Problem: I read this background article the other day: Fish mortality is a parameter used in fisheries population dynamics to account for the loss of fish in a fish stock through death. The mortality can be divided into two types: Natural mortality: the removal of fish from the stock due to causes not associated with fishing. Such causes can include disease, competition, cannibalism, old age, predation, pollution or any other natural factor that causes the death of fish. In fisheries models natural mortality is denoted by (M).[1] Fishing mortality: the removal of fish from the stock due to fishing activities using any fishing gear.[1] It is denoted by (F) in fisheries models. I am facing a new situation today: Bob works as a scientist for a large fishing company in Norway. Norway's government has strict regulations on fishing to protect its fish stock. Part of Bob's job is to provide the government with fish mortality data. Today, he has two samples of fish to investigate, sample A and sample B. Bob concluded sample A had natural mortality, but sample B had fishing mortality. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: On which fish fishing gear was not used, sample A or sample B?

A: sample A

Problem: I read this background article the other day: Centripetal force is, simply, the force that causes centripetal acceleration. Objects that move in uniform circular motion all have an acceleration toward the center of the circle and therefore, they must also suffer a force toward the center of the circle. That force is the centripetal force. For orbiting satellites, such as the moon orbiting the earth or the earth orbiting the sun, the centripetal force is produced by gravity. When an Olympic hammer thrower whirls a massive ball on a chain, the centripetal force is created by the athlete and transmitted by the chain. I am facing a new situation today: Adam wants to show his little brother a trick. He gets a bucket of water and says to him "I bet i can turn this bucket upside down and no water will fall out". His brother doesn't believe him of course. So Adam takes the bucket by the handle and quickly starts spinning it in a circle. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Will the centripetal force on the bucket increase or decrease as Adam spins it faster?

A: increase

Problem: I read this background article the other day: Depleted soils can be protected from soil erosion by groundcover plants such as naturally growing grasses in agroforestry systems. These help to stabilise the soil as they increase cover compared to short-cycle cropping systems. Soil cover is a crucial factor in preventing erosion. Cleaner water through reduced nutrient and soil surface runoff can be a further advantage of agroforestry. The runoff can be reduced by decreasing its velocity and increasing infiltration into the soil. Compared to row-cropped fields nutrient uptake can be higher and reduce nutrient loss into streams.Further advantages concerning plant growth: I am facing a new situation today: Rob is an environmental scientist. He was doing a study on agroforestry. To test the sustainability of agroforestry he conducted two pilot projects, pilot A and pilot B. In pilot A, he used a land for agrofroestry. In pilot B, he used a land for usual row-cropping. He needed to find the pros and cons of both systems. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which project would have lower nutrient uptake, pilot A or pilot B?

A: pilot A

Problem: I read this background article the other day: Capital flight, in economics, occurs when assets or money rapidly flow out of a country, due to an event of economic consequence. Such events could be an increase in taxes on capital or capital holders or the government of the country defaulting on its debt that disturbs investors and causes them to lower their valuation of the assets in that country, or otherwise to lose confidence in its economic strength. This leads to a disappearance of wealth, and is usually accompanied by a sharp drop in the exchange rate of the affected countrydepreciation in a variable exchange rate regime, or a forced devaluation in a fixed exchange rate regime. This fall is particularly damaging when the capital belongs to the people of the affected country, because not only are the citizens now burdened by the loss in the economy and devaluation of their currency, but probably also, their assets have lost much of their nominal value. This leads to dramatic decreases in the purchasing power of the country's assets and makes it increasingly expensive to import goods and acquire any form of foreign facilities, e.g. medical facilities. I am facing a new situation today: Nirvania continued to develop and became a first world country by 2025. Its economic strength and the accumulation of capital, led to prosperity and citizen happiness. On the other side of the river, Borania, however, decided to return to dictatorship and it's citizens and investors started to lose hope and move their capital to foreign accounts and investments. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which country has more confident citizens?

A:
Nirvania