235 that is fissionable (will undergo fission) and therefore, this is the uranium isotope than can be used for fuel in a nuclear reactor. For uranium to be used as fuel, the percent of uranium-235 must be increased to at least 3%. Uranium in which the U-235 content is more than 1% is called enriched uranium. Somehow, the two isotopes must be separated so that enriched uranium is available for use as fuel. Separating the isotope by chemical means (chemical reactions) is not successful because the isotopes have exactly the same chemistry. The only essential difference between U-238 and U-235 is their atomic masses; as a result, the two isotopes are separated by a physical means that takes advantage of the difference in mass.

John is a nuclear scientist who works at the Fermi lab. Today, in front of him he has four samples, sample A, sample B, sample C, and sample D. Sample A is the naturally occurring uranium. Sample B is enriched uranium. Sample C is the U-238, and sample D is the U-235. He needs to figure out how to best use them.

Which sample would have lower percentage of uranium-235, sample A or sample B?

4006459399

Naturally occurring uranium is composed almost entirely of two isotopes, uranium-238 (99%) and uranium-235 (1%). It is the uranium-235 that is fissionable (will undergo fission) and therefore, this is the uranium isotope than can be used for fuel in a nuclear reactor. For uranium to be used as fuel, the percent of uranium-235 must be increased to at least 3%. Uranium in which the U-235 content is more than 1% is called enriched uranium. Somehow, the two isotopes must be separated so that enriched uranium is available for use as fuel. Separating the isotope by chemical means (chemical reactions) is not successful because the isotopes have exactly the same chemistry. The only essential difference between U-238 and U-235 is their atomic masses; as a result, the two isotopes are separated by a physical means that takes advantage of the difference in mass.

John is a nuclear scientist who works at the Fermi lab. Today, in front of him he has four samples, sample A, sample B, sample C, and sample D. Sample A is the naturally occurring uranium. Sample B is enriched uranium. Sample C is the U-238, and sample D is the U-235. He needs to figure out how to best use them.

Would sample A have higher or lower percentage of uranium-235 than sample B?

4010457095

Naturally occurring uranium is composed almost entirely of two isotopes, uranium-238 (99%) and uranium-235 (1%). It is the uranium-235 that is fissionable (will undergo fission) and therefore, this is the uranium isotope than can be used for fuel in a nuclear reactor. For uranium to be used as fuel, the percent of uranium-235 must be increased to at least 3%. Uranium in which the U-235 content is more than 1% is called enriched uranium. Somehow, the two isotopes must be separated so that enriched uranium is available for use as fuel. Separating the isotope by chemical means (chemical reactions) is not successful because the isotopes have exactly the same chemistry. The only essential difference between U-238 and U-235 is their atomic masses; as a result, the two isotopes are separated by a physical means that takes advantage of the difference in mass.

John is a nuclear scientist who works at the Fermi lab. Today, in front of him he has four samples, sample A, sample B, sample C, and sample D. Sample A is the naturally occurring uranium. Sample B is enriched uranium. Sample C is the U-238, and sample D is the U-235. He needs to figure out how to best use them.

Would sample B have higher or lower percentage of uranium-235 than sample A?

631224343

Naturally occurring uranium is composed almost entirely of two isotopes, uranium-238 (99%) and uranium-235 (1%). It is the uranium-235 that is fissionable (will undergo fission) and therefore, this is the uranium isotope than can be used for fuel in a nuclear reactor. For uranium to be used as fuel, the percent of uranium-235 must be increased to at least 3%. Uranium in which the U-235 content is more than 1% is called enriched uranium. Somehow, the two isotopes must be separated so that enriched uranium is available for use as fuel. Separating the isotope by chemical means (chemical reactions) is not successful because the isotopes have exactly the same chemistry. The only essential difference between U-238 and U-235 is their atomic masses; as a result, the two isotopes are separated by a physical means that takes advantage of the difference in mass.

John is a nuclear scientist who works at the Fermi lab. Today, in front of him he has four samples, sample A, sample B, sample C, and sample D. Sample A is the naturally occurring uranium. Sample B is enriched uranium. Sample C is the U-238, and sample D is the U-235. He needs to figure out how to best use them.

Would sample C and sample D have same atomic mass or different atomic mass?

1330493221

Naturally occurring uranium is composed almost entirely of two isotopes, uranium-238 (99%) and uranium-235 (1%). It is the uranium-235 that is fissionable (will undergo fission) and therefore, this is the uranium isotope than can be used for fuel in a nuclear reactor. For uranium to be used as fuel, the percent of uranium-235 must be increased to at least 3%. Uranium in which the U-235 content is more than 1% is called enriched uranium. Somehow, the two isotopes must be separated so that enriched uranium is available for use as fuel. Separating the isotope by chemical means (chemical reactions) is not successful because the isotopes have exactly the same chemistry. The only essential difference between U-238 and U-235 is their atomic masses; as a result, the two isotopes are separated by a physical means that takes advantage of the difference in mass.

