Problem: I can use this background: Sugaring is a food preservation method similar to pickling. Sugaring is the process of desiccating a food by first dehydrating it, then packing it with pure sugar. This sugar can be crystalline in the form of table or raw sugar, or it can be a high sugar density liquid such as honey, syrup or molasses. The purpose of sugaring is to create an environment hostile to microbial life and prevent food spoilage. Sugaring is commonly used to preserve fruits as well as vegetables such as ginger. From time to time sugaring has also been used for non-food preservations. For example, honey was used as part of the mummification process in some ancient Egyptian rites. A risk in sugaring is that sugar itself attracts moisture. Once a sufficient moisture level is reached, native yeast in the environment will come out of dormancy and begin to ferment the sugars into alcohol and carbon dioxide. This leads to the process of fermentation. Although fermentation can be used as a food preservation method, it must be intentionally controlled, or the results will tend to be unpleasant. Now, I have a new situation: Peter decided to sugar mangoes, ginger, pineapples, peaches to preserve them for next spring. He also bought blueberries and raspberries to eat fresh. Answer this question please: Which fruit had a lower sugar content, peaches or blueberries?

A: blueberries

Problem: I can use this background: According to current definitions, all planets must revolve around stars; thus, any potential "rogue planets" are excluded. In the Solar System, all the planets orbit the Sun in the same direction as the Sun rotates (counter-clockwise as seen from above the Sun's north pole). At least one extrasolar planet, WASP-17b, has been found to orbit in the opposite direction to its star's rotation. The period of one revolution of a planet's orbit is known as its sidereal period or year. A planet's year depends on its distance from its star; the farther a planet is from its star, not only the longer the distance it must travel, but also the slower its speed, because it is less affected by its star's gravity. No planet's orbit is perfectly circular, and hence the distance of each varies over the course of its year. The closest approach to its star is called its periastron (perihelion in the Solar System), whereas its farthest separation from the star is called its apastron (aphelion). As a planet approaches periastron, its speed increases as it trades gravitational potential energy for kinetic energy, just as a falling object on Earth accelerates as it falls; as the planet reaches apastron, its speed decreases, just as an object thrown upwards on Earth slows down as it reaches the apex of its trajectory.Each planet's orbit is delineated by a set of elements: Now, I have a new situation: John is an amateur astronomer. Last week he was observing the sky with his telescope. First he pointed his telescope at planet Mars. He noted it as case A. Then he pointed his telescope to planet Jupiter, which is farther form the Sun than Mars is. He noted it as case C. Finally, he pointed the telescope to a faraway planet called WASP-17b. He noted that as case B. Answer this question please: Would case C see faster or slower movement than case A?

A: slower

Problem: I can use this background: Enzymes increase the rate of chemical reactions by reducing the amount of activation energy needed for reactants to start reacting. One way this can happen is modeled in the Figure below . Enzymes aren't changed or used up in the reactions they catalyze, so they can be used to speed up the same reaction over and over again. Each enzyme is highly specific for the particular reaction is catalyzes, so enzymes are very effective. A reaction that would take many years to occur without its enzyme might occur in a split second with the enzyme. Enzymes are also very efficient, so waste products rarely form. Now, I have a new situation: Keith is a physician with the city hospital. He noticed that reactions inside human body happen in different rates. He specifically noticed two cases, case A and case B. In case A enzymes were present, but in case B enzymes were not present. Answer this question please: In which case rate of chemical reactions would be higher, case A or case B?

A: case A

Problem: I can use this background: Collision theory tells us that molecules need to collide in order for a reaction to take place. All else being equal, anything that increases the frequency of collisions would also increase the rate of reaction. One way to do this is to increase the concentrations of one or more of the reactants. Using a real world example, a busy freeway will experience much more frequent car collisions than a fairly empty neighborhood street. Similarly, forcing more randomly moving molecules into the same amount of space will cause an increased number of collisions over a given length of time, providing the reactants with more opportunities to transform into products. Now, I have a new situation: Jordan and Elizabeth are performing a chemistry experiment for the science fair. Jordan uses a high concentration of the reactants when starting his reactions. Elizabeth uses a low concentration of the reactants when she starts her reactions. Answer this question please: Who will have reactions with less frequent collisions between the reactant molecules?

A:
Elizabeth