A143 ‑turn circular coil of radius 3.43 cm and negligible resistance is immersed in a uniform magnetic field that is perpendicular to the plane of the coil. the coil is connected to a 10.7 ω resistor to create a closed circuit. during a time interval of 0.115 s, the magnetic field strength decreases uniformly from 0.523 t to zero. find the energy, in millijoules, that is dissipated in the resistor during this time interval.

61.9 mJ

Explanation:

We can start by calculating the emf induced in the coil by the changing magnetic field, which is given by:

where

is the change in flux linkage through the coil

is the time interval

The flux linkage through the coil is given by

where

N = 143 is the number of turns

A is the area of the coil

B is the strength of the magnetic field

The radius of the coil is

r = 3.43 cm = 0.0343 m

So its area is

So, the initial flux linkage is

where is the initial strength of the magnetic field.

The final strength of the magnetic field is zero:

So, the final flux linkage is zero:

Therefore, the change in flux linkage through the coil is

The flux linkage decreases uniformly, so the emf induced in the coil is constant and it is given by

This is also the potential difference across the resistor of the closed circuit connected to the coil, . The resistance is

So, the power dissipated through the resistor is

And therefore, the energy dissipated in the time interval of 0.115 s is

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:

i would think it's food chain