John is a nuclear scientist who works at the Fermi lab. Today, in front of him he has four samples, sample A, sample B, sample C, and sample D. Sample A is the naturally occurring uranium. Sample B is enriched uranium. Sample C is the U-238, and sample D is the U-235. He needs to figure out how to best use them.

Would sample C and sample D have same chemistry or different chemistry?

3509629208

Naturally occurring uranium is composed almost entirely of two isotopes, uranium-238 (99%) and uranium-235 (1%). It is the uranium-235 that is fissionable (will undergo fission) and therefore, this is the uranium isotope than can be used for fuel in a nuclear reactor. For uranium to be used as fuel, the percent of uranium-235 must be increased to at least 3%. Uranium in which the U-235 content is more than 1% is called enriched uranium. Somehow, the two isotopes must be separated so that enriched uranium is available for use as fuel. Separating the isotope by chemical means (chemical reactions) is not successful because the isotopes have exactly the same chemistry. The only essential difference between U-238 and U-235 is their atomic masses; as a result, the two isotopes are separated by a physical means that takes advantage of the difference in mass.

John is a nuclear scientist who works at the Fermi lab. Today, in front of him he has four samples, sample A, sample B, sample C, and sample D. Sample A is the naturally occurring uranium. Sample B is enriched uranium. Sample C is the U-238, and sample D is the U-235. He needs to figure out how to best use them.

Which smaple would be fissionable, sample C or sample D?

2607526537

Naturally occurring uranium is composed almost entirely of two isotopes, uranium-238 (99%) and uranium-235 (1%). It is the uranium-235 that is fissionable (will undergo fission) and therefore, this is the uranium isotope than can be used for fuel in a nuclear reactor. For uranium to be used as fuel, the percent of uranium-235 must be increased to at least 3%. Uranium in which the U-235 content is more than 1% is called enriched uranium. Somehow, the two isotopes must be separated so that enriched uranium is available for use as fuel. Separating the isotope by chemical means (chemical reactions) is not successful because the isotopes have exactly the same chemistry. The only essential difference between U-238 and U-235 is their atomic masses; as a result, the two isotopes are separated by a physical means that takes advantage of the difference in mass.

John is a nuclear scientist who works at the Fermi lab. Today, in front of him he has four samples, sample A, sample B, sample C, and sample D. Sample A is the naturally occurring uranium. Sample B is enriched uranium. Sample C is the U-238, and sample D is the U-235. He needs to figure out how to best use them.

Which smaple would not be fissionable, sample C or sample D?

4031690103

Naturally occurring uranium is composed almost entirely of two isotopes, uranium-238 (99%) and uranium-235 (1%). It is the uranium-235 that is fissionable (will undergo fission) and therefore, this is the uranium isotope than can be used for fuel in a nuclear reactor. For uranium to be used as fuel, the percent of uranium-235 must be increased to at least 3%. Uranium in which the U-235 content is more than 1% is called enriched uranium. Somehow, the two isotopes must be separated so that enriched uranium is available for use as fuel. Separating the isotope by chemical means (chemical reactions) is not successful because the isotopes have exactly the same chemistry. The only essential difference between U-238 and U-235 is their atomic masses; as a result, the two isotopes are separated by a physical means that takes advantage of the difference in mass.

John is a nuclear scientist who works at the Fermi lab. Today, in front of him he has four samples, sample A, sample B, sample C, and sample D. Sample A is the naturally occurring uranium. Sample B is enriched uranium. Sample C is the U-238, and sample D is the U-235. He needs to figure out how to best use them.

Which sample would more likely be used as fuel, sample C or sample D?

4042569083

Naturally occurring uranium is composed almost entirely of two isotopes, uranium-238 (99%) and uranium-235 (1%). It is the uranium-235 that is fissionable (will undergo fission) and therefore, this is the uranium isotope than can be used for fuel in a nuclear reactor. For uranium to be used as fuel, the percent of uranium-235 must be increased to at least 3%. Uranium in which the U-235 content is more than 1% is called enriched uranium. Somehow, the two isotopes must be separated so that enriched uranium is available for use as fuel. Separating the isotope by chemical means (chemical reactions) is not successful because the isotopes have exactly the same chemistry. The only essential difference between U-238 and U-235 is their atomic masses; as a result, the two isotopes are separated by a physical means that takes advantage of the difference in mass.

John is a nuclear scientist who works at the Fermi lab. Today, in front of him he has four samples, sample A, sample B, sample C, and sample D. Sample A is the naturally occurring uranium. Sample B is enriched uranium. Sample C is the U-238, and sample D is the U-235. He needs to figure out how to best use them.

Which sample would less likely be used as fuel, sample C or sample D?

