3. Which of the following claims do NOT a limitation of Bohr's model? * Electrons in an orbital have constant energy
Electrons can exist in between energy levels
Electrons must absorb a quantum to move up an energy level
Electrons behave like particles

B. Electrons can exist in between energy levels .

Explanation:

The value of energy for each energy level in an atom is quantized. Thus, electrons are not allowed to be found in between the energy levels.

When an electron absorbs energy, it becomes excited. And it would jump to a higher energy level whose energy is equal to the new energy of the electron. If the value of its new energy is less than the energy of higher levels but greater than the energy of it current energy level, the electron remains in its initial level. This is because, electrons do not exist in between energy levels .

1. the question asks the most appropriate, which seems to rule out "all of the above." your choice appears to be the correct one.

2. the protocol described is good for identifying correlation, but not cause and effect. for cause/effect, you need to devise a protocol that will assign the treatment (or not) to groups that have essentially the same "demographics" with respect to all the other variables. your choice regarding control group seems appropriate. random assignment of treatment (choice d) may be appropriate also. (i think you can argue that b and d are just different descriptions of the same method.)

3. d will randomize the birds, but may not guarantee there are 10 in each group. e will do both, so seems the better choice.

comment on question 2

based on the problem statement, it seems clear that confident, attentive drivers are more likely to use daytime running lights. so, the protocol might need to be devised in such a way that the lights would be turned on or off without the driver's knowledge. (an attentive driver will figure it out.) assigning a confident, attentive driver to a group required to drive without running lights might mess with his/her confidence and attentiveness. you don't want your experiment to do that. (nor do you want the experiment to subject a driver to greater risk of accident as a consequence of driving without running lights.) experiments involving human safety are always problematic.

increased stability in the completion of fluorine's outer shell.