[Q]: I have a new situation: Reed started studying protozoa and was more interested in the predatorial behaviors of protozoa, while Brad wanted to know more about other types of protozoa, suck as grazers and decomposers. But I can use this background: Protozoa generally feed by engulfing and digesting other organisms. As consumers, they have various roles in food chains and webs. Some are predators. They prey upon other single-celled organisms, such as bacteria. In fact, protozoa predators keep many bacterial populations in check. Other protozoa are herbivores. They graze on algae. Still others are decomposers. They consume dead organic matter. There are also parasitic protozoa that live in or on living hosts. For example, the protozoan that causes malaria lives inside a human host. For their part, protozoa are important food sources for many larger organisms, including insects and worms. What is an answer for this question: Which person learned more about protozoa keeping bacterial populations in check?
****
[A]: Reed

[Q]: I have a new situation: David wanted to test the theory of Einstein. To that end, he measured the time perceived by an airline pilot, who naturally traveled very fast. He labeled it as case A. To compare the pilot with a slower traveler he measured the time perceived by a semi truck driver covering the same distance. He labeled it as case B. He was amazed by the counter intuitive results he got from the experiment. But I can use this background: Einstein showed in his thought experiments that people travelling at different speeds, while agreeing on cause and effect, measure different time separations between events, and can even observe different chronological orderings between non-causally related events. Though these effects are typically minute in the human experience, the effect becomes much more pronounced for objects moving at speeds approaching the speed of light. Subatomic particles exist for a well known average fraction of a second in a lab relatively at rest, but when travelling close to the speed of light they are measured to travel farther and exist for much longer than when at rest. According to the special theory of relativity, in the high-speed particle's frame of reference, it exists, on the average, for a standard amount of time known as its mean lifetime, and the distance it travels in that time is zero, because its velocity is zero. Relative to a frame of reference at rest, time seems to "slow down" for the particle. Relative to the high-speed particle, distances seem to shorten. Einstein showed how both temporal and spatial dimensions can be altered (or "warped") by high-speed motion. What is an answer for this question: According to Einstein, who would seem to gain less time, case A or case B?
****
[A]: case B

[Q]: I have a new situation: Rob is an environmental scientist. He is looking at two samples of soil, sample A and sample B. Sample A is from Amazon Rain-forest, where they get one of the highest rainfall in the world. Sample B is from the Atacama Desert, where they get one of the lowest rainfall in the world. He needs to determine the properties of these samples. But I can use this background: Rainfall in an area is important because it influences the rate of weathering. More rain means that more rainwater passes through the soil. The rainwater reacts chemically with the particles. The top layers of soil are in contact with the freshest water, so reactions are greatest there. High rainfall increases the amount of rock that experiences chemical reactions. High rainfall may also carry material away. This means that new surfaces are exposed. This increases the rate of weathering. What is an answer for this question: Which sample would show decreased rate of weathering, sample A or sample B?
****
[A]: sample B

[Q]: I have a new situation: The U.S. produces its energy using fossil fuels, while Germany uses nuclear power plants as their main energy source. The two countries impact the environment in different ways. But I can use this background: In the U.S., the majority of electricity is produced by burning coal or other fossil fuels. This causes air pollution that harms the health of living things. The air pollution also causes acid rain and contributes to global warming. In addition, fossil fuels are nonrenewable resources, so if we keep using them, they will eventually run out. The main advantage of nuclear energy is that it doesn't release air pollution or cause the other environmental problems associated with the burning of fossil fuels. On the other other hand, radioactive elements are nonrenewable like fossil fuels and could eventually be used up. What is an answer for this question: Which country contributes more to global warming?
****
[A]:
The U.S.