Mosses don't spread by dispersing seeds; they disperse tiny spores. the spores are so small that they will stay aloft and move with the wind, but getting them to be windborne requires the moss to shoot the spores upward. some species do this by using a spore-containing capsule that dries out and shrinks. the pressure of the air trapped inside the capsule increases. at a certain point, the capsule pops, and a stream of spores is ejected upward at 3.6 m/s, reaching an ultimate height of 20 cm.

a)

what fraction of the initial kinetic energy is converted to the final potential energy?

express your answer numerically.

ufki =

b)

what happens to the "lost" energy?

choose the correct answer

it has been transformed into thermal energy of the spores and surrounding air.
it has been transformed into thermal energy of the spores and potential energy of surrounding air.
it has been transformed into potential energy of the spores and kinetic energy of surrounding air.
it has been transformed into potential energy of the spores and surrounding air.

/ Em₀ = 0.30

Explanation:

In this exercise we use the relationship of mechanical energy, kinetic energy and gravitational potential energy

      K = ½ m v²

      U = mgh

We calculate the mechanical energy at two points

Initial. Lower

    Em₀ = K = ½ m v²

Highest finish

    = U = mg and

Let's calculate

    Em₀ = ½ m 3.6 2

    Em₀ = m 6.48

    = m 9.8 0.20

    = m 1.96

The fraction of lost energy is

    / Em₀ = m 1.96 / m 6.48

    / Em₀ = 0.30

30% sun is converted into potential energy

It has several transformation possibilities

It is transformed into thermal energy of air and spores, since this energy cannot be recovered

when the use of electricity burdens the fuse and miniarure circuit beakers and there is a possibility of a fuse then they automatically cut off the electricity supply to your homes and after you fix the problem u jzt switch it on and it continues the supply of electricity to ur homes

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: