5. which of the following statements most accurately differentiates potential and kinetic energy?
a. any object that has motion has kinetic energy, while any object not in motion but with the potential to do work has
b. any object that has motion has potential energy, while any object not in motion but with the potential to do work has
c. kinetic energy is a form of mechanical energy, while gravitational potential energy isn't
d. gravitational potential energy is a form of mechanical energy, while kinetic energy isn't
mark for review (will be highlighted on the review page)

A. Any object that has motion has kinetic energy, while any object not in motion but with the potential to do work has potential energy

Explanation:

Both kinetic energy and potential energy are part of the mechanical energy of an object, their origin is different. In fact:

- The kinetic energy of an object is the energy due to the motion of the object. It is given by

where m is the mass of the object and v its speed. As we see from the equation, when an object is stationary, v = 0, and therefore it has no kinetic energy.

- The potential energy of an object is the energy stored as 'potential' to do work. There are several types of potential energy. For instance, gravitational potential energy is the potential energy that an object possesses in a gravitational field, and it is given by

U = mgh

where m is the mass of the object,  g the acceleration of gravity, h the height of the object with respect to the ground. When the object is released from its position, it falls freely towards the Earth, and this energy is converted into kinetic energy.

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:

answer: the correct answer is 1.

explanation: there are various process in which a radioactive nuclei decays:

1) alpha decay: in this process, a heavier nuclei decays into lighter nuclei by releasing alpha particle. the mass number is reduced by 4 units.

2) electron capture: in this decay process, a parent nuclei absorbs an electron and gets converted into a neutron. simply, a proton and an electron combines together to form a neutron. mass number does not change in this process.

3) gamma ray emission: it is a decay process in which an unstable nuclei gives excess energy by a spontaneous electromagnetic process. this decay releases . this process does not change the mass number.

4) positron emission: it is a type of decay process, in which a proton gets converted to neutron and an electron neutrino. this is also known as -decay. in this the mass number remains same.

from the above information, we see that only alpha-decay is producing a change in the mass number of the nucleus.