A ball was kicked horizontally off a cliff at 12.0 m/s, how high was the cliff if the ball landed 66.0 m from the base of the cliff?
cliff height = _m

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:

-first use of geothermal energy occurred more than 10,000 years ago in north america by american paleo-indians

-the first industrial use of geothermal energy began near pisa, italy in late 18th century

-in 1904, italian scientist piero ginori conti invented the first geothermal electric power plant in which steam was used to generate the power

-with the above experiment, the first geothermal plant in usa started in 1922 with a capacity of 250 kilowatts

-however, in 1946 first ground-source geothermal heat pump installed at commonwealth building in portland, oregon

-during the 1960’s, pacific gas and electric began operation of first large scale geothermal power plant in san francisco, producing 11 megawatts

-in 1973, when oil crisis began many countries began looking for renewable energy sources and by 1980’s geothermal heat pumps (ghp) started gaining popularity in order to reduce heating and cooling costs

-as effect of climate change started showing results, governments of various countries joined hands to fight against it, for which kyoto protocol was signed in japan in 1997, laid out emission targets for rich countries and required that they transfer funds and technology to developing countries, 184 countries have ratified it

hope this

momentum of soft ball three times less than baskey ball