Which statement describes why energy is released in a nuclear fusion reaction based on mass-energy equivalence? for large nuclei, the mass of the original nucleus is greater than the mass of the products. for large nuclei, the mass of the original nucleus is less than the mass of the products. for small nuclei, the binding energy of the lighter nuclei is greater than the binding energy of the heavier nucleus. for small nuclei, the binding energy of the lighter nuclei is less than the binding energy of the heavier nucleus.

Option (c) is the correct answer.

Explanation:

When two or more small nuclei combine together to form a larger nuclei then this process is known as nuclear reaction.

The smaller is an atom, the more energy it requires to release an electron. This energy is known as binding energy.

Thus, when two small nuclei fuse together then there will be more binding energy as compared to when two large nuclei fuse together.

For example, fusion of two hydrogen atoms release more energy then one helium atom, and upon binding excess energy is released into the space.

Hence, we can conclude that energy is released in a nuclear fusion reaction based on mass-energy equivalence because for small nuclei, the binding energy of the lighter nuclei is greater than the binding energy of the heavier nucleus.

Option (c) is correct . For small nuclei, the binding energy of the lighter nuclei is greater than the binding energy of the heavier nucleus.

The process by which two or more tiny nuclei unite to generate a bigger nucleus is known as a nuclear fusion reaction.

The more energy it takes to liberate an electron from a smaller atom. This is referred to as binding energy.

As a result, when two little nuclei fuse together, there is more binding energy than when two big nuclei fuse together.

For example, the fusion of two hydrogen atoms produces more energy than the fusion of one helium atom, and surplus energy is expelled into space upon binding.

As a result of mass-energy equivalence, we may deduce that energy is liberated in a nuclear fusion reaction.

Hence for small nuclei, the binding energy of the lighter nuclei is greater than the binding energy of the heavier nucleus.

To learn more about nuclear fusion refer to the link;

link

relativism, roughly put, is the view that truth and falsity, right and wrong, standards of reasoning, and procedures of justification are products of differing conventions and frameworks of assessment and that their authority is confined to the context giving rise to them. more precisely, “relativism” covers views which maintain that—at a high level of abstraction—at least some class of things have the properties they have (e.g., beautiful, morally good, epistemically justified) not simpliciter, but only relative to a given framework of assessment (e.g., local cultural norms, individual standards), and correspondingly, that the truth of claims attributing these properties holds only once the relevant framework of assessment is specified or supplied. relativists characteristically insist, furthermore, that if something is only relatively so, then there can be no framework-independent vantage point from which the matter of whether the thing in question is so can be established.

relativism has been, in its various guises, both one of the most popular and most reviled philosophical doctrines of our time. defenders see it as a harbinger of tolerance and the only ethical and epistemic stance worthy of the open-minded and tolerant. detractors dismiss it for its alleged incoherence and uncritical intellectual permissiveness. debates about relativism permeate the whole spectrum of philosophical sub-disciplines. from ethics to epistemology, science to religion, political theory to ontology, theories of meaning and even logic, philosophy has felt the need to respond to this heady and seemingly subversive idea. discussions of relativism often also invoke considerations relevant to the very nature and methodology of philosophy and to the division between the so-called “analytic and continental” camps in philosophy. and yet, despite a long history of debate going back to plato and an increasingly large body of writing, it is still difficult to come to an agreed definition of what, at its core, relativism is, and what philosophical import it has. this entry attempts to provide a broad account of the many ways in which “relativism” has been defined, explained, defended and criticized.

explanation:

a straight line sloped