3242862001

The Table above includes the ideal mechanical advantage of each class of lever. The mechanical advantage is the factor by which a machine changes the input force. The ideal mechanical advantage is the increase or decrease in force that would occur if there were no friction to overcome in the use of the machine. Because all machines must overcome some friction, the ideal mechanical advantage is always somewhat greater than the actual mechanical advantage of the machine as it is used in the real world.

John designed a hypothetical lever that would have ideal mechanical advantage. He labeled the lever as lever A. He then wanted to compare this lever with a real world lever, which he labeled as lever B. He intended to use these levers to increase force.

Which lever would have more friction, lever A or lever B?

3249546677

The Table above includes the ideal mechanical advantage of each class of lever. The mechanical advantage is the factor by which a machine changes the input force. The ideal mechanical advantage is the increase or decrease in force that would occur if there were no friction to overcome in the use of the machine. Because all machines must overcome some friction, the ideal mechanical advantage is always somewhat greater than the actual mechanical advantage of the machine as it is used in the real world.

John designed a hypothetical lever that would have ideal mechanical advantage. He labeled the lever as lever A. He then wanted to compare this lever with a real world lever, which he labeled as lever B. He intended to use these levers to increase force.

Which lever would have less friction, lever A or lever B?

2840078388

The Table above includes the ideal mechanical advantage of each class of lever. The mechanical advantage is the factor by which a machine changes the input force. The ideal mechanical advantage is the increase or decrease in force that would occur if there were no friction to overcome in the use of the machine. Because all machines must overcome some friction, the ideal mechanical advantage is always somewhat greater than the actual mechanical advantage of the machine as it is used in the real world.

John designed a hypothetical lever that would have ideal mechanical advantage. He labeled the lever as lever A. He then wanted to compare this lever with a real world lever, which he labeled as lever B. He intended to use these levers to increase force.

Would lever A have more friction or less friction than lever B?

2843289652

The Table above includes the ideal mechanical advantage of each class of lever. The mechanical advantage is the factor by which a machine changes the input force. The ideal mechanical advantage is the increase or decrease in force that would occur if there were no friction to overcome in the use of the machine. Because all machines must overcome some friction, the ideal mechanical advantage is always somewhat greater than the actual mechanical advantage of the machine as it is used in the real world.

John designed a hypothetical lever that would have ideal mechanical advantage. He labeled the lever as lever A. He then wanted to compare this lever with a real world lever, which he labeled as lever B. He intended to use these levers to increase force.

Would lever B have more friction or less friction than lever A?

895560538

The Table above includes the ideal mechanical advantage of each class of lever. The mechanical advantage is the factor by which a machine changes the input force. The ideal mechanical advantage is the increase or decrease in force that would occur if there were no friction to overcome in the use of the machine. Because all machines must overcome some friction, the ideal mechanical advantage is always somewhat greater than the actual mechanical advantage of the machine as it is used in the real world.

John designed a hypothetical lever that would have ideal mechanical advantage. He labeled the lever as lever A. He then wanted to compare this lever with a real world lever, which he labeled as lever B. He intended to use these levers to increase force.

Which lever would have greater mechanical advantage, lever A or lever B?

915614560

The Table above includes the ideal mechanical advantage of each class of lever. The mechanical advantage is the factor by which a machine changes the input force. The ideal mechanical advantage is the increase or decrease in force that would occur if there were no friction to overcome in the use of the machine. Because all machines must overcome some friction, the ideal mechanical advantage is always somewhat greater than the actual mechanical advantage of the machine as it is used in the real world.

John designed a hypothetical lever that would have ideal mechanical advantage. He labeled the lever as lever A. He then wanted to compare this lever with a real world lever, which he labeled as lever B. He intended to use these levers to increase force.

Which lever would have smaller mechanical advantage, lever A or lever B?

2708679262

The Table above includes the ideal mechanical advantage of each class of lever. The mechanical advantage is the factor by which a machine changes the input force. The ideal mechanical advantage is the increase or decrease in force that would occur if there were no friction to overcome in the use of the machine. Because all machines must overcome some friction, the ideal mechanical advantage is always somewhat greater than the actual mechanical advantage of the machine as it is used in the real world.

John designed a hypothetical lever that would have ideal mechanical advantage. He labeled the lever as lever A. He then wanted to compare this lever with a real world lever, which he labeled as lever B. He intended to use these levers to increase force.

Would lever A have higher or lower mechanical advantage than lever B?

2712283742

The Table above includes the ideal mechanical advantage of each class of lever. The mechanical advantage is the factor by which a machine changes the input force. The ideal mechanical advantage is the increase or decrease in force that would occur if there were no friction to overcome in the use of the machine. Because all machines must overcome some friction, the ideal mechanical advantage is always somewhat greater than the actual mechanical advantage of the machine as it is used in the real world.

John designed a hypothetical lever that would have ideal mechanical advantage. He labeled the lever as lever A. He then wanted to compare this lever with a real world lever, which he labeled as lever B. He intended to use these levers to increase force.

Would lever B have higher or lower mechanical advantage than lever A?