Es

which is an example of two-dimensional motion

a bird flying in the air

a leaf falling from a tr

a train traveling along a track

d)

a lady bug crawling on a soccer ball

A leaf is falling from the tree.

Explanation:

If motion is in only one direction(x-direction) then it is know as one directional motion.

If motion is in only two direction (x and y directions) then it is know as two directional motion.

If motion is in only three direction (x , y and z directions) then it is know as three directional motion.

A bird is flying in the air -This is three directional motion.

A leaf is falling from the tree - This is two directional motion.

A train is running on track - This is  one directional motion

A lady is crawling  on the surface of the ball - This is three directional motion.

Therefore the answer is  ---

A leaf is falling from the tree.

freezing

deposition

condensation

explanation;

melting also called fusion is the process where solid becomes liquid, sublimation is the process where solid becomes gaseous without first changing to liquid, deposition involves change from gaseous to solid state, freezing involves change from liquid to solid, boiling or evaporation involves change of liquid to gaseous state, while condensation is the change from gaseous state to liquid state.

endothermic reactions involves absorption of heat from the surroundings or the environment while exothermic reactions involves loss of heat energy to the surroundings.

in this case, sublimation, evaporation and melting are endothermic reactions (gain energy from the environment) while, freezing, deposition and condensation are exothermic (loss of energy to the surroundings) reactions.

